Firearms & Freedom

David Hardy and Sebastian remind us that it is the NRA’s 137th.

From Rustmeister:

I’ve always had a nagging little pain concerning the term “Fudd”. I don’t know where it came from, probably from one of those big gun boards I can’t get on because I can’t get my name approved (I haven’t tried all that hard, really). While Ride Fast says it’s used in a joking manner, I don’t see it that way. It’s a slur, like any other. Elmer Fudd is arguably the dumbest cartoon character ever conceived. Grouping a whole section of gun owners that way is stereotyping, plain and simple.

Exactly. While some claim it is a joke, or an insult aimed at a small subset of hunters, I think it is seen as a slur to all hunters. If we feel that there is a segment of the hunting population that either doesn’t understand our Second Amendment rights, or are willing to throw certain types of firearms under the bus, or whatever, calling names is not the answer. Education is a much better answer that mocking them, and driving a wedge between the hunting and non hunting gun owners.

This E-mail from AHSA was forwarded to me by Jack, one of my readers:

Yesterday, The USA Today reported that Dan Cooper, founder and owner of Cooper Firearms, lost his job.  The reason: He’s voting for Obama:

“Montana gunsmith Dan Cooper has been ousted as chief executive of the rifle company that bears his name after pressure from gun owners who are angry that he is supporting Democrat Barack Obama.”

Today, on behalf of the American Hunters and Shooters Association (AHSA), I condemned the actions by the NRA and its cronies forcing Dan Cooper out.

[snip]

This is wrong, and rank and file gun owners who have no political ax to grind need to stand up, reject such underhanded tactics and have their voices heard. That’s why AHSA was formed, to end this partisan bullying and to restore pride to the shooting sports.   This action against Cooper reinforces my commitment to making change happen by electing Obama - and by building an organization for hunters and shooters who are tired of extremism.

Sincerely,

Ray Schoenke

Ray, The NRA had nothing to do with this. It was a grassroots movement that started with a group of gun bloggers. The story had it right, it was pressure from gun owners, “rank and file gun owners,” not the NRA, or any Evil Gun Lobby. You seem to hope that by chanting NRA loud enough and often enough you can make it stick. No matter how many times you say NRA NRA NRA NRA, it doesn’t change the fact that there is a grassroots movement out there that does not toe the Brady/VPC/AHSA line.

From Rasmussen:

Nearly two-thirds of U.S. voters (63%) say Barack Obama is more likely than John McCain to restrict an individual’s right to own a gun, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

[snip]

Sixty-four percent (64%) say the issue of gun control is at least somewhat important to how they will vote, with 32% saying it is Very Important. Just 10% say the issue is not important at all.

While 39% of GOP voters say gun control is Very Important to how they will vote, only 28% of both Democrats and unaffiliated voters feel the same way. Fifteen percent (15%) of unaffiliateds say it’s not important at all, as do 10% of Democrats and five percent (5%) of Republicans.

Check out the rest, there are some fairly interesting results. While some of the people that say that gun control is an important issue to them are in favor of more, it is good to see that it is at least on people’s minds.

Am I happy that Dan Cooper was forced to resign as CEO of Cooper Arms? Not really. It is too bad that Mr. Cooper got involved with the incident, but after what he did, especially the USAToday story, I could not support his business, and made my feelings clear, both to them, and on this blog. Apparently there were enough people that agreed with me that the board felt it was in the best interest of the business for Mr. Cooper to resign his position.

Do I think I did the right thing? Absolutely. What Mr. Cooper did was far more damaging to the cause of gun rights than a simple vote or even a political donation. Through the USAToday interview, he linked himself, his business, and his NRA membership to his support of Sen. Obama, a man with a long history of opposing our Second Amendment rights, no matter what he says in the Presidential campaign.

Then, when Mr. Cooper was called on it, he, or a person in the company, posted an explanation that included the claim that he had donated to Sen. McCain’s campaign, and by implicaion supported him. No evidence of any such contribution could be found, and lacking any evidence to the contrary, I would have to assume that we were lied to. I will be happy to correct that, should I receive evidence to the contrary. Also, in the USAToday article, he was quoted as supporting Sen. Obama.

Considering these factors, I think that the reaction by myself and others was justified. I do not take pleasure in his losing something he has presumably worked quite hard for, but I stand for our rights, and he took a position that could damage them. I do not regret what we did, and would do it again.

The accusation that either the people who contacted Cooper Arms, or the board, are against the First Amendment shows either a profound error in understanding, or blatent disredard to the true meaning of the amendment.

The text of the First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Through the Fourteenth Amendment, this is incorporated against the states. Nothing in the First Amendment guarantees that there will not be consequences to your exercise of your right from private parties, only the Congress, and later state government, shall not infringe on that right.

I fully support anyone’s right to support in word, finances and vote the candidate of their choice. However, I am not always going to support the choice that they make, and will choose to exercise my First Amendment right to disagree. In the case of a business, I may disagree with my finances, taking my business elsewhere. I will also use this blog as I feel appropriate. In this case, Mr. Cooper expressed his views, Some others and I expressed ours, and a sufficient majority sided with us. The board of Cooper Arms, acting in a manner they felt was in accordance with their duties to their employees and shareholders, took our side.

Looks like the court requested a motion to narrow the question at hand to incorporation, and the plaintiffs obliged.