Category: Gun Rights

Kevin reports that he and Soldiers Angels have come up with a PayPal free way to continue their raffling of a Para GI Export to raise money for the organization.  This is good both from the standpoint of Soldiers Angels continuing to raise money, and from the standpoint of sticking it to PayPal.

The Brady’s are touting their latest victory over the big bad National Rifle Association because she was confirmed 68-31.  Even the Washington Post is saying not so fast.  NRA has been pushing pretty hard, and exploring the edge of the envelope.  Defeating a Presidents nominee is extraordinarily difficult, and this result should not be surprising.  But you will see many in the media attempt to play up NRA’s weakness here, and try to make the case for the gun control movement.

You had nine Republican Senators defect and vote for her.  The nine were Vionovich (OH), Graham (SC), Alexander (TN), Gregg (NH), Bond (MO), Snowe (ME), Collins (ME), Lugar (IN), and Martinez (FL).

Here’s the situation as I see it.  Previously we had a choice between lousy not lousy when it came to gun rights.  The Democrats were lousy, and the Republicans were just enough not lousy to keep us voting for them.  After suffering defeat after defeat, and at risk of becoming a regional party, the Democrats decided to run pro-gun candidates in conservative districts in order to rebuild their majority.  The gambit worked!  Now Republicans have to be very concerned that Democrats are threatning the loyalty of what has been a very significant voting bloc for them.  NRA has 4 million members, and some 13 million, I believe, who have been members and are sympathetic.  Additionally, I think I recall there being 33 million people who think they are members of the NRA.  That’s nothing to sneeze at in politics.

So what we have before us in an opportunity to whip the Republicans a bit, and let them show us that they can out pro-gun the Democrats.  I think the Thune amendment was part of that.  I also think the Sotomayor vote is too.  Nine defections certainly sucks, but 31 Republicans still voted against her confirmation.  That’s 31 Republicans who just showed us they can out pro-gun the Democrats.  Despite the loss, this puts us in a very good position.  A lot of those pro-gun Dems will know they need to work to make it up to us for their vote on Sotomayor.  Guys like Tester, Webb, Pryor, Begich, and the other pro-gun Dems know they are not going to win re-election or easily win re-election without NRA support.  In essence, we may be in a position now where the pro-gun elements of each party, which are a majority of both houses of Congress, try to out do the other.  It’s far from the reality the Brady’s are touting, and far from what you’ll see in media outlets.  I honestly don’t think NRA’s power has ever been stronger, and we’re very very lucky that’s the case.

Plans for the North American Leaders summit:

Mexico also wants more gun control in the U.S., particularly when it comes to assault weapons.

“I would like to see the assault weapons ban reinstated – it’s not philosophical, it’s because of what we have seen on the ground…There is a direct correlation between the assault ban and expiring in 2004 and the numbers – simply the sheer numbers – of assault weapons that we seize in Mexico…We are both cognizant of what can and cannot be done right now – we will softly, diplomatically…continue to say that this is an important issue for us but I think the real perspectives of this moving on Capitol Hill these days are slim to say the least,” the official said.

““The Mexican government is not about challenging the Second Amendment.  That’s a sovereign decision of the United States.  It’s a sovereign decision of the U.S. Congress.  That’s up to you guys. But the Second Amendment wasn’t adopted by the Founding Fathers to allow transnational organized crime to illicitly buy weapons in the Unites States and be illicitly cross them over international borders into countries where those calibers and types of weapons are prohibited,” the official said.

So they expect me to believe that because in 1994 we banned flash hiders and bayonet lugs, that Mexican drug cartels just couldn’t abide by dealing with post-ban features, and went without.  You know, if the people pushing these issues weren’t so dishonest, our jobs would be a lot harder.  Trust me, the last thing Mexican officials want is for us to actually listen to them.  As long as they can blame the United States for their inability to control their own border, and control their own crime and corruption, they don’t need to answer for their own failing.  They blame our gun laws for the same reason New Jersey and New York blame the gun laws in the rest of the country; to pass the buck.  The alternative is admitting to your own people that your policies are a failure, and no politician will ever do that.

It looks like Bloomberg is throwing down on the NRA, and claiming victory.  The article provides good insight into how the political process works.  I suggest everyone read it.

It did not look like the odds were in their favor. Feinblatt maintained a whip sheet, one of those essential lobbying tools for tracking “who’s with us, who’s against us and who’s on the fence.” He figured there were more than two dozen senators who were undecided, leaning yes or leaning no. But he was particularly focused on one.

“We had to flip Specter,” Feinblatt says. “There was no question about it — we had to flip Specter.”

Yes, Arlen Specter, he of the recent switch from the Republican Party to the Democrats. The former district attorney. The guy facing a tough reelection campaign next year. That Specter, the one they call “Snarlin’ Arlen.” He became their bellwether.

I hope Toomey cleans his clock next November.  At least now I don’t really have to worry much about NRA endorsing Specter in the election.  Bloomberg appears to be positioning himself as the chief opponent of gun rights.  But he’s on the defensive.  We’re coming after New York City’s gun laws.  One way or another, they will be forced to accept the right of the people to own and carry a firearm for self-defense.

There’s been a lot of rumors floating around on the Internet that this entire Thune amendment was staged, and was theater, and have used evidence of vote trading to bolster the claim.  I hate to break it to these folks, but all politics, at least that which you see, is theater. Some figure that out and become disillusioned and cynical, but there’s no reason to be.  You can still influence the process, and find success.

Thune and the NRA were wise to push the bill.  When someone hands you the keys to an expensive sports car, you don’t drive it around like a old lady on Sunday.  You open up the throttle and see what it can do.  That’s what the Thune amenmdnet was about.  In this case, we didn’t quite get the performance we wanted, so we’ll go back, tune the engine, stiffen the suspension, and try again.  Next time we may not come two votes short.  If Bloomberg wants to fight this again, I can promise him we’ll give him the opporuntity.

Once a Republican stronghold, Delaware County, the county directly South of the City of Philadelphia, and where I grew up, now claims wild eyed leftist and gun hater Joe Sestak as their representative.  Sestak won the seat from Curt Weldon in 2006.  Now Sestak wants to be our Senator, and is challenging Snarlen in the primary.  He’s announced he won’t run again for the Congressional seat. The candidates are starting to line up.

What’s disturbing me is the prospects so far aren’t looking too good from our point of view.  So far we have:

• Tom Killion – R (State Rep. NRA D rated)
• Bryan Lentz – D (State Rep. NRA F rated)
• Greg Vitali – D (State Rep. NRA F rated)
• Steven Welch – R (businessman, no known rating)

Is there no gun vote left in Delaware County?  Let’s hope Steven Welch is on our side.  Delaware County’s demographics don’t lend themselves to someone who’s wildly pro-gun, but we ought to be able to do better than a D for that seat.

Joe notes that the Montana Shooting Sports Association is preparing a lawsuit to enforce the Montana Firearms Freedom Act.   My prediction will be the suit loses in the 9th circuit, because of Raich, and goes no further.  The letter will probably get them around standing, but I don’t see how they get around Raich.  Even under the much more strict Lopez Test, it would have a tough time.  I like these various Freedom Acts, just a symbolic middle finger to Washington.  But when the rubber meets the road, they are symbolic, unless Montana is serious about enforcing it, which I doubt they are.

Look at these Zogby results:

“Would you support or oppose a U.S. Senator who voted to confirm a Justice to the U.S. Supreme Court who does not believe in the right to keep and bear arms and the right to self-defense?”

Fifty-two percent of American voters would oppose the re-election of any Senator who votes to confirm a Supreme Court nominee who does not believe in the right to keep and bear arms. Only 26 percent of voters would support such a Senator.

Among Independent voters, 57 percent would oppose such a Senator, and only 17 percent would support. Forty-nine percent of young voters (age 18-29) would oppose a Senator who votes to confirm a nominee who does not believe Second Amendment rights apply to all Americans, and just 31 percent would support such a Senator. A plurality of Hispanic voters (42 percent) would oppose such a Senator, and only 28 percent would support. A large percentage of Hispanics (30 percent) are not sure. A majority of union members (54 percent) would also oppose, and 29 percent would support.

It gets better:

“Currently, 39 states have laws that allow residents to carry firearms to protect themselves, only if they pass a background check and pay a fee to cover administrative costs. Most of those states also require applicants to have firearms safety training. Do you support or oppose this law?”

An overwhelming majority of Americans (83 percent) support concealed-carry laws, while only 11 percent oppose them. A majority of Independent voters (86 percent), Democrats (80 percent), young voters age 18-29 (83 percent), Hispanic voters (80 percent), and those who voted for President Obama (80 percent) support the right to carry a firearm.

I think this problem is one of Brady’s own making, actually.  What this poll would seem to indicate, once you say the magic word of “background check” the American people seem relatively willing to let people do what they want when it comes to firearms.

New York Times has the story here.  I’ll be honest, I think he deserves some legal punishment for the negligent discharge.  I would even accept some jail time, because I think an ND in a crowded night club because you don’t know how to properly carry your gat is worth some punishment.  But if I were on the Grand Jury, I would have voted to no bill him and let him walk.  While I think Burris ought to be punished for irresposible gun handling, carrying a firearm for personal protection is his right, and New York City infringes on that right, and is looking to make an example of Burris, lest the rest of us peons get it in our head we have a right to defend ourselves outside the blessings of the City of New York and Michael Bloomberg.