Tab Clearing: Too Much Going on Edition

I have to start scaling back our posting frequency on here. I also normally try to read every comment, and respond to the ones I feel a need to respond to. But the volume has gotten to be pretty high lately. Right now I feel like I have two full time jobs, and I’m not able to get to stuff I want to do with my club, which can bring local pressure to bear on lawmakers. The pace can be very tiring, and I can really sympathize with Robb, I’m not going to completely unplug, but I’m going to pull things back to DEFCON 3 for now. I will still keep everyone updated on major news as it happens, but I need some breathing room to work on stuff for the club, focus better on work during the day, so I’m not working all night until the wee hours to make up for it. I will share with you what’s been building up in my “list of things to maybe blog about.”

Tam and Roberta come to an understanding about the protocols for using children as political pawns.

Tom Ridge used to be anti-gun, and then claimed to be pro-gun, and now is anti-gun again, suggesting that banning semi-autos is “a very important step.” Step to where, Tom?

Another generation of Bushes prepares to enter politics. God help us. God help the GOP.

The activism gap behind the gun control debate. I’ve had a lot of people e-mailing asking what they can do. I hope that momentum keeps up through 2014, because folks, if the GOP holds together, we need to work hard. They are going to make 2014 a referendum on gun control.

Smart Guns, an Engineer’s Perspective. I was peripherally involved in this debate. The anti-gun folks think we need smart guns. So does Obama. Personally, I’d prefer to go straight to phasers. Though, I wouldn’t accept any firearm that needs batteries to function, at least not with the current state of battery tech.

Barry’s list of executive actions, summarized: “Tell everyone to do their goddamned jobs.”. And again here too.

How we are going to be safer (not sure where I found this, but it’s excellent)

Don’t worry guys, John Boehner is on the case!

Some excellent hypocrisy over a video game.

Obama’s proposals have nothing to do with Sandy Hook. Of course they don’t. Nothing would have stopped that, short of making it easier to adjudicate mentally ill people, or making sure people like Nancy Lanza can’t own firearms.

Glenn Reynolds: “Gun control is a way of rubbing Middle America’s face in the fact that it doesn’t run things. That’s the actual appeal.” Similar to what I mentioned here.

What Illinois Avoided, So Far, And What To Do About It.

Why are gun death statistics inflated with gun-suicides? Prof. Althouse notes: “It occurred to me, after the Sandy Hook murders, that blaming guns is a secular substitute for blaming the devil. People find it too challenging to figure out why a human being would do this terrible thing and they latch on to the idea thatthe gun made it happen. Suicide presents a similar challenge, and one way to fathom it is to say: It was the gun. Isn’t it like saying the devil made him do it? The gun/the devil is a great go-to answer, freeing you from wracking your brain about the workings of the human mind.”

New York’s Gun Control Make the PATRIOT Act Looks Careful and Deliberated. Hey, never let a crisis go to waste.

DSCC Mining Supporters By Demonizing NRA

Well, it would seem the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee wants to capitalize on the great popularity of what was, a few weeks ago, considered a losing issue for Democrats. Time to cash in on gun control, for the children. From a reader via e-mail:

Breaking Washington Post Headline: “NRA planning ‘the fight of the century’” [NAME] – Today, we have the momentum to take monumental steps toward reducing gun violence.

But the NRA and their army of lobbyists are working to tear any proposal to shreds. If we don’t stand up to the NRA immediately, they will destroy our chance to stop gun brutality. But the window of opportunity is so small that I need you to act right now so it doesn’t slip away.

Sign the petition and denounce the NRA immediately. Stand with Democrats who want to reduce gun violence. Let’s get 100,000 signatures by midnight tonight!

The NRA will do anything to demolish common-sense gun laws. They even released a repulsive ad that calls President Obama an “elitist hypocrite,” and uses his children as political pawns.

It looks like a means to collect names. My guess is they will then tag that person as interested in gun control as a topic, and use that to solicit donors.

And Now Massachusetts…

Today, we get to look at another big anti-gun state to see what the gun owners are facing. According to Reuters, it’s summed up as “requir[ing] gun buyers to undergo background checks even when they made purchases at gun shows, limit[ing] buyers to purchasing one gun per month and reduc[ing] access to high-powered ammunition.”

I tried to look up introduced bills in Massachusetts, but no matter which bill turns up under a search for “firearm,” they all show as up as cannot be found, so I’m having to rely on that description above for any analysis. In other words, I can’t tell you much based on a quick search, but I can give you context to what kinds of laws Massachusetts gun owners already face that they are just trying to make even more complicated.

As I wrote back during NY Gov. Cuomo’s State of the State speech, Massachusetts already declared all previously issued gun licenses invalid – and then proceded to admit that they didn’t even tell thousands of gun owners about the change in the law, so they were suddenly in possession of firearms and ammunition illegally.

Massachusetts gun owners already go through costly license renewals every few years, and they already have to show those licenses every single time they buy either a firearm or ammunition. Even in private sales–including those at gun shows–the buyer and sellers have to show that they are legally licensed, complete an FA-10 together that has information on both individuals and the gun details, and mail a copy to state within 7 days. A private seller is also limited to selling 4 guns per year.

As for purchase restrictions, well, that’s pretty clearly just a case of trying to add insult to injury just because “they can.” There’s no purpose for it given that they already so heavily restrict licenses in the first place. There’s no accountability in issuing them, and it’s all up to the whim of local authorities. It’s tough to judge anything about the supposedly high-power ammunition bill since there’s no real description for what that even means.

So, yeah, we see in Massachusetts what they are trying when there’s really not much else to do when it comes to screwing gun owners. They already suffer enough.

Leahy Goes Soft On Guns

He supports outlawing private transfers and magazine bans, and he’s going to hold hearings. Leahy’s committee is where all the anti-gun bills will be referred to, so this is a significant bellwether and it does not bode well for us at all. Folks, we have to get writing. Vermont, unfortunately, has a long history of sending anti-gun legislators to Congress, so if you do live in Vermont, get writing. We have to keep a close eye out, because now that Obama has fired the starter pistol, we’re going to find out how many more “friends” never really were.