More post-election gun thoughts
Cam says the congress isn’t as pro-gun as we thought:
Just going down the list, I’d have to disagree with his assessment of Carper in Delaware. Countertop says he’s in the middle, but NRA gave him an “F” (as did GOA). Countertop says Florida’s Bill Nelson’s in the middle, but the NRA and GOA both gave him an “F” as well. Same for Tom Harkin in Iowa and Amy Klobuchar in MN. In fact, don’t even get me started with Klobuchar.
Countertop also says Missouri’s Claire McCaskill’s a pro-gun candidate, and I have no idea where that came from. She was rated “F” by both NRA and GOA, she opposed concealed carry in Missouri (as Klobuchar did in Minnesota), and supports renewing the Clinton Gun Ban. Maybe she turns out to vote with gun owners, but there’s nothing in her past that would indicate that’s going to be the case.
November 13th, 2006 at 11:43 am
I am not optimistic. I’d really like to believe this wasn’t a total disaster, but the party is still run by the loons. Here’s what I think is going to happen:
Bush will accept virtually the entire democratic agenda in exchange for the Democrats agreeing to a compromise in Iraq that is less than the “cut and run” they need to really placate their base.
There will be an attempt, a serious attempt, to pass another assault weapons ban in 2007. Probably as an amendment to a bill the Republicans really need to pass. Whether it does pass or not is another story. The new ban will not have a sunset clause and will include 50 caliber rifles. I think we’ll be lucky to get a ban identical to the old one.
There is no chance at all of passing any pro-gun legislation through Congress for the foreseeable future.
Democrats will block any sufficiently conservative candidates for the courts that would uphold the second amendment.
After the assault weapons ban, expect them to try for something else.
Democrats will begin to lose in areas they’ve gained grounds, but the damage will be done. Don’t forget a Republican congress was unable to repeal the assault weapons ban in 1996. Once it’s in there, it’s not coming out.
I think it’s a disaster, and we’re going to be on the defensive for the foreseeable future. We need to be organized, we need to care, and we need to join the NRA. Whether you like it or not, think they suck or not, they are the organization that makes the politicians pay attention. No one else has their clout in Washington.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:01 pm
One of the “doomsday” scenarios that I have heard/thought about myself is that a new AWB would specifically preclude “grandfathering”.
Normally I’d write it off, but that’s EXACTLY what CA did with the .50 cal ban – “turn ’em in”. No grandfathering for folks who had already dropped several large on a .50 cal rifle…
Which makes me wonder if I should complete my AK build or just leave it as is…
November 13th, 2006 at 12:04 pm
We won’t get any help from the President if anti-self defense bills pass in Congress. I know he supported the semi-auto weapons ban, albeit from the tall grass, politically. Former Republican Congresman, Bob Barr, said the Bush Administration was even more anti-gun than Clinton , behind the scens that is.The two-parties, especially at the top, will double-team us for their treason with citizen disarmament, while they work to keep open borders so the invasion can continue. It’s despicably evil!!
November 13th, 2006 at 12:10 pm
Jay, finish the build. You can always turn it in ammo first.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:23 pm
NRA ratings are worthless. No matter how pro-gun a Democratic candidate is, if the NRA backs the opponent, that candidate will have a hard time getting a decent rating. In these close races, I wouldn’t be surprised if the grades are meaningless.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:47 pm
Sebastian,
Not only should we all join the NRA, but we should all join Gunowners of America and maybe a third pro-gun organization. The more, the more the better! I’m a member of both the NRA and GOA and JPFO (Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership for those who support ALL the Bill of Rights.
And in Tennessee, join Tennessee Firearms Association which works to support our Article I, Section 26 of the Tennessee Constitution’s Declaration of Rights RIGHT to keep AND CARRY weapons.
November 13th, 2006 at 12:54 pm
Hugger–The NRA does usually support republicans. But they gave Webb an A–against one of their golden boys, Allen. And last year they endorsed the democrat in the AG race. Both examples are from VA, but, hey, that’s where I’m from. 🙂 But I’ll definitely grant that the NRA has made some weird endorsments recently. Brown in CA? WTF!?
November 13th, 2006 at 2:19 pm
BH, do you have any examples of this? As Aught Six noted, Webb had no problem getting an A rating from the NRA – unless you count the little problem he had getting around to returning his *&^%ing survey in the first place, and they also endorsed Democrat incumbent Rick Boucher over A-rated Republican Bill Carrico. The only reason the NRA endorses more Republicans than Democrats overall is because … newsflash … more Republicans than Democrats are gun-friendly.
AS: Where do you get the idea that the NRA endorsed Jerry Moonbeam? According to their web site, they didn’t endorse anyone in that race, and there is no bigger non-endorsement than an F grade.
November 13th, 2006 at 2:38 pm
Jay G:
That is not correct. Ass. Bill 50 was a horrible bill, but it does contain a grandfathering provision, as did the “assault” weapons bans of 1989 and 1999 on which it is based.
November 13th, 2006 at 3:20 pm
Just after the election, I used to be in the “It’s a Disaster” camp with Sebastian. After analysis of the results, I’m more optimistic. Bringing up gun control will be a disaster all right — for the Democrats.
Remember, the AW ban resulted in at least 20 seats (Bill Clinton’s estimate, true number is probably 30) going to the GOP in 1994. There are alot of moderate Democrats who remember that debacle. It’s true Pelosi doesn’t care what they think because her district loves gun control. But there are alot of Blue Dogs — such as Jim Matheson in Utah — for whom any vote for gun control would be political suicide. When it comes down to it, getting elected is more important to them than pleasing Nancy Pelosi.
The only Wild Card in all of this is the possibility of another Columbine. If the Media dance in the blood long enough it might create enough pressure on the Blue Dogs for them to vote for something in order to show the Soccer Moms that they Care About The Children.
But then again, the Republicans were all falling over themselves after Columbine in 1999 to pass something for Bill Clinton to sign, and the grass roots gun owners stood up and said no. I didn’t think we could stop the Gun Show Ban back then but we did, so I’m fairly optimistic we can stop an AW Ban or .50 Cal Ban in 2007.
November 13th, 2006 at 3:42 pm
Xrlq,
One of the gun blogs had posted that. (I can’t remember which one, however… looking it up… time elapses) I found it very weird, but didn’t care enough to look it up to make sure it was right since it was a CA state race.
Okay… just found it: It was for a Bill Brown for a Sheriff position. That Brown supported the other Brown for AG. Whew. Mea Culpa. So, yeah, I goofed. Good catch.
November 13th, 2006 at 3:51 pm
Oops again, I forgot to include what post I mangled up the first time: Cordrea’s War On Guns.
November 13th, 2006 at 4:04 pm
Unc,
No need to turn anything in if they don’t know I have it… 😉
Xrlq,
I happily stand corrected on the CA .50 cal ban.
I still would not be the least bit surprised to see certain elements, like magazines > 10 rounds, take a bullet (pun intended). Would not surprise me in the least to see all large capacity magazines banned with no grandfather provision.
Of course, there is also the law of unintended consequences. Like finding out that certain 10 round magazines for certain .40S&W handguns will fit 14 rounds of 9mm…