Category: The Media

Robert Schlesinger doesn’t seem to understand how rights work.  Let’s take a look at what he says:

Thanks to the Supreme Court, D.C. citizens can keep and bear arms. They simply have to register them, and cannot have any of the semi-automatic variety. Only radical gun rights advocate suggest these are unconstitutional limitations—and if they are unconstitutional, then under-armed D.C. citizens can gain redress through the courts.

What they can’t do is try to gain redress through Congress, where the 600,000 D.C. residents lack a real voice. Which wouldn’t stop Congress from dictating what kind of gun laws D.C.’s 600,000 residents should have.

Let me rephrase this slightly:

Thanks to the Supreme Court, D.C. citizens can subscribe to newspapers. They simply have to limit themselves to newspapers registered with the government, and may not read any radical papers like USA Today. Only radical first amendment advocates suggest these are unconstitutional limitations—and if they are unconstitutional, then under-educated D.C. citizens can gain redress through the courts.

What they can’t do is try to gain redress through Congress, where the 600,000 D.C. residents lack a real voice. Which wouldn’t stop Congress from dictating what kind of censorship laws D.C.’s 600,000 residents should have.

Still consider yourself a Bill of Rights supporter Mr. Schlesingler?

The LA Times is unhappy with the National Park carry rule:

The impact of this rule change should have been obvious to those who drafted it; ancient petroglyphs that are already used by some for target practice will become even more bullet-scarred, rangers will have to cope with armed and dangerous visitors, wildlife will come under fire and campers will have to worry that the rude guy in the Winnebago next door is packing heat.

Wait, wait, I can help them write the next bit:

And I beheld when He had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was an earthquake: and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood: and the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind. And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.

It’s hard to win on gun rights when the media just flat out refuses to characterize your issue properly.  Virginia is considering a bill, which is eminently reasonable, that will allow concealed carry license holder to carry in restaurants licensed to serve alcohol provided they do not consume any.  Here’s how the Roanoke Times characterizes it:

The Senate last week passed a bill, with the help of Roanoke’s Sens. John Edwards and Ralph Smith, that would allow those with permits to carry concealed guns into bars and restaurants that serve alcohol.

They must tell a designated employee they’re packing, and they must abstain from drinking or risk a misdemeanor. But who would be the wiser?

We don’t think guns and booze belong in the same building and support those establishments that ban any and all weapons from their premises. But at least with open carry, there is transparency about who is and who is not toting a weapon to happy hour.

How much more transparent can you get than having to go up and tell someone at the restaurant you’re packing heat?  This is about as transparent as you can get.  It’s ridiculously transparent, in fact, given that I would never have to do such a thing in most other states.  The Roanoke Times doesn’t even consider the alternative is people leaving loaded firearms in cars where they could be stolen.  But their coverage is at least better than the New York Times, which says:

The Senate’s retreat from gun controls was compounded by its repeal of another worthy Kaine priority — a ban on people swaggering into bars with concealed weapons and make-my-day fantasies.

Yeah, because that’s exactly the bill that’s being proposed.  And they wonder why they are going down the crapper.

Every time a story like this appears in the media, calling for a renewal of the Assault Weapons Ban, we should be ready to hit them with Letters to the Editor.  If we’re going to work to sabotage the Brady Campaign’s efforts to create a positive media environment for renewal, this is what we’re going to have to do.  Good guidelines are 200 words or less for an LTE.  You need to get your follow up in quick, while the editorial is still fresh.  Be clear and concise.  Pick one line of argument and stick to it, rather than jumping all over the place.

I think every black rifle owner out there should go to at least one NRA high-power, CMP, or practical match this spring, and get yourself classified as a competitive shooter.  Some letters should focus on the widespread use of AR-15s and various other military patterned rifles in shooting competition.  Identify yourself a competitive shooter who uses one in matches.  Talk about the qualities that make them beneficial for sport shooting.  All letters should stress we’re not speaking of machine guns, which is the most common misconception.  Other letters should focus on their use in self-defense.  Talk about the AR/AK benefits for that purpose: their smaller size, the fact that they fire an intermediate powered cartridge, the fact that you can easily mount a flashlight to the rifle.  The availability of ammunition because of their widespread use in law enforcement.

The only way we’re going to come out of these next four nightmarish years unscathed is if we all pitch in, and help defeat this bill in the realm of public opinion before it even has a chance to go anywhere in Congress.