Bitter – Page 96 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Hunters Improving the Economy

You have to love seeing this story in the Wall Street Journal.

Roughly 7,000 hunters turned out [for NJ’s bear hunt] this year, killing 469 bears. Last year, when the state also had a six-day hunt, 592 were shot.

The furry haul has unleashed a bull market for mounted bears, turning New Jersey’s taxidermists into unlikely job creators.

Mr. Clark brought on two extra seasonal workers to help process the trophies and is looking to hire a full-time taxidermist immediately. One of the workers, when not skinning mammals, makes a living as a cookie deliveryman. Bill and Ken’s Taxidermy in Morganville, N.J., also hired more help.

Apparently, the most important question a taxidermist will ask is whether the mouth should be left open or closed. I wouldn’t even know how to decide; there are just way too many cute mounts for black bears. I knew a guy who had three different bear mounts that all looked so different. And then there’s the choice of a rug.

Ultimately, the hunt is important for maintaining healthy population numbers. However, any help to the economy is surely appreciated, too.

Happy Bill of Rights Day!

What are you doing to celebrate?

I think I’ll put on a bottle of wine to chill for tonight. I realize that the 21st amendment isn’t part of the original 10, but those first 10 are worthy of a toast.

Continue reading “Happy Bill of Rights Day!”

Republicans Sell Out the Free Market – Again

Just because the GOP is calling it a liquor privatization bill doesn’t actually mean that they are doing away with a government monopoly, cutting costs, or leading the fight for a remotely smaller government.

No, in fact, the leader of the new “amended” bill here in Pennsylvania that would end the complete control of all wine & liquor sales by the government is bragging about how he made certain to cut the private markets out of the picture by pricing the licenses to compete out of the range they were willing to accept. That’s right, the GOP lawmakers are bragging about trying to shut out the free market.

The current proposal will allow places that currently sell beer to sell wine, but only after they pay $50,000, plus an additional $15,000 every year after that. Oh, and if it’s a grocery store, we have to keep the same inconvenient current model of going to buy groceries from one part of the store, checking out, buying alcohol (beer only, for now) from another part of the store, and checking out yet again. Explain to me how this is an improvement.

Effectively, the state will still control prices and selection. While there is a wholesaler license available, GOP Rep. John Taylor from Philly purposefully priced it out of what he believes the market will pay at $100 million:

Taylor said he arrived at that figure by asking several groups what they would pay for a license to sell wine to retailers and then adding a few million. (emphasis added)

So, what we get is the perfect example crony capitalism. The prices are set based on private conversations that a lawmaker won’t reveal to potentially favor or disfavor anyone he chooses.

I also see this as potential burden for taxpayers. Sebastian and I sketched out this possible scenario last night while talking about the unbelievably stupid bill:

Continue reading “Republicans Sell Out the Free Market – Again”

Is Bloomberg’s Head in the Sand?

Did you know that Michael Bloomberg stopped HR 822 from passing? It’s news to me.

A reporter asked him if Washington had made any recent progress in cracking down on illegal gun sales, giving the mayor an opening to talk about one of his marquee issues.

“This year, we, a lot of people, helped in keeping Congress from passing this Right to Carry bill, where every state would have to recognize the carry laws in other states,” the mayor responded. “And there are some states that have no laws, so it would essentially mean everybody could carry a gun anyplace no matter what state laws were, and Congress did not pass it.”

“I suppose thatâ€™s progress,” he said, sounding unconvinced.

Perhaps he sounds unconvinced because it’s still an active bill and will remain so until late next year. So, yeah, progress is that you’re still having to fight for another year on a bill that would have passed the Senate during the last session. Yay for progress!

Rifle Champions

ESPN profiles the University of Alaska Fairbanks as longtime NCAA Rifle champions. The piece dispels several myths, such as the idea that collegiate rifle shooting has anything to do with hunting. I think this tidbit is pretty funny:

When Fairbanks hosted and won the national championship in 2007, nearly 1,000 fans showed up for the finals, far and away an NCAA record for the sport.

(h/t Outdoor Pressroom)

What I Know About Sports – Tim Tebow Edition

Tim Tebow is terrible & awful. Tim Tebow is amazing & a blessing. This my understanding of professional football based on Twitter, Facebook, and sporadic headlines I might catch of a sport I don’t actually follow. I know we have a Broncos fan in Philly who appreciates that the team didn’t hire dog killer, and one of my close friends from college is a lifelong Bronco fan.

The friend from Colorado recently posted a link to a story that puts some of the crazy headlines about his shortcomings in perspective.

Do you know what else Tim Tebow has never done?

Tim Tebow has not climbed all Seven Summits. He’s never built an invisible jet or hosted the Country Music Awards. If he has solved the mystery of Loch Ness, or washed dishes at The French Laundry, it’s never been written about. Tim Tebow’s portrait does not hang in the Louvre. Sandra Bullock has never made a Tim Tebow movie. Tim Tebow has never made a Sandra Bullock movie.

Sure, Tim Tebow has been on the cover of Sports Illustrated, but has he been on the cover of Dwell or Bon Appetit? That’s right: no. Loser! …

That’s embarrassing. Why do people care about him?

Yes, Tim Tebow beat the Miami Dolphins, the Oakland Raiders, the Kansas City Chiefs, the New York Jets and the Chargers of San Diego. But Tim Tebow has not beaten the Detroit Lions. Or the Detroit Pistons. Or the Detroit Red Wings. Or Manny Pacquiao. Or Dara Torres. Or Real Madrid. Or Gary Kasparov.

It is even better from the opening until the end, so go read the whole thing.

As for me, I’ll go back to ignoring the NFL and ignoring the fact that my favorite college team completely bit the dust mid-season – again.

Robots, No; Serious People, Yes

Unlike the head of the Pennsylvania GOP, I’m not afraid of a Texas candidate with a style of folksy flair. However, there is such a thing as taking the folksy thing a bit too far when a candidate not only reveals ignorance, but defends that ignorance as something the American people want. If we were talking about ignorance of something like an obscure genre of literature, yeah, most voters could give a damn about a what a presidential candidate knows. If we’re talking about the nine current members of the Supreme Court, uh, that’s just a tad more important.

â€œI donâ€™t have memorized all of the Supreme Court judges,â€ Perry said on “Fox News Sunday,” responding to a question about a Des Moines Register interview he did last week when he referred to the eight justices of the high court. After the interview, the campaign said Perry was referring to a specific case that went 8-to-1 in a direction Perry didn’t agree with.

The American people “arenâ€™t looking for a robot that can spit out the name of every Supreme Court justice or someone that’s going to be perfect in every way. They’re looking for somebody who’s got values,” Perry said.

I think it’s a bit appalling that he just called all of us who can name all nine justices robots. And, no, I don’t want a robot in the Oval Office. I do want a leader who understands that regardless of what pro-gun legislation he/she might sign or anti-gun legislation to be vetoed, the most important Second Amendment decisions he/she will likely make will be in a Supreme Court appointment and any federal bench appointments. Knowing the nine sitting justices is a reasonable measure that one takes the Court seriously.

As a side note, I think the campaign’s spin for Perry is actually worse than what he said. They claim he just couldn’t remember how the justices fell in a case on which he held an opinion strong enough to make it a campaign issue. If the case is that important, shouldn’t Perry know the justice who stood with his position which would, by default, give him the names of the eight who voted against his position?

Public Support for the Shooting Sports

I guess this goes in the “we’re winning” column, but the optimist in me sees room for improvement.

Seventy-one percent of those polled approve of recreational shooting, with 44 percent strongly approving. …

The most noteworthy part of the survey documents a slight but consistent upward trend in American opinions favoring shooting sports. In 2001, 59 percent indicated shooting sports were “perfectly acceptable.” In 2006 the percentage had climbed to 63 percent; this year shooting sports are “perfectly acceptable” to 66 percent. In contrast, the percentage of Americans who said “shooting sports are inappropriate” dropped from 11 percent (2001) to 5 percent (2011).

CeaseFirePA Writes Re-Election Ads for Pro-Gun Lawmakers

There is nothing about this headline that doesn’t scream “re-elect these people,” and we have our opponents to thank.

Anti-gun violence group targets legislators
CeaseFirePA campaigns against Barletta and Marino for backing border legislation.

The article immediately puts CeaseFirePA on the defensive, forcing them to answer the question over whether their targeting of Republican Reps. Lou Barletta & Tom Marino is really just about partisan politics. They cite an ad targeted at Rep. Mark Critz in the southwest corner of the state, but they fail to mention anything about Reps. Tim Holden or Jason Altmire in their interviews on the ad buy. I guess the former Democratic staffer running the organization doesn’t want to piss off the two Democrats most likely to keep their seats in redistricting.

Back to the title of this post, this is where you know CeaseFirePA made a great investment in making sure that pro-gun lawmakers stay in office in those districts that are extremely friendly to our rights:

For their part, Barletta and Marino say they have no qualms about having voted for the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act, which gives gun owners who have a concealed carry license from one state the right to arm themselves in any other state that also has a concealed carry law.

The spokespeople for the representatives talk about how this would simply be like the same recognition as a driver’s license and how Pennsylvania already has reciprocity with 26 states. It’s simply no big deal.

I just have to laugh at the ad targeting one more time. Even the Democrats who held these seats in safer years went out of their way to be seen as pro-gun, and you’d frequently see “Sportsmen for…” signs out for candidates of both parties. So, thanks CeaseFirePA! The myopic NJ-centric attitude of the organization’s leader is helpful with silly moves like this.

Concealed Carry Numbers for Pennsylvania Counties

After an email exchange with Dannytheman this morning, I was reminded of a method we used to answer questions about how big the pro-gun electorate in Bucks County was during the 2010 elections. We were asked by campaign advisors who weren’t the types to turn their back on gun owners if our numbers were small, but they would have liked to have the number quantified just so they could understand priority in doing outreach during campaign season.

The first form this question takes is usually how many NRA members are in a given district. Well, we don’t know that. Not even NRA knows exactly how many they reach in a given area. (I explain the reasons for this in a post on the same topic for PAGunRights.)

Nor is there a way to calculate exactly how many gun owners there are in a standard political district. A person whose entire collection of firearms was inherited 20 years ago may make voting in defense of their rights just as much a priority as someone who recently sought out training for the first time and is buying everything new. In addition, while all firearms in a household may actually belong to one person, the family may vote along the same principles.

However, we can use concealed carry license numbers as a rough guide. These are people who take gun ownership serious enough that they undergo additional background checks and pay extra fees. They take the time out of their busy lives to stop by the sheriff’s office and wait in line for their license. Even if they aren’t putting a gun on as part of their daily routine, they care enough to make an extra effort in defense of themselves and their rights. This is a reasonable substitute to give a rough idea of the number of voters interested in hearing about a candidate’s record on the Second Amendment.

In Bucks County, that number based on the latest available data is right around 27,000. That includes the nearly 1,000 sportsmen’s firearms permits issued. Even though that is a fairly small percentage of the entire county population, it’s still a very large interest group in one region.

So, if you’re looking for a way to articulate the approximate impact of people who will be interested in a candidate’s Second Amendment record, consider using the number of licenses and permits issued as a reasonable proxy. My guess is that it still underestimates the number of people who care about the issue because of the influence of family and friends on voters, but it’s a reasonable measure to consider when having these sorts of discussions with lawmakers and candidates.