The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State …
Here’s the vote breakdown on the Amtrak bill. Â Senator Specter was among the no votes, along with a lot of other Democrats. Â Keep in mind this is a bill so modest, even the Brady Campaign doesn’t have a problem with it. Â No Republican voted against it.
I think it’s safe to say that Arlen Specter’s NRA grade is toast this election. Â I hope, in fact, that NRA will endorse his opponent.
The Senate voted for Amtrak to allow firearms to be transported aboard trains as checked baggage, in the same manner as they are permitted on aircraft. Â Amtrak is complaining they don’t have the manpower, but I don’t see what manpower they need. Â Last time I took Amtrak, they didn’t exactly have elaborate security measures. Â Most of what goes on in a train station is even more security theater than you see at airports.
UPDATE: Helmke:
Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said he “doesn’t have problems with people transporting guns on trains so long as steps are taken to make sure they’re secured and properly stowed.”
I guess this one was a little too reasonable for them to oppose. Â It would be hard to argue against, considering security concerns are much higher on planes, and you can transport firearms on planes in checked baggage.
Cemetery reports that an attorney in New Jersey has noticed the trend:
More importantly however is that gun rights in New Jersey has taken a big step back. Thus, I’m afraid that denials will spike and that they have actually already started. I’ve been very, very successful with the many gun permit applications that I have handled. However, I have noticed an increase in the amount of denials that other people have had.
I doubt the one-gun-a-month law, signed by Governor Corzine last month, has anything to do with it, since it does not go into effect until January. More likely there were many first time gun buyers motivated to go through an unfamiliar process during the Great Obama Gun Rush, and police departments are now getting around to denying a lot of applications which were improperly filled out. Â New Jersey is one of those states where it probably makes sense to hire a lawyer to help you through the process.
Richard Aborn, former head of the Brady Campaign, goes down in flames in the New York City District Attorney primary. Â He ran his entire campaign on his record fighting for gun control, and came in dead last, despite raising a lot of money and having a ton of endorsements from the who’s who in New York City gun control politics. Â Even in New York City, people really care more about other issues.
This from the Yakima Herald in Yakima, Washington:
So he signed a pledge, as have more than 450 other mayors from 40 states across the nation, to find ways to keep illegal guns out of the hands of criminals, the mentally ill and juveniles.
Nothing wrong with that, right?
Not so fast. The National Rifle Association says the Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the nonpartisan group that Yakima’s mayor joined, is nothing more than another thinly veiled attempt to limit gun ownership — this time by trying to regulate private gun shows out of existence.
Except the Yakima Herald doesn’t seem to realize what a snow job Bloomberg has pulled over on these mayors. Â His group has very little to do with illegal guns, and that’s apparent just looking at their issues list to anyone reasonably well researched in gun control policy. Lautenberg’s gun show bill, which they support, goes way farther than just regulating private sales, and is aimed solely at making gun shows, or any place where firearms are transferred, so legally risky as to effectively put them out of business. Â That’s not even mentioning their support for eliminating your right to bear arms based on your presence on a secret government list with no due-process or recourse through the court system.
Gun owners need to call these mayors to task for supporting this nonsense. Â Don’t let them get away with just repeating Bloomberg’s snow job. Â Point out to your mayor exactly what they are doing in his or her name. Â Definitely don’t be these guys:
“It’s like talking to a stone wall,” he said.
He’d prefer Brenner not be in the mayors’ group, he said, “but you know . . . that’s only one opinion.”
Ron Scheeler, an NRA member from Springettsbury Township, said he received the card, too, but didn’t call.
The retired state police commander said he still has a permit to carry a gun.
“I believe I have a right to do this,” he said. “I also believe people have a right to state their point of view also.”
These guys are why we lose. Â Elected officials have a right to an opinion, but they don’t have a right to represent their opinions on behalf of your town, nor do they have a right to continue to serve in the capacity as mayor. Â If your town has a MAIG mayor, make life difficult for them. Â All it takes is a few squeaky wheels.
Despite pleas from California’s firearms proponents, three anti-firearm bills squeaked in just before the end of the legislative session, were passed, and are now headed for Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s desk. At this point, should he not veto them, ammunition registration (AB962), added retailer paperwork (SB 41) and the prohibitions on gun shows in the Cow Palace exhibition center (SB 585) will be signed into law, and gun owners will have lost three more battles.
The California Association of Firearm Retailers and the National Shooting Sports Foundation fought against these pieces of bad legislation. Another organization, the National Rifle Association, was conspicuously absent. Now, it’s up to residents and concerned citizens to persuade Schwarzenegger to veto them.
The best way to do that is to give him plenty of feedback- respectful feedback – asking that he veto AB 962, SB 41 and SB 585. You can call his office at (916) 455-2841, fax it at (916) 455-3160, or email him at:Â http://gov.ca./interact.
Emphasis mine. Â Jeez Jim, are you getting your information from Larry Pratt these days? Â I will admit that I do not follow California politics that closely, but just doing a bit of looking you have this, this, this, and this. Â Not to mention Ed Worley, the NRA lobbyist for California has appeared on Cam’s show several times over the past few weeks to talk about what’s been going on in Sacramento. Â Just because we lost doesn’t mean NRA isn’t there. California’s a tough state. Â We don’t have much to work with, and we all know that. Â I’m open to criticism of NRA’s strategy in California, but as with most criticism I see out there of NRA, this one isn’t based in reality.
The City of Pittsburgh seems to be backing off the assault weapons ban issue.
In looking over the mayors who are not actually in office, I tried to put together how many of those mayors were not actually in office on the day that Bloomberg ran the anti-concealed carry advertisement in USA Today. I did this a while ago in my Mayors Against Guns research, but I completely forgot to note it. I have since updated with more information, and what I found was rather jarring.
It would appear that at least 19 of the mayors whose names ran in the USA Today ad were not actually mayors of the cities listed. At least one was attributed to a city he has never represented while most were long booted from office. That’s not a policy spin dispute, that’s a matter of flat out lying.
Add to the fact that at least two mayors have directly said they never approved their signature to the advertisement, and I would say that USA Today should be asking some serious questions before accepting any other ads from Mayor Mike.
Last night’s episode of Cam & Company featured a spokesman from Buckeye Firearms Association who argues that several mayors he’s heard from or about did not even know they were members since they do not ever recall signing up for the coalition. This raises concern that they did not give Bloomberg permission to print their names in support of his policy position in the USA Today advertisement. That would put the number of names erroneously printed at 24. Two dozen errors on one page is not acceptable in any newsroom, why would USA Today publish such falsehoods as part of an advertisement?
If you are looking to advertise with USA Today, perhaps signing Bloomberg’s name to a pro-gun measure, you can find the specs here. Technical specs are widely available, but ethical specs are apparently optional.
UPDATE: The Mayor of Winter Park, FL is on Cam & Company tonight. He confirmed that Mike Bloomberg never checked with them before signing their name to the advertisements and letters to Congress.