According to CBS Pittsburgh. Republicans have not been doing well in state-wide races, generally, and I question whether Rep. Saccone has enough state-wide name recognition. But I can’t think of anyone better. The PA GOP does a pretty awful job of developing talent and moving them up the ladder. Of the state-wide state offices that are typically stepping stones to Senator or Governor, the Dems now control all of them. Casey’s advantage going against Santorum was name recognition, in that his father, Bob Casey, was a Pennsylvania Governor. Saccone has an uphill climb, so he is going to have to be a stellar candidate. I’d suggest if he can’t learn to channel some of that good ol’ populism that was Trump’s schtick, he’s probably doomed. One advantage Saccone has is he hasn’t been in office all that long. It’s a lot harder to pull off populist everyman when you’ve held office as long as some voters have been alive.
Category: Anti-Gun Folks
A Day Without Moms Demand
Today is the “Day Without Women” protest. I’ve long written in favor of smart activist tactics, and written against dumb ones. This has had the side effect of limiting my audience, because sometimes dumb activist tactics are very self-satisfying. Perhaps a feeling of righteousness and being part of something you think is contributing something has value of its own? Perhaps that is something I should consider, but it’s just never been my drug. If gun owners were mounting a similar “Day Without Gun Owners,” I’d call it out for useless activism that serves no purpose other than the contribute to activism fatigue (most people have lives to live).
Mom’s Demand is taking part in the Day Without Women, and why shouldn’t they? In fact, if they want to make it the year without women, please do. Decade? Century? I would strongly encourage it! Keep your people basking in that self-satisfied nothing, Shannon Watts. Don’t you ever change.
You Know What Makes Guns Get Left in Cars? Gun Free Zones
Bloomberg’s propaganda media outlet “The Trace” is busy promoting the idea that cars are not gun safes again. The great irony in this is that Bloomberg’s organizations also promote laws that create a patchwork of restrictions on taking guns into places like post office’s, restaurants, parks, public transit, etc. You know what people do when as part of their daily errands have to go to one of these places? Yep, you guessed it: leave their guns in their cars. You might wish people would just leave them at home, but that’s not going to happen. You might wish that the law banned people from carrying firearms outside the home entirely, but now all but five or so states allow most law-abiding people to do so, and that’s not going to change. Gun free zones encourage people to leave guns in cars. If Bloomberg’s organizations feel this is a real problem, they would end their opposition to measures that encourages people to keep their firearms where it is least likely to be stolen: on their persons.
Why No One Should Trust Social Media
This fascinating article in Mic talks about how Snap tried to pick Mike Bloomberg’s deep pockets using the gun control issue, but apparently they weren’t biting. Apparently they told Bloomberg’s Everytown folks if they didn’t buy all the ads, then they would be available to the NRA as well. They didn’t bite on that one, because apparently Everytown was already talking to Snap’s news division about a big ol’ chunk of earned media they felt would be more valuable.
This is how the game is played folks. They didn’t have to jump in bed with Snap’s advertising division, because their news division had already jumped into bed with Bloomberg!
It’s a joke. Seriously, don’t believe anything you see in the media, and especially social media. You can’t even go with “Trust, but Verify.” Expect you’re being lied to and seek primary sources.
And How Much has Bloomberg Spent, Shannon?
Heads are melting because NRA had a seat at the table for the Gorsuch nomination.
Is Wayne LaPierre Donald Trump's new Apprentice? After $30M in campaign contributions, @NRA was invited to White House. #ThursdayThoughts pic.twitter.com/WvGoNpCrkk
— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) February 2, 2017
Yeah, and that was our money, honey — sent in $25 dollar increments by millions of Americans. If the tables were turned, and you had a seat at Hillary’s table, it would be because Bloomberg bought it for you.
Mixing Issues: CeaseFire Takes Position on Refugees
I guess we’re not the only ones with this problem. Hey Pat, you know how we were telling you that none of the gun control people endorsing you were EVER going to actually vote for you, because none of them actually cared about the issue beyond its usefulness in promoting other progressive causes? Well …
… can’t say I didn’t warn you.
More Media Wagon Circling Over the Hearing Protection Act
This time the LA Times is getting in the game:
Stiff federal regulations on silencers date back to 1934, when they were enacted as part of a crackdown on machine guns and other instruments of mobster violence.
Actually, silencers were included in NFA because of concerns over poaching during the Great Depression. I think it’s hilarious that the LA Times writer cited the Michael Rosenwald’s WaPo article we talked about the other day, because Rosenwald’s article actually said as much. It’s almost as if no one who comments on Rosenwald’s article actually read it! Was the concern over poaching legitimate? I don’t think so. I’d argue politicians back then were just as ignorant as they are now, and Maxim had only started selling them three decades prior.
Manufacturers say it’s illogical to raise a higher bars to silencer purchases than gun purchases, but this is a double-edged sword. They may be right, but that’s an argument for making guns as hard to buy as silencers, rather than the other way around.
That’s not politically tenable in this country. Again, this is the kind of crap the bores me. You’re never going to get ordinary handguns under NFA-like restrictions. Originally, this was tried when the NFA was passed, and handguns were awkwardly removed under pressure from the National Revolver Association and the NRA. What we were left with was the AOW designation.
“There’s no evidence of a public health issue associated with hearing loss from gunfire,†says Kristin Brown of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. “There is evidence of a public health crisis from gun violence, and we think that’s where legislative efforts should be directed.â€
Yeah, she’s an authority for sure. Let’s get Kristen to stand next to a Glock 19 as its magazine is emptied and then see how long it takes her hearing to come back to normal, assuming it does not cause permanent damage. Why doesn’t Kristen ask some of the old dudes at my club, who grew up around unsuppressed gunfire in the days before hearing protection was all that good? She won’t be able to without shouting at them, because they are all deaf as a post. Even those of us who wear hearing protection have had instances where either the foam didn’t fully expand, or the rifle butt slipped them out of position and your next shot rings your ears.
OSHA says that any noise over 85 decibels is the “action level” for requiring workers to wear hearing protection. OSHA warns that exposure of 110dB for a period of one minute risks permanent hearing loss. The sound of a 9mm firing is 160 decibels. That is loud enough to physically burst your eardrums. It will hurt if you’re near it. Also note that the decibel scale is logarithmic rather than linear. For those who don’t get that, it means that 160dB is a whole crapload louder than 85dB that OSHA considers action level. Silencers reduce the report of gunfire to below the level that risks bursting eardrums, but it’s still loud: about 120-130 decibels.
Others point to indications that silencers can reduce public awareness of developing firearm attacks and interfere with law enforcement.
Nonsense. Can you hear the sound of a jackhammer from a pretty good distance? Then you can hear the sound of a suppressed firearm.
The fact is this: if you are around a gun being shot in an indoor environment without suppression, you are more than likely going to suffer permanent hearing loss if you’re not wearing hearing protection. Most people who don’t shoot have have no idea how loud gunfire really is. TV and computer speakers cannot do it justice. People like Kristen Brown and her allies are going to deliberately lie about the effects because they are depending on that public ignorance to derail what is, actually, a legitimate effort to make it easier for people to buy what is honestly a firearm safety accessory that never should have been regulated the way it was in the first place.
Nevada Background Check Initiative Can’t Be Implemented
Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, and Happy New Years all rolled into one: Bloomberg spent 20 million dollars in Nevada to secure a razor thin win, and he still gets nothing. The Attorney General in Nevada checked with the FBI and the law as it was written is simply not implementable. The FBI stated that states can’t commander federal policy on the matter, and that they refuse to conduct the checks in accordance with the way Bloomberg’s new law requires. How is this so? Hilariously, it’s a pretty simple mistake.
The issue is that Nevada is designated as a Point-of-Contact (POC) state, meaning that, like Pennsylvania, they have a state background check system that is designated by the FBI to conduct background checks under the Brady Act. Bloomberg’s new law states that the checks have to be conducted by the FBI’s National Instant Check System. Given that Nevada is a POC state, the FBI will not conduct checks on behalf of Nevada. The law cannot be complied with, and is therefore completely unworkable and unenforceable.
Never interrupt your enemy when they are in the middle of making a mistake, and always have a backup plan in case your main plan fails. In this case, it looks like we did.
It’s hard to believe Bloomberg sunk 20 million dollars into this with such a glaring error. I will admit I did not read the ballot initiative carefully enough to notice this, but once I started reading the opinion it was obvious. Nevada is a POC state! FBI doesn’t allow dealers to use NICS.
No doubt this won’t be the end of this controversy, since I imagine they’ll attempt to get a judge to bend the plain wording of the language to match Bloomberg’s drafter’s intent rather than what they actually wrote. I imagine someone at LCAV is seething right about now. We’ve benefitted a lot from their lack of real expertise and experience in this area of law. To be honest, their people just aren’t very good, and we should be thankful for that.
But Remember, They Support the Second Amendment
There’s an old adage that one should never interrupt your enemy when they are in the process of making a mistake, and I’m certainly not going to. I think we were even accused of being Russian stooges in there, but I’m not sure.
This is why they have lost, and why for the foreseeable future they will continue to lose. For the most part, we went out into the culture with a mission to persuade and change minds, and save the handful of states where the law and/or culture has already been rigged against that, we’ve succeeded. The only reason the gun control movement has seen any success at all is because Mike Bloomberg is a good strategician, and has the will and capability to outspend us. If it had to depend on the minds at the Brady Campaign, the issue would have made no gains whatsoever in the past five years.
Just an Observation
I don’t know how many of you follow “The Trace,” which is part of Mike Bloomberg’s new media strategy. It’s actually a pretty soft-sell type publication when it comes to gun control. They obviously have a pro-gun control bent, but they also do some decent reporting on the issue. So I admit, I use them as one of my sources. I tend to think “The Trace” is to the gun control movement was Guns.com is for us. Guns.com also does some decent straight reporting on the issue, bit with a bit of a pro-gun bent.
Anyway, I noticed since the election that The Trace has gone from more of the soft-sell to a much harder sell. I don’t know if that’s part of a deliberate strategy change, or whether a lot of people over there are just pissed off at the election results. Not that I’m complaining: the hard sell is a lot easier to make fun of, and it should provide some good material in the future. The mainstream media has gotten pretty boring with their gun reporting, and the fever swamp places like Media Matters are so hilariously over the top as to be hardly worth paying attention to. It’s self-parodying.