SHARE Act Passes The House Of Representatives

The Sportsmen’s Heritage and Recreational Enhancement Act of 2015 aka SHARE Act, an omnibus bill, passed the House of Representatives on Friday afternoon. The final vote was 242 Aye to 161 Nay with 30 not voting. Included in the Ayes were 230 Republicans and 12 Democrats while the opponents consisted of 4 Republicans and 157 Democrats.

Why should we care if this bill passed and why should we fight for it in the Senate? If you read the summary below you will see stuff dealing with polar bears, African elephants, and baited fields. Unless you are a wealthy hunter, you might say, “Meh, who cares.”

However, you will also see increased funding for public shooting ranges, an exemption of lead bullets from the Toxic Substances Control Act, and provisions for armed self-defense on Corps of Engineers managed properties. The Griffith Amendment also includes provisions for safe passage of guns and ammunition by non-prohibited persons. Those are things that everyone one in the gun culture, whether v1.0 or v2.0 can care about.

This bill revises a variety of existing programs to expand access to, and opportunities for, hunting, fishing, and recreational shooting.

Hunting, Fishing, and Recreational Shooting Protection Act

Components of firearms and ammunition and sport fishing equipment and its components (such as lead sinkers) are exempted from regulations of chemical substances under the Toxic Substances Control Act. The authority of the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to regulate the use of ammunition and fishing tackle based on its lead content is limited.

Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act

The Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act is amended to: (1) increase the proportion of funding from the Act that states may use for acquiring land for public target ranges, and (2) delay by 10 years until 2026 the date after which interest from the wildlife conservation and restoration fund is available for apportionment.

Polar Bear Conservation and Fairness Act of 2015

Interior must issue permits to allow a hunter to import polar bear parts (other than internal organs) if p the bear was legally harvested in Canada from an approved population before the May 15, 2008, listing of the polar bear as threatened.

Recreational Lands Self-Defense Act of 2015

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers may not prohibit individuals from possessing a firearm in public areas of a water resources development project.

Recreational Fishing and Hunting Heritage and Opportunities Act

Federal public land management officials must facilitate hunting, fishing, and recreational shooting on certain federal public land.

Hunter and Farmer Protection Act

The bill revises standards for determining what a baited area is for purposes of the prohibition on taking migratory game birds.

The National Park Service (NPS) may not prohibit individuals from transporting bows and crossbows if certain requirements are met.

The NPS may establish hunter access corridors.

Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act Reauthorization of 2015

This bill revises the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act to extend the authority provided to Interior under the Act.

African Elephant Conservation and Legal Ivory Possession Act of 2015

This bill revises and reauthorizes the African Elephant Conservation Act through FY2020.

This bill provides special rules to expand access to federal land and waterways for film crews of five people or fewer.

This is a bi-partisan bill strongly supported by the NSSF, the NRA, Safari Club International, the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus, and many other shooting and hunting groups. Indeed, the target range expansion bill was originally proposed back in 2011 by former Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO).

I look at the Republicans who voted against the bill and some I can understand. Rep. Bob Dold (R-IL) took anti-gun Sen. Mark Kirk’s seat though he IS a member of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus. Rep. Dan Donovan (R-NY) is new and represents a Brooklyn and Staten Island district. Rep. Peter King (R-NY) is just an asshole. However, Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-KY) who represents south-western Kentucky including Paducah has some explaining to do. He is listed as a member of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus and there are a lot of hunters and anglers in his district.

What I don’t understand (or maybe I do) are the 18 Democrats who are members of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus that voted against the bill. Included in this list are past leaders of the Caucus such as Mike Thompson (D-CA) and Bennie Thompson (D-MS). Is their concern and that of their fellow Democrat CSC members polar bears, African elephants, and lead sinkers or is it a need to stick to the Democrat’s anti-gun national agenda?

I’d wager it is unfortunately the latter.

I am thankful that some Democrats – not all of whom are members of the CSC – crossed the aisle to vote for this bill. The goals of the bill are bi-partisan and worthwhile. Now it is on to the Senate where hopefully it won’t get lost in the shuffle. We need to start sending letters, faxes, and emails along with calls to our senators demanding this bill get in and out of committee and brought to the floor for a vote.

“An Act to Regulate the Sale of Concealed Weapons in North Carolina” – Part II

In any discussion of the 1919 act regulating the purchase of certain weapons in North Carolina, you have to go back to the state of politics as they existed in the 1890s. Post-Reconstruction, the Democrats had regained power in the state from the Republicans. However, this dominance was threatened in the 1890s by the rise of what was called Fusion politics. The Republicans and the Populist Party in North Carolina, while they differed on a national agenda, agreed on many items including education, voting rights, and the restoration of the charter of the Farmer’s Alliance which the Democrat-controlled General Assembly had revoked.

The guiding principle behind the fusion of the Republicans and the Populists was that they would agree to support the stronger candidate in each race against the Democrat’s candidate. Sometimes this would be the Populist and sometimes this would be the Republican. The elections of 1894 showed the success of the fusion approach. The Fusionists gained six US House seats from the Democrats; two for the Republicans and four for the Populists. They also elected both US Senators and took a super-majority in both house of the NC General Assembly. They repeated this success in the elections of 1896 where they widened their lead in the General Assembly, picked up another US House seat, and Republican Daniel Russell was elected governor. The General Assembly that convened in 1895 had five African-Americans as members and it loosened voting restrictions on blacks. As a result, voting participation of African-Americans increased significantly.

The Democrats had to come up with a strategy to overcome the successful fusion between the Populists and Republicans. They turned to New Bern attorney Furnifold M. Simmons who was appointed chairman of the NC Democratic Party. Simmons organized local party organizations in each county as well as a speaker’s bureau of orators such as South Carolina’s infamous Pitchfork Ben Tillman. The overriding strategy was based upon one thing: white supremacy.

The “white supremacy campaign” was exactly that. The Democrats repeatedly stated that only white men were fit to hold political office. They often accused the fusionists, especially the Republicans, of supporting “negro domination” in the state. Indeed, there were a large number of African American officeholders, some of whom had been elected and many more who were appointed to office. The Democrats referred to themselves as the “white man’s party” and appealed to white North Carolinians to restore them to power.

One of the most significant events of the campaign was the appearance of an editorial in the Wilmington Daily Record on August 18, 1898. The Daily Record was an African American newspaper published by Alex Manly. The editorial was a response to a speech by a Georgia woman who had called for the widespread lynching of African American men in order to protect white women. The Daily Record suggested that consensual relationships between African American men and white women were common and that often the man was accused of rape only after the relationship was discovered. Once the Democratic papers got hold of the editorial there was an uproar. Under headings such as “Vile and Villainous” and “A Horrid Slander,” the editorial was reprinted throughout the state. Some Democratic papers continued to run it in almost every single issue up to election day.

Not only was the election of 1898 built around white supremacy, it featured the intimidation of black voters by the neo-Fascist Red Shirts at the behest of Simmons as well as an actual coup d’etat after the election in Wilmington. Josephus Daniels, publisher of the News and Observer and an ardent white supremacist, said of Simmons that he was “a genius in putting everybody to
work—men who could write, men who could speak, and men who could ride—the last by no means the least important.” (As an aside, the News and Observer is editorializing in favor of keeping Jim Crow laws from that era.)

The role of newspapers such as the N&O, the Charlotte Observer, the Wilmington Morning Star, and the Wilmington Messenger cannot be understated. While their current staff and readership would be appalled by the overtly racist messages they published, they were the essential propaganda arm of the Democratic Party in North Carolina. In an era before the advent of TV and radio, the newspapers were the media. They conveyed the message to their readers through both editorials and through cartoons aimed at the less literate. Norman Jennett’s cartoons for the N&O ran above the fold and were praised by Democrats as “one of the powers that brought about the revolution.” Many of them can be found here.

On the eve of the 1898 election, Simmons wrote an editorial that laid out the reasons to vote for the Democrats and at its heart was the cause of white supremacy. It appeared on the front page of Daniels’ N&O on November 3rd.

Then came the evidence, disclosing the actual condition of affairs, in that section of the State, which astonished and shocked the consciences and moral sensibilities of the people.

NEGRO CONGRESSMEN, NEGRO SOLICITORS, NEGRO REVENUE OFFICERS, NEGRO COLLECTORS OF CUSTOMS, NEGROES in charge of white institutions, NEGROES in charge of white schools, NEGROES holding inquests over the white dead, NEGROES controlling the finances of great cities, NEGROES in control of the sanitation and police of cities, NEGRO CONSTABLES arresting white women and white men, NEGRO MAGISTRATES trying white women and white men, white convicts chained to NEGRO CONVICTS and forced to social equality with them, until the proofs rose up, and stood forth “like Pelion on Ossa piled.”….

The battle has been fought, the victory is within our reach. North Carolina is a WHITE MAN’S State, and WHITE MEN will rule it, and they will crush the party of negro domination beneath a majority so overwhelming that no other party will ever again dare to attempt to establish negro rule here.

They CANNOT intimidate us; they CANNOT buy us, and they SHALL NOT cheat us out of the fruits of our victory.

And victory was what the Democrats got in 1898. They gained back five seats in Congress from the Populists and Republicans and a super majority in the General Assembly (2 Populists and a smattering of mountain Republicans remained). While the fusionists won in Wilmington, then the state’s largest city, that lasted all of two days until white supremacists rioted and took over the city council from the elected representatives in what became known as the Wilmington Massacre.

They consolidated their gains in 1900 with the election of Democrat Charles B. Aycock as governor, the appointment of Simmons as US Senator, and a constitutional amendment that imposed both a poll tax and a literacy test. The amendment contained a grandfather clause enabling anyone whose ancestors were eligible to vote prior to 1867 to vote. Voter turnout dropped from around 85% in 1896 to less than 50% thereafter. A Republican would not be governor of North Carolina again until 1972 and a Republican majority in either house of the General Assembly until 2010.

Not only had the Democrats cemented their power but so had Furnifold Simmons. He would serve in the US Senate for 30 years and would use the power of patronage to maintain his control. Only once in the succeeding years was his candidate defeated for governor in the Democratic primary and then he worked to destroy the man. His organization wrote journalist W. J. Cash reached to “the headwaters of every Little Buffalo and Sandy Run in North Carolina; into every alley of every factory town.” The Democratic Party controlled a segregationist North Carolina and the Simmons Machine controlled the Democratic Party.

Part III will cover the passage of the act through the General Assembly in 1919 with the primary sponsor being none other than Simmons’ brother-in-law Sen. Earle A. Humphrey (D-Goldsboro).

The Triumph Of The Lame Ducks

The Senate voted at 5:59pm EST to confirm Dr. Vivek Murthy as the next Surgeon General of the United States. The final vote was 51 in favor with 43 opposed and 6 not voting. The confirmation of Dr. Murthy could be called the triumph of the lame ducks.

In March, the nomination of Murthy was dead in the water. It was going nowhere because a number of red-state Democrats were up for re-election and knew voting for Murthy would have been the kiss of death.

From the New York Times on March 14th:

The nominee, Dr. Vivek H. Murthy, an internist and political ally of the president’s, has come under criticism from the National Rifle Association, and opposition from the gun-rights group has grown so intense that it has placed Democrats from conservative states, several of whom are up for re-election this year, in a difficult spot.

Senate aides said Friday that as many as 10 Democrats are believed to be considering a vote against Dr. Murthy, who has voiced support for various gun control measures like an assault weapons ban, mandatory safety training and ammunition sales limits.

Liberal journalist Dave Weigel attributes the death of the filibuster to putting the pressure on these Democrats. They could no longer hide behind a Republican filibuster to avoid taking a position.

Presumably the 10 Democrats including such “pro-Second Amendment stalwarts” as Kay Hagan, Mark Pryor, Mark Begich, Mary Landrieu, and possibly Mark Udall who all lost re-election in November.

It’s funny how a politician’s true colors come out when either they don’t face an election for a number of years or they are being sent home by the voters.

Only three Democrats voted against Murthy:  Joe Donnelly (D-IN), Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), and Joe Manchin (D-WV). And the rest, including Hagan, Pryor, Begich, Landrieu, and Udall voted for Murthy.

Murthy’s confirmation was the triumph of the lame ducks. Their vote was a big “f*%k you” to the voters of their home states who had just turned them out of office.

Who In The VA Has The Vets’ Back?

I brought my Honda in for service this morning. The car in line ahead of me had the following bumper sticker which I understand is given to donors to the Democratic National Committee.

The car was driven by a middle-aged woman who also had a VA employee parking decal for the Charles George VA Medical Center in Asheville.

As long-time readers may know, my father was a career US Army non-com. When he was medically retired in 1972, he depended upon the VA health care system for his medical care. From what I remember, he received good care from VA hospitals in both North Carolina and Maine. I don’t remember him ever speaking of having to wait to receive care.

Looking at the most current VA wait time statistics for the Charles George VA Medical Center, one sees some significant wait times especially for new patients. It takes over 31 days for a new patient to see a primary care physician/FNP/PA, 43.57 days to see a specialist, and almost 32 days to see a mental health professional. The stats are better for existing patients in that they average a week or less across the board. It could be worse as the wait times at the VA medical centers in both Durham and Fayetteville are significantly longer.

After looking at these numbers, I still am moved to ask – who has the vet’s back?

Meddlesome Democrats Want Federal Action On “Stand Your Ground” Laws

In theory, the police powers have traditionally been reserved for the states in our federal system of government. Police powers are those concerned with the health, safety, and welfare of the people. Intrusion by the Federal government into these areas which have been traditionally reserved to the states has grown over the last century. And now, a group of meddlesome Democrats want to intrude even more.

Yesterday, a letter was sent to Attorney General Eric Holder asking for the Justice Department to gather more data on justifiable homicides where the Stand Your Ground defense was invoked. This effort is led by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) in the Senate and Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) in the House. Other signatories include Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA), Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-OH), and Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL).

From TheHill:

The group is also seeking data on other variables of such killings, including their location, information about who in the altercation was armed, the kind of weapons used and reasons they were justified.

“We believe this information would prove extremely useful in helping to evaluate the laws that govern the use of lethal force and in quantifying the impact of such laws on public safety and civil rights,” the lawmakers wrote to Holder…

The lawmakers are also asking the Justice Department to sponsor research through the National Institute of Justice related to trends in justifiable homicides and state-by-state analyses of the impacts of different variations of “stand your ground” laws.

Durbin, citing existing research, said the laws have led to increased violence.

The letter includes a request to order research by the National Institute of Justice into instances of “lethal force by individuals have been issued a concealed carry permit” and whether such use of lethal force resulted in any prosecutions. They also are demanding research into whether variations in concealed carry laws have a “statistically significant impact on the incidence and outcome of uses of lethal force.”

In my opinion, this letter should be seen as not only an attack on self-defense laws but also on our Second Amendment rights. Given who is spearheading this attack, Dick Durbin and Elijah Cummings, you have to wonder if it is really about public safety and civil rights and not about midterm elections and energizing black voters. That, and protecting gangs such as the Black Guerrilla Family in Baltimore and the Latin Kings, Conservative Vice Lords, and Gangsters in Chicago.

So Much For Pro-Gun Democrats In North Carolina

Last week, the North Carolina House of Representatives passed HB 937 by a margin of 78 to 42. This bill would amend various North Carolina gun laws. Included in this list of laws were provisions that clarified the General Assembly’s intentions with regard to park carry, that would permit concealed carry (but not alcohol consumption) in establishments that served alcohol, that would permit concealed carry at events that charged admission, and that would permit concealed carry holders to leave their firearms in a locked vehicle on university and community college campuses. Note on this last provision, a person would still be breaking the law if they carried on campus.

The margin of victory for this bill was provided by every single Republican and one lone Democrat voting to pass this bill. The lone Democrat was Rep. Paul Tine (D-Dare) who should be congratulated for breaking ranks with his fellow Democrats to vote for gun rights.

Strong efforts were made to derail this bill through amendments proposed by anti-gun Democrats. However, each and every amendment was tabled through the efforts of Speaker Tom Tillis (R-Mecklenburg) and Rules Committee Chairman Tim Moore (R-Cleveland). This precluded debates that would delay passage of the bill.

As to the amendments themselves, they were, for the most part, the same sort of anti-gun legislation seen in states like Colorado, New York, Maryland, and Connecticut. Five of the 12 total were introduced before the Second Reading vote and the rest before the Third and final Reading of the bill. I have listed the amendments in order below along with their purpose.

  1. Would provide for universal background checks on all private transfers. Uses the Bloomberg language on transfers. Introduced by Rep. Paul Luebke (D-Durham)
  2. Would have deleted the provision concerning firearms in locked vehicles on university and community college campuses. Introduced by Rep. Alma Adams (D-Guilford)
  3. Would increase the penalty for consumption of alcohol while carrying concealed. Includes a $1,000 minimum fine and five year revocation of NC CHP. It also increases it to a Class 1 misdemeanor from a Class 2 misdemeanor.  Introduced by Rep. Darren Jackson (D-Wake)
  4. Would ban magazines with a greater than 10 round capacity as well as shotgun tubes or magazines holding more than eight rounds. Introduced by Rep. Pricey Harrison (D-Guilford)
  5. Would require the safe storage of firearms. Introduced by Rep. Verla Insko (D-Orange)
  6. Would require that a person adjudicated mental incompetent or involuntarily committed and whose rights have been restored under GS 122C-54.1 wait a minimum of seven years after restoration before being allowed to have a CHP. Introduced by Rep. Dennis Riddell (R-Alamance)
  7. Would give universities and community colleges the option to ban concealed handguns on campus. This would also negate storage of a firearm in a locked vehicle on campus by concealed carry permit holders. Introduced by Rep. Rick Glazier (D-Cumberland) Tabled by unrecorded voice vote.
  8. A repeat of Amendment 5 introduced by Rep. Verla Insko (D-Orange)
  9. A repeat of Amendment 4 introduced by Rep. Pricey Harrison (D-Guilford)
  10. A repeat of Amendment 3 introduced by Rep. Darren Jackson (D-Wake)
  11. A repeat of Amendment 1 introduced by Rep. Paul Luebke (D-Durham)
  12. A repeat of Amendment 2 introduced by Rep. Alma Adams (D-Guilford)

While it might be argued that a vote against tabling the bill was a vote to have a broader debate on the merits of the amendment, nonetheless the amendments themselves were anti-gun measures. With the exception of Amendments 6 and 11, not one Democrat voted in favor of tabling these anti-gun amendments. Rep. Michael Wray (D-Halifax) voted to table Amendment 6 and Rep. William Brisson (D-Bladen) voted to table Amendment 11. The only amendment to gather more than 3 Republicans against its tabling was Amendment 6 which garnered 11 Republican “Nay” votes. That amendment was sponsored by Republican Dennis Riddell who ultimately voted for the full bill.

With the exception of the provision concerning storage of firearms in locked vehicles by concealed carry holders on university and community college campuses, this bill was not filled with controversial provisions. It should be remembered that restaurant carry and parks carry both passed the State House in the 2011-2012 session of the General Assembly. Both of those bills had significant support from Democrats.

Given the relatively non-controversial nature of this bill, it is disturbing to see Democrats who claim to be pro-gun and pro-Second Amendment not only vote against this bill but essentially in a favor of the more draconian gun control measures passed in states like New York and Colorado. There are five Democrats below who got a B- or better from the NRA as well as five Democrats who received at least one star from GRNC who traditionally is a hard grader. Not a damn one of them voted for the passage of HB 937.

I am equally saddened by the number of African-American legislators who voted against this bill. Twenty out of the 42 who voted against this bill are African-American. Additionally, Rep. Charles Graham (D-Robeson) is an enrolled member of the Lumbee Nation. Both African-Americans and the Lumbee Indians were targets of the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacists. Gun control laws in North Carolina were meant to keep blacks and other minorities disarmed in the face of these white supremacist groups such as the Klan. Indeed, the current pistol purchase permit requirement is a legacy of these Jim Crow laws.

I have listed below the Democrats who voted against HB 937 on the Third Reading. I have also included their email address and their 2012 ratings by both the NRA and GRNC. If one of these legislators is your representative, I’d write and express my displeasure at their vote.

Last
Name
Email NRA GRNC
Adams Alma.Adams@ncleg.net F 0
Alexander Kelly.Alexander@ncleg.net B- 0
Baskerville Nathan.Baskerville@ncleg.net ? 0
Bell, L Larry.Bell@ncleg.net F 0
Brandon Marcus.Brandon@ncleg.net ? 0
Brisson William.Brisson@ncleg.net B+ 1*
Carney Becky.Carney@ncleg.net F 0
Cotham Tricia.Cotham@ncleg.net F 0
Cunningham Carla.Cunningham@ncleg.net ? 0
Farmer-Butterfield Jean.Farmer-Butterfield@ncleg.net D- 0
Fisher Susan.Fisher@ncleg.net F 0
Floyd Elmer.Floyd@ncleg.net 0
Foushee Valerie.Foushee@ncleg.net ? 0
Gill Rosa.Gill@ncleg.net D 0
Glazier Rick.Glazier@ncleg.net D- 0
Goodman Ken.Goodman@ncleg.net D 0
Graham, C Charles.Graham@ncleg.net C 0
Hall, D Duane.Hall@ncleg.net ? 0
Hall, L Larry.Hall@ncleg.net F 0
Hamilton Susi.Hamilton@ncleg.net C- 0
Hanes Edward.Hanes@ncleg.net ? 0
Harrison Pricey.Harrison@ncleg.net F 0
Holley Yvonne.Holley@ncleg.net ? 0
Insko Verla.Insko@ncleg.net F 0
Jackson Darren.Jackson@ncleg.net D 0
Lucas Marvin.Lucas@ncleg.net B 2*
Luebke Paul.Luebke@ncleg.net F 0
McManus Deb.McManus@ncleg.net ? 0
Michaux Mickey.Michaux@ncleg.net F 0
Mobley Annie.Mobley@ncleg.net D- 0
Moore, R Rodney.Moore@ncleg.net D 0
Pierce Garland.Pierce@ncleg.net C- 0
Queen Joe.Queen@ncleg.net B 3*
Richardson Bobbie.Richardson@ncleg.net NR NR
Ross, D Deborah.Ross@ncleg.net F 0
Terry Evelyn.Terry@ncleg.net ? 0
Tolson Joe.Tolson@ncleg.net C+ 1*
Waddell Ken.Waddell@ncleg.net ? 0
Wilkens Winkie.Wilkins@ncleg.net C- 0
Wray Michael.Wray@ncleg.net B 1*

Democratic Senators Up For Re-election In 2014

The Instapundit mentioned this handicapping of those Senate Democrats at -risk up for re-election the other day. It was done by Moe Lane and offers his assessment of their re-election chances. The ranking leaves out four Democrats who are up for re-election – Coons, Durbin, Harkin, and Reed – and I’m assuming that is because they face no risk of losing.

Using Lane’s assessment as a starting point, I went back and added in each senator’s 2008 NRA-PVF rating and their current GOA rating. The chart with this is below:

State
Senator
Est. Risk
NRA (2008)
GOA (2012)
Alaska
Mark Begich
Serious Risk
AQ
D
Arkansas
Mark Pryor
Some Risk
C-
F
Colorado
Mark Udall
Some Risk
C
F
Louisiana
Mary Landrieu
Serious Risk
C
F
Massachusetts
John Kerry
Only if vacant
F
F-
Michigan
Carl Levin
Low Risk
F
F-
Minnesota
Al Franken
Serious Risk
F
F
Montana
Max Baucus
Some Risk
A+
D-
New Hampshire
Jeanne Shaheen
Some Risk
F
F
New Jersey
Frank Lautenberg
Only if vacant
F
F-
New Mexico
Tom Udall
Low Risk
C-
F
North Carolina
Kay Hagan
Serious Risk
F
F
Oregon
Jeff Merkley
Some Risk
F
F
South Dakota
Tim Johnson
Serious Risk
A
F
Virginia
Mark Warner
Low Risk
A
F
West Virginia
Jay Rockefeller
Low Risk
D
F

Of the five ranked as “Serious Risk”, two are A/AQ rated by the NRA, two are F rated by the NRA, and one is C rated by the NRA. While all of these senators should be the target of letters and calls regarding the various gun control proposals, the five at “serious risk” should be deluged with calls and letters from those of us who believe in the Second Amendment.

There is an old saying that goes a senator should be a statesman in his first two years, should be half politician and half statesman in the middle two years, and damn well better be all politician in the last two years. Let’s use that to our advantage in this fight for our gun rights.

UPDATE: Sen. Jay Rockefeller announced today that he will be retiring at the end of his term in 2014. That means a low risk seat in the chart above just became an open seat and one that can be picked up by a pro-gun rights candidate.

It’s Bush’s Fault

Police in Manhattan Beach, CA are investigating a pig’s head wrapped in a Romney T-shirt left at a local GOP headquarters as an “illegal dumping of an animal carcass”.

You know in your heart of hearts that if that pig’s head was left at a Demcratic Party officer or an Obama for America headquarters that the Party of Tolerance™ would be screaming about a “hate crime”. The Secret Service would be involved and there would be a joint press conference with representatives from the LAPD, the FBI, and the LA District Attorney’s Office promising to track down the miscreant.

Go figure.

Almost As Bad As Obesity

Ralph Fascitelli, a member of the gun control group Washington Ceasefire, want Democrats to embrace gun control and make it an issue in this election. He says they are the party of “progressive stands on social issues”. He is upset that the Democrats aren’t saying more about gun control on the campaign trail and in their official platform.


Gun violence, which costs this country as much as a $100 billion annually and is perhaps along with obesity the number one public health issue of our time, was put on mute again.

He goes on to say that the Democrats have taken the wrong message from the 1994 elections which saw the Republicans win the House of Representatives as well as from Al Gore’s loss of his home state of Tennessee in 2000. Fascitelli says embracing gun control isn’t a lost cause. He compares it to Obama’s newly found appreciation for gay marriage as a way to “energize the base”.

Comparing guns to obesity and using specious statistics from the Brady Campaign is no way to make an effective argument. He may get the true believers to agree with him but your average Democratic politician who wants to get elected or re-elected will continue to mumble just enough platitudes to confuse the voters on both sides of the issue.