Politics – Page 183 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Gun Control Out, Fireworks Control In…

I don’t really believe that gun control as “the” solution is on its way out the door anytime soon, but one MAIG mayor seems to have found a different inanimate object to blame on his city’s lower quality of life – fireworks.

In Pennsylvania, residents can’t buy the good fireworks. But non-residents are free to do so, which attracts quite a few people from New Jersey and New York. The businesses that set up are a great source of at least temporary employment (we have one that operates all year round here), and obviously a source of tax revenue.

Allentown has long banned residents from setting off fireworks, yet the city still issued permits allowing businesses to sell the pyrotechnics.

On Friday, City Council members joined with Mayor Ed Pawlowski to silence that mixed message with an ordinance that would end the permits and ban the sale of fireworks throughout the city. …

“If they can’t be used here, there is no reason to offer them here,” Pawlowski said. “We don’t need out-of-town fly-by-night operators setting up shops that reduce our quality of life in the city.”

Clearly, these devices which are not legal to use in the city are responsible for all of the problems in Allentown. Just by banning these damn stores, Allentown will increase their quality of life – except for those jobs and tax revenue, not that either one of those things is needed in the Great Recession.

It shouldn’t be surprising that a MAIG partner organization in Pennsylvania is pushing a similar ban on gun stores in their legislative questionnaire this year.

Good News for Pat Toomey

Jim Geraghty notes that, historically, if you’re six up thirty days out from the election, you’re quite statistically likely to be the winner. This is good news because I find Joe Sestak particularly loathsome.

The Source of the Dwight Evans Smirk

When I sorted through the mess of ~~making sausage~~ passing Castle Doctrine here in Pennsylvania, I noticed something on the face of the Democratic Chair of the Appropriations Committee.

(Rep. Dwight Evans â€“ the anti â€“ had a very smug look on his face as he agreed, so Iâ€™m wondering what he got out of that deal.)

I was right to notice it because that smirk meant something. This alert just came out from NRA:

Your NRA-ILA has learned that anti-gun forces are plotting to attach a plethora of anti-gun amendments to House Bill 40 when the Pennsylvania House of Representatives returns to session Monday, October 4.

Such amendments include: a ban on semi-automatic rifles; â€œone-gun-a-monthâ€ purchasing restrictions; a prohibition on the use of out of state Right-to-Carry permits by Pennsylvania residents while inside the Commonwealth; mandatory reporting of lost or stolen firearms; mandatory storage of firearms within the home; and increased regulations of firearm ownership in Philadelphia. Two other amendments to this anti-freedom laundry list are currently pending.

Don’t Forget Your State Races

I have been harping on the importance of state representative and senate seats for ages, but this news from Governing just makes the point all that more stark:

When Governing last assessed the 2010 state legislative elections in July, the situation looked grim for the Democrats. The Democrats had 21 of their chambers in play, compared to just four for the Republicans — by far the most lopsided split we’ve seen in any of the past five election cycles.

Now, a few months down the road, the Democratic outlook for the state legislatures has only worsened. …

Putting it all together, we estimate that the Democrats are on the verge of losing a net of four to 12 Senate chambers and six to 15 House chambers. At the higher end of those ranges, the control numbers for state legislative chambers would be fully reversed. Today, there are significantly more Democratic-controlled state Houses and Senates. But if the GOP makes strong enough gains, it could hand the Republicans sizable leads in both chambers — just as the decennial redistricting process is set to begin.

In all, we’ve shifted 18 chambers from their July ratings — all in the Republicans’ direction.

Found via NCSL.

Time to Re-up My EFF Membership

EFF is going after Righthaven and the Las Vegas Review-Journal in a big way, and I have to hand it to the Democratic Underground for standing up to these bullies. It appears to me that the Righthaven guys are now in way over their heads:

Opsahl noted three intellectual property attorneys from the San Francisco law firm Winston & Strawn LLP are working on the case for the Democratic Underground on a pro bono, or public service, basis. They include Andrew Bridges, whom Opsahl called one of the nationâ€™s foremost intellectual property attorneys, with extensive experience defending Internet service providers.

Also working on the case for the Democratic Underground are J. Caleb Donaldson and Kathleen Lu of Winston & Strawn, Opsahl and Corynne McSherry of the EFF; and Las Vegas attorney Chad Bowers.

Righthaven are also now suing AR-15.com and Virginia Citizens Defense League. I’m not really going to be happy until these people are disbarred for this unethical behavior. I’m happy to live in a state where barratry is still a crime. Not that it helps people being sued in Nevada much.

More on Making Sausage Passing Castle Doctrine

As I mentioned last night, some kind of deal was made so that Castle Doctrine would be released from Appropriations today. The good news is that it was finally released on a 26-8 vote.

What jumps out at me are some of the names of people voting with us on this bill. Josh Shapiro was last rated D by the NRA – that’s hardly a pro-rights grade. Bryan Lentz takes pride in his F rating, so he’s definitely not a friend to gun owners. And yet they both voted with us, not once, but twice. That’s how far disconnected the Philly politicians are on this issue. It’s not enough for them to oppose it, but they have to put up roadblock after roadblock to keep a bill that gives us more opportunities to defend our lives from criminal attack from even being allowed a full vote.

Concealed Carry in New Jersey

Every once in a while we get a bill to make New Jersey a shall issue state. They never go anywhere. One recently was introduced by State Senator Jeff Van Drew. The requirements to get the license are insane, though it is technically shall-issue. It’s a 500 dollar annual fee, requires semi-annual qualification with a gun of the type you’re carrying, and your qualification will be the same as police. It does not, as best I can tell, have any reciprocity, but New Jersey technically will issue (if it did issue) to non-residents. So it would be possible to get a permit to carry in New Jersey as a Pennsylvania resident, you’d just apply directly to the New Jersey State Police.Â The media is not happy with this bill:

The idea that New Jersey needs a bunch of paranoid people toting ballistic binkies in public places is ridiculous â€” regardless of the safeguards. And, of course, the Legislature has more pressing issues, like property tax relief, a pension Armageddon, ethics and others. When did guns jump to the top of the list?

Nothing like a little condescension to start your day! Bryan Miller isn’t happy either. Our side is also not happy because of the insane requirements. Ordinarily I’d say we should support this law as a step in the right direction, and go back and try to correct the problems later, but I think ANJRPC may be setting up a lawsuit, since they’ve been pinging members asking about whether they’ve been denied a permit unfairly. Given that, I’d be reluctant to make the law harder to challenge.

Sausage Making – Castle Doctrine Edition

For those of you who aren’t paying attention, we’re fighting to pass Castle Doctrine in Pennsylvania. And, to be honest, I don’t blame you if you’re not paying attention. However, you can tell those of us who are by the imprints on our foreheads where we’ve beaten our heads against the wall a few too many times.

Castle Doctrine isn’t too popular with Philadelphia Democrats. In theory, that shouldn’t matter. Though the Democrats control the House, it’s by a narrow margin and definitely due to the number of rural, moderate Democrats. The Speaker is one of those types, so he should move anything he wants out to the floor. Alas, that is not how it works.

We managed to move the bill out of one House committee, but only in exchange for some votes on anti-gun bills. The good news is that ours passed, and none of the bad bills survived. But, somehow, the Castle Doctrine bill then went on to the Appropriations Committee that is chaired by an extremely unfriendly Philadelphia Democrat who wouldn’t let it out. (Resume head banging against the wall at this point, please.) So, we got the sponsor to push a discharge petition. Yay! Except…

NRA and other groups have been alerting gun owners that the discharge petition would happen any day now. And it never happened. Then, it was on the schedule for tonight, and we were getting great updates from Rep. Seth Grove on Twitter as the vote progressed. So, we tuned in to PCN (our state C-SPAN of sorts), and found out the effort is being abandoned. Head banging may resume…

According to the statement by the sponsor of Castle Doctrine, the Democrats have agreed to release the bill tomorrow morning out of the Appropriations Committee. (Rep. Dwight Evans – the anti – had a very smug look on his face as he agreed, so I’m wondering what he got out of that deal.) According to the Majority Whip, there will be a full House vote on Monday.

In addition to working through the House, NRA has been sending out alerts to try and drum up support for a Senate amendment to House bill that will accomplish the same goal.

So, if you live in Pennsylvania, call your state rep and state senators. You know the game by now. And, if you’re really up for a little sausage making exercise, tune into PCN on Monday to see if the House Democrats hold true to their word.

UPDATE: According to Rep. Grove’s Facebook updates, the final votes will actually happen on Tuesday and Wednesday.

The Second Amendment Post 2010

Jim Geraghty has pointed out a serious issue with the 2010 elections, from a gun rights perspective:

[…] it seems like a lot of rural Democrats who represent districts that voted for Bush and McCain have figured out that when theyâ€™re accused of being liberals, as long as they never vote wrong on guns, they can always point to their NRA endorsement and use that as cover. […]

This is the primary mistake many of these Democrats have made. Voting the right way on the gun issue can offer you some cover, but it’s not absolute protection if you get all the other voters out there angry at you. This means you can’t run in right leaning districts, vote for deficit busting government takeovers of health care, and expect to stay in office because you voted the right way on the gun issue.

The big question is what effect is this going to have on the Democrats disposition toward the Second Amendment going forward? Certainly after November, our opposition will be hammering on the point that, because NRA could not offer perfect protection, Democrats obviously have nothing to gain by being pro-gun. I worry that 2010 will undo many of the bipartisan gains we have made in this issue.

But it is worth pointing out, at least for Democrats, that adopting pro-gun views did lead to electoral success in rural districts before the Obama/Pelosi Health Care Reform Express started barreling down the tracks, with little concern over what political careers might get run over in the process. The lesson for Democrats is not that they have nothing to gain by being pro-gun, but that you can’t piss off multitudes of voters on other issues, then expect the single issue gun vote to save you. Even if all our people voted in lock step this election, we can’t stop an anti-incumbent tidal wave this big.

Bad Encryption Policy Rears Ugly Head Again

Years ago there was an effort to create encryption that had a “back door” for law enforcement. Looks like Obama is reviving this idea. It’s a horrible idea, and not technologically feasible. You can’t have secure encryption that has a back door. I’m not sure how the government expects service providers to detect and disable encryption. Maybe I’m just sending gobbelty gook for my own personal edification.

This is like gun control. It’s not enforceable, and the only people who will comply will be those who have nothing to hide.Â It’s a bad idea that’s largely unworkable. Compliance is going to be very low. But I for one am so glad those civil liberty loving Democrats are in charge. If those authoritarian Republicans were in charge, I don’t know what we’d do!