The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State …
Joe is asking folks to call and e-mail their state senators, and has a list. This is a pretty bad and broad ban on so-called assault weapons. Even if you don’t live in Nebraska, if you live near Nebraska, shoot in Nebraska, or have some kind of tie to the state, call.
Bitter notices in an unrelated article that legislators in Nebraska are feeling the heat from NRA members over proposed gun control measures. Good! It’s how this is going to go down in flames.
Last month I wrote a bit on how we could begin to restore liberty and limited government in this country by seizing key social institutions back from the progressives:
If we want to reverse the progressive slide, we have to make progress in academia, particularly in topics that tend to feed the political elite, such as political science, law, and economics. The good news is, we’ve pretty much won on economics, and I think we’re making progress in law.
This post by Ilya Somin over at Volokh talks about progress we’re making in the legal realm:
Steven Teles’ important new book, The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement, does an excellent job of analyzing and explaining the growth of non-liberal public interest law. He notes that the success libertarian and conservative public interest law groups was not foreordained. Indeed, early efforts in the 1970s and early 80s were mostly dismal failures. How did the founders of IJ and CIR turn things around? Teles notes two important causes: the second generation of libertarian public interest firms learned from the the strategies of their liberal predecessors and distanced themselves from business interests.
Read the whole thing. IJ and CIR are worthy organizations that have shown demonstrated progress on the issue. This is a generational fight, but I believe if we work hard enough, it’s winnable.
Interesting article. Luckily, Pennsylvania has company, and we’re not even really the worst. People are fleeing Michigan in droves. Followed by New Jersey. Pennsylvania is 42nd in terms of percentage of outbound moves. California has lost the most in sheer numbers. Why?
“When California faced a Mount Everest-sized $14 billion deficit in 2003, one of the major causes for the red ink was the stampede of millionaire households from the state,” Laffer and Moore note in their report. “Out of the 25,000 or so seven-figure-income families, more than 5,000 left in the early 2000s, and the loss of their tax payments accounted for about half the budget hole.”
People don’t like high taxes? Who knew?
The Golden State also has tarnished itself among less-wealthy persons. Moore said migration trends based on moving company data show California had the second-highest domestic population outflow of any state in 2005 “despite the beautiful weather, beaches, and mountains.”
California budget officials are predicting another $14 billion deficit this year, although the state has some of the highest tax burdens in the nation. The state budget has ballooned from $79.8 billion in fiscal 2004-05 to $102.3 billion this fiscal year, a jump of 28 percent.
Makes you wonder if Californians were really better off voting for Arnold, who has ruled more like a Democrat than a Republican, than they would have been with Cruz Bustamante. The California political establishment likes big government, and those that don’t are voting with their feet.
Pennsylvania is in trouble too. We have a particularly difficult time keeping young people in this state, enough that it was a campaign issue for Rendell. It’s amazing when I go to DC, the difference in demographics. Bitter is one of the older persons in her workplace, and she’s seven years younger than me. At 34, I’m one of the youngest here at mine, and it’s been the same story at every workplace since I left college. People my age got their degrees and went elsewhere. Same with my shooting club. You don’t see too many guys there under 50, let alone 40. I worry that young people aren’t taking to the traditional shooting sports, but then I think “Maybe the reason you notice this is because there just aren’t any young people left in your state?” If that’s the case, we’re in a lot of trouble. I suspect with Pennsylvania, it’s mostly a lack of opportunity driving young people away. Why are there few opportunities here? Because Pennsylvania has among the highest corporate taxes in the country, and it’s a horrible drain on businesses.
Today is the big day for Hillary. Texas and Ohio primaries. I’m giving a big presentation today, so I don’t have much time to think about it. I will leave you in the capable hands of Marshall Manson, who thinks the Democratic primary won’t end today. I certainly hope so. The more they fight each other, the less likely we are to have to deal with either of those two in the White House come next January.
Taking a look at the new Walther SP22, I notice this at the bottom:
Important Note: The SP22 is not available for sale in California. Void where prohibited by law.
I wonder if California’s laws in this matter, which seem to ban ordinary .22LR sporting pistols, is the kind of law that Ray Schonke finds to be reasonable. Kudos to Walther (and by association Smith & Wesson) for not subjecting the rest of us to California’s nonsense.
… and spend the evening reading Kevin’s long but good tome on the history that’s lead us forward to Heller.
Rep. Norm Dicks may derail the National Parks rule change:
Dicks vows to block bid to lift ban on loaded weapons in national parks WASHINGTON – With a showdown looming, U.S. Rep. Norm Dicks says he’s prepared to block any effort by the administration to lift the current ban on carrying loaded weapons in national parks.
It’s not an idle threat.
As chairman of the House Appropriations interior subcommittee, Dicks oversees the National Parks Service’s annual budget and is in a position to prevent the administration from dropping the Reagan-era ban. While the Washington Democrat is usually reluctant to add legislative provisions to his spending bill, he is ready to make an exception in this case even if it prompts a presidential veto.
Remember this when the Democrats try to tell you how much they support the second amendment this fall. I have a great deal of respect for our staunch pro-gun Democrats like Dan Boren, John Tester, Rich Boucher, and many others, but the fact is they are part of a party who promotes leadership that are actively hostile to the rights of gun owners. We are not talking about arming people in National Parks here, simply making National Parks compliant follow whatever rules the states want to put in place on the matter of firearms. Right now, I can be arrested if I travel through a National Park on the way to shoot somewhere else. That’s not right. It should be changed.
I’m guessing, based on this article, that AHSA is done acting like a pro-gun group, and has actively decided to come out as an attack dog of the anti-gun faction of the Democratic Party.
NRA’s right wing attack dogs have been having quite a time this past week trying to weave a web of deception designed to discredit me and the leadership of the American Hunters and Shooters Association (AHSA). In my recent diaries at Daily Kos (here and here), I have carefully laid out how AHSA, a new progressive gun rights organization, tapped into the concern of rural hunters and shooters over NRA’s failure to address access to public land and environmental issues resulting in a stunning NRA defeat in the hotly contested 2006 Missouri US Senate race. I’m sure many Kos readers were as surprised as I was that NRA, once again, acknowledged AHSA’s campaign made the difference for Claire McCaskill in that key 2006 Senate race.
Apparently we bloggers are now not only on the take, but also NRA’s “right wing attack dogs”. Forgive me for a minute while I check myself for fleas. They are correct that AHSA’s campaign was recognized in that link, but if you follow it, NRA basically calls them liars:
AHSA’s political activities are predictable when you consider its primary goals are to discredit the NRA and advance the interests of anti-gun politicians. AHSA`s first effort was in the 2006 Missouri Senate race. AHSA used direct mail to mislead sportsmen and distort the landmark work NRA was doing to protect millions of acres of wetlands in Missouri. While NRA was working with legislators to protect the 100-year flood plain in Missouri from development and ensure that land would be available to hunters, AHSA produced direct mail falsely claiming the NRA had “sold out hunters†so that they could mislead sportsmen into voting for anti-gun candidate Claire McCaskill (See Who Needs Another Alternative To NRA for more information.) Unfortunately, AHSA’s lies were at least partly to blame for McCaskill’s election and the loss of Sen. Jim Talent, a valuable friend of gun owners and sportsmen.
Read the whole thing. Pretty clearly AHSA is attempting to get progressive street creds by pitting their “progressive” yin to NRA’s “right wing” yang. I would note that there’s another group that uses this exact tactic, known as Gun Owners of America, and AHSA would fall all over themselves if they were half as good at playing this card from the left as GOA is at playing it from the right.
Their leaders call our first responders “jack booted thugs”; they fight efforts to restrict armor piercing handgun ammunition that threaten cops; they oppose background checks on all sales at gun shows; they opposed voluntary industry efforts to provide free child safety locks with all new guns sold; they oppose efforts to keep guns out of the hands of terrorists; they want to repeal restrictions on keeping guns out of bars and restaurants when liquor is served; they want to force employers to allow guns in the work place; they oppose efforts of our nation’s big city mayor’s to stop illegal gun traffickers ;and, incredibly, they want to criminalize efforts by law enforcement to share crime gun trace information. This is just a short list that more than justifies labels like “right wing whackos”.
Wait, am I reading something by AHSA or the Brady Campaign? You guys aren’t even pretending anymore.  Face it Schoenke, the gig is up. You’re another gun control group, and it couldn’t be more obvious. Everyone should read the whole sorry thing.
I see some folks seem to be confused about how NRA elections work. I’ve noticed questions in comments on other blogs too. NRA has some internal protections in place to prevent exactly this type of scenario:
“I had this grand plan — if they had four million members, I’d get five million Americans to join [NRA], vote for me, and then I’d dismantle the organization,” – Michael Moore
Fancy plan, but it won’t easily work. NRA has voter eligibility requirements, and seventy six board seats, none of which are ever up for election at the same time. The board does not direct day to day activities of NRA, but they do hire Chris Cox and Wayne LaPierre. They also oversee various activities of the Association through various committees. Seventy five of the board members are elected to three year terms. The seventy sixth board member is only elected to a one year term every year at the annual meeting. Who ends up on the ballot is determined by the Nominating Committee, which is largely composed of existing board members.  NRA membership can run petition candidates on the ballot to bypass the Nominating Committee process. Driving change within NRA is a slow process, and would require a prolonged desire by membership to move in a certain direction.
But back to voter eligibility. All life members are eligible to vote in NRA yearly elections. People with continuing memberships are eligible to vote after five unbroken years. If you have let your membership lapse at any period of time in the past five years, you’re not eligible to vote in NRA elections. When you are eligible to vote, you will get a ballot included in your issue of National Rifleman, America’s First Freedom, or whichever NRA publication your subscribe to. Your existing publication for this month probably contains bios, but may not contain a ballot if you’re a new member. If you’re pretty sure you’ve had five unbroken years of membership, and your issue doesn’t have a ballot in it, call NRA’s membership number and see about getting one if you want to vote. I have heard of people failing to get ballots when they were eligible to vote.