Bitter – Page 137 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Speed of Gun Control

This article provides a bit of history on some of the Chicago-area gun bans. It turns out that the widow of a man shot became so obsessed with blaming the gun that the very night her husband was shot, the first thing she wanted to do was organize a press release to go out in the morning calling for a gun ban.

A major segment of the case began, however, not with lofty constitutional quarrels but the long-ago murder of a lawyer and judge in a Chicago courtroom. It was Oct. 21, 1983, when wheelchair-bound Hutchie Moore, using a handgun he had hidden under a blanket, shot his ex-wife’s divorce lawyer, James Piszczor, as well as the presiding judge in the Cook County Circuit Court, Henry Gentile, on the 16th floor of the Daley Center.

Piszczor’s best friend, Christopher Walsh, was in Washington attending a reunion of clerks to then-Chief Justice Warren Burger, when he heard of Piszczor’s death. …

“I flew back that night,” Walsh recalled last week. “Jim’s wife, Maureen, asked me to issue a press release the next morning.” In that release, Piszczor’s widow launched a drive to restrict handguns in their hometown of Oak Park, Ill., a Chicago suburb. “She said that part of the problem that led to Jim’s death was access to handguns, and she didn’t want another widow to have to deal with what she was dealing with.”

I realize that people deal with death differently, so I’m going to try not to judge here. However, I really can’t imagine a circumstance where the very night that my other half was killed, my reaction would be to go into political activist mode and send out press releases.

Regardless, it worked. And it stood for more than two decades.

Freedom States Alliance Folds

I totally missed this, and I don’t recall seeing it other places. Apparently Freedom States Alliance got eaten up by another gun control group last week.

Pretending Gun Control Doesn’t Exist

It would seem like the organizers of the London Olympics want to pretend as though gun control doesn’t exist. I noticed that their page on Shooting has a “Get Involved” section that pretends shooters don’t have to leave the country to practice.

Shooting is a fun way to learn discipline and responsibility. In the UK, more than 350,000 people currently practice the sport, with equal numbers of boys and girls entering competitions.

If you want to get involved, British Shooting is a good place to start.

As with many sports, there are schemes to encourage young people to reach a high level.

Find details of all the Shooting clubs and facilities in your local area in the ‘related websites’ section.

It’s just so casual, like British shooters haven’t been effectively ostracized by society and the UK sporting world. Let’s just pretend like there’s a local gun range where you can pick up any gun to shoot so conveniently for every British youngster! It’s almost as if they choose not to mention that the only reason the world’s shooters are even allowed to compete in the London Olympics is by special exemption and that these athletes will have to go abroad to even practice.

But there is one thing that stands out to this description of how to get involved in the sport. There’s a justification for why people would even want to consider involvement. There’s no list of reasons why people want to play handball or go swimming. It’s as if they feel the need to make excuses for why shooters are even being listed as athletes.

The Brady Rankings – In Context

The Brady Campaign has officially declared itself to be a radical gun banning organization. There’s no other way to view them after reviewing their latest state rankings of gun laws released this morning.

The rankings are conducted on a 100-point scale. Their “best” state is California which comes in at 79 points – a C+. The second spot is secured by New Jersey with 73 points – a C-. However, I consider the most telling grade to be Massachusetts. Brady said they only scored a 54 out of 100 – or have an F in the gun control grade book.

Massachusetts is a state with discretionary license to own. If you walk into a police station and offend the police chief by wearing his least favorite color, he has the authority to deny you a license to even own a rifle or handgun in your home. Massachusetts is a state where the gun laws go so far that pepper spray requires its own firearms permit. If a new shooter wants to take empty shell casing home after a successful day at the range, they risk criminal charges for inert cases if they do not have a gun license.

This is what the Brady Campaign considers to be a failing grade?

There is no right to own arms in Massachusetts. That is still not good enough for the Paul Helmke. What is good enough? Confiscation? Would that get them up to maybe a B? What is an A for the Brady Campaign?

Democratic Gun Owners Need to Get to Work

A key message from yesterday’s post on the challenging climate we’re facing here in Pennsylvania is that we need Democratic gun owners to show up in a big, big way. If you’re a Pennsylvania gun owner who is registered as a Democrat, you don’t have the option of staying home for the primary election.

Consider that the most “moderate” of the Democratic gubernatorial candidates on record only wants to ban your rifles. (Whether you decide to cast your lot with the one seeking the least amount of gun control or the far-left progressive who can’t win statewide is up to your own voting strategy.)

But as of tomorrow, one of the more extreme gun control advocates is dropping his gubernatorial bid to instead challenge a pro-gun Democratic House member for an open Senate seat.

The Senate seat in question has been primarily Democratic since 1963, so it is likely that the Democratic primary will serve to determine the final office holder, regardless of the election in November. The Democrats who have held it before have been very pro-gun, and hopefully we can keep that tradition. Right now, State Rep. Jim Wansacz currently holds an A rating and is hoping to continue the trend. But tomorrow he will be challenged by Chris Doherty who wants to limit the number of guns you can buy, end statewide preemption, make your license to carry obsolete, and possibly create a formal gun owner registry to track how many guns you try to purchase. It doesn’t matter if you’re a carry advocate, recreational shooter, hunter, or all three, your status as a lawful gun owner under Chris Doherty will be impacted in a very negative way.

That’s one nice thing about Pennsylvania, we still have some pro-gun Democrats. It means that Democratic voters who actually respect the Second Amendment will often have a choice of candidates. In this case, it’s pretty clear that Rep. Wansacz needs your vote, your political donations, and your time.

Debate Between the Sexes

Here’s a topic for discussion as you either take a break from digging out or take a break from watching footage of people digging out:

What so-called “chick flicks” should a man suck it up and see? You know, the ones that are cultural classics or just so often referenced that it makes more sense to just get those two (or more) hours out of the way to say you’ve seen it.

For example, I have forced Sebastian to watch Gone with the Wind, My Fair Lady, and Dirty Dancing. Because who doesn’t see those movies? It’s just part of our common culture. There are enough jokes about putting Baby in the Corner and common references to frankly just not giving a damn that you have to see the movies to get it.

It’s not a classic, but I also made Sebastian watch Atonement with me because I thought it was just a good movie. (Although I’m always very angry after watching it.) It had some war, so that was enough to convince him to sit still. (And really, that Dunkirk scene.)

Now I’m debating whether to make him watch the BBC version of Pride & Prejudice with me. I’ve seen several versions, but I hear this is the best. Is Mr. Darcy an important enough literary figure that he should know what the hell references to him mean? Or is making any man watch even the film version of an Austen story considered cruel and unusual punishment that is only slightly less harsh than actually reading her?

Beyond the question of Pride & Prejudice, are there others that you guys recommend? Anything the women in your lives made you watch that you’re now happy you saw because, at the very least, you now understand references in the real world?

Concerns about Congress

So far, things are looking really good for Republicans in 2010. Political watchers even think things look rosy here in our Congressional district where they have moved Patrick Murphy’s seat from Solid Dem to Likely Dem to only Lean Dem. I assume that’s because they believe a former Congressman who Murphy narrowly beat will put up a good campaign. At this point, one could only wish.

I’ve had my concerns about Mike Fitzpatrick ever since I heard he was entering the race. Bucks Right hits the nail on the head with what’s bothering me at the moment:

Mike Fitzpatrick, presumptive Republican nominee in his own mind for the US House Seat representing Pennsylvaniaâ€™s 8th district, appears to be employing the little seen â€œgimmick a dayâ€ political strategy in his run to regain the seat he lost nearly 4 years ago to Patlosi Murphy.
…
Sweet Jesus. To anyone remotely associated with the campaign who may read this: While you werenâ€™t paying attention, Patlosi turned himself into kind of a big deal to the far-left wing of his party. If you think running a rinky-dink, misspelled, incoherent, gimmicky campaign against the well-oiled Rahm Emanuel digital age machine is going to take Murphy out, youâ€™re wrong. Youâ€™re killing me here. Do you need a consultant? How about a proofreader?

Amen.

The fact is that Fitzpatrick already lost when Murphy was a no-name upstart. While I’m open to the idea he may be the best candidate to take on Murphy, that doesn’t mean he’s a good one. The weird gimmicks he’s been touting only go to confirm that.

As Bucks Right points out, Fitzpatrick asked for a spending freeze of $1 million in the campaign.

Murphy is a talented fundraiser. Why would he do that since he can far out-raise Fitzpatrick?
Murphy has the media adoration that will land him endorsements and free coverage. A spending freeze would only hurt Fitzpatrick who can’t counter the coverage.
There are higher priority races for the GOP this year, so Fitzpatrick can’t rely upon outside groups to come in and save him. If Murphy did agree to freeze spending, there are a number of groups that will come in and save him with additional funds because of his leadership on some issues like “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the fact that he picked up the tab for the street money for Obama in Philly in 2008.

Fitzpatrick’s “spending freeze” gimmick will only hurt Fitzpatrick. Did no one think that one through? Or are they just hoping that Murphy doesn’t take them up on the offer?

The latest gimmick was the announcement that he’ll honor term limits by not serving more than three additional terms. Great. That means even if Fitzpatrick does win, we will have to go back and fight another uphill battle in six years. If he’s not even going to stick around even if we can manage to elect him, then why should I invest my votes, dollars, and time with Fitzpatrick? At that point, I suspect that my resources are better spent on a candidate like Jeff McGeary or Ira Hoffman. I don’t quite think they are to the point of being able to take on Murphy, but if this gets them started on a path toward name recognition that could serve them well in another run for another office, my investment would still pay off.

Fitzpatrick made the case to PA2010.com that he would be the best candidate because of a serious lead on a campaign infrastructure and experience. If this is the kind of goofy & sloppy campaign we can expect with all of that experience on board, then Fitzpatrick has moved this race closer to the Solid Dem category.

Lost

The new episode is on the DVR. There will be no spoilers allowed. Thanks to Sebastian’s new crazy work schedule, our speedy viewing sessions have dropped dramatically. We’re waiting to catch a couple of hours in a row to watch the finale of Season 3. Obviously, that still leaves us with 2 more seasons.

We’re getting to an interesting point in this little viewing exercise. I find the show to be quite predictable by now, and I find myself hoping that more characters die. In fact, I say we just give up and nuke the whole damn island/island chain/whatever. This doesn’t give me much hope for the remaining three seasons. Perhaps those of you who watched last night can give a spoiler-free clue as to whether it is worth it, or I’ll be screaming at the computer to just nuke the whole damn world in order to be free of these characters.

Just Shut Up

Nevadans aren’t too happy with President Obama right now. They were once polite in asking Obama not to attack their state. Now they are being a little more blunt. Next time, I suspect the request will look something like: “Shut you damn pie hole, you pompous prick! Oh, and how do you like you Senate without a Majority Leader?”

Civic Duty

Sebastian was called up for jury duty this morning. Because he was working very late last night, getting up early was less than ideal. Add to the fact that he never leaves enough time to get ready in the morning when his schedule changes, snow, and a rush hour he’s not used to, and you have the makings of a stressed out Sebastian.

But, he’s doing something good for the community – or something. He took his phone and computer. Hopefully he can get some work done or do a bit of blogging. Of course, there’s not much to find out there. Things are pretty slow right now.