Now what?

Disclaimer: I fully support Emily Miller in her quest to expose the outrageous process for legally acquiring a firearm in the District if Criminals. That said...

I keep hearing from the Brady's and their ilk that "guns are different". That a little infringement on GUNS should be accepted because $GUNS CAN KILL, and $Guns are different, and gun owners are just looking for arguments to settle permanently. Politicians lap this up because it furthers their goal of aggrandizing more power unto themselves. Makes for good copy and good video to be seen on the side of $PROTECTING THE CHILDREN. But, what now? DC is on their way to One First (SCOTUS) again over their registration process. The DC resident still has no way to BEAR, since KEEP only applies "in the home". And the criminals ignore the laws anyway...

Councilman Mendelson's condescending display of willful ignorance about "market forces" preventing more FFLs in town, and the "lack of desire to acquire guns based on the miniscule number of registrations" since Heller, was so galling I almost broke my TV in anger. He knows damned good and well that the reason there aren't any more FFLs is because DC's zoning makes it IMPOSSIBLE to open a store. And, the registration process is so expensive and onerous as to dissuade all but the most dedicated (and financially well-off) from completing the process. There is a reason why Charles Sykes' office is at MPD. Just ask Alan Gura.

As for the anti-rights crowd trashing Emily Miller? I bet if you asked them to support outlawing abortion, they would recoil in horror at the affront to their Liberal sensibilities. If DC mandated that a woman go through every step that Emily Miller went through in order to obtain an abortion, there would be marches on city hall daily (all covered gleefully by a complicit media) until the laws were changed. A woman has the "constitutional right" (nowhere enumerated) to kill her unborn baby, but has to jump through the hoops Emily Miller jumped through to acquire a firearm (which IS enumerated in the Constitution)? Give me a break.

Emily Miller, a petite woman, is no match for a thug intent on doing her harm. She wants to acquire the means to protect herself, and equalize her odds against said thug, and the Powers That Be block her at every turn. Shameful.

Councilman Mendelson, you should go back to Emily Miller's articles documenting her journey through your morass of red tape. Every time you see the word Gun or Firearm, I want you to substitute the word ABORTION. Every time you see some class, certificate, mandate, or registration hoop, I want you to substitute Abortion Class, Abortion Certificate, Abortion Registration (with renewal every 3 years). I want you to make the young woman get schooled in some guy's basement about Abortions. I want you to require abortion clinic visits prior to allowing a procedure be done. I want you to make the person prove that they know abortion laws. I want you to ensure that the city's zoning laws make it as easy to open an abortion clinic as it now is to open a gun store. Lastly, I want you to have to openly answer for your role in molding "market forces" to make abortions as easy to acquire in DC as guns currently are.

After all, Abortions kill more people in the United States every year than guns do. We should regulate them at least as diligently. Right? Do it for the children.

Newbius

No Candlelight Vigil here.

Sorry folks. I am not lighting candles for the "victims of gun violence", no matter how well-intentioned the PR campaign-for-relevance is. I have two "victims of gun violence" in my own family and at least one friend too, and I am not playing the game of "blame the tool, not the wielder". The Brady Campaign can suck it.

My son was not mugged by a gun. He was mugged by a mugger who used a gun. My friend was not robbed by a gun, he was robbed by a robber who armed himself with a gun. My uncle died from a gunshot wound, and the gun did not fire itself.

I carry a gun. Daily. Not because I have something to prove, because I don't. I carry a gun daily because it is the most effective tool for self defense that I own. My wife now owns one of her very own, too.

The Brady Campaign would tell you that my wife would be better off in an encounter with a mugger, rapist, or murderer if she just gave them whatever they wanted. Just lie back and think of England, or some-such rot. Nonsense. Why should we acquiesce to the predators in our society? Why should we allow our finest and fairest to be victimized, just so some milquetoast, namby-pamby, progressive policy wonks can feel better about themselves? Screw that. I am done playing their games.

In honor of those who have sacrificed everything, so that we can have our Liberty, here is a tribute. To our Fighting men and women of the military, and to those freedom fighters everywhere in the world striving to keep the flame of Liberty alive, I salute you. I stand ready to join you at the call.

Maybe my wife will even let me borrow her gun... :)

Pax,

Newbius

Emily takes a training class

Follow Emily Miller's attempt to navigate the bureaucratic maze in D.C. HERE.

Newbius

The open carry debate

A little brouhaha has erupted over the 'library carry' demonstration. I am not going to address the specific controversy here.

What I will state is this:

Define your goals. Plan a way to effectively achieve those goals. Do an 'after-action' report to gauge the effectiveness of those plans. Adjust, adapt, and then repeat.

If your goal is to maximize media exposure, regardless of reaction or outcome, then you take the negative with the positive and live with the result. If your goal is something else, then it would help to state it in advance so that the reaction can be tempered in the context of the desired outcome.

Pax,

Newbius

Protecting Life

(No, not abortion this time.)

I have heard many anti-gun-rights activists use the phrase "I just don't believe that it is worth killing someone for the cash on my pocket", or some similar sentiment.

The logic failure in the above sentence is this: That bargain has already been made by the person robbing you. To them, your life is immaterial. The contents of your pockets are only gain to them. The surest way to eliminate the risk of being caught is to eliminate the (probably only) witness to the crime, namely you.

Now, with this in mind, the bargain becomes instead: "Is your life worth your life?"

I do not believe that the cash in my pocket is worth killing for, but my life surely is. As are the lives of my family and friends. We have let the criminals and the politicians (but I repeat myself) frame the debate for far too long. It is time to get back to basic principles, and expose the true message to those who are being misled. Gun control is not about the guns. It is about the control, specifically of YOU the law-abiding person, not the criminal.

I choose to protect my life. I choose the most effective tool to do it with. The politicians may be dancing with the devil, but the patriot still remembers the tune. Guard your life and guard your liberty. Buy a gun and learn how to use it.

Pax,

Newbius

Driving Across Country, Part 3

Saturday morning dawn broke over Monument, Colorado to crystal blue skies and temperatures in the low teens. Our hosts woke us up to the smell of fresh coffee, bacon and eggs, and hot pancakes. We had had a good night's sleep and were well rested, ready to begin the final leg of our journey.

We tooled around the local farmlands, taking in the sights while on our way East to connect with Interstate 70 in Limon. On the way east, we passed a school zone: "50 MPH when flashing". Now that's the kind of school zone I could get used to. A couple of dirt roads and a state highway or two later, we connected with the interstate for the long haul East.

Rolling hills gave way to vast expanses of flat farm land as Eastern Colorado ranch land became Western Kansas farms. I have never understood until now just what was meant by "America's Bread Basket". Now I do. For the next 400 miles, all you could see in any direction, horizon-to-horizon, were farms. Vast expanses of board-flat, freshly harvested fields of wheat and corn, with an outbuilding or farmhouse every couple of miles, or so. I was in jaw-dropping awe at the vastness of the farmlands in Kansas. For the next 7+ hours, the view was an ever-changing variation on the same theme.

As we neared Topeka, the farms began to gain the occasional oil pump, and a few more cows, too. It was time for more fuel, for the car as well as our bodies. Steak 'N Shake was good, the gas was ethanol free, and we were ready to head to St. Louis. We fired up the car as the sun set in the west and re-joined the procession of people traveling into Missouri. The Kansas City turnpike runs you through an interesting set of twists, turns, and transitions until you are across the river and into Missouri. Royals Stadium is lit like an empty crown this wintry city night as we blast through town.

The road is still crowded this Saturday night as we continue on arrow-straight to the east to our next driver change in St. Louis, 3 hours away. I had never seen the Gateway Arch in person and intended to stop there and take it in. The trip to St. Louis was uneventful, and a bit uninspiring in the dark. Just tail lights and troopers to keep you on your toes.

We arrived at the Gateway Arch right at 11:00 PM local time. The park was officially closed for the evening, but we parked in the lot next to the historic church and walked over to see the arch up close. It was beginning to get a bit cold out, high 20's, but was still clear with no breeze. My bride and I held hands as we strolled through the park to take some pictures up close.

The Gateway Arch. Click to Embiggen

When we got back to the car, I had to get my hard case out for my XDm-45. We were about to drive across a firearms "no-man's land" as we were to continue on through Illinois. I popped the trunk and got my keys, case, and my vitamins and pills out and brought them up to the cab of the car. Immediately after (rapidly) securing the gun, spare magazines, holsters, etc. into the case and closing it in the trunk, a police car drives up to the front of my car. The park police cops get out on either side of me, flashlights drawn, and start asking questions...

Actually, nothing bad came of it. They wanted to know if we were OK. I kept smiling as I told them we were changing drivers, and I was just taking my vitamins and prepping to go to sleep while my wife drove. Flashlight #2 asked where I was going...I told him home to Virginia, at which point Flashlight #1 noticed the plates on the car and told his partner (who was closely examining my Gadsden Flag sticker in the back window) that we were OK and then they left. An interesting encounter. Even though at that instant I was no longer armed, it still felt like an official "contact". And, while Missouri states you have no duty to inform the officer about any weapons, I was not absolutely sure that I wasn't on Federal lands at the time. I kept my mouth shut about any guns, and this meeting was quick and professional.

Once we cleared the park, we crossed the "Martin Luther King, Jr. Bridge" into East St. Louis, IL to get a cuppa and some go juice. I am not sure what should be said about East St. Louis, except that it felt like I disarmed too soon for my own good. Ah, well. As a law-abiding citizen, I do what I have to do. Even when it feels wrong...

I would tell you about southern Indiana, except that I was asleep through most of it.

More in Part 4

Virginia Legislative Recap - Semi-Final

My previous posts on the reform bills and legislative shenanigans are here, here, here, here, here, and here.

Below is a recap on the important gun control reforms attempted by the Virginia Legislature this session:

HB52 Affirmative defense to permit violation. Killed by Senate Committee for Courts of Justice.

HB26 Removes ability for courts to request non-statutorily-required documentation in applying for Carry Permit. Killed by Senate Committee for Courts of Justice.

HB637 Waives application fee for carry permit for certain members of USCG. Passed by both houses.

HB 854 Castle doctrine. Killed by Senate Committee for Courts of Justice.

HB 8 Concealed handgun permit; renewal by mail. Passed by both houses.

HB 49 Handguns; repeals one-gun-a-month limitation. Killed by Senate Committee for Courts of Justice.

HB 69 Virginia Firearms Freedom Act. Killed by Senate Committee for Courts of Justice.

HB79 Concealed Permits, prohibiting access to applications and permittee information. Killed by Senate Committee for Courts of Justice.

HB 108 Firearms; disposition of those acquired by localities. Killed by Senate Committee for Courts of Justice.

HB 109 Repeals local authority to impose a license tax of not more than $25 on persons engaged in the business of selling pistols and revolvers. Also, a record keeping requirement for such persons is deleted and the clerk of the circuit court shall destroy any such existing records. Passed by both houses.

HB 171 Firearms in locked vehicles; immunity from liability. Killed by Senate Committee for Courts of Justice.

HB 236 Makes a locality no longer able to prohibit hunting generally within a half-mile radius of a subdivision, but a locality would still be able to prohibit hunting within a subdivision. Killed by Senate Committee for Courts of Justice.

HB 490 Legislation enabling development of plan for lifetime concealed carry permit. Killed by Senate Committee for Courts of Justice.

HB 870 Concealed handgun permit; removes option for locality to require applicant to submit fingerprints. Killed by Senate Committee for Courts of Justice.

HB 871 Concealed handgun permit applications; upon denial, clerk to provide notice of right to hearing. Passed by both houses.

HB 885 Concealed weapons; person may carry a handgun in motor vehicle or vessel if locked in compartment. Passed by both houses.

HB 1070 Concealed handguns; person who possesses valid permit may carry into emergency shelter. Killed by Senate Committee for Courts of Justice.

HB 1092 Concealed handgun; certain retired law-enforcement officer may carry wherever he travels in State. Passed by both houses.

HB 1191 Allows a circuit court judge to authorize the clerk of court to issue concealed handgun permits in instances where the application is complete, the background check does not indicate that the applicant is disqualified, and, after consulting with the local sheriff or police department, there are no other questions or issues surrounding the application. Passed by both houses.

HB 1256 Concealed weapon; certain law-enforcement officers who have resigned eligible to carry. Passes by both houses.

HB 1379 Provides that certain Northern Virginia localities may adopt local ordinances that regulate the possession and storage of firearms, ammunition, or components or combination thereof at child-care facilities, so long as such regulation remains no more extensive in scope than comparable state regulations applicable to family day-care homes. Passed by both houses.

HB505 The Restaurant Carry bill. Passed by both houses.

If I missed anything, I apologize. I would like to extend an extra-large helping of thanks to Delegate Mark Cole and Senator Richard Stuart for championing freedom and gun rights this session.

I also want to heap an extra-large pile of scorn onto Senator Henry Marsh III. Shame on you Senator for resorting to parliamentary shenanigans in order to let four pro-crime, anti-freedom politicians kill the will of the people this year. What you pulled this year with the creation (with 2 weeks left in the session) of your anti-gun goon squad to kill these bills was sheer cowardice. I intend to make it my mission to dog you, Senator Puller, Senator Howell, and Senator Lucas and see to it that you get run out of town and back to private life where you can't thwart the people any longer.

Count on it.

Pax,

Newbius

Riddle me this

Hypothetical court test case:

Defendant owns sequentially numbered firearms itemized below:

Exhibit A: Mossberg 500 12ga, 18.5" barrel, standard buttstock, S/N xxxxxxx4, produced 01/29/xxxx



Firearm "A" is considered a shotgun according to the BATFE. If the owner cuts the barrel down to a length under 18", it is a violation of the National Firearms Act of 1934. Possession of the modified gun without registering it with the Federal Government (impossible to do with a modified weapon) and paying a $200 tax is a Felony.

Exhibit B: Mossberg 500 12ga, 18.5" barrel, pistol grip, S/N xxxxxxx5, produced 01/29/xxxx



Firearm "B" is not considered a shotgun according to BATFE. If the owner cuts the barrel down to a length under 18", it is not a violation of the National Firearms Act of 1934.

Please note that ALL of the parts on each firearm are interchangeable with one another. The act of putting the stock from Firearm "A" onto Firearm "B" would break no laws, according to BATFE, as Firearm "B" is not considered a pistol, nor is it considered a shotgun.

Arrest: Defendant swaps the stock and grip on his sequentially-numbered, but otherwise unmodified firearms. This act shortens Firearm "A" to an overall length below the minimum allowed and defendant is arrested by BATFE.

Accusation: Defendant is accused of violating NFA34 for possession of a contraband firearm, a "sawed-off shotgun" - Firearm Exhibit "A", without registering said weapon with and paying the Tax to the Federal Government.

No charges are filed for firearm exhibit "B".

If you were an honest judge, how would you decide?

As an aside- if you were to put a buttstock on an ordinary pistol, you would be in breach of NFA34. If you were to put a pistol grip on your rifle or shotgun in place of the buttstock, such that the overall length is less than the legal minimum, you would be in violation of NFA34. If the factory does it for you, it is legal as long as the tribute tax is paid.

Makes perfect sense, right?

H/T Sipsey Street
Images from "World Guns" website, Mossberg Shotguns page
Is the Miller Decision even correct? See JPFO Summary
|||

Who paid for YOUR politician?

In case you live in Virginia, and are curious who is buying the services of LOBBYING your representatives, you can go to The Virginia Public Access Project and find out.

In it, you just might find that the recent Special Election in District 41 was won by Eileen Filler-Corn, an employee of lobbying firm Albers & Company, and wife of Democrat operative and pollster Robert Corn.

I guess if you are going to buy a seat in the Virginia Legislature (she outspent her opponent 4:1 and only garnered 50.1% of the vote), it helps to have employers, friends, and family inside the Democrat machine to ensure your victory. Oh, and she supports gun control, too. She is also owned by the Labor Unions, but what Democrat isn't?

Wake up, Virginia!

Newbius
|||

Pro-crime Democrats stall in Virginia

In an effort to slow down legislation removing restrictions on law-abiding citizens, State Senator Henry Marsh III has created a subcommittee of rabidly anti-gun Democrats to handle gun issues.

The NRA is reporting this act as follows:

With two weeks remaining in the 2010 session, the Chairman of the Senate Courts of Justice Committee, State Senator Henry Marsh (D-16), announced this morning the creation of a new “Sub-Committee” which will hear all the firearm related bills passed by the House of Delegates.

Senator Marsh’s motion is unprecedented and a direct slap in the face to Virginia’s law-abiding firearm owners and to the House of Delegates, which has already vetted and voted to approve these bills with many garnering strong bi-partisan support.

Senator Marsh has previously been quoted lamenting the fact that he didn't have enough votes to stop these reforms from passing in his Senate Committee for Courts of Justice. So, in what I believe to be a cynical ploy to retain control over these issues (against the will of the people and the majority in the Legislature), he has created this "Special" committee.

The members of the committee are Puller (Chairman), Howell, Lucas, Quayle, Marsh. Four "F"-rated Democrats and one "A"-rated Republican (Quayle).

Shame on you Senator Marsh. Shame on your pro-crime positions against the citizens of your district. Shame on you for supporting laws that have their history in racism and oppression against minorities. Your constituents deserve better than this.

Newbius
|||

The District of Columbia Gun Labyrinth

Want to lawfully exercise your Second Amendment right to self defense in the District of Columbia? Then be prepared for a lengthy and tortuous trip down the rabbit hole of rules, regulations, and fees.

Read this Examiner article by Kris Hammond and prepare to be amazed at the arrogance of the officials in DC for implementing this sham on their population. Shame on them. The reality is that criminals won't follow this procedure, and only the law-abiding are impacted. Perhaps that is how they want it to be.

Someone please tell me how this process doesn't constitute Infringement of a right? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Anyone?

Newbius
|||

VA Senate Committee for Courts of Justice

Last week, the House of Delegates passed numerous pieces of legislation on to the State Senate for consideration. With the exception of a couple of those, all of them have been forwarded to the Committee for Courts of Justice.

This committee is chaired by Senator Henry L. Marsh III, a member of the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus. Senator Marsh is an NRA "F" rated politician who opposes most of the reforms being presented. In the Richmond Free Press article last week on the "One gun a month" repeal, Senator Marsh was depicted as follows:

The fate of the repeal now depends on what happens in the Senate Courts of Justice Committee headed by a prominent member of the Caucus, Richmond Sen. Henry L. Marsh III.

He’s appalled that the House passed the repeal, but he said Wednesday he’s not sure he has the votes to halt the wipeout of the law.

Still Sen. Marsh is vowing to do all he can to stop the momentum of the bill.

“We’ve got too many guns already,” Sen. Marsh told the Free Press. “Anyone who wants a gun can get one. Who needs more than one gun a month?”

The make-up of the Committee is 10 Democrats and 5 Republicans. And, although the VLBC has 3 members on this committee, the overall composition with regard to gun rights is not in line with party affiliation. I mention the VLBC here specifically because I find it appalling that they continue to support gun control even though the history of gun control is overwhelmingly racist in nature. (For additional reference, go HERE, HERE, and HERE.)

Below are the members of the Senate Committee for Courts of Justice, along with their NRA Ratings for their most recent election cycle. Please contact these Senators and politely request that they approve and pass out to the floor the House gun control reform bills which are pending before them.

Henry L. Marsh III (D-16) (VLBC) NRA "F"
Richard L. Saslaw (D-35) NRA "D"
Janet D. Howell (D-32) NRA "F"
L. Luise Lucas (D-18) (VLBC) NRA "F"
Linda T. Puller (D-36) NRA "F"
Donald McEachin (D-9) (VLBC) NRA "F"
J. Chapman Petersen (D-34) NRA "C"
W. Roscoe Reynolds (D-20) NRA "A"
John S. Edwards (D-21) NRA "A"
R. Creigh Deeds (D-25) NRA "A"
Frederick M. Quayle (R-13) NRA "A"
Thomas K. Norment, Jr. (R-3) NRA "B"
Mark D. Obershain (R-26) NRA "A"
Ryan T. McDougle (R-4) NRA "A"
Robert Hurt (R-19) NRA "A"

Pax,

Newbius

Prejudice

Isn't it funny how the people who claim to be against prejudice are typically the same people who advocate for infringements of your rights in different ways?

In the current brouhahas regarding DADT and HCI/Brady Campaign vs Starbucks, the prejudices are telling. If you substituted "Negro" or "Jew", or "Catholic", or "Italian", or "Chinaman" for "Gays" or "Guns" in the arguments, you could rightly conclude that the people doing the advocacy against certain people, groups, or rights are merely exercising prejudice against the targeted group. Prejudice that would not be tolerated were it directed against a politically-favored group today.

Any time you run across someone attempting to curtail your rights, or advocate for policies which do not assure the maximum liberty possible, do a check and see if the policy fails the "Jews in the attic" test. If it fails, it should be opposed.

In the fight for Liberty in America today, we are all Jews...

Pax,

Newbius

Another 1000 words

I received this picture in an email. I do not know where it originated, but I appreciate the sentiment.

Click to Embiggen


Pax,

Newbius

Reminder

Gun Control laws are NOT about the guns. They are about the CONTROL. They are about removing the only effective means of resistance to tyranny that the citizens have at their disposal.

Those who advocate policies of control only want power over you, and ultimately the power over whether you live or die. Do not give them that control over you in any aspect of your life. Not over Guns, Medicine, Speech (internet), Travel ("watch lists"), Property (Kelo v. New London), Energy (Cap and Tax Trade), or Business (Card Check, General Motors, Chrysler, TARP).

Government justifies itself by continuing to infringe upon all aspects of life it can get away with. It is the nature of government and must be held in check to the irreducible minimum necessary to preserve a functioning society, and nothing more.

Above all, never forget the price paid for your freedom. Good men and women of honor paid the ultimate price in blood for your liberty. Honor that sacrifice.

Newbius
|||

I can't say something nice

So I am not going to say anything at all about the passing of Edward Kennedy.

Newbius
|||

Excellent essay on Gun Control

From Marko, The Munchkin Wrangler. Go, READ!

It is too bad that people like Paul Helmke would rather have willing victims and low-levels of officially-sanctioned violence, than allow people to defend themselves against predation. Of course, people like him are of the same political stripe as those who would deprive you of your choice - in life in favor of governmental mandates infringing upon your Liberty.

It amounts to the same thing, really. Either way you are the victim. The only difference is whether the perpetrator is a hardened criminal, or a hardened politician.

Is that redundant?

Newbius
|||

Cynics, Thieves, and Whores

The most recent vote on National Reciprocity for concealed carry, while failing, did expose an interesting phenomenon. Namely, that the thieves in the U.S. Senate believe gun owners are idiots, and that they will do anything to get a vote from us.

Judging by the rhetoric they used, they think we are all morons (and maybe they are right, they DO seem to get re-elected). Senator Thune has an interesting press release worth reading about this. You can find it HERE.

Being the cynical sort that I am, I decided to look into the NRA Report card (at the time of their previous election) for each Democrat Senator who voted FOR the Thune Amendment, and when they are up for re-election. I am of the opinion that while several of the Democrats who voted for the Thune Amendment were making votes based on principal, the rest were whores looking for a payoff in the form of votes from NRA members in their upcoming re-election.

I was not disappointed.

The current class of Democrat Senators whose terms expire in 2011, their NRA Rating, and their vote on National Reciprocity:

Bayh : D- : Yea
Bennet : NR : Yea
Boxer : F : Nay (Safe incumbent)
Burris : NR : Nay
Dodd : F : Nay (Safe incumbent)
Dorgan : D+ : Yea
Feingold : D : Yea
Inouye : F : Nay (Safe incumbent)
Leahy : D : Nay
Lincoln : D+ : Yea
Mikulski : F : Nay (Safe incumbent)
Murray : F : Nay (Safe incumbent)
Reid : B : Yea (Safe incumbent, usually for gun rights though)
Schumer : F : Nay (Safe incumbent)
Specter : A : Nay (Darlin' Arlen, the turncoat)
Wyden : F : Nay (Safe incumbent)

Of the Class of 2013, the only surprise vote among the Democrats was:

Conrad : D+ : Yea

Similarly, the surprise vote of the most recent class was:

Hagan : F : Yea

So, an optimist would look at these votes and think "Hey, these Democrats are finally getting on board with protecting our rights". I suppose you could look at it that way, given the recent Heller decision. The other way to look at it is this: These people are up for re-election soon...

As a member of the hated gun lobby (in that I am a gun owner, and I regularly contact my Congress-Critters about gun issues before Congress), I have a slightly different take. My take on this is that these people need and want our votes (because they are whores, remember?). They have been voting partisan politics for a long time, and the demographics are changing in their states and districts. Their political reality is that they are no longer safe enough to vote with Sarah Brady and George Soros. The HuffPo gadflies won't re-elect them all by themselves.

They need us.

They hope that an engineered vote that everybody KNEW was going to fail would provide them with some political cover to come back to us and say "Didn't I do great? I voted for your gun rights. Vote for me." I say that the vote was engineered because Lugar and Voinovich are both "F" rated Republicans and the Dems are in the majority in both houses. So if we fall for this, we will have proven that you really CAN fool most of the people most of the time, especially if your political ad can truthfully say you support gun rights and point to this vote for validation.

Let's not fall for another Hubert Humphrey and vote for these people just because they tossed a bone into our yard. Let's make true Humphrey's quote about us: "...gun owners never forget and very seldom forgive". Let's throw every bum out who dares to trample on our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Because, without the Second Amendment, what guarantee do you have for any other right recognized by our Constitution? If these thieves and whores in Congress think it is OK to trample your gun rights, what do you think they are doing to the rest of your civil liberties?

Think about that.

Pax,

Newbius

National Reciprocity Fails

Reciprocity has enough votes to pass, but fails a filibuster-proof majority.

The vote on the Thune amendment was today, and it went 58-39 for passage. Short of the number required to break a filibuster. Since the amendment failed to garner 60 votes, the amendment was withdrawn.

We now have a roll-call vote on who supported the amendment, and as soon as the roll-call is posted to either Thomas or the Senate website, I will cross-post here. The good news: proponents got more votes than expected. The bad news: some of those votes may have been political cover for the upcoming 2010 election. As in..."See, I voted for gun rights so support me!", even though the vote was meaningless due to the pre-conditions placed upon the Senate by the leadership for the vote to take place at all.

If your Senator voted in favor of this amendment, please take the time to call them and thank them for the vote. Let them know that you are watching and keeping score. If your Senator voted against this amendment, let them know that you were watching and were disappointed in their vote against your Second Amendment rights.

Additionally, if your Senator voted against, why in Hell aren't you doing everything in your power to defeat them? Bringing home the PORK shouldn't be a sufficient reason to keep some of these bastards in office...

Keep pressuring them. Keep their phones lit up 24/7 until they realize that you will no longer sit idly by while they continue to obstruct and erode your Constitutional Rights.

Because, the alternative is something that no sensible person wishes to contemplate...

Newbius
|||

*** UPDATE ***

The roll call has been posted. Thanks to David Codrea for putting it online. You can see the vote HERE.

I spoke to a representative in Senator Thune's office about the vote. According to Thune's office, all votes in the Senate require 60 to pass (she said Constitutional requirement, which is not true, it is just the reality of the current rules of engagement). Thune's office did not know if they would be able to garner the other 2 votes if the amendment is introduced again, and also did not know if he was going to re-introduce the measure as either a stand-alone measure (unlikely) or as part of another mandatory appropriations bill (possible, depending on circumstances).

Looking at the vote, however, 2 Republican Senators could have stood for the Citizen and voted for the amendment instead of against. The Senators in question are Voinovich (R-OH) and Lugar (R-IN). These two are all it would have taken to pass National Reciprocity through the Senate (arguably the tougher body to pass legislation through).

We can call their offices and thank them for their failure to support the Second Amendment, and remind them that we will score this vote at their next election. It is the least we can do...

Newbius

Brady Campaign cannot handle debate, part 2

Readers,

Since I had the temerity to offer an opposing opinion last night on the Brady Facebook Page, I was promptly removed from public view. I posted about it HERE, and received a response (quite civil, actually) pointing out my own commenting rules to me.

No issue there.

When I checked my site statistics, however, it became clear that the Brady Campaign not only cannot tolerate dissent but they want to begin the debate here. Excellent! How do I know this?

THIS is how I know.

Game on! Bring it if you can...

Newbius