Who has the ball?

May 13, 2008

John McCormack interviewed Paul Helmke for an article at The Weekly Standard. One of the most interesting quotes comes towards the end:

Helmke describes the Brady Campaign’s present situation with a football analogy. “The other side had marched the ball down on the 2 yard line  .  .  .  but now we got the ball back. The bad news is we’ve got 98 yards to go,” he says. “You don’t throw the Hail Mary pass.  .  .  .  You’ve got three downs to get a first down.” Sounds like a game plan. But first the Brady Campaign will need Obama or Clinton to pull off a few trick plays to keep that record on guns well out of sight and win the election in November.

Taking this apart, I would not say that the gun lobby has been able to get “the ball down to the 2 yard line.” While we have managed to make great strides in the past 20 years, handguns are still illegal in D.C. (Hopefully Heller will reverse that) and Chicago, and there are many odious laws still on the books. However, the momentum has clearly been on our side. Right to carry, Castle Doctrine, Katrina bills, the list goes on. As for the gun control side, they did manage to pass microstamping and a partial lead ammo ban in CA, and have made themselves annoying with the ammo coding, but that has gone nowhere. I really don’t know where he gets the idea that they have the ball back. We may be on the verge of a turnover with the coming elections, but the pro gun side still has the ball.

The other question is, what is the hail mary pass? What is the final outcome? They are good about claiming they don’t want an all out ban on guns, but they want to ban “assault weapons,” whatever they are, hand guns, and others. What does that end game look like? They are very good at avoiding that question.

The last point is one I have touched on before, and that it the incremental approach. Mr Helmke talks about having three downs to a first, indicating that they will be more than happy to go for “small” wins, instead of insisting on everything they want right away. We have seen our rights eroded in the past, one small piece at a time, and we need to take a hint from that, and continue to “advance the ball,” even if it is a little bit. That is the approach that has been used on us in the past, we need to learn the lesson that it works, and use it. 

Hat tip: Cam & Co

No Comments » | Brady Campaign, Castle Doctrine, Concealed Carry, gun politics | Permalink
Posted by Peter

Dave Hardy on gun politics trends

April 1, 2008

Dave Hardy has an interesting story regarding the gun control/gun rights trends over the last few decades. I think he minimizes a few of the recent bad things, but also doesn’t directly touch on the good over the last few years: Katrina legislation, Castle doctrine, CCW, etc. I do find it funny that the two main democrat candidates are at least minimizing their anti-gun stands, and in some cases posturing as pro-gun, despite having all of one pro-gun vote between them.

No Comments » | Castle Doctrine, Concealed Carry, gun politics | Permalink
Posted by Peter

Gura on machine guns

March 21, 2008

Michael Bane had a post regarding the discussion of machine guns in the D.C. v. Heller oral arguments, including quoting a post from Alan Gura. I have to admit that I cringed listening to the exchanges regarding machine guns, as I believe that military style weapons should be available to U.S. citizens, and machine guns seemed to be bargained away. Alan Gura, however, nailed it. If he had gone in arguing that the court had to rule for an all encompassing right, we would likely lose the case. Listening to the tone of questioning from the justices, it is clear that they were not in sympathy with opening the door wide to all weapons. We must remember that a victory in part is much better than a loss in full; we must be willing to take a small win, and use that as a building block to a larger goal.

 

Remember that the NFA was passed over 70 years ago, and as much as we would like to see it disappear in one sweeping ruling or a single bill in congress, IT WON’T. I am sure there are many people that want the court to rule that everything up to and maybe beyond howitzers were allowed, and some of them feel that some arms were “thrown under the bus” by Gura, but Alan Gura went for the win IN THIS CASE, and he did so quite well. If the court decides that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right and strikes down D.C.’s ban, WE HAVE WON. It may not be the sweeping reversal of (almost) all gun control laws that we would love to see, but it is a win, we need to take it.

 

Michael Bane also makes a very good argument for the legalization of suppressors, and that would be an excellent start in legislative incrementalism. After that, maybe short barrels, and then… Just as our liberties have been taken away a little at a time, we need to win it back in ANY increment that we can get.

The other area where Alan Gura nails it is the final quote:

“You want to change 922(o)? Take a new person shooting. Work for ‘climate change.’”

 

I haven’t gotten a chance to start ranting about this, but if we want to win this argument, we must take new people shooting. We must take more opportunities to exercise our rights, and encourage others to do the same. We must win in the court of public opinion, and the wins with the law makers and judges will follow. Take a friend hunting or shooting. Bring someone to a First Shots class. Talk to a coworker, friend, or family member, and work to educate them. Work for climate change.

 

As much it may feel like we are losing ground at times, look around: 48 states have some form of concealed carry; and castle doctrine and Katrina legislation are sweeping the nation. Some studies say that approximately 66% of Americans feel that the Second Amendment protect an individual right. We are making great strides, and I think it is safe to say we are winning. We have a long way to go, but momentum is on our side.

So go shooting!

No Comments » | Castle Doctrine, Concealed Carry, D.C. v. Heller, Katrina, New Shooters, gun politics | Permalink
Posted by Peter