For entertainment purposes only, Charles P. Pierce at Esquire‘s Political Blog on the NRA’s latest fever dream and its most unlikely opponents:
America’s gun lobby is beside itself these days, which is two too many gun lobbies for my way of thinking. House Resolution 822 has very little chance of becoming law because the Senate likely wouldn’t pass it, and the president is even less likely to sign it. HR 822 is one of those fundraising, gin-up-the-rubes exercises that is the only apparent public function that the Republican House of Representatives is willing to fulfill. HR 822 is a bill the proposes the establishment of a federal right-to-carry law, which would allow a concealed-weapons permit granted in, say, Alabama to be valid in New Jersey. (This, of course, is in keeping with the “full faith and strapped” provisions of the Constitution.) Pass this law, and you could Plaxico your Glock into your underwear and walk from New York to San Diego without running afoul of local gun laws.
__
The usual pests are opposed to this law. Gun violence victims. Mayors. Attorneys General. Chiefs of police. Frank Bruni. But the real resistance came from gun owners who looked deep within this law and saw the UN-New World Order-Obamafascist implications of it. These people saw HR 822 as opening the door to federal gun registration, and to the establishment of “minimum federal standards” for gun permits, and to the general meddling of the federal government in the rights of all Americans to stick their gun down their pants and go to the Piggly Wiggly….
__
The National Rifle Association, on whose behalf this law exists at all, thanks to its wholly owned subsidiaries in the Republican caucus, loves this bill to death, and it’s spent an unusual amount of time knocking down the wild-eyed speculations of its more wild-eyed members. So we finally have a definitive answer to the question of whether or not there is a paranoid conspiracy about gun ownership that is too weird for the NRA. The answer is, yes. There’s one.
__
Some of you may now be saying, hey, what about the devotion that all conservative Republicans have to states rights? If New Jersey would rather not be made into a magnet for gunplay tourism, doesn’t it have the right not to be made into one? This assumes that the devotion that all conservative Republicans have towards states rights is in any way sincere. Silly you. If you’re keeping score in the culture wars, what we know for certain is that there are two compelling federal interests that conservatives believe override the principles of states rights and limited federal government. The one is being able to carry a gun down your pants, and the other is keeping gay people from marrying each other. And, yes, we are also happy to see you.
More, including excellent video choices, at the link.
Linda Featheringill
Where are the jobs?
glocksman
States already have the ability to recognize out of state permits.
Hell, my state by law recognizes carry permits both from other states and from other countries.
Unlike drivers licenses, carry permit standards vary wildly from state to state, thus making it problematic at best to force states to honor permits issued by another state.
This bill is just a solution looking for a problem.
As far as the NRA goes, I’ll rejoin the day they kick Grover Norquist off the the Executive Board.
Grover doesn’t give a damn about gun rights issues, he’s just looking to co-opt the NRA into supporting Republicans and his anti tax dogma.
ericblair
Shorter NRA: BUY MOAR GUNZ PLZ. That’s it. Pandering to paranoids is just a sales tactic.
singfoom
Eh, I’ll stand aside on this one. I’m one of the few liberals I know who grew up in a hunting/shooting family and I love guns and love shooting. The NRA nuts make me chuckle, and I don’t think we need assault weapons in urban zones.
As long as there’s a sufficient training regimen that goes into de-escalation of situations and has a large # of hours required, I’ve no problem with conceal & carry.
(Gets popcorn)
Emma
@singfoom: The problem is that I don’t think there’s a single iota of effort put towards the “training regimen.” Everything proposed has been derailed by the gun nuts. Until you prove to me that the NRA will be willing to use its political clout towards sanity, I’m not buying any proposal that would allow the nuts from some other state to come prove their so-called manhood in mine (in Florida we have enough problems of our own along those lines).
singfoom
@Emma: Fair enough. Like I said, I usually try to stay out of these debates, because I have close liberal friends who are zealously anti-gun and look at me like I have grown horns when I mention how much I like shooting and that I have a FOID card.
You’re probably right though, any given state could have a horrible training regimen that doesn’t even emphasize situational de-escalation and ends up breaking the entire deal by allowing poorly trained shooters from one state into others…. As AL said, this is unlikely to pass, so no worries.
I’m perfectly fine with gun laws being a state thing.
The Thin Black Duke
What could possibly go wrong?
Villago Delenda Est
“States’ Rights” has always, ALWAYS been code for “we want to keep the nigger down, and you’re not going to stop us!”
The first time anyone asserted “States’ Rights”, John C. Calhoun (of South Carolina) denounced it as near treason. This was of course when New England states objected to the splendid little war of Calhoun and his fellow “war hawks” in 1812.
Monkey Business
If you want to own a handgun, rifle, shotgun, etc., I believe you should have the right to.
After a rigorous background check, a mental health exam, and extensive safety training.
Grumpy Code Monkey
@singfoom:
I’ve always thought of making it more like driving a car – you must take real classes on gun law and gun safety, you must pass both a written and a proficiency test (can you shoot what you’re aiming at, do you know where the safety is, do you know whether the safety is on or off, etc.), and you must carry liability insurance.
But no, that’s several bridges too far, because after all we don’t have a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to drive.
When someone asks, “what part of ‘shall not be infringed’ don’t you understand,” ask back, “what part of ‘a well-regulated militia’ don’t you understand?”
singfoom
@Grumpy Code Monkey: Fair enough. For myself, I shot my first gun at seven, after 7 years (or 5 years of understanding speech) of my father explaining exactly how I would not go in the gun closet and the horrible things that would happen to me if I did without him.
Add to that 2 weeks of 4H gun and safety and general survival training, and that was enough for a “Young Hunter’s” license.
I would expect that firearms and children are probably more highly regulated today.
In my current state, you have to have a FOID or be the guest of someone who does to go into a range.
Where I grew up, you just went out to the country and shot. The regulation would break down in the rural country side, where it’s just part of life.
The balance between the rural view of guns and the urban view of guns (hunting tools vs. crime/protection pieces) will always be there.
Emma
@singfoom: The balance between the rural view of guns and the urban view of guns (hunting tools vs. crime/protection pieces) will always be there. I don’t think that’s the big one. For example, I travel quite often to a state where several of my friends go hunting, and I’ve had some really good meals out of that. Each of them owns two or three hunting rifles, follow the rules, don’t take more than their legal limit. Cool. I like duck a l’orange a whole lot.
The problem is the “collector” who stockpiles man-killers. AK-47 are not useful in hunting anything except humans. And that makes me a hell of a lot queasy.
singfoom
@Emma: We’ll stop here. My fondest gun wish? A WWII era PPsh, the Russians answer to our Thompson. Would be a hoot to shoot.
I am fond of automatic 45s and other guns that are NOT hunting guns. I won’t be able to convince you that they can be kept safely and are for fun rather than killing people (in my use case), but I respect your position.
The only thing I will say in addition to that is that any gun can be used to kill.
Cheers.
Mnemosyne
@singfoom:
Considering that Florida tried to pass a law outlawing pediatricians from giving gun safety advice to parents, I’m afraid you are very wrong about that. The NRA doesn’t give a shit how many kids injure or kill themselves as long as the donations from scared white people keep rolling in.
Roger Moore
@singfoom:
And the problem is that this ensures that there won’t and can’t be any such system. It guarantees that the system that matters is the system that throws up the fewest obstacles to letting anyone carry a concealed weapon. It just takes one state to pass out concealed carry permits to anyone with a pulse to undo the sane system in every other state.
Emma
@singfoom: I think you’re missing my point. If you tell me you want one or two guns to shoot for fun — ok. If you tell me you want a hand-crafted over-under with 32″ barrels and tight chokes for pheasant shooting, got it. Rooms full of man-killers and ammo, I’d want somebody to examine your head.
debbie
I got a robocall from Wayne LaPierre this afternoon about this. He’s spittin’ mad about this unholy alliance between Russia, China, and Obama.
Brachiator
Sorry. I read this as the NBA’s latest fever dream. Thought it was about the lockout.
MazeDancer
Laughed so hard. Charlie Pierce is a reason to learn to read.
Steeplejack
Gotta recommend this awesome video someone just sent me: Splitscreen: A Love Story. Shot entirely on a cell-phone camera.
DFH no.6
@Roger Moore:
And that would be my very lovely home, the state of AZ.
Along with, of all places (and it was first, even) Vermont.
As of July, 2010, you no longer needed to get a permit via a certificate of training in AZ (which was mostly anti-liberal propaganda with a little gun safety thrown in, anyway) for concealed carry.
No permit is needed at all anymore. Just stick your loaded gun in your purse, your pocket, your ankle holster, your glove box, and off to the Safeway you go.
The only requirement is the federal one of background checks when purchasing (and even that is dispensed with in the loophole for gun shows, of which we have many).
Lefty-liberal that I am, I’m with singfoom on guns. I have a couple that I shoot at the local range, and take with me when I camp in the woods (where I amuse myself shooting at empty beer cans on a log).
Never been hunting, and doubt I ever will, so I have handguns, not hunting weapons. City boy, through and through (other than the camping thing, I guess).
Sorry to say (because sensible regulations make, well, sense) we should stay far away from any fights over gun control.
Our “side” lost the battle on gun control a while back. It’s a political loser for us just about everywhere outside of, say, Berkeley.
Humbert Dinglepencker
Why concealed carry? If the ‘purpose’ of a handgun is self-protection, why not let everyone see that you are the baddest ass in the valley? Why hide it? And what good is a concealed hand gun when the perp behind you has his own Special pressed up against your mastoid bone? You gonna reach for that Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the wuuld, resting sweetly in that butter-smooth quick draw holster? What do you think your chances are of pulling it, spinning, and drilling that waste of people-meat? What what are they…punk? Or that lady with her silver Barretta snug in her purse? What good is that piece if the perp throws her to the sidewalk or rips the purse from her hand…and then has his way.
Just once…just once, I would like for the NRA to admit, publicly that the only purpose for a handgun is to kill another human being. It’s not very good as a hammer. Doesn’t open cans very easily. ‘Way useless as a nutcracker…smashes the nut-meat. A handgun’s not much for hunting deer and such like. Not all that accurate, like a rifle. If you have to get close enough with a Saturday nite special to bag the deer, you might as well go hoofo-a-mano – and see who wins.
No, a handgun is for killing people at close range. Spare me the ‘target practice’ and the ‘self protection’ crap. It’s a killing machine. If the NRA would admit that, I’d shut my mouf.
Roger Moore
@DFH no.6:
It’s not just Berkeley. It’s a lot of big cities that have serious problems with gun violence, i.e. the bluest of the blue congressional districts. One way politicians there prove their liberal credentials is by being strongly in favor of gun control.
Handgun Ban : Liberals :: Abortion Ban : Conservatives
Discuss.
singfoom
@Emma: Well, if I had too much money, I would have dozens of guns and tons of ammo, but to be fair to me, I read a lot of zombiepocalypse stories, and would just like to be prepared.
But until I have tons of money, I won’t be buying tons of guns.
Ken
Three, surely? The “A” word. (Ends with “bortion”.)
Djur
@singfoom: Isn’t there a point at which the benefits of gun control might outweigh “hey, I think it’s fun to have a room full of guns”? I mean, handguns are boring to me. On the other hand, I think it would be just incredibly awesome to have an unmanned drone with Stinger missiles, that I could use to blow up targets out in the sticks.
For some reason, I don’t see anyone arguing that the 2nd amendment and my desire for fun is sufficient to let me buy an armed drone.
Evolving Deep Southerner (tense changed for accuracy)
@Djur:
If your understanding of the 2nd Amendment is that it is there to enable the citizenry to defend itself against a tyrannical government run amok, then, yes, you need shit as good as anything in the tyrannical government’s arsenal.
Not saying that’s my understanding of the amendment. But I AM saying I know folks who’d say “Well, yeah! Drones! Why the fuck SHOULDN’T we be able to have ’em?”
alex milstein
So now the people who always yell at the feds that “THIS IS A STATES RIGHTS ISSUE, STAY OUT OF OUR BUSINESS,” suddenly WANT the feds to negate a state’s right to decide whether concealed carry is OK? I guess it’s ok when they want it, but not ok when they don’t. Why am I not surprised?
Ivan Ivanovich Renko
@alex milstein: It’s been that way since before the ACW– the Southron states were all in favor of states rights except when it came to escaped slaves.
THEN they wanted the Fed’rl Gubmint to help return their “prop’ty,” regardless of the laws of the state to which that “prop’ty” may have run.
Paul in KY
@singfoom: I would like to get one of those reproduction BARs. Very expensive, I hear.
Still wants one.
Paul in KY
@Humbert Dinglepencker: If you are walking around openly displaying it, then someone can take it from you.
The ‘concealing’ is 2 fold:
1) Stop people from freaking out when they see you packing like Wyatt Earp.
2) Hide it so bad people won’t just come up & take said gun away & then use it on you or other people.
Paul in KY
@Djur: We have to draw the line somewhere :-)