Category: Gun Rights

The Washington Post seems to be reporting that D.C. voting rights advocates are optimistic that the gun rights “GOP Amendment” can be stripped from the bill.  GOP amendment?  Yeah, that’s why it passed with 62 votes.

The House is expected to pass its version of the bill next week without any gun language. The differences between the bills will have to be hashed out in a conference between the chambers.

“That’s why you have conferences. I’m sure there will be an effort to fix this,” said Tom Davis, the former Republican congressman from Virginia who was the original architect of the bill. He said the legislation appeared to have enough support to pass without the gun amendment attached.

Says Majority Leader Steny Hoyer:

Hoyer branded the gun amendment “inappropriate and wrong,” telling the Politics Program on WTOP (103.5 FM): “I hope it won’t be in the final product.”

Seems pretty appropriate to me.  If they want representation in the federal government, they have to follow the federal constitution.  Apparently Hoyer thinks that’s wrong an inappropriate.

The amendment drew widespread support, he said, because “people don’t want to vote against the National Rifle Association.”

But, he added, if the amendment was dropped, legislators could approve the bill and still get credit for their pro-gun stance in the earlier vote.

“You can have your cake and eat it, too,” he said.

He’s quite likely right about this, but as I pointed out before, the benefit is getting the Senate on record, and demonstrating to President Obama that he’s not going to get a break on this issue.  The stars lined up in our favor, and we moved on it.

For example, 26 states, including Maryland and Virginia, have laws requiring safe storage for guns. Virginia, Maryland and California have laws limiting buyers to one handgun purchase a month. A dozen states, including Maryland, require handgun owners to register their weapons with authorities or obtain licenses to possess them.

A dozen states?  A half dozen maybe, but I think they need to review state laws on this matter.

The legislative session for 2009 in Virginia has ended.  Head over to the VSSA blog for a review of the bills currently sitting on Governor Kaine’s desk.

It looks like things might actually be happening in Ilinois:

“It’s heating up. We think we’re close,” said Todd Vandermyde, a National Rifle Association lobbyist who has pushed the concealed-carry proposal in Springfield before. “You’ve got 48 states that have this. That’s a statement.”

Gun control advocates are firing back with bills to create new restrictions on the sale and transfer of those guns, while trying to stop the concealed-carry movement.

There are a lot of anti-gun bills in the Illinois legislature too, and a good offense is often the best defense.  They will have to expend energy to defeat this bill, which makes some of the other bad stuff take a back seat.  The Bradys are already worried about it.

Mannard, of the gun-control group, says that argument clashes with common sense. “If I’m walking down the street, and the neighbor across the street is carrying a loaded 9 millimeter with a 15-round clip, that doesn’t make me feel safer.”

A 9mm with a 15 round magazine?  Why, that’s exactly what I carry.  I’ve never noticed any of my neighbors giving me worried looks.  Apparently these people don’t quite grasp the definition of the word concealed.

Countertop has an excellent post describing how gun owners often miss an opporuntity for even simple political action.  In regards to an issue poll sent out by his local state representative:

Well, there were somewhere between 569 and 580 surveys responded to. Its a pathetic rate. But then, there is only a small pool of people (especially in a transient area like this) who pay attention to local politics. On most issues, its tough to get a sense of where the area is. Views on taxes run the gamut, and include plenty of conservative and liberal positions as well as those incorporate a little of both. Same with transportation. On many of the questions significant numbers of people simply responded “I need more info.” On one, dealing with energy, 27.9% responded they needed more info.

And what was the result on the gun issue?

Now, 571 people responded to the question. I know the NRA has at least that many members in his district. And VCDL too. Heck, my local gun club has that many, not to mention the local Republican party.

500 people responded yes. Thats 87.6%.
Only 48 people responded No, a paltry 8.4%.

Folks, I can’t hold Jim Scott’s gun banning ways against him anymore. He’d be a fool to be anything but a gun banner. We have no business complaining about his votes when in a District with diverse views on everything else, nearly 90% of his constituents who care are against our gun rights. Until the large gun rights crowd in McLean makes their voice heard, his votes fall on their inactive hands.

Read the whole thing.  It’s a continual frustration that even the simplest of actions aren’t undertaken by gun owners.  The vast majority won’t lift their fingers to do much for their gun rights.  Even most NRA members pay their 35 dollars a year to Fairfax and figure their rights are taken care of.  NRA is merely our agents.  Creating a beneficial political climate NRA can work in is our responsibility as members.  There’s a reason that all these years later, NRA is stll using the slogan “I am the NRA!” because it’s true.

Not having had much luck with the trial balloon last week, the media would appear to be stepping up the story:

U.S. officials acknowledge that U.S. gun laws are partly to blame. The 1994 ban on the sale of assault weapons like AK-47s in the U.S. led to a decrease of such weapons south of the border. But the ban expired in 2004, and the numbers in Mexico spiked. Last week, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said the Obama administration would seek to reinstate the ban. Contributing to the problem is the fact that Mexico’s customs control is famously weak, and authorities rarely check inbound traffic from the U.S.

I think it is very interesting that the Brady Campaign has not commented on Mr. Holder’s statements publicly.  Why?  Quite likely because they understand what the consequences of it were.  It can successfully be classified as a “gaffe” which distracted the Administration from its legislative agenda, and angered enough Congresspeople that now Brady has to deal with a total repeal of D.C.’s ridiculous gun laws.

Not much hope/change for the Bradys yet.  They are still on the defensive.   But for how long?

UPDATE: They did make a release on it.  I must have missed it.

We are told the NRA are a bunch of ineffective weenies, who do nothing to fight for our gun rights, and exhibit demonstrably poor leadership on the issue.  Demonstrably poor leadership like capitalizing on Holder’s gaffe to actually ram a repeal of an “assault weapons” ban though an overwhelmingly Democratic controlled Senate.  It’s a local repeal, but if this passes the House in tact, and is signed by Obama, it’ll be legal to buy an AR-15 in DC with just a 4473 and NICS check.

The benefit of this, even if the gun rights language does not survive the conference committee, has been to force Senators, and soon House members, to put their cards on the table.  This lets us know far better where we stand in the 111th Congress than we did before.  Let’s look at some of our yes votes that were unexpected:

• Bayh (D-IN) – Not always friendly to guns, but voted with us.
• Bennet (D-CO) – We knew nothing about Bennet’s position on guns before this.
• Byrd (D-WV) – Byrd can be tricky on guns sometimes.  He was with us on this.
• Conrad (D-ND) – Not expected.  Good news.
• Dorgan (D-ND) – Also not expected.
• Feingold (D-WI)- Expected, but also can be tricky on guns.
• Gregg (R-NH) – He stuck with his fellow Republicans.  We applaud him.
• Hagan (D-NC) – F rated, so this is a real surprise.
• Landrieu (D-LA) – Very good for this C rated Senator.
• Lincoln (D-AR) – Excellent.
• McCaskill (D-MO) – Pleasant surprise.  F rated and AHSA endorsed.
• Pryor (D-AR) – Surprise
• Reid (D-NV) – Expected, but worthwhile to point out Reid is mostly pro-gun.
• Udall (D-CO) – Pleasant surprise
• Udall (D-NM) – Pleasant surprise
• Snowe (R-ME) – Held with party.  Unexpected.
• Specter (R-PA) – Expected, but likes to split with Rs often.
• Collins (R-ME) – Held with party. Unexpected.

Notables in the no column were Dick Lugar, the only Republican to vote against this, and Kirsten Gillibrand, who has now clearly calculated to retreat on gun rights a bit.  This is not to say the vote will be identical if an semi-auto ban comes up.  We’ll lose some of these yes votes, who represent politicians trying to split the middle on guns on an issue important to NRA, but not likely to be noted too heavily by the folks back home.  But we got the Senate on record, and soon the House.  That is tremendously valuable to us heading into the 2010 midterms.  We have to pick up pro-gun seats in 2010.  Don’t for a minute believe politicians like Obama, Pelosi, and their ilk won’t kneecap us at the earliest opportunity. The votes aren’t there right now, and we have to keep things that way.

For now, things are looking better than I thought. Congress didn’t just run from Holder’s remarks, they got in the car and peeled out in the opposite direction, choking him on burnt rubber.  This is not behavior politicians exhibit toward an ineffectual organization, especially after such a stunning blow in 2008.  But you know what?  I don’t credit NRA for this. They were just willing to exploit it on The Hill.  The credit goes to the millions of people getting active, buying guns, buying ammo, renewing their NRA memberships, getting concealed carry licenses, and generally engaging in activities that make politicians take notice.  NRA is nothing without engaged members, and at the end of the day, that’s what the politicians are really afraid of.  Let’s keep it that way.

Looks like both Pelosi and Reid are making it clear:

“Senator Reid would oppose an effort (to) reinstate the ban if the Senate were to vote on it in the future,” Manley told The Hill in an e-mail late Thursday night.

It was not immediately clear whether Reid would block the bill from the Senate, but his opposition casts serious doubt on its chances. Also, Manley noted that Reid voted against the ban in 1994 and again when it expired in 2004.

Don’t let this lull you into a sense of complacency.  We still have enemies in the Senate.  Diane Feinstein is vowing to continue fighting for a new assault weapons ban.  She won’t stop.  The progressives are formulating a plan to start replacing moderate and blue dog Democrats with solid progressives, and they will raise millions of dollars to do so.  The 2010 midterms are going to be vitally important.

Kirsten, Kirsten, why have thou forsaken me?   Gillibrand voted no on the DC gun rights amendment.  I think at this point, it is safe to say that my public advocacy for her is at an end.  In the battle to influence Gilly, and convince her to keep her A rating on the gun issue, gun owners in New York and elsewhere have lost, and the New York Times, Newsday, and Michael Bloomberg have won.

I do not regret my early advocacy for her.  She came out of the house with an A-rating and a solid, if not long record of being pro-gun, including supporting key issues like ATF reform, Tiahrt, Heller, DC gun rights, and other things.  She is still likely to be better than the likely Democratic or Republican alternatives.  New York is not Tennessee, Texas, or even Pennsylvania on the gun issue.  It will be a long road back to somebody like Al D’Amato for New York gun owners.

It is a stark lesson that principles often take a back seat in politics.  I’ve had it on good word from people who have dealt with Kirsten Gillibrand that she was a real believer in the Second Amendment, and I have little doubt she is, but she’s obviously more of a believer in winning elections.  She’s early in her political career, and has been elevated, with very little money in her campaign fund, to a state wide Senatorial office.  She’s facing the very real prospect of a primary challenge from the left, followed up by a tough battle against her Republican opponent.  She will likely never be more politically weak than she is right now, and she might, ultimately, end up defeated.  I still hold out the possibility that the Kirsten Gillibrand who emerges from all this, won’t be anti-gun, but for now, she’s on her own.  If gun owners in New York want to make the strategic move of supporting her because she’s better than the awful alternatives, that’s up to them, but she has a lot to make up to me before I’ll support her again.

I’m told that there’s been a pro-gun amendment attached to the bill giving DC representation in Congress. It basically guts Washington DC gun control regulations, and preempts City Council from further regulation. The amendment passed 62-36.

I am also hearing that Holder’s comments were instrumental in helping bring this issue back up, and picking up the votes it needed. So thanks Eric! We really appreciate the help getting this amendment tacked on to a must-pass bill for the Democrats!

This bill is too important for the Democrats for Obama not to sign it. It is a giveaway to an important political constituency, the part of it that gives DC representation is also completely unconstitutional to boot! So that part is likely to be thrown out by the courts.

Looks like today has gone from gloomy to pretty good!

UPDATE: Yep, NRA confirms there’s indeed been a vote.  If DC wants representation, they have to follow the Constitution.

UPDATE: Final bill passes the Senate with 61 votes.