Democrats and guns
Montana Senators Max Baucus and Jon Tester have a message for the Obama administration: they will oppose any gun restrictions the new administration may be considering.
In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, the two Democrats said the Justice Department should enforce existing laws rather than propose additional laws they said could infringe on Second Amendment rights.
More like this please.
March 5th, 2009 at 11:21 am
The press and the Pols are noticing the surge in gun sales. As they say, “You don’t have to be a weatherman to see which way the wind is blowing.”
March 5th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
So that is two. Out of 40 non-Democrat Senators.
I will be impressed when Snowe, Collins and Specter sign such a letter. This falls into the category of Brer Rabbit begging Brer Fox not to toss him into the thorn bushes. Any action by the Dems against guns will increase support for these two Montana Senators (and my two Texas senators, for that matter). But they can not stop anti-gun legislation by themselves.
March 5th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Baucus and Tester are both Dems.
March 5th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
“…should enforce existing laws rather than propose additional laws they said could infringe on Second Amendment rights.”
“Could” infringe?
And the existing laws couldn’t infringe on Second Amendment rights? Not a single one of them?
Lets try this; “The Justice Department should enforce existing laws against negroes rather than propose additional laws that could infringe on Civil Rights.”
Huh? How many people take that as a pro Civil Rights stance and call for more of it? Would we sit idly by and accept a federal department of alcohol, tobacco, negroes and explosives (BATNE)? Do you like the juxtaposition there? Should anyone sit by and accept such a thing as an inevitability, just to appear politically “reasonable”?
If you reject the idea that gun control laws equal crime control, and instead take the stance (as do I) that gun laws are not only counterproductive to their stated goals but unconstitutional and just wrong, you sure don’t call for more enforcement of them. What would be the point in that, unless it’s an unprincipled attempt to appear “reasonable” to people who know nothing of the issue and nothing of the constitution’s history?
Are we trying to appeal to the sensibilities of idiots at the expense of our credibility, at the expense of the constitution, at the expense of reason, and at the expense of liberty? Why?
It’s hypocritical. It’s McCainian (to perhaps coin a new term). It’s relying on ignorance for public support, and it’s what Republicans do when they listen to their super-smart advisors.
March 5th, 2009 at 9:48 pm
Baucus, from Montana, was the deciding vote to pass the “Assault Rifle Ban”, since expired. He is considered a traitor to gun rights by a lot of gun owners in Montana……..
Mr. C.