Sunday, July 09, 2006

Gun Control is a "Loser" — MSM

Even the MSM is taking note that gun control is a suicidal political strategy for U.N. delegates, Democrats, probably even dogs and cats. This is from U.S. News & World Report, which has always been the least gun-grab-happy of the newsweeklies:
Not long ago, it was the gun lobby on the defensive from the passage of the Brady bill in 1993 and the 1994 ban on "assault" weapons. But some say support for gun control cost Democrats the House in 1994, and former President Clinton credited it with Al Gore's 2000 presidential defeat. "It's different than it was in the early '90s. Those were, in retrospect, the glory years," says Paul Helmke, former GOP mayor of Fort Wayne, Ind., who recently took the reins of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

Meanwhile, with little fanfare, National Rifle Association backers in Congress allowed the assault weapons ban to expire in 2004 and last year shielded gun makers from being sued over crimes committed using their products. Since 1999, nine states have eased restrictions on concealed weapons, and NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre says the freedom of gun owners is in "the best shape it's been in decades."
Of course, that just means that the enemies of freedom will try even harder, especially this being an election year. I've been thinking about this for a bit, and from my standpoint, here's what our national political strategy should look like:
Michael's National Five-Point Plan for Consolidating Our Current Successes

Immediately pass a federal law banning confiscation of legal weapons during any emergency. Katrina proved what we RKBA people knew all along, to wit, the government will happily strip you of your only means of self-defense if it can get away with it. Let's make sure they can't, once and for all.

Rein in continued BATFE abuses. The laws are already on the books if anybody would step up to the plate and enforce them. There are enough legitimate law enforcement issues out there — for example, I have a friend at BATFE in gang intervention, a necessary and wildly dangerous job — without local agents launching their own personal crusades.

Stop all antigun initiatives in other branches of government service. The U.S. Forest Service, for example, ought not to be allowed to run overt antigun programs while the parent USDA resolutely insists that it supports the rights of gun owners. How many other personal vendettas under the protection of a GS rating are running out there? Make them stop!

National CCW reciprocity and enforcement of federal "Safe Passage" laws! We need this yesterday! Again, if it works for drivers licenses, there should be no problem with it working for carry permits. A second part of this issue is demanding that all states abide by federal "Safe Passage" laws — it is criminal that prosecutors in Boston, New York and Chicago can jail innocent people trapped for a night at their airports through no fault of their own because nobody in Washington D.C. has the balls to tell those cities that they are indeed part of the United States!

Dismantle the onerous conditions of the 1968 Gun Control Act, the machinegun amendment of the 1986 FOPA, the 1990 Crime Control Act and the 1999 "Al Gore Stands Up!" trigger lock requirement. These laws were all passed as sops to a small minority of very loud antigun activists who no longer have any credible standing. The laws should go away! Now!
It has long been my contention that there never was a truly national anitgun movement; rather, it existed among a minority of residents in several major cities (NYC. Chicago, D.C., L.A. and San Francisco) and the febrile minds of the MSM. We need to convince our legislators to move as if that was indeed the case.

If you like my 5-point plan, pass it on...


Anonymous said...

You are so correct....I will email this to all my so called reps in congress and both senate jerks from my state.

Stephen Malone

Not Available said...

Lets have a law that bans all gun laws.

Michael Bane said...

I think Brother Sweeney, although he is a lowly gunsmith, has tapped into something here, and that is the difference between playing "defense" and "offense."

For the most part, the generation of lobbyists, RKBA activists, bloggers, etc. have spent most of their professional lives playing defense, parrying one B-S antigun attack after another.

We'd have to go back to the 1950s to remember what the gun culture was like before we went to war. And, yes, I go back that far, and sometimes I'm amazed to remember there was a time when I could carry my father's Winchester 62 with me on my bicycle, stop at the hardware store for a box of .22s then go shooting, without adult supervision or even the slightest raised eyebrow. Talk about "A Long time ago in a galaxy far away!"

The problem is that we've played defense for so long our offense isn't as good as it should be. This is the most visible with our politicians, who can't for the life of them understand what the hell else we want, aside from more habitat for friggin' ducks and for them to wear a Mossy Oak shirt once or twice a year for photo ops.

It also affects our lobbying organizations,, who tend to respond to the loudest most recent noise...if you have any doubt about what that noise is, I suggest you get a Cabela's catalog.

Frankly, the process goes something like this...we in the internet/gun culture community raise a stink about a serious issue...our politicians, who are the most sensitive to shitstorms that might have an effect on their fundraising, calls our representative organizations...our representative organizations assure the pols that hunting access and finding more hunters are the "focus" issues, and all that racket on the internet will eventually go away.

It took me a *year* and cost me at least one friendship within the RKBA community to get the rogue Forest Service antigun initiative recognized as a threat. Before the sunsetting of the AWB, I personally sat in high-level meetings where the much-denied "compromise" — swapping a new AWB for the lawsuit pre-emption bill — was seriously input was someting to the effect of, "...suicide ...destruction of the gun lobby...etc."

Our guys can be well-meaning as all heck, but really out of touch with those of us out in the field. Again, they respond to the loudest and most recent noise...


Anonymous said...

Michael I too remember when we had far more gun freedom in this nation than we have today.

Most of the guns in my family were purchased through the mail. No background checks No 4473's Nothing.
Rolling back the 68 GCA has to be top priority and the other laws you mentioned is absolute.

I believe in the JPFO approach to the BATF. I do not believe the BATF can be Reformed, they must be Ended. I still believe that local law enforcement should handle things locally and that the Feds have NO constitutional jurisdiction.

I believe the key is when is the NRA going to take a stand, Remember when Wayne La Pierre refered to the BATF as Jack Boot thugs after WACO? Wayne went into a hole when George Bush sr. fired back about ending his NRA membership. Wayne should have at least fired back that the NRA does not support murder of children even by Our government.

I will never forget WACO or Ruby Ridge.

Anonymous said...

I believe one of the reasons our "offense" is weak, rests with the length of time the "Elmer Fudd" contingent of the shooting world were the ones actually in charge of things. I am not an insider but it still sounds like they still have way too much influence in that industry community.

They (Fudd's) finally lost control of the NRA I think, they are loosing control at the local level now too.

In our area, we are beginning to see gun club "uprisings" where larger numbers of non-hunter shooters are swamping some of the "Fudd" clubs and wresting control away to begin to allow things like action pistol sports, NFA firearms, and gasp, classes or competitions where people shoot "assault rifles"! Those things that were in the past prohibited or at least inhibited by Fudd leadership in some of those local clubs.

Sounds like the industry side of shooting are just the laggers here. I think the trend is for the self defense oriented CCW people, action pistol competitors, and people who love black rifles to grow more powerful as our numbers swell, and I believe they are growing fast.

FD in AL

Anonymous said...

I agree with Mr. Sweeney. Politicians don't do things because they're the right thing to do, they do them because there's something in it for them, i.e. votes or fundraising. What we need to do is convince politicans that they will gain votes and secure their positions by supporting pro-gun laws.

Eric said...

The one thing I think people tend to forget is that a large number of "liberals" - dare I say a majority - secretly like guns and shooting. What they can't stand are the typical NRA "Elmer Fudd" variety or the dumbass gunstore commando types. We need to make sure we clearly delineate the difference between "taking the offensive" and being offensive.

There's a lot of folks voting democratic that are actually on our side. We need to win them over. Don't ask me how to do that with the current moronic ideology split between the two major parties - the sum total of which seems to represent a *minority* of Americans, but winning over the right people is going to be key to the long term fight for our civil liberties. 51/49 voting splits are not a long term strategy for achieving this. We need 75/25 (which is about where I think the true value of pro/anti gun rights is split through the electorate).

We have friends out there and need to find a way to welcome them to the party. Organized shooting sports come to mind...

Anonymous said...

I agree with what Eric says.

Many Rebulican and Democratic politicians scare the hell out of me with their hardline stances.

Because of this I often find it very tough to vote for a pro-gun canidate yet I find it very easy to not vote for a anti-gun one.

It sucks when all we have to choose from is the lesser of two evils.