Category: Gun Rights
New York Times Weighs in on Lead Ammo Ban
Of course they think it’s a disgrace that the EPA can’t ban lead ammunition, because why can’t we have a back door way to end the shooting sports and hunting as we know it? That would mean Heller and McDonald are without consequence, and we won’t be dismantling New York City’s gun laws in short order. It think that’s what the Times is really afraid of.
Anschutz Sells Out
We really need to revive American manufactured precision small bores, because the European Manufacturers are going to be increasingly regulated into extinction, or forced to neuter their products. We nearly destroyed Smith & Wesson over less, and now I will never purchase an Anschutz product.
Won’t Take No for an Answer
The groups petitioning the EPA to ban the use of lead in ammunition and fishing sinkers don’t like taking no for an answer – even if it is only a partial “no”. When the EPA quickly dismissed the part of the petition dealing with lead ammunition saying they didn’t have the authority to regulate it, they allowed the effort to ban lead sinkers and weights to continue.
In politics, a partial win usually is OK. You win a little now and hope that you can gain more in the future. However, the Center for Biological Diversity and the American Bird Conservancy don’t want to accept even a partial win. They want it all.
In press releases that both have issued, they accuse the EPA of bowing to electoral politics by dismissing the part of the petition dealing with ammunition. Well, duh!
The last thing the Obama Administration wants now is an effort targeted at hunters and gun owners who are already pissed off and distrustful of this administration. Frankly, I’m surprised they are willing to anger fishermen unless they are assuming it is only worm dunkers – and not fly fishermen – who use lead. As a fly tyer, I can assure you that I use lead to weight my flies on occasion.
Daley Won’t Seek Re-Election in Chicago
Mayor Richard M. Daley stunned the political establishment in Chicago this afternoon when he announced he would not be running for re-election in 2011. He has held the office since 1989 when he won a special election to replace Mayor Harold Washington.
According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Daley said “it just feels right” regarding his decision to not seek re-election. On December 26th, he will eclipse his father, Mayor Richard J. Daley, as the longest serving mayor of Chicago. The Sun-Times quotes his brother, William (Bill) Daley, on what is behind the decision:
“It’s not Maggie’s health or [the city’s] financial problems, unemployment or crime. Blaming this decision on the re-election campaign or fear he wasn’t gonna win is silly also. All of the things you go to to find a reason, there’s bits of truth in all of them. It’s not one thing. It’s an accumulation of 21 years and looking, not just at an election, but the next four years in one’s life. He’s healthy. He’s got time to do other things — or nothing.â€
However, a poll commissioned by the Chicago Tribune conducted earlier this summer found:
The poll found only 37 percent of city voters approve of the job Daley is doing as mayor, compared with 47 percent who disapprove. Moreover, a record-low 31 percent said they want to see Daley re-elected, compared with 53 percent who don’t want him to win another term.
Now that Daley isn’t going to run for re-election, politicians who have previously suppressed their desire for the office are now thinking of running. Some of the names mentioned include Rahm Emanuel, Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr., a number of sitting aldermen, Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart, and Cook County Assessor Jim Houlihan.
The announcement leads to two important questions. First, will the coalition that kept Daley in office and the Chicago Democratic Machine running start to fight amongst themselves? And, second, what will this mean for gun rights in Chicago and the State of Illinois?
I think the answer to the first question is absolutely yes. Alderman Ed Smith, considered the dean of the African-American alderman on City Council, guarantees that there will be an African-American candidate for mayor.
“If we can raise the money, there’s gonna be a [black] candidate. We’re not short on people who can run this town and who would get in the race.
Probably the best analogy would be to Yugoslavia upon the death of Marshall Tito. Without a leader that could hold a coalition of antagoinistic factions together, the factions began to fight for power and control and the place fell apart. I wouldn’t be surprised if it is the same in Chicago.
As to gun rights, none of the potential candidates is going to be good for our side. However, they could be “less bad” than Mayor Daley. For example, Rahm “Never let a crisis go to waste” Emanual has described being Mayor of Chicago as his dream job. He saw what the impact of gun control did for the Clinton administration in 1994. When he was head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, he recruited many “Blue Dog” Democrats who were pro-gun. I’m not saying he’d be pro-gun but might be less anti-gun than the present regime.
Sheriff Tom Dart came out against concealed carry in Illinois last year when SB 1976 was proposed. Obviously, Jesse Jackson, Jr. would not be good for gun rights but he may be damaged goods due to Rod Blagojevich.
I’d love to hear the comments from people who live in the Chicago area who might have a better feel for potential candidates and where they stand on gun rights.
Update on Korean Garands
The Washington Times ran an editorial on Friday that referred to the blocked Korean Garands as “Obama’s backdoor gun ban.” The paper confirmed with the State Department that the rifles’ importation was being blocked and that they were looking at alternative options. As the paper notes, during the Clinton administration, “alternative options” meant melting down surplus rifles. The end result of that fiasco is that it left the U.S. Army scraping the barrel when it came to finding M-14s for their Designated Marksmen.
The Washington Times further accused Obama of doing this to appease the “gun grabbers.”
Therefore, the best way for Mr. Obama to appease the gun-grabbing fringe is to take actions that won’t bring too much attention to what he’s doing. As long as the destruction of these rifles stays under the public radar screen, he will have achieved his goal.
The Firearm Blog has a post about the South Koreans’ reaction to the surplus Garands and M-1 carbines being blocked. They link to a story in the Korean newspaper The Chosun llbo. The story reiterates much of what was said in the original Korea Times article. Quoting an unnamed Korean official who said:
“It’s difficult to understand why the U.S. opposes the deal now, when we already shipped tens of thousands of these firearms to the U.S. in the early 1990s. We are trying to grasp the real underlying cause of this reversal through diplomatic channels.” He added that because these firearms were originally made in the U.S., selling them back needs approval from Washington.
The Chosun Ilbo article does have one humorous aspect. The picture that they use to illustrate the M-1 Carbine seems to be that of a plastic, G.I. Joe toy carbine.
The Korean M-1s are back in the news
This time, Maxim Lott brings them up on Fox News. No new information here, it appears to be a rehash of the Korean Times article; except that Dennis Henigan brings some PSH to the discussion, and Chris Cox counters. Still no one directly involved willing to be quoted on the record.
A couple of things jump out at me based on this whole fiasco. First, The Obama administration denying Korea’s request to sell could be a PRO-gun move in that they could be saying “nope, you can’t sell them, you have to give them back.” (Could be. Not saying it is, or even that it’s likely. Bear with me). Secondly, there is no good that can come out of the administration’s official silence and buck-passing on this. It’s fired up the pro-gun side less than 90 days out from a make-or-break election for the White House; and if they do come in under the terms of the Lend-Lease (given back to the US, rather than sold directly), they have another stark choice; send them to Captain Crunch to appease the Bradies and PO the NRA, or give them to CMP (which will have the opposite result). Pick a side of the fence and stick with it, guys – straddling it just ends painfully when you slip… At any rate, this stealth gun-hating has consequences.
Seen at the Volokh Conspiracy – where Dave Kopel’s post gets a new world record by going from 0 to Godwin by the first comment. Which leads to the funniest thing I’ve seen all week on gun control “However, it is almost certain that Hitler wished that Americans didn’t have so many M1 Garands and Carbines. :)” (David Kopel)
Has anyone gotten the CMP on-record about these rifles?
(As a side note – I can’t own the Carbine – it be banned by name as an assault weapon in the state of New Jersey)
Open Carry Ban Rejected by California Senate
I can’t remember the last time the California legislature actually voted down a new gun control law, but that appears to have happened. Are the gun control groups losing their juice even in the California Legislature? I’m sure even in California, politicians have more to gain than they have to lose by voting down stuff like this.
Editorial on EPA Ammo Ban Denial
The Arizona Republic thinks it’s a good thing that the EPA rejected the lead ammo ban petition, not because it’s based on flimsy evidence, or presents serious constitutional problems, but because the Obama Admionistration just doesn’t need a fight with the NRA right now.
Whatever gets it done. Obviously Obama’s people agree, or they wouldn’t so quickly have killed the petition.
EPA Denies Petition for Ammo Ban
Chris Dolnack of NSSF is reporting that the EPA has denied the petition by the Center for BioDivesity. We are a force to be reckoned with, and it appears that the Obama Administration is still afraid to tangle with us.