The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State …
Alan Gura has a great letter to the editor in the WaPo explaining why the fees being requested are not exorbitant, closing with “If the city doesn’t want to pay civil rights lawyers’ fees, it should obey the Constitution. Freedom isn’t free.” Damn straight.
Hat tip to SayUncle
Bitter points to an interview in Field and Stream where McCain talks about his positions on guns. He’s still supporting regulating private transfers, but he’s definitely mellowed on the issue a lot since 2002-2003 timeframe. The real fear is that a Democrat congress will send McCain a private sale bill and force him into a position where he either has to flip-flop, or piss us off. Either way, the Democrats win.
I’m actually surprised the Republicans in Pennsylvania didn’t try that with Ed Rendell more in his first term, when they controlled both the Senate and General Assembly.
This woman is in my Congressional District, and although from a Democratic family, is voting McCain and Manion this year.
I am sure we have quite a few Dems for McCain here. I’m definitely one of them. I obviously still believe in my core values as a Democrat but have grown absolutely sick of what this party has become and how it no longer represents me. The reason I haven’t officially left the party is simple: I want my vote for McCain to be counted as a “Democrat vote for McCain” I was and still am a Hillary supporter. And there are LOTS of us who have come over.
I still basically can’t stand John McCain the politician — I will never forgive him for gutting the First Amendment with his ridiculous campaign finance law. But politics is never that simple. The person that heads the party’s ticket is a vessel for holding the coalition together, and getting a winning majority. The Republicans would have had a harder time finding a better candidate for that purpose in 2008 than John McCain, especially after his Vice Presidential pick.
One of the reasons I haven’t been hating as much on McCain as a lot of people probably has to do with where I’m from. I’ve spent the last eight years watching George W. Bush destroy the Republican coalition in the Philadelphia suburbs. Bush’s brand of conservatism is not one that the suburban Republicans can really get behind. Less intrusive government, yes. Balanced budgets, yes. Lower taxes, definitely. Less corruption? Sure. But Bush has largely ignored this part of the coalition, believing that if he just cut taxes, we’d go away and be happy. He was wrong, and the evaporation of Republican support in the suburbs here is a big part of that. Supporting Bush here is embarrassing, because he offends nearly everyone.
But McCain is the kind of Republican that Republican leaning people here can feel good about putting a lawn sign out for. You can say “I support McCain” without people looking at you like you’re from some kind of alien planet. McCain doesn’t seem to elicit the same kind of visceral hatred from Democrats (at least the sane ones) that Bush does. McCain’s reputation as a fiscal conservative and a reformer will play well here, and will give Republicans some issues to build a coalition around. For eight years now, they’ve had nothing.
I’m seeing McCain start to change that, and regardless of whether I’m pissy at him for supporting campaign finance, or ending private transfers of guns, he’ll be a useful vessel for helping rebuild a brand who we desparately need to win in order to secure a lot of things I do care about for the future. I’m not letting my reservations about McCain’s imperfections get in the way of that.
The Inky is editorializing against Congressman Pat Murphy because he apparently doesn’t hate guns enough:
It sure looked that way yesterday, when Murphy voted with the National Rifle Association – and against the best interests of cities in his own backyard trying to stem gun violence, including Philadelphia.
Murphy was among 85 House Democrats who joined 181 Republicans in approving a bill that would roll back gun-safety measures enacted by the District of Columbia, after the Supreme Court struck down the city’s 32-year-old handgun ban in June.
I’d be willing to go to bat for Congressman Murphy if he was legitimately having a change of heart on the gun issue, but what does one of his staffers say?
Aides insist the congressman hasn’t changed his stripes. He still favors a ban on assault weapons and supports “reasonable gun laws.” The District of Columbia vote was about “striking the proper balance between constitutional rights and reasonable restrictions.”
Who is running this campaign? If you want to play the moderate-on-the-gun-issue suburban Democrat, the way Murphy is playing it is exactly wrong. It’s guaranteed to get him no allies.
I’m angry with Murphy’s support of the so called “assault weapons” ban. This violates one of our commandments, “Thou shalt not support gun bans!” HR1022, which Murphy has signed on to a sponsor, will ban most of the firearms that high-power competition shooters compete with, including the AR-15 and M1A. It will ban the Ruger 10/22. It will also ban all semi-automatic shotguns. That’s not moderate. That’s extreme. Murphy will get no support from us, no matter what he does on the DC issue, if he doesn’t withdraw his sponsorship of this bill.
On the other side of the card, the radical gun control activists in Philadelphia are furious that Murphy is supporting the Second Amendment when it comes to the Heller decision. Now even the Inky is calling him out for his ridiculous triangulation on this issue.
Patrick Murphy did not win Bucks County in 2006. He lost it narrowly. Because Pennsylvania’s 8th Congressional District includes parts of Montgomery County, and the City of Philadelphia, that was enough to win him the seat. Running on gun control, but only sort of, is exactly the wrong politics to play for this district. Murphy needs to pick a side, and I think the Congressman would find that truly embracing gun rights would find him a lot more support than gun control.
There are more than a dozen shooting clubs in Bucks County, several of which have memberships in the thousands. A lot of these guys are union members, and have common cause with the Democratic Party on other issue. Why is Congressman Murphy throwing these votes away for what measly support he’ll get from the few gun control proponents out there?
Right now his triangulation is ensuring that on the gun issue, Patrick Murphy is losing votes on all sides. That’s never smart politics.
In other words, when Congressional oversight of banks forces banks into taking risks they can’t afford, the solution is more Congressional oversight of banks. To put it more plainly: When the boat is taking on water, open up the taps.
Talking about McCain’s hinting that there might need to be some undefined level of increased government regulation to get us out of this mess.
… for putting “Y” instead of “Yes”, apparently they can’t keep track of their own weapons.
Washington State is considering a measure that would basically extinguish the shooting sports in that state.
Congressman Jason Altmire was one of the representatives to get up on the House Floor last night to speak in favor of HR6691:
When the D.C. City Council decided to ignore a ruling from the United States Supreme Court and when the District of Columbia decided to play games with the Constitution of the United States, it was they that brought us to the point where we are today, where congressional intervention is necessary to uphold the rights of Washington, D.C. citizens under the second amendment to the Constitution.
As a signatory of the amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to overturn the unconstitutional gun ban, I was outraged at the D.C. Council’s new gun restrictions. So I joined with Mr. Childers of Mississippi to help craft the Second Amendment Enforcement Act, which is the text of the amendment we are debating here tonight.
This bill repeals D.C.’s gun ban and permits law-abiding gun owners the right to keep their firearms in ways that will ensure their availability and use for self-defense. This amendment ensures that the intent of the Supreme Court and of the second amendment are upheld for all citizens, including those who live in the District of Columbia.
As I said before, when it counts, Altmire has been with gun owners. While I greatly appreciate the work Congresswoman Hart did for gun owners when she was in Congress, I think it’s hard to agree that Jason Altmire hasn’t been a leader on this issue.
The house has passed the Childers amendment.
UPDATE: Here’s the NRA release.
Cemetery’s Gun Blob is new to the whole gun rights scene, so I’m going to offer him a bit of advice on his attending a NJCDL meeting last night:
But was interesting to learn, is that the NRA doesn’t have NJ on it’s radar, and it’s pretty much up to us NJ gun owners to take action. NJ is such an anti gun state, the NRA doesn’t really have a vested interest since the lines aren’t clear. There are Anti’s on both sides of the fence here, and by voting Republican can actually hurt you. And by voting Democrat can actually help you. There were a few people who said they were Pro Gun Democrats there. NJ is it’s own beast I say, on so many levels.
Rule number one of gun activism is always take what other groups say about NRA with a grain of salt. That even goes for a lot of state associations. It’s not at all true that NRA doesn’t pay any attention to New Jersey: they do. It’s just exceedingly difficult to win there. New Jersey also has a good state association, even better than Pennsylvania’s, which doesn’t do donkey to stand up for gun rights over here.
But that’s not to say that the message about it being up to gun owners isn’t correct. Mobilizing gun owners has always been something volunteers do. Almost half of New Jersey’s congressional districts have no EVCs. That means no one in those districts is working to help get pro-gun politicians in office, and anti-gun politicians out. NRA does not ignore New Jersey, but they can only do so much if Garden State Gun Owners don’t stand up and do something to help.