Despite President Barack Obama’s attempt to smear opponents of his gun prohibition scheme — announced yesterday with children as political props — as unreasonable and uncaring, resistance is building in the firearms community and on Capitol Hill.
This column discussed the gloves-off reaction from the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and National Rifle Association, and Sen. Charles Grassley, the Iowa Republican who launched the first inquiry into Operation Fast and Furious, raised that thorny issue Wednesday afternoon.
“It’s intellectually dishonest for the White House to argue for new programs restricting the sale of guns,” Sen. Grassley said in a statement released to the press, “when this administration deliberately allowed the illegal sale of guns to known straw purchasers. And, if the President has the authority as he claims to take these actions via executive action, why did he wait until now? Why did it take so long to determine that current law wasn’t being enforced? Why didn’t the President push for these authorities after learning that one of his own employees at the ATF purchased a firearm, possibly violating federal law by putting false addresses on the paperwork?”
Grassley was alluding to former assistant special agent in charge George Gillett, who was a key player in Fast and Furious. This column discussed that issue.
Even CBS News was asking Thursday morning whether the president’s gun ban plan has a chance.
A new Time/CNN poll has some confusing revelations that might give some people the impression that there is bad news for gun owners. Others may see things differently. This may ignite some discussions here in Las Vegas as the third day of the annual Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trade (SHOT) Show unfolds.
According to the poll, 48 percent of the respondents agree with the National Rifle Association’s position on guns, Time reported, while 42 percent disagree. The NRA’s proposal to put armed guards in schools is supported by 54 percent of the respondents, while 47 percent opposed it.
Where gun rights activists run into trouble is on background checks at gun shows (87 percent support) and 75 percent support checks on all private transactions by “non-licensed dealers,” whatever that is.
This poll also says 56 percent support a ban on so-called “assault weapons,” and “high capacity” magazines. That contrasts with a Gallup poll in December that showed a slight majority opposing such a ban.
But here’s a surprise: The Time/CNN poll said 69 percent of the respondents support gun registration with local authorities. Evidently, none of those people understand the privacy issue as well gun owners in two New York counties, epitomized by this guy. Publication of names and addresses of licensed gun owners is one big reason that there should be no registration, and that the identities of concealed pistol license holders should be protected by a confidentiality law.
Some Washington gun activists might believe that poll was conducted in Seattle, which just saw its new far-left liberal Gov. Jay Inslee sworn in this week. Inslee has promised “disruptive change” in state government, and he will push the “Reproductive Parity Act” (does that mean he wants men to have babies, too?) and gun control.
Perhaps the newly-minted governor — who quit his post as a congressman last year to run for the seat, earning the blind knee-jerk obedience of Seattle’s liberal voters who stop thinking when there is a “D” behind a candidate’s name — might join some of his fellow Washingtonians this Saturday at noon down by the Tivoli Fountain.
That’s where a crowd of gun owners will gather for the third annual gun rights rally, this year in conjunction with Guns Across America and Gun Appreciation Day. He might tell them how he feels about the Second Amendment, right-to-carry, state preemption, self-defense and other topics of interest.
Don’t forget the Washington Arms Collectors gun show at the Puyallup Fairgrounds this weekend, when the Second Amendment Foundation will launch its “Bucket of Bucks” fund raising effort.
When Mr. Obama rolled out his 23 executive orders Wednesday, using those children as props, he acknowledged, “(W)hile there is no law or set of laws that can prevent every senseless act of violence completely, no piece of legislation that will prevent every tragedy, every act of evil, if there is even one thing we can do to reduce this violence, if there’s even one life that can be saved, then we’ve got an obligation to try.”
That same rationale should apply to eliminating dangerous “gun-free zones” and supporting national concealed carry recognition. Perhaps instead of trying to ban semi-autos, he should support firearms training as an elective in high schools so that teens can understand how to safely use a gun, as did a 15-year-old recently when burglars tried to break into his parents’ home.
As Mr. Obama said, “if there’s even one life that can be saved, then we’ve got an obligation to try.”