Category: Anti-Gun Folks

Michael Bane points to a hit piece on guns shows that’s been making its way around the blogosphere.  Other than the usual “Grenade launchers, RPGs, and Bazooka’s, Oh My!” and “There are people who love Hitler here!” crap you’d expect from folks who have no idea what they are looking at, I particularly love this one:

An organizer of the Antioch show told me the heightened specter of government scrutiny prompted numerous dealers to demand a total ban on cameras of any kind inside the show.

The reason that dealers ban cameras is to deter straw purchasers!  It’s also the reason many dealers ban cell phone use in their stores or booths.  It prevents easy communication with the actual, prohibited buyer.

Isn’t this the kind of thing you would, you know, want to encourage rather than deride?  But I suppose that gets in the way of their “Look at all these dumb crazy rednecks” narritive.  Remember that when they try to tell you it’s all about public safety.  There were idiots at this gun show, but it wasn’t who the Daily Beast thought they were.  Perhaps they should look in a mirror.

Robert Spitzer is a Political Science professor at SUNY Cortland, he also is the author of three gun control books.  He wrote a Letter to the Editor in the New York Times this morning that says this:

Former President Jimmy Carter is right about bringing back the assault weapons ban, including the fact that legitimate hunters and sportsmen have no interest in using such weapons for sport. He mentions the underlying cause that feeds opposition to it: the deep-seated fear among gun owners of anything labeled a “gun ban.”

Here’s what I’d like to ask my readers to do.  Post as a comment, or e-mail me pictures of “assault weapons” being used for sporting purposes.  I’m looking at you CMP and NRA HP shooters.  I am going to make a collage for Professor Spitzer.  Let’s be sure he understands exactly how many people use these for sport all the time, in hundreds of legitimate shooting matches all over the country.

Howard Nemerov brings us part II of his series on the VPC’s finances.

Two people perform most of VPC’s public outreach: Executive Director Josh Sugarman and Legislative Director Kristen Rand. Between 2003 and 2007, as revenues decreased 49.9%, both Sugarman’s and Rand’s salaries increased 5.9%. But because revenues decreased, these two top earners––each of whom earned $132,894 in salary and $3,987 in benefits in 2007––went from 15.5% of total revenue in 2003 to 32.7% in 2007, more than doubling their slice of the pie (111.3% increase). Having just two employees taking home about one-third of total revenue may not be a long-term success strategy for a normal business, but it works when normal profitability concerns don’t exist. To understand the financial circumstances of VPC, one must understand their definition of “public support,” which accounted for 91.8% of VPC’s total revenue between 2003 and 2007.And to understand VPC’s “public support,” one must understand the Joyce Foundation, because VPC’s primary “public donor” is the Joyce Foundation.

Bitter did an analysis of VPC’s finances a few years ago.  Now Howard Nemerov has updated us on the current state of VPC’s finances:

In 2007, VPC saw a small improvement, mostly by cutting functional expenses by 48.7% since 2003, plus the fact that salaried employees received no raises since 2005, along with  $144,227 increase in “direct public support.” (Where this “public support” comes from will be examined in Part 2, because this tells the story of who VPC really represents.)

This ought to be good.

Thirdpower notes that Josh Sugarmann of the Violence Policy Center is less than thrilled with Obama’s first 100 days.

We have the video from the interview with Cam last night.  I am still speechless.  A high school teacher who doesn’t realize that federal law applies to the whole country, including New York.  A high school teacher who took what New Yorkers Against Gun Violence said about the law at face value, and who pretty clearly hasn’t researched the topic at all.  This is what’s teaching the next generation?  God help us.

Click below to see the video, it is in three parts:

Continue reading “Look Who’s Teaching”

I found a great example of a well-written letter to the editor.  It’s sharp, witty, plays off a kernel of truth with just a little exaggeration (but not too much!), and gets people thinking about the issue.

Unfortunately, it was submitted by an anti-gun activist.

That doesn’t mean we can’t learn from it.  If there are any readers in south Florida, a well-written response would likely get published.

We talked earlier about a public school teacher in New York who’s taking his kids to Albany to protest gun rights.   I just got this tip from Cam Edwards of NRA News:

Saw your link to the story about that history teacher and his lobbying/field trip to Albany later this week.  Wanted to let you know that we did about a 30 minute interview with Mr. Espinoza this afternoon and will be playing it at 11 p.m. tonight.

This ought to be good.  Be sure to tune in, either on the web site, or on Sirius Patriot 144.

The Lancaster media covered the Ted Nugent “Live Free” rally, and here’s a complete accounting of their coverage of Bryan Miller’s protest:

From ABC 27 Lancaster County:

A small group held a silent protest outside of the rally. They said they are not against gun rights, but that Nugent sends a violent message.

Not against gun rights?  This is not the Bryan Miller I knew.  From LancasterOnline:

While he spoke, 16 people protested across the road from the club entrance.

That’s it?  The people who were at the pro-gun side of things had to pay 150 dollars a head to be there.  And we still outnumbered them by an order of magnitude.  So that’s going to be it? Miller gets his name in one article in the Lancaster media market?  I think I could generate more than 16 people to protest a gun control rally, and without using the blog.   How the mighty have fallen.