Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Get Ready!

From David Hardy at Arms & the Law:
Supporting it is an insider DC tip that his people are seriously considering a federal ban or restriction on "right to carry" laws. Exactly where the constitutional power to enact such a measure is to be found is less than clear to me. But so are a lot of other things like that.
Here's the Keene material from NewsMax.

Here also is the Brady press release.


Anonymous said...

I'll be totally honest here.

I really do hope that bHo Inc. really goes for a federal ban on right to carry laws.

Here's why.

There are so many folks with CCW permits now that such a whacky move would backfire completely on bHo Inc.

I've taught CCW classes for six years now.

I know first-hand that there are lots of folks who don't care about EBR's who would get mightily upset about a federal ban on state right-to-carry laws.

A federal ban on right-to-carry would be such a turd in the proverbial punchbowl that bHo would have Republican super-majorities in both houses of Congress and would be a guaranteed one-term failure.

Anonymous said...


Which is it, BHO has other fish to fry other than guns or he is coming after our gun rights immediately?

Anonymous said...

From a strategic viewpoint, it doesn't matter if BHO gives the Feinstein/Schumer/Reid/Pelosi Cabal the green flag to come after us now or later. We have to start our counter-offensive immediately, i.e. work our duffs off for friendly candidates or officeholders in their bids to get elected or keep their jobs.

If the bast'ds come charging out of the woods in January, our tactics need to be a little different than they would be if it looks as if they plan on waiting until after the midterms. If they're dumb enuf to come at us immediately, we need to ramp up our act accordingly. Maybe launch a throat-grabbing "victim disarmament" ad campaign -- full page newspaper ads and powerfully dramatic commercials on TV. Ugly, vicious looking crook attacking mom and kids in their home. Mom calls 911 and gets idiot dispatcher -- "huh...wha? Please spell your name, ma'am..." -- Mom in desperation looks in drawer for gun, but finds instead a sheet of paper with the huge words "Brady Bill" over a picture of a gun with a no-no line through it. Crook grabs sheet of paper from Mom's hand, as kids scream in background. Crook laughs at paper, tears it up and then grabs Mom. Ad then fades to crime-scene aftermath with bodies under sheets. Camera closes in on torn "Brady Bill" while funereal voiceover explains what's at stake to anyone still not up to speed with what the hell's going on.

Does this make any sense? We fight either way, but, either way, we fight smart.

Anonymous said...

Wouldn't that be a huge violation of the 10th Amendment?

Of course, what comes out of DC these days (and for many years) that isn't a huge violation of the 10th Amendment?

As for b-ho, I'm wondering if b-ho might not leave us all hanging in the wind by doing nothing about guns for a while, citing issues with the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the economy, mortgage bailouts, etc. as more important. Trying to lull us into a false sense of complacency.

Then, maybe late next year, he can laughingly point to the near hysterical buying and publicity, like the Rep. from GA who talked about b-ho forming a Nazi-like civilian security service. In the smug, smarmy way only he can, he can then tell us that we were all fools, see, he didn't take our guns away, we have nothing to fear, pay no attention to that man behind the curtain, etc.

In the intervening period, he has put into place - quietly - the infrastructure necessary to move against the gun owners, after lulling us into that false sense of security.

I'm just saying . . .

Anonymous said...

I believe those in newly gained power will realize that they didn't get voted FOR, the others got voted AGAINST. So before they start poking at hornets nests, I hope they consider how easily things can shift.

I believe that the perception is that Obama is the sweetheart, and that glow doesn't extend very far.

Anonymous said...

All the more reason why we need to start plugging away at the electoral process. One good way would be to join your local GOP party, another: help your local congressperson stay in office, if he or she supports the 2nd, or, if you're being represented by a weaknik or a grabber, support whomever runs against him or her. Best way to get involved is through your local party.

Tip O'Neill used to say that all politics is local. Being part of the grassroots is what it's all about.

Anonymous said...

The BHO may try and use executive order to ban guns etc but but case law may no be in his favor. As this may be seen as an attempt to make law. It may also violate the separation of powers. even if he did manage to get the House and senate to pass a bill, which he issue executive order on he would also have to get the Supreme Court not to invalidate that law.

Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) that Executive Order 10340 from President Harry S. Truman placing all steel mills in the country under federal control was invalid because it attempted to make law, rather than clarify or act to further a law

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order_(United_States) )

Anonymous said...

You guys aren't thinking asymetrically enough.

You need to reach those "C" grade and up Democrats that are out there instead of alienating them by saying that only Conservatives and Republicans are pro 2A. Many Democrats and a larger than expected amount of Liberals are too. Those people are the ones best able to argue against Pelosi and her friends.

You need to reach the urban single mothers who carry just to make it to work. You need to reach the Gay community who has seen many physical assaults on them for being "Different". You need the people who escaped abusive relationships and carry out of fear from their ex.

The NRA needs to avoid the whole "paranoia" ads that it did after the LA riot and place ads in JET and Ebony magazine about how they are fighting to get the guns back to their rightfull owners in New Orleans.

They need to place "Eddie the Eagle" gun safety public awareness adds in magazines like Good Parenting and Woman's Day.

We need to stop thinking regional and start thinking National. Heck! Even a CNN poll showed that over 80% of those polled believe in the right to keep and bear arms. That was on CNN! There's got to be a way of reaching this block of people.

If these things can't be done, at least someone has got to try and find a way of getting all the different major gun web sites to work in unison to voice a large yet polite voice against "gun control" measures in the house now and in future.

Everyone who visits a gun web site must remember that they are an enthusiast and just like there are car enthusiasts, its the silent owners that we must get the support of. Most people drive minivans or sedans, not Ferraris and Corvetts. And most people have one or two guns and keep them in a drawer just in case. They don't practice every week and they don't go to events. Get them to think of shooting as a fun thing to do instead of just a protection from fear tool and we got this thing beat!

be603 said...

The One and his comrades in the House and Senate leadership are just arrogant enough to try this.

Pride goes before a fall...

Anonymous said...

The Brady bunch also ignore the fact that even though Obama bin Biden won, gay marriage was soundly defeated.

Anonymous said...

The anonymous poster up a post or two who suggested that we need to think more asymetrically has some good points. I like the Eddie Eagle idea, and those can be very effective down the road piece. Could really capture the youth imagination if a "real" Eddie appeared in some clever, engaging TV ads, as well. I say down the road a piece because it would appear that our first battle will be over semiauto "assault" weapons. A little trickier getting Eddie to address our concerns with this. Frankly, I'm not sure what would be the best public approach, i.e. trying to persuade the kind of folks who say they have nothing against bolt action or pump rifles, but can't see why any "sportsman" would want to own a black rifle.

Because they're fun, because their only difference from a Remington Model 1100 shotgun is their appearance, that mechanically they're essentially the same as the 1100 or a Ruger 10/22? Those arguments, of course, make perfect sense, but would they work on somebody who thinks that because they look like weapons of war, they somehow don't belong in the average Joe' or Jane's hands?

There's a gap here in perception and understanding between people who simply hunt and people who consider themselves gun enthusiasts, or, among ourselves, gun nuts. If we can reach those most immediately beyond our -- and I'm a gun nut -- culture and what I'm calling the hunting culture, and enlist them to help us reach beyond to the gun-skeptic culture -- which I consider everybody up to the hoplophobes, we have a much better chance of tilting the overall public opinion to resist the Feinstein/Schumer/Reid/Polosi Cabal's attempt to manipulate the argument to get their hairy camel's nose under our tent.

Eddie Eagle just might be the perfect ambassador who can lead this campaign, but he must be more than a cartoon character with an eye just on teaching gun safety to kids. Eddie has to be a tad more sophisticated, and it wouldn't hurt for him to have a wife or girlfriend to work with our feminine allies -- Eleanor Eagle? Help me here!

Anonymous said...

It doesn't seem to matter what is legal, or even makes sense, the "Cool Aid" drinkers believe anything this guy says. We appear to be out numbered. We thought that we could always count on traditional values prevailing, but it looks like the new "Urban Socialists" are the norm. You know the ones, latte sipping, text-messaging, aborters, atheists, school exam cheaters, etc.; That's all they care about. So what if one of the sheep-like creatures gets culled by a criminal, life goes on, (b-)Ho-hum. They don't even care that it's going on, or will increase in level; let alone worry about protecting themselves.
Everything has been affected by them too. Talk-radio is marginalized, religion is for a minority and only a "few" remain clinging to their guns.
I won't stop fighting, but I think that the battle is lost, even without a fight. They just took over. I pity the so-called 2A supporters that voted for b-Ho. No, wait, I loathe them! It's turning out that he lied about everything, including what he'd do for the economy. Truth be know, or as many were forwarned, the President can't fix the economy, he can only screw it up.
Life Member

Anonymous said...

Guys and Gals,

It wasn't but a short time ago the "gun culture" was abuzz with talk about a National concealed carry law that would force states to recognize CCW's from any state.

A federtal guvmint with that power has the authority to restrict or prohibit CCW's. Just saying.

Anonymous said...

This idea makes me a tad nervous, Anon, as it would probly entail a centralized database. Not a helluva lotta difference between that and registration.

Anonymous said...

Not only is the constitutioality of a federal CCW ban questionable, but how would such a law be enforced? Federal agencies are not set up to be street level cops, and if stattes dont enforce it, what sort of penalties can the federal government apply to the states?