Intimidation tactics

The antis (more like one antigunner and her media allies) are trying to intimidate Assemblyman Steve Katz over a campaign fundraiser to be held at a training center which features a virtual shooting gallery:

“… Jackie Hilly, executive director of New Yorkers Against Gun Violence, was sharply critical of the event’s theme.  “It is appalling when people are still suffering,” Hilly said of the event’s proximity to the 12 deaths and nearly 60 injuries from a Colorado movie theater shooting. “I think it is in poor taste while people are out there still having funerals for people who were killed by rapid-fire weapons,” she said. “There would have been better ways for him to arrange a fundraiser and it is his responsibility to know how his fundraisers are promoted.” …”

They’re trying to intimidate him and Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos who will be guest speaker.  They want to shut Katz up and shame Skelos into allowing the microstamping bill to come up in the Senate during a special session later this year.

The appropriate thing to do in this situation is to tell the Journal News (which has a long history of antigun activism) and Jackie Hilly to go fuck themselves.  Unfortunately, I think Steve is too polite to do that so the next best thing is to just ignore them.  Nobody in the district is clamoring for more gun control.

Like they have a choice

Some nonsense from The Hill:

“Democratic gun reformers are giving President Obama a pass as they push support for tougher gun laws …”

Like they have a choice in the matter.  It is blindingly obvious that there aren’t the votes in either the House or Senate to pass anything on the antis agenda.  Advocates even admit that in the article:

“… [Rep. Mike Quigley] is quick to note that there hasn’t been a single House hearing on guns since he arrived on Capitol Hill more than three years ago. Indeed, when he requested such a hearing in the last Congress when Democrats controlled the chamber, party leaders rebuffed him. “I never thought the issue would get to this point where we can’t even have a conversation,” he said …”

So, how exactly are the antis giving Obama a pass on the issue?  That makes it sound as if the antis have a lot more power than they really do and are doing the President a favor by letting him slide so he can focus on other things:

“… Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), Congress’s loudest voice for tougher gun laws, also declined to poke Obama on the issue, suggesting the president is focused on things like the economy that resonate with a much greater number of voters.  “I do believe the President of the United States … believes in what we believe in,” she said this week. “But there are other things that, right now, [are] on everybody else’s plate.” …”

What crap.  They just cannot admit that the gun control is a fringe issue and that there isn’t the political will to move the agenda.

Pirro slams Bloomberg

Good commentary from Jeanine Pirro especially considering she has an antigun record almost as bad as Bloomberg himself.

Schumer’s soundbite

Chuck Schumer wants to attach an amendment to a cybersecurity bill prohibiting the sale of magazines holding 10+ rounds:

“… Schumer defended the Brady law and assault weapons ban on the floor Thursday evening, perhaps in preparation for the coming fight with Republicans and gun rights activists …”

This is nothing more than a PR stunt.  There aren’t the votes to pass it in the Senate, not that it will even come up:

“… Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Thursday the Senate’s schedule is too packed to even have a debate on gun control. Asked if the Senate might debate the issue next year, Reid said: “Nice try.” …”

Yep.  Nice try Chuck.

Still nothing

The antis and their leftist media allies have been screaming for the past week for more gun control.  What it got them?  Still nothing.  Both Romney and Obama are avoiding the issue:

“… On Wednesday the two candidates finally elaborated on the issue, and offered divergent opinions. In an interview with Brian Williams, Romney suggested that no new gun legislation is needed, and made a confusing statement about suspect James Holmes obtaining weapons illegally (later his campaign acknowledged that Holmes bought guns legally, and said he was referring to the bombs in Holmes’s apartment). On Wednesday evening while speaking before the National Urban League convention, Obama said he supports greater gun control. It was his most in-depth discussion of the issue as president, yet Obama was vague on what exactly he plans to do …”

Not true.  Both candidates positions are perfectly clear: they want nothing to do with gun control.  They know the issue is a stinker with the American public and they know that associating with antigun advocates hurts them politically.  The antis simply refuse to accept that.

Nothing

Nothing.

That is what the antigunners are going to get out of the massacre in Colorado.  The usual suspects, Mayor Bloomberg, Carolyn McCarthy and New Yorkers Against Gun Violence, are doing their blood dance, encouraged by leftist media outlets who are unwilling to accept their declining relevance in shaping public opinion in the 21st century.

This quote sums it all up:

“Gun control advocates sputter at their own impotence.”

Yep.  And they cannot understand why.

Neither of the presidential candidates wants to talk gun control.  Congress isn’t interested, except for Frank “The Walking Dead” Lautenberg.  The antis have nothing left except lame PR stunts destined to fail.

Romney speaks on guns, not 2A

Mitt Romney is attacking Obama on guns, but not on 2nd Amendment issues:

“Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney lashed out Tuesday at President Obama for a lack of “transparency’’ in invoking executive privilege to withhold Operation Fast and Furious documents.  In a release headlined “Transparent Hypocrisy: Obama’s Fast and Furious Broken Promises,’’ Romney campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul said: “President Obama’s pledge to be transparent has turned out to be just another broken promise.’’ … “If we want to talk about transparency, the real issue is why has this president used his presidential power and executive privilege to keep the information about the Fast and Furious program from being explained to the American people?’’ Romney said …”

Fast and Furious is a big scandal and a legitimate topic of discussion for the candidates.  While Romney’s record on the 2A is poor, he could have at least mentioned in passing the concern that many in the mainstream have that the operation was set up as a backdoor way of promoting  gun control.

Schimel’s press conference

Michelle Schimel and Jose Peralta are going to have a press conference this afternoon.  They are hoping to get some political mileage out of the recent bunch of shootings as a way to push microstamping.  That’s not likely to happen for no other reason than the state legislature is in recess and is not going to come back just to deal with her pet issue.

Meanwhile, Mayor Mike is busy bashing the NYCLU for opposing the over the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk policy which the courts don’t like:

“… “Let’s be clear: the NYCLU’s priority is not protecting our safety. It is protecting their ideology,” he said. “And in that regard, they are no better than the NRA. “One group views the Second Amendment in absolutist terms; the other group views the Fourth Amendment in absolutist terms. Both groups, I think, are dangerously wrong on the Constitution,” he added. “The right to bear arms and the right to privacy do not trump the right of citizens to walk down their own street, or walk down their own hallway, without getting blown away.” …”

There’s that damn Constitution getting in the way again.

Of course, these people have been pretty quiet about the NYPD officers running illegal gun smuggling operation and the drug addict who stole guns to pay off his pusher.  That’s not part of the antigun narrative.

Romney-Rice?

The latest rumormongering has Mitt Romney picking Condoleezza Rice as his VP.  I would not go so far as Juan Williams in saying it would be a game-changer, but I do think she’d be a good choice.  Plus, she’s pro-gun as this transcript from an 2005 appearance on Larry King Live shows:

KING: We have a Second Amendment. People can own guns. By the way, what do you think about gun control?

RICE: The way I come out of my own personal experience, in which in Birmingham, Alabama, my father and his friends defended our community in 1962 and 1963 against White Knight Riders by going to the head of the community, the head of the cul-de-sac, and sitting there, armed. And so I’m very concerned about any abridgement of the Second Amendment.

I’ll tell you that I know that if Bull Connor had had lists of — of registered weapons, I don’t think my father and his friends would have been sitting at the head of the community, defending the community.

KING: So you would not change the Second Amendment? You would not…

RICE: I also don’t think we get to pick and choose from the Constitution. The Second Amendment is as important as the First Amendment.

KING: But doesn’t having the guns, while it’s protection, also leads to people killing people?

RICE: Well, obviously, the sources of violence are many, and we need to — to get at the source of the violence. Obviously, I’m very much in favor of things like background checks, and you know, controlling it at gun shows. And there are lots of things we can do.

But we have to be very careful when we start abridging rights that our Founding Fathers thought very important. On this one, I think that they understood that there might be circumstances that people like my father experienced in Birmingham, Alabama, when in fact, the police weren’t going to protect you.

KING: Did you see him take the gun?

RICE: Oh, absolutely. Every — every night he and his — he and his friends kind of organized a little brigade.

KING: How old were you?

RICE: I was 8. Eight years old.

KING: You remember that?

RICE: I remember it very, very well.

Gangster values

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s latest idea makes his gun control proposals look smart:

“… We’ve got two gangbangers, one standing next to a kid. Get away from that kid. Take your stuff away to the alley. Don’t touch the children of the city of Chicago. Don’t get near them. And it is about values. As I said then, Scott, who raised you? How were you raised? And I don’t buy this case where people say they don’t have values. They do have values. They have the wrong values. Don’t come near the kids — don’t touch them …”

Yeah, this is going to work.  How long before Mayor Mike tries this approach?

Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com