Another Reason Dealers Shouldn’t Talk to Reporters

Now we have put the term “bling gun” into the vocabulary of reporters, namely the Washington Post. The article refers to the gold plated Desert Eagle that Gilbert Arenas was caught with in the Verizon Center in Washington D.C. That didn’t come from the reporter, it came from the owner of Atlantic Guns in Silver Springs. Nothing like associating legal gun purchases of legitimate collector pieces (a gold plated Desert Eagle is a wall piece, the kind you lock behind a nice piece a glass in a nice felt lined display case) with a term generally associated with people who have large sums of cash and few ways to convert them into legitimate, untraceable assets (gang members and drug dealers). That might lead the public to wonder what kind of people you’re selling guns to up there at Atlantic Guns. That might make them wonder about the legitimacy of the whole industry.

I’ve seen dealers represent the issue very well, but 9 times out of 10 a gun dealer talks to a reporter, they say something stupid. It’s really best if dealers, or really anyone not accustomed to dealing with them, take a policy of not taking to reporters. The few times I’ve been in that situation, I let Bitter deal with them (she’s a professional at this). Sometimes there are reporters looking to do a fair piece, most of the time they are looking for you to slip up so they can make gun owners look bad.

Concealed Carry Reciprocity Fixes Possible in Wyoming

I wasn’t aware there was a problem there. Only three times have I been pulled over or in a traffic incident that involved police while armed, and one of those was in Wyoming (found out they aren’t as mellow about speeding as Montana). Since Wyoming isn’t a state that requires you to inform law enforcement, I did not notify the officer I was carrying. Actually, the only time of the tree I informed was Texas, because it was the law, and that meant waiting for 20 minutes while the licenses were verified. Needless to say, I am not one who believes in informing law enforcement. I’m not going to shoot a cop. He or she isn’t going to get hurt by what they don’t know.

Reaching the Next Generation of Sportsmen

Today brings news that the fishing & boating industry group is taking another big step in their outreach to recruit young anglers as part of the Take Me Fishing campaign. They have worked with the Boy Scouts to offer up new merit badges for taking lessons in boating and fishing.

About the Scouting Patch Program –

* Passport Patch – Cub Scouts and Scouts aged 6 to 11 earn this patch by completing an introductory six-step program that teaches various skills to be knowledgeable, safe and confident while boating and fishing. The Passport to Fishing and Boating Program has been recognized by the Boy Scouts of America for excellence in aquatic education.
* First Catch Patch – Cub Scouts and Scouts aged 6 to 11 earn this patch by organizing a real-life fishing trip using the resources found on TakeMeFishing.org.
* Mentor Patch – Scouts aged 12 to 17 earn this patch by organizing a fishing trip for newcomers to the sport. The Mentor Patch develops leadership qualities and introduces someone new to boating and fishing.

These are obviously branded patches, but I have to admit that it will be interesting to see what comes of it – particularly the Mentor Patch. At that point, you go far beyond the basic fishing patch into actually encouraging kids to organize fishing trips for others.

I find this interesting because of how many shooters I know who cite the Boy Scouts as their first foray into the gun culture. It’s not surprising since there are two different badge categories for shooting (rifle & shotgun). It is interesting though that there is no hunting badge or anything that going to a range that only allows handguns would earn.

RBFF research reveals “90 percent of adult outdoor enthusiasts were introduced to nature-based activities between the ages of five and 18.” In that spirit, as part of a year-end donation, we called up the NRA Foundation and made a donation to youth programs. A few people come to shooting as an adult (I did in college), but an overwhelming number of people I’ve met who not only shoot, but actively do something to advance our movement (political or sporting) have been shooters since they were children.

Santorum Starting out Strong

It looks like defeated Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum is looking to run for President in 2012. I’d certainly take Santorum over Hope and Change, but his plan, if you can call it that, needs work. Kathryn Jean Lopez has it over at The Corner:

Because you’ve been with me through thick and thin, I wanted to share this plan with you first before anyone else.  It’s this simple:

  1. Reinforce our conservative allies in Congress for the next 11 months in order to slam the brakes on the Obama agenda.
  2. Take back the House of Representatives in the 2010 election.
  3. Lay the groundwork to defeat Barack Obama in the 2012 election.

You heard me right, XXXXXXXXXX.

See, I was really hoping I didn’t hear you right, Rick, because that’s not a plan. That’s putting the Republicans back in power, which is not a plan. Republicans, who I would point out, had six years of rule to get our house in order and failed, and Rick Santorum was part of that Republican leadership.

Santorum is a pretty consistent fiscal conservative, I’ll give him that, but I don’t think he’s presidential material, and this “plan” reinforces that. He better have seriously reinvented himself if he’s going to want me support in 2012.

Obama Going to “Help” in Massachusetts

It’s a difficult position Obama is in, in regards to the Massachusetts Senate race. After campaigning for Corzine in New Jersey and Deeds in Virginia, and having them both fail spectacularly, he’s going to be naturally reluctant to put his weight behind another candidate who might fail. But it looks like he’s going to go. I guess they really can’t take a chance of losing Massachusetts at this point. This article says it’s the a questionable decision, pointing out:

Obama has a net favorable rating in MA, according to public and private polls. A Suffolk Univ. poll out today shows 55% of MA voters viewing him favorably, while just 35% see him unfavorably. But the intensity of voters who view him unfavorably, or who disapprove of his job performance, is so high that an appearance with Coakley could bring out more GOPers ready to vote for Brown than it could Dems set on their nominee.

“Obama is radioactive in polls,” said one senior Dem operative who has seen the campaign’s internal numbers. “Every time they dropped his name in a poll, it was awful. So you just can’t take those kinds of chances.”

Personally, I would advise Obama to go if I were his political advisor. If he goes and loses, his presidency takes a hit from losing a Ted Kennedy’s seat in Massachusetts to the GOP. If he doesn’t go and loses, his presidency takes a hit from political failure, because the political earthquake that a Brown victory in Massachusetts would cause certainly will frustrate, if not outright derail the Administrations agenda. Everyone knows this race is important. Victory is really the only option that works for Obama, so he has to try to achieve it.

But from our perspective, there is no better way to but the kibosh on all this nonsense than by sending Scott Brown to the United State Senate, so if you live in Massachusetts, be sure to get out to vote next Tuesday for Brown.

UPDATE: More bad news for the Dems.

What Publishing Permit Information Gets You

I’ve said before that no gun owner ever complained about permits being public record until newspapers decided to be bozos and publish lists of permit holders. If the Brady Campaign and MAIG were smart, they’d be the first on the phone to these papers telling them to knock it off. I would have no problem with papers iterating through the permits finding and reporting on people who legitimately should not have them. But that’s not what they do. That’s what we would call real reporting, and no newspaper has the money to do that these days.

But why should the Bradys be against publishing? Because that will create a backlash that will cause the law to change.

Thursday, a House committee voted 11-0 to keep information about gun permits from being released to the public — information The Indianapolis Star has used to document how guns have fallen into violent hands.

The NRA lobbyist for Indiana is Ashley Varner, mentioned in the article, who used to handle NRA’s media relations with bloggers when she was working in ILA’s Public Affairs office. A lot of us bloggers know her, so I think I can speak for us all when I say “Go get em Ashley!”

Political Uncertainty

Democrats are probably crying in their coffee this morning with reports that a legit poll has Brown up by 4. That is within the margin of error, so it’s no assured victory. However, Geraghty notes that the numbers look right for a reasonable sample. At this point, it’s purely turnout.

Granted, lack of turnout by Republicans helped turn a red seat blue this week in Virginia – for gun owners, sent an A+ rated seat into the hands of an F rated candidate. The direct result of the election appears to be a shakeup on a key committee that may mean pro-gun reforms are stalled until the next election. No one can afford to be cocky.

In other news, it looks like the Massachusetts race has Charlie Cook re-examining a lot of other Democratic races perceived to be safe in 2010. Our own, PA-8, was just flipped from “Safe Democratic” to “Likely Democratic.” We’ve got until November to swing that to “Toss Up” and the Massachusetts Senate seat made the transition from “Solid Democratic” to “Toss Up” in just 8 days.

Well, At Least Now They Admit It

The Star Press is admitting that they are treating gun owners in Indiana like child molesters by publishing their permit information for people to search. The problem is they think this is how it should be, because those sex perverts could have gun permits, you know. Can you think of any offense that involves fondling children that doesn’t make one a prohibited person? I can’t.