Shall Not Be Questioned – Page 1461 – The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State …

Gunning for Obama?

I think Obama’s success has more to do with Hillary Clinton’s deficiencies than Obama’s own strengths. Both Obama and John Edwards lack political and executive experience. Of course, so does Hillary Clinton, but more importantly Hillary lacks the political talents of her husband, and carries all of his baggage too. But that’s neither here nor there. What I mean to bring up is a post from this blogger, which mostly speaks highly of Obama, but tripped over my google alert with this:

Can he still blow it? Yes, he can. The institutional Democratic Party, which has been behind Hillary Clinton, and which destroyed Dean with John Kerry, remains intact. America is filled with gun nuts, and any one of them could turn Obama into Martin Luther King Jr. at any moment.

No one doubts I have strong disagreements with Obama on the topic of guns, as do the rest of us here, but why the implication that us “gun nuts” are out to kill the dark ones? If anything, “gun nuts” have a much stronger disdain for Hillary Clinton than we do for Obama, but I don’t think any of us “gun nuts” want either of them dead. We don’t call people who would do that “gun nuts” we call them plain “nuts”, “murderers” or “assassins”, thank you.

Meaning of “Bear Arms”

Take a look at Clayton Cramer’s and Joe Olsen’s response to one of D.C. major assertions in Heller, that “bear arms” has some kind of military connotation.

Bob Barr on Georgia Issues & Heller

I’m glad to see Congressman Bob Barr, who has done more for gun rights in this country, both in and out of Congress, than a lot of other folks, speaking about the Heller case, and also praising some of the excellent work done by GeorgiaCarry.org:

While the debate over firearms rights in Georgia is often seen as a black and white issue — with gun control advocates lining up against the National Rifle Association (for which I serve as a board member) and other pro-Second Amendment groups, and with various media outlets taking sides reflective of the views of their editorial directors — the fact is, there is probably more that is not known about Georgiaï¿½s gun laws than is known. At least one group — GeorgiaCarry.Org — is working to educate not only lawmakers, but also journalists and the citizenry, concerning the history and extent of our state’s gun laws.

And closes with this:

These and other firearms-related issues likely will — and should — occupy the attention of our legislators during the 2008 session. One hopes that organizations like the NRA and GeorgiaCarry.Org, will continue to proactively educate and advocate on behalf of the inherent Second Amendment rights of all law-abiding Georgians, just as the lawyers representing such citizens in the District of Columbia will be doing in the Supreme Court early next year.

Hopefully NRA and GeorgiaCarry.org will be able to resolve differences over bills and work together.Â HB 915 is mostly a fine bill, with laudable and necessary objectives, but including the provision scuttling the parking lot bill was guaranteed to ensure NRA would not get behind it.Â Sometimes to work together, you have to put minor differences aside.Â Car carry is important to some gun owners, and while I don’t agree with it, if HB 915 is important to you, it’s not exactly a winning move to be selfish about your concerns, while saying someone else’s don’t matter.

I think reasonable people can disagree on the property rights aspects, I certainly have my views, which contrast against NRA’s and more than a few of my readers, I understand that taking that position has its consequences with other gun owners who disagree with me.

More on Georgia Issues

The Rome News-Tribune is covering the HB89, HB 915 controversy, and stumbles across the reason NRA is probably not backing HB 915:

Now for the meat in the coconut. Bearden’s bill – prefiled last week as HB 915 – contains this language: “Nothing in this Code section shall be construed to limit, restrict, or prohibit in any manner the existing rights of a private property owner, unless such private property has been leased to a government entity, and nothing in this Code section shall be construed to limit, restrict, or prohibit in any manner the existing rights of a private tenant, private employer, or private business entity.”

I didn’t see this section of HB 915 upon my first reading of the bill, or rather, what it did exactly didn’t quite sink in:

(c) This Nothing in this Code section shall not apply to competitors participating in organized sport shooting events. Law enforcement officers, peace officers retired from state or federal law enforcement agencies, judges, magistrates, solicitors-general, and district attorneys may carry pistols in publicly owned or operated buildings be construed to limit, restrict, or prohibit in any manner the existing rights of a private property owner, unless such private property has been leased to a government entity, and nothing in this Code section shall be construed to limit, restrict, or prohibit in any manner the existing rights of a private tenant, private employer, or private business entity

So basically HB 915, GeorgiaCarry’s preferred bill, scuttles HB 89, the NRA bill, by design, and you folks are wondering why NRA isn’t getting behind HB 915? Listen, I like the rest of the provisions in HB 915, but this isn’t a way to get things done.

I don’t agree with the NRA bill, but smearing them for not supporting your preferred bill when it undermines their preferred bill strikes me as not only unfair, but underhanded. If we spent half as much time going after the anti-gunners as we spend going after each other, we might get somewhere.

UPDATE:Â GeorgiaCarry.org has responded that HB 915 has nothing to do with HB 89, and that they have been working on this bill long before NRA introduced the parking lot bill.Â I do apologize for the insinuation that this was deliberate, but I’m still not sure I agree that this section doesn’t interfere with the main purpose of HB 89.Â I will have more on this, but be sure to follow the link to hear their side of this issue.

Unhappy Georgians

Both Conservative Scalawag and this guy are unhappy about NRA’s lack of support for Georgia HB 915, which improves Georgia’s carry laws by removing off limits places, and also includes a number of other pro-gun provisions:

Yep, the NRA, in my opinion has completely alienated the Georgia citizens and gun owners. This begs the question, are they even relevant as a pro-2nd Amendment organization any longer, or just another DC lobbyist group with its own interest at heart.

I wouldn’t go that far, but I agree that we should be asking for answers here, and I’m going to try to get one.Â This could be a matter of NRA believing that HB 89 is a more important legislative priority for them, which I think would be a mistake, but I also think it would be a mistake to pick up our toys and go home because we disagree on priority, or in my case, whether HB 89 is desirable at all.

If NRA were ignoring fighting an anti-gun bill in favor of pushing HB 89, then I would agree with a high level of outrage, but that’s not the case here.Â The fact is, HB 89, which prevents employers from firing employees for having a firearm in their vehicle, is important to a lot of gun owners, and I doubt the folks who support that bill feel like NRA is ignoring their concerns.Â Â We all have to be a little patient here.

As I have said before, I don’t agree with the NRA on pushing the parking lot stuff, but I’m not going to agree with the NRA on a lot of things over the course of years. Â Nonetheless, they’ve staked a lot of political capital on this particular issue, so from their perspective, it’s necessary for them to follow through.Â Before we get out the torches and pitchforks, let me see if I can find out what’s going on.

NSSF Alert

Apparently Citi Merchant Services and First Data Corp are being evil and refusing to allow credit card transactions between federally licensed dealers.Â NSSF provides contact info in the link above if you’d like to call them to tell them (politely) how much they suck.

Open Primaries in Pennsylvania

Here’s a good CenterDaily article about the primary system in Pennsylvania.Â Originally my opinion on open primaries was negative.Â I felt that it was a freedom of association issue, and that the parties should be able to control who votes in their primaries.

I’ve since changed my mind, and decided that if the political parties wish to hijack the election apparatus of the state in order to choose delegates to their convention, then the state gets to set the terms under which its election apparatus gets used.Â If the parties don’t like this, they can go back to using a caucus system like they do in Iowa.

So I’ll get on board with making Pennsylvania primaries open, and while we’re at it, how about joining Super Duper Tuesday so that candidates will actually pay attention to us.

What’s Wrong With These Women?

And more importantly, where were they when I was 14?Â Geez.Â I guess kids today who are hot for the teacher can thank Al Gore for his Internets.

Why Not Ban Kite String and Rubber Bands?

Politicians in New Jersey are doubling their efforts to save its citizens from themselves.

Robinson Arms Controversy?

From Robinson Arms XCR Wikipedia Entry:

On January 1, 2008, Alex Robinson, CEO of Robinson Armament Co., announced his endorsement of Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney on the Robinson Armament Co. website. This has led to considerable controversy in the firearms enthusiast community, as Romney indicated on a December 16, 2007 interview on Meet the Press that he would sign a reauthorization of the expired Federal Assault Weapons Ban. This endorsement is seen as peculiar because reauthorizing the Assault Weapons Ban would make sale of the XCR to civilians in the United States illegal. The endorsement has led to calls for a boycott of Robinson Armament Co. in the firearms community.^[2]

Robinson Armament has released a statement about this.

Many of you are supporting one of the very pro-gun candidates. That’s great. The question is: What if Mitt, Rudi, or John get the nomination? I think this is fair question.

If one of the solid gun stance candidates do not win and we totally alienate the other candidates, where are we?

If we were all really smart and working together to make sure all the bases are covered, we would make sure that we have some people working with the candidates who have less than stellar pro-gun records. Just in case they make it.

The reason I’ve been working with Romney is that I knew early on that he would be a contender. He’s got a lot going for him that a lot of people like. Though gun control issues are the biggest issues for you and I, many Americans feel there are bigger and more important issues. I completely disagree. A candidate’s stand on the Second Amendment is a litmus test. Candidates who want gun control are typically for big government, want to tax us out of existence, and support lots of other liberal ideas.

Read the whole thing. I don’t know if I’ll be willing to join the call for a boycott over this, but it’s some pretty bad political reasoning. Alex Robinson should have a talk with Bitter, who worked in this issue in Massachusetts under Romney. He’s unreliable, and will throw anyone under the bus if the political winds change, and he thinks it’s politically expedient for him to do so. It would be one thing if Romney already had the nomination locked up, but he doesn’t. It’s still time to fight for pro-gun rights candidates.

UPDATE: One guy even wants to go so far as to cut up and destroy his SBR XCR.Â I’d be happy to take it off his hands if it makes him feel dirty.Â I might be convinced to join a boycott, but I won’t go so far as suggesting people destroy a perfectly good rifle!