Shall Not Be Questioned

Frank Lautenberg held a very Brady press conference yesterday, saying he’ll introduce legislation to end the “gun show loophole,” which is code speak for making it a federal crime to sell or give a gun to your shooting buddy or family member.  Since we were in Harrisburg yesterday, we didn’t get a chance to report on this while it was breaking.  Virginia Shooting Sports Association has a pretty thorough rundown.

I would also point out that we have a ban on private transfers on handguns here in Pennsylvania.  It is impossible to legally obtain a pistol without a background check. Yet Our gun laws are constantly touted as “ineffective” and “insufficient” by those pushing for more.   The exceedingly high crime rate in Philadelphia is always pointed to as an example of that.  It’s too easy to violate the law, and too difficult to enforce it.  It will only be obeyed by those who know the law, and are interested in complying with it.  Which is to say, not the people murdering police officers in Philadelphia.

All in all, I’d say it was a very successful day.  This was, without a doubt, the largest rally of any of the past ones I’ve attended.  I’d estimate turnout of over 1000.  The Capitol Police said they were turning away people because they couldn’t fit them all on the rotunda.

I checked my Glock and Kel-Tec with the Capitol Police when I came in, and they had to escort me to their lockers downstairs in their offices, because the arms locker by the security checkpoint had overflowed.  I was a bit confused about how they handled the security checkpoint.  I declared my firearm, and the officer asked me to empty stuff onto the x-ray belt.  I started pulling my KelTec out (with the holster), and had it in my hand and he corrected me not to put the gun (in the holster) on the x-ray belt.  He waved me to go through the metal detector, which beeps like all hell because I had two guns on me.  It is not an instinctive act to go through metal detectors while armed, and I wanted to be sure I understood the instructions correctly.  Got escorted downstairs, and got a receipt for the guns.  Checking out was no problem.  Show driver’s license, show LTC, verify serial numbers matched the receipt, and we’re good to go.

I’m happy to report that we seem to be continuing the tradition of PAFOA people getting screamed out of Babbett Joseoph’s office.  She shouted some hate at a group this year too, saying “I think you people are crazy.”  Apparently never having looked in a mirror herself.  Most of the other Philadelphia politicians who are against us are cordial, and hear us out.  Not her!  Bitter and I stopped in to a few of our area politicians who have been supportive to introduce ourselves, and talk about the issue, and our concerns, and explain what we do and what we can offer them.  The Philadelphia suburbs are changing politically, and we’re not going to hold on to them if we don’t get organized.  Remember, Rendell was able to buck NRA by keeping quiet on guns, and by playing up to his natural base in the Philadelphia suburbs.  We are the hinge on which the state pivots.  We lose the Philly suburban legislators on guns, and we lose the state.  That’s what’s at stake in our districts.

Had a nice talk with NRA’s State Liaison, John Hohenwarter.   Bitter and I were looking for some advice on how to get connected with people and other activists he might know in our area.  We’re really looking to have a good ground game together for the 2010 elections.

We met with our State Representative, Frank Farry, while we were in Harrisburg.  We had a nice conversation with him on the issues, and I think we have much common ground.  Representative Farry will be a solid legislator on our issue if we can help him stay in office for the next couple of terms, and get his seat a little safer.

It’s challenging being in a suburban district, in a relatively anti-gun media market, and he’ll no doubt be under a lot of pressure to mediate his stand.  We seem to be off to a good start.  He told a story of an NRA member who took his magazine into the voting booth at the same time Rep. Farry was voting himself.  On the way out the man said “I was with you until I saw this in the magazine,” referring to the giant “?” next to his name, because his campaign manager didn’t get the NRA questionaire in on time.  It’s because of guys like that, who take their magazines into the voting booth, that we’re still in good shape.  Now, if Representative Farry, and dozens of other suburban lawmakers stand with us on issues, it is incumbent on us to do everything we can to help them fight off challengers to their seats, and those challengers will surely come.  This is a tough issue in the suburbs, and politicians are balancing a lot of issues.  Particularly for new legislators, we have to be especially proactive at keeping them on our side.

Looks like newly elected Delaware Governor Jack Markell is joining his buddy Ed Rendell in denouncing firearms that look like assault weapons.

Markell’s gun initiatives include:

• Banning what gun-control advocates call assault weapons, semiautomatic rifles with military characteristics such as large-capacity magazines, flash suppressors and pistol grips or thumbhole stocks.
• Exempting Wilmington from the state law that prohibits counties and municipalities from enacting gun ordinances.
• Limiting what he termed “bulk purchases” of handguns.
• Closing the “gun-show loophole.” Licensed firearms dealers selling at gun shows must perform the state and federal background checks required by law.

I’m sure a lot of competitive shooters would be surprised to discover that thumbhole stocks were a dangerous feature to have on their rifles.  There’s a pretty good chance the Governor doesn’t have the votes to get this passed.

“Law-abiding citizens have nothing to fear from any of my proposals on guns,” Markell said, adding that his goal is to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them.

Yes, which is exactly why you’re talking about banning certain scary looking semi-automatics for everybody, and probably a few non-scary guns if they can get away with it..  Do these people listen to themselves when they talk?

I’m in the car headed to the rally this morning in Harrisburg.  Obviously not the one driving.  I can blog at the same time as doing many other things, but driving is not among them.  Yesterday I noticed a post by a blog I’ve highlighted here previously.  Capitol Ideas is a well done blog, but that’s not to say that I agree with the author on everything.  One of them is might possibly be gun rights.  See, the thing is, Wayne was right in everything he said.  Most folks don’t realize that these so-called assault weapons are actually less powerful than grandpa’s deer rifle, and almost certainly less lethal than the 12 gauge shotgun that you actually will find in a duck blind.

But it seems controlling guns isn’t enough for some folks, especially politicians in Harrisuburg:

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Tom Caltagirone, D-Berks, said recent events highlight the need for a fix in the law since the protective suits are being used more and more often by criminals.

“What purpose does body armor serve outside of law enforcement? There may be a bill,” Caltigirone said.

But a spokeswoman for the NRA argued that the vests serve a legitimate purpose, with everyone from your local pizza delivery-guy to schoolkids (???) are sporting Kevlar. “Do we take that away from them, or do we have government do its job?” spokeswoman Kim Stolfer asked.

Kim isn’t a spokesman for the NRA, and I’m not sure there are really too many school kids sporting kevlar these days, but there are plenty of professional jobs where it’s a good idea.  I wouldn’t be a bartender in a rough bar without wearing ballistic protection.  Definitely wouldn’t be a bouncer, security guard, or even pizza delivery guy, as Kim mentions.  There are plenty of reasons that ordinary citizens might decide to wear a little ballistic protection.

But aside from that argument, I think there’s a good case to be made that armor falls under the term “arms” and thus possession by the law abiding is constitutionally protected.  They certainly qualify as being in “common use” since they are worn by people in dangerous professions, and one can hardly consider body armor particularly dangerous.

Plus, and maybe I’m crazy here, I just have a problem with the government saying “I’m sorry, but we have to be sure we can properly shoot you, should it ever become necessary.”  That doesn’t sit well with me.  In some ways, I feel like that’s worse than taking my guns away.  It would be like declawing a cat, vs cutting a foot off so he can’t run so fast.