Interesting
The anti-gun DLC-funded American Hunters and Shooters Association is actually sounding like a pro-gun group:
We’re opposed to reinstating the semi-auto assault weapons ban. There’s a lot of confusion about this legislation. Most people believe an assault weapon is a full-auto. Those fully automatic guns are already regulated. The best way to deal with this issue is to make sure that criminals don’t get guns in the first place.
It’s a flip-flop and I’m a bit uncertain what their strategy is here.
October 20th, 2008 at 8:35 am
They want to seem credible.
In the coming years, they will be able to a stance like this and say “See, our request for restrictions is fair and reasonable.”
October 20th, 2008 at 9:35 am
I think it is nothing more than an attempt to justify and legitimize their endorsement of Obama.
Their newfound opposition to specific gun control proposals amazingly parallels the few egregious things that McCain has either voiced or shown support for in the past.
By decrying the proposals now, they can list McCain’s support for them as valid reasons for gun owners to oppose him…all the while prudently ignoring Obama’s support for those very same proposals…and more.
So…on one side we’ve got the MSM, the supposed “Fact Checkers” and Obama’s campaign saying to the Fudds “you can trust Obama, he won’t take your duck guns and deer rifles.”
On the other hand, you have a faux “sportsman’s” organization saying “see, McCain has supported gun control that we don’t support, he’s bad.”
And the ignorant will be duped.
You always have to view these things in the proper perspective. They aren’t directed at those of us who are informed and educated on the issues. They are directed at the other 95% of the population who has no idea what the issues are or where the candidates stand on them.
October 20th, 2008 at 9:43 am
Assault rifles, of course, are capable of full auto fire. All these people do is add to the confusion. Jack.
October 20th, 2008 at 9:57 am
AHSA is just trying to deflect criticism from NRA. Their sole purpose is to get as many of the Fudds to vote for Obama and other antigun Democrats this election as possible.
October 20th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
I don’t know, but somehow, I got on their mailing list. I clicked the “unsubscribe” link, and the page told me no such email addy was subscribed. So how I got the message, I do not know. I did reply and tell them to take me off their list.
October 20th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
That is weird. The AWB was a plankholder signature issue for them, and was the main out-the-gate way they distinguished their “reasonable” selves from the “fringe” NRA.
October 20th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
Sounds like they’re using Q-ships to me.
I’d suspect that they’re trying to appeal to the middle ground and solicit funds, then funnel them to their ‘projects’, all the while disavowing it.
Regards,
Rabbit.
October 20th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
If I kick you in the balls for three days straight and then on the fourth day say that “I love you”, are you really so stupid as to believe me?
October 20th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
A masochist and a sadist were in bed together. The masochist looks at the sadist and says “beat me”. The sadist replies, “No”.
October 20th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
Maybe I’m letting optimism get away from me, but is anyone else a little heartened by the fact that a gun control group (albeit a gun control group trying to not look like one) is shy about publicly coming out in favor of an AWB, whatever the reason?
October 20th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
I’m not Eric, I think Sailorcurt nailed it.
October 20th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
No, I’ll be (among) the last to claim their motives are anything like forthright. I just can’t help but consider the… I dunno… the peripherals — past ones that lead here, and some possible results they might not have intended.
Let me put it this way… can you imagine them trying this with Title II firearms? By accounts, deregulating suppressors and full-auto weapons still gets inside the comfort zone of most everyone except those who, just for instance, enjoy reading and commenting on gun blogs. And I doubt the AHSA would want to upset that by clearing up any confusion about them.
Assuming all that’s true (and I’m open to the idea that it’s not), their angle here becomes a little bit interesting. “Conventional” gun control orgs, when trying to show how reasonable they are, have always pointed to how they’d let you keep your hunting rifles and most of your shotguns, probably. Now we have one trying to put itself in the center by arguing against an AWB. Put another way: opposition to the Clinton-era ban now appears to make one a *moderate* on gun control.
Put another other way: they’ve essentially thrown out a new AWB as a realistic goal.
Put another other different way: they’re openly giving up ground here. The one thing EVERYONE knew Obama was going to be able to get done was an assault weapons ban. The advice has been “if you’ve been wanting an AR, get your lower before the election”. Now a big chunk of his supporters have declared a pro-AWB position nonsensical. It may help Obama get elected, but stand in the way of actually getting a law put in place.
October 21st, 2008 at 10:30 pm
“Opposing” anything is cheap, especially if you cotton to situational ethics like AHSA does.
The real test, of course, is when Obama puts in the precursor to an AWB via an Executive Order during his first week in office (look for a blizzard of Executive Orders from him), and THEN we’ll see what starch is left in AHSA’s spine. Or are they invertibrates?