The other Democrats and guns
I’ve been highlighting a lot of the good. Michael Bane says not so fast:
I got a quick bulletin from Jim Shepherd at The Shooting Wire, the only guy in this business with more (and sneakier) contacts than moi, that elements of the gun control agenda WILL be in the Dems’ “First 100 Hours” Pelosi action plan
Folks, if that’s the case, the only thing that can stop it is from within the Democrat party. Don’t count on Republicans, they couldn’t even stand up to one another.
Update: Countertop says nyuh-uh:
Heck, what your gonna find is that no anti gun legislation is getting through the senate – indeed we might even be able to move pro gun legislation through (and withstand filibusters). No matter what the Nancy Pelosi House does, they will have to contend with this simple fact.
November 10th, 2006 at 3:24 pm
I tend to agree with countertop on this one. I think that brings the all-time “I agree with countertop” tally to three. 🙂
November 10th, 2006 at 3:53 pm
The Dems never pass up ANY and EVERY opportunity to try and pass anything on their agenda. Republicans continue to allow victories to slip from their fingers repeatedly and turn to ashes. If you don’t see this you haven’t been paying attention.
November 10th, 2006 at 4:06 pm
I would think anti-gun tyranny would be more likely to be stopped in the House, but if it can’t get through the Senate either–all the better! I suppose I just associate that Nazi-Commie style tyranny with it’s most radical proponents like Senators Shumer, Kennedy, Feinstein, Kerry, Clinton, Durbin, Reed, Lautenberg…and some others.
November 10th, 2006 at 6:22 pm
Oh come on tgirsch, I just know we’ve agreed at least four times before.
November 11th, 2006 at 12:21 am
If they do go after guns, they’ll lose the Senate in 08.
November 11th, 2006 at 10:03 am
All those moderate freshmen Democrat reps will be the key. They’ll have to choose between supporting Pelosi and getting re-elected. And I’m not quite sure how they’ll vote, although I am alot more optimistic about them blocking gun control than I was before the election.
I think what’ll happen is many of the “blue dogs” will go to Pelosi before the start of the next session and tell her if she pushes them on gun control she’ll get it shoved back in her face. I expect that gun control will then quietly disappear as an issue for the next two years.
Unless, of course, there’s another Columbine, with accompanying Media frenzy. Then all bets are off.
November 11th, 2006 at 10:45 am
Unless, of course, there’s another Columbine, with accompanying Media frenzy. Then all bets are off
I find it curious that those seem to happen with just perfect timing to bolster Democrat gun control pushes in Congress. There is just something uncanny about the serendipity of their occurrences.
November 11th, 2006 at 2:45 pm
striaghtarrow,
Yes, I’ve wondered about that serendipity of shootings.
School shootings SHOULD prove the futility of gun control because schools are law-imposed gun-free zones. Gun-free zones only make for captive unarmed victims for criminal and/or deranged shooters. If guns were the problem, then these shootings would be happening at places like police stations and gunshows.
If rational thinking was the rule, more school shootings should result in “media frenzies” calling for more guns in schools in the hands of principals and teachers:
In Israel, teachers and parents who serve as school aides go armed at all times on school grounds, with semi-automatic weapons. Since this policy was put into effect, terrorist attacks in Israeli schools have dropped to zero. The only recent exception was the tragic case of a group of schoolchildren who were murdered by an Arab gunman as they visited the “Zone of Peace” on the Jordanian border. The Jordanians specifically requested that the Israeli teachers and chaperones leave their weapons behind … which they did.
–Vin Suprynowicz, “Pining for the Peaceful Paradise of an Omnipotent State”
November 12th, 2006 at 6:45 pm
According to the LA Slimes, as cited today by David Hardy in Of Arms and the Law blog, there is a HUGE decision process going on within the (D) party now on this very subject of old (lib) vs new (centrist) (D)onks.
I think it boils down to seniority. The old libs have the seniority, and they will get the Chairs of the important committees where things like AWB2 will get their start. The action will all be in committees, and the new centrists will have to take a hell of an earboxing if they want to vote not to refer these bills out of committee.
Yes, new Representatives are responsible to their electorates, but they are, under our wonderful two-party system, primarily responsible to their Party leaders. It matters not whether they please the electorate, if they DON’T please the Speaker or their Committee Chairs, they don’t get any Party support for re-election.