Hey Fuddies, Listen Up!

Dear Hunters,

I know some of you seem to think it’s OK to leave us evil black rifle types to the wolves, because, after all, they are never going to come after your grand daddie’s shotgun. Well, you need to wake up and pay attention to what’s happening in California:

In CRPA’s opinion, the Departments current regulatory proposal to further define what constitutes the “capacity to accept” a detachable magazine is nothing more than a covert attempt to ban as “assault weapons” most centerfire semiautomatic receivers and rifles in California. Accordingly, CRPA is in strong opposition to the proposed new regulations.

Who would have guessed? The anti-gun groups and politicians aren’t interested in just stopping at “assault weapons”. They’ll push laws and play with definitions until they get what they want; that’s right, your deer rifle. Because it’s not about reasonable gun laws. They’ve never wanted that. They hate guns and won’t stop until you can’t have one. So next time we tell you to fight with us, we really hope you listen. It might already be too late for you in California.


Evil Black Rifle Lovers

Mexico Wants Stricter US Gun Laws

Mexico is agitating for more strict gun laws according to Jeff Soyer. The funny thing is, the Mexican Constitution is modeled after the US constitution, complete with their own right to bear arms provision:

Article 10 – The inhabitants of the United Mexican States have the right to possess arms, in their residences, for their security and legitimate defense with the exception of those prohibited by federal law, and those reserved for the exclusive use of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and National Guard. Federal law will determine the cases, conditions, requisites, and places in which the bearing of arms by inhabitants will be authorized.

Of course, Mexican federal law pretty much prohibits everything. But surely this has to mean something, and doesn’t grant the Mexican federal government blanket powers to ban all firearms? Maybe Mexico should start respecting their own laws first, before they start asking other people to change theirs.

The NRA Strikes Back at Street

I’m pleased to see this up over at NRA News:

Philadelphia Mayor John Street talks tough when he pushes anti-gun laws, but when it comes to enforcing laws, he doesn’t put his money where his mouth is.

Philadelphia just set another record for the number of murders in 2006. Last year in the City of Brotherly Love, there were 406 murders, the most in almost a decade.

Yet instead of calling for increased enforcement and prosecution, Mayor Street is pushing a budget that’ll take a dozen prosecutors off the job!

Back in September, Mayor Street was more than happy to join New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg in demanding still more new gun bans for the state of Pennsylvania.

I will not go so far as to compare John Street to Wilson Goode, who is without a doubt the worst mayor that the City of Philadelphia has ever had, but the City has certainly not gotten better under Street’s watch. Cutting law enforcement and prosecution, appointing an incompetent Chief of Police, while at the same time as blaming law abiding LTC holders for the cities crime is just reprehensible. Does John Street really believe the gangs shooting it out over drug turf in North Philadelphia are bothering to apply for licenses to carry their guns with the Philadelphia Police? Does anyone really believe that?  Why does the Philadelphia press keep acting simply as mouthpieces for this nonsense rather than ask the hard questions?

Federal Gun Rights Bill Even a Federalist Could Love?

Of Arms and the Law gives us the text of a new law that has been introduced in Congress by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett of Maryland.  This looks like a bill even federalists might be able to get behind, since it appears to be essentially restoring second amendment rights through the 14th amendment.  It doesn’t explicity cite the source of Congressional power, but I seem to recall that Congress does not specifically have to state the enumerated power under which it passes legislation, it just has to fit within the scope of it’s powers.  So if my non-lawyer eyes are reading this right, it would let someone denied the right to have a firearm in Washington D.C., Chicago, or New York to obtain a firearm for self-protection, state or local law to the contrary.

That means this bill will absolutely infuriate Mayor Bloomberg, and for that reason alone, I think it would be worth passing.  Sadly, as Dave mentioned, there’s a snowball’s chance in hell of that happening, which is a sad statement on what’s become of our Congress.

My Letter to State Representative Chris King

Chris King (D-142), my newly elected state rep who defeated incumbent Matt Wright, is so green he doesn’t even have an e-mail address yet. But when he does, I plan to forward this along to him in regards to the subject of the legislation that Dwight Evans has introduced into the PA house.

Hon. Christopher King
Room 101A East Wing
Harrisburg, PA 17120-2142

Dear Representative King,

First, I would like to congratulate you on winning the seat to be representative of Pennsylvania’s 142nd Legislative District. Winning a seat held by such a long time incumbent is quite an achievement, and I look forward to having you represent us.

I’m writing you today about an article, appearing in the Philadelphia Inquirer on January 11th, revealing Representative Dwight Evans’ intention to reintroduce measures to revise the Commonwealth’s gun laws, considered and defeated in last September’s Committee of the Whole session of the General Assembly. I attended this meeting and had a productive conversation with Representative Wright on the issue, but since Representative Evans has announced his intentions to reintroduce these bills, I wanted to take time to discuss my views on this with you.

As I’m sure you are aware, the Pennsylvania Constitution, which you no doubt have recently taken an oath to uphold, recognizes an individual right to keep and bear arms in defense of one’s self and the state. While I share everyone’s concerns about the violence in the City of Philadelphia, as a gun collector and sport shooter, I urge you to oppose any of Representative Evans’ bills which place further burdens on our rights as Pennsylvanians.

While some of the proposals may seem reasonable, such as “one gun per month”, these types of laws do affect collectors, and will do very little or nothing to address the violence we’re seeing in Philadelphia. The City of Reading, which shares the same gun laws that the City of Philadelphia claims to be woefully inadequate, has experienced a sharp drop in violent crime this year after having a record year previously. The City of Pittsburgh, I understand, has also experienced falling crime rates. Philadelphia’s claims that our gun laws are inadequate would not seem to stand up to evidence, and I think The City would be better served focusing on effective solutions, such as putting more police officers on the streets, locking up violent criminals, and aggressively targeting gangs, rather than focusing on symbolic measures which won’t really address the problem.

Thank you for your consideration in this matter. I am happy to see that you were rated A- by the NRA in the last elections. Reading over your campaign materials, it seems we agree on many issues, so I hope your legislative record will give me cause to support you in future elections.


Langhorne, PA

I’m sickeningly nice when I want to influence them. I don’t even mind stroking their ego a little. What I won’t mention now, but might, if he starts buying into Evans’ and Rendell’s crap, is that I’ll do everything I can to make sure he’s a one termer if he pisses me off.

Here We Go Again

This one almost flew under my radar screen, but fortunately, David Codrea picked it up before I missed it:

Hoping that the new Democratic state House will be more receptive to gun-control legislation, state Rep. Dwight Evans yesterday said he will reintroduce a series of gun bills that previously failed.
“We have 50 new members in the House who are not entrenched, who can listen to reason,” Evans, a Democratic candidate for mayor, said at a City Hall news conference attended by a crowd of state and local leaders.
“What we want is common-sense gun policies that can stop the flow of illegal guns on our streets,” said Evans.
The package of 13 bills, which he said he’d introduce on Feb. 22, includes proposals to limit gun purchases to one a month, to ban assault weapons statewide and to allow cities to enact their own gun laws.
If the new Democratic house passes any of this shit, you’ll be out so fast your heads will spin. When Evans’ steaming pile of gun control manure came forward last year, culminating in the Committee of the Whole meeting, which I traveled to Harrisburg to attend in September, there was overwhelming opposition to all the measures Evans and his gun control cohorts wanted. Again, Philadelphia politicians are failing to understand that the city has a criminal problem and not a gun problem. Pushing the gun angle is a way to make it look like they are doing something, but it’s a dodge because they have no political courage to actually tell people what the problem is and solve it.I’d really like not to have to travel to Harrisburg again this year, but I will if it becomes necessary. My state rep at the time, who I met in last years session, and was sympathetic to the cause, was unfortunately voted out this fall. My new state rep, who’s part of the new Democratic caucus in the house, got an A rating from the NRA during the campaign, and I will have to write to him to make sure that he lives up to rating. I didn’t vote for Mr. King, but I have nothing against him, and would be willing to become a supporter if he keeps good on his promises.