It’s not a bug, it’s a feature
The press is all goo-goo because, well, I’ll let them tell it:
Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, who once owned a .45-caliber revolver, is not licensed to carry a concealed handgun in Texas. State officials refused Monday to reveal whether she has ever been licensed.
Miers’ brother gave her the Smith & Wesson handgun when he was worried about her living alone in Dallas. Judge Nathan Hecht of the Texas Supreme Court, a longtime friend of Miers’, has said she kept the gun for a long time.
State law requires the release of information about license holders but not former license holders, said Pamela Smith, assistant general counsel for the agency
A person in Texas can own a gun without a concealed handgun license. Texas is one of 43 states that allow concealed weapons, and more than 230,000 residents are registered under the law.
So, she owned a gun. Big deal. Say, I never recall one story about the Chinese assault rifle that John Kerry may or may not have owned.
October 11th, 2005 at 8:46 am
Diane Feinstine packs heat too.
Gun control hypocrites abound so owning a handgun is no bona fides when it comes to amendment 2 issues.
October 11th, 2005 at 10:28 am
More Gun Hysteria
Fox (search) News and the Ass. Press are reporting that *gasp* Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers owned a gun without a license. Nevermind that there is no ownership license in Texas.Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, who once owned a .45-caliber…
October 11th, 2005 at 12:47 pm
While I don’t wish to cast aspersions on Ms. Mier’s manhood, er, womanhood, er personhood, I think a .45 LC is a bit much for the lady.
A nice, compact .38 Special would be a much better choice.
October 12th, 2005 at 6:21 am
From the way some of our more notable pundits on the right are inflamed over the Miers nomination and, more recently, the offense taken by what I perceived as the casual dismal by our First Lady of Lauer’s statement concerning possible sexism, both women had best go out and pick-up the latest and greatest in concealable full auto’s. In fact, this is the only comment I’ve made on the Miers nomination and that because I’d read Miers owned a weapon and had thought, ‘Smart woman, she probably knows how to use it.’
While I’m on this subject for the first and last time, I’d just read a post at the Corner by Podhoretz in which he wrote, ‘Hugh Hewitt suggests that there will be a major crack-up on the Right because of the Miers imbroglio.’ which he then goes on to dispute.
I’d certainly hope the nomination would not be the cause of a ruckus and split as Hugh suggests, as it would tend to be indicative of a poorly formed and very loosely aligned base. Certainly a portent of future political disaster, no-matter this particular case or some later one.
We’ve certainly bigger fish to fry. Like one akin to the Fraud’s offer of Royal Pardon to 36 terrorists named in wanted(if I recall – dead or alive) list they’d circulated last summer. It sounds like a proposal some of our Democrat’s would enshrine.