Wednesday, January 27, 2010

"Quiet" is a relative thing.

Unc and Sebastian are sitting in their rocking chairs, talking about how peaceful and quiet it is in the gun rights world these days.

That must be because they're not in Indiana, where politicians are acting the fool and the media is squawking non-stop over Guns In Parking Lots and Closing The Toter's Permit Database.

9 comments:

West, By God said...

In Florida, there's a new pro-gun bill getting ready to pass, and I've seen exactly 1 reference to it in the local media. They just said, "it is guaranteed to pass" then moved on to the next story. Yawn.

Glad Indiana is staying nice and riled up though :)

Once the Chicago gun case is ruled on, I expect things to heat up nationwide.

Tam said...

"Glad Indiana is staying nice and riled up though..."

The votes thus far have been one-sided stompings. It's been pretty droll to watch. ;)

Weer'd Beard said...

Meanwhile last night my friend's apartment was broken into, and she's still waiting on the State of Massachusetts permission for her to BUY a gun.

Must be nice to live in a free state, but you can't forget that a war is still going on.

Stranger said...

Taxachusetts is not by itself. Nebraska requires you buy a permit to buy a handgun, among other states with idiots for legislators.

How things have changed for the worse since I lived on the banks of the Niobrara - and collected a ten cent bounty on every rat tail I turned in.

The only gun control was Old Useless the town Marshal checking your ammo to make sure you were using .22 dust shot.

Stranger

ErnestThing said...

Or in California, where pre-planned lawsuits are standing in a single-file line to nullify the Ca AWB.

The fun for the rest of you starts happening when these laws get shot down, and the other states (and districts) who used these laws as a model realize they bet on the wrong horse.

Newbius said...

I especially liked Sebastian's defense of the NRA over at Volokh. Wherein, he defends them by stating that, as the premier organization defending our Second Amendment rights, they should be forgiven for not having coherency in planning their advocacy in front of the Supreme Court. Or something like that... you can read it here: http://volokh.com/2010/01/25/nra-gets-oral-argument-time-in-mcdonald-v-city-of-chicago/#comments

Tam said...

Newbius, I'm no rabid NRA fangirl but:

A) I didn't pick up that meaning from Sebastian's comment at all. Sure, he can be a little enthusiastic in his leg-humping of the NRA-ILA at times, but I don't see this as one of those times.

B) I think the people who run around calling the NRA a pro gun control organization and saying that they secretly sabotage pro-freedom efforts so they can stay on the gravy train are acting more than a little loony, at least on that point. It's like saying... oh, I don't know... maybe that Omar Bradley secretly was letting Hitler win because he was afraid he'd have to get a real job after the war.

Ian Argent said...

It's the calm before the storm. There's some pushing matches in the seats, but we're all waiting for the starting whistle to go in March with the arguments in McDonald; and the real fun starts when the decision gets handed down. At which point (assuming anything close to an honest majority opinion) the dogs of lawsuits are slipped and everybody and his little brother lawyers up and sues. Fun times

Newbius said...

Tam,

I just thought it was comical that Sebastian's defense of the NRA in the thread amounted to "the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing". One would think that with all of the spiffy Juris Doctors that they have on staff, that they could at the very least present a unified front when representing the organization and their membership. That IS one of the things I pay them for..

Pax