Posts Tagged ‘Second Amendment’

NRA Endorses Trump

Saturday, May 21st, 2016

“The National Rifle Association threw its weight Friday behind Donald Trump, as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee personally assured the group’s members he would protect Second Amendment rights if elected – and claimed that likely Democratic rival Hillary Clinton would threaten them.”

Will it help unify the Republican Party behind Trump? Some. Gun owners and Second Amendment activists are a significant part of the GOP coalition. But Clinton and the Democratic Party are so clearly hostile to civilian gun ownership that it’s hard to imagine any NRA members voting for her, and culturally most gun owners seem to hail from the fraction of GOP primary voters which has already embraced Trump.

Trump’s official policy statement on Second Amendment rights is fine, and whoever wrote it (clearly not Trump) has a firm grounding in the issue, and Trump has even said he has a concealed carry license himself. Whether Trump follows through or not remains to be seen, but he already starts so far ahead of Clinton on the issue that I’m not sure his past support of the idiotic “assault weapon” ban some 15 years ago really matters anymore. (And even then he was saying “Democrats want to confiscate all guns, which is a dumb idea because only the law-abiding citizens would turn in their guns and the bad guys would be the only ones left armed.”)

If Trump wins in November, Republicans will almost certainly retain the House and possibly the Senate, which means no anti-Second Amendment legislation will be headed to his desk for at least two years. Trump could do absolutely nothing on guns during his presidency and still be a vast improvement over Obama or either Clinton.

Dan Patrick Sends Three Second Amendment Bills On To Committee

Tuesday, February 3rd, 2015

Lt. Governor Dan Patrick announced that he’s sending three pro-Second Amendment bills to the Senate State Affairs Committee:

  • Senate Bill 11 (SB 11), An act relating to the carrying of concealed handguns on the campuses of and certain other locations associated with institutions of higher education, by Sen. Brian Birdwell (SD22).
  • Senate Bill 342 (SB 342), Relating to providing for the open and concealed carrying of handguns without a license and to related offenses and penalties, by Sen. Don Huffines (SD16).
  • Senate Bill 346 (SB 346), Relating to the authority of a person who is licensed to carry a handgun to openly carry a holstered handgun, by Sen. Craig Estes (SD30).
  • Except for the effectivity date, the campus carry bill is essentially identical to Birdwell’s SB 182 in the 83rd legislative session, which was killed in 2013.

    SB342 provides for essentially unlimited constitutional carry, while SB346 would authorize open carry only for CHL holders. I think it’s canny of Patrick to advance both at the same time. Some squishy republicans may balk at universal carry, but voting for SB 346 will allow them to split the difference and still appear pro-gun.

    One possible snag for any pro Second Amendment bill: the Senate Criminal Justice Committee is still headed by Democrat John Whitmire. However, since Whitmire is considerably more pro-gun than the average Democrat this may not be a problem.

    Will Speaker Joe Straus kill pro-Second Amendment bills in the House? He’s killed some in the past, but he’s also been very careful not to leave his fingerprints on the knife. Given how Straus has crowed about endorsements from the NRA and the Texas State Rifle Association, I’m guessing he won’t go to the mat to kill popular Second Amendment bills supported by a clear majority of senators. Straus is another reason I think SB 346 is more likely to pass than SB 342.

    Operation Choke Point’s Smoking Gun?

    Thursday, January 15th, 2015

    Via Instapundit comes updated news of Operation Choke Point, the Obama Administration’s unconstitutional attempt to force the banks and credit unions used by gun dealers (and other targeted businesses, most of which are entirely legal) to close their accounts. Bank regulator’s have denied they were doing this in the past, but now a gun business owner has recorded a credit union manager telling him the Feds have forced them to close his account.

    Here’s a Fox News report on the case:

    Imagine the media outcry if a Republican administration were using the same tactics against abortion clinics or gay bars.

    The new congress should investigate this along with Fast and Furious…

    Gun and Crme Roundup for April 16, 2014

    Wednesday, April 16th, 2014

    The Bundy Ranch story is part of the Second Amendment story (and the Tenth Amendment story), but is too big and sprawling to unpack here. So here are some of the other things that have been happening:

  • Gun grabber Michael Bloomberg has pledged $50 million to defeat the NRA. Since every time Bloomberg opens has wallet, it seems like more Republicans win, we’ll see how long that commitment lasts…
  • But Bloomberg is sure that his Big Gulp and gun banning antics have earned him entry into the kingdom of heaven. “It’s not even close,” says he. Well, when you’re so exalted that you know the mind of God, why bother with the opinions of puny mortals?

  • “We gun owners have been utterly unreasonable and lacking in common sense for roughly 20 years. And by golly, look where it’s got us! We’ve whomped the enemies of gun rights into quivering submission.” (Hat tip: Borepatch, who offers further thoughts.)
  • Fast and Furious helped supply arms to gun trafficking rings in the U.S.
  • Connecticut: Massive non-compliance with new gun registration rules.
  • East Texas citizen terminates meth freak with gun.
  • Eric Holder wants to waste more money on smart guns.
  • A Harvard Law roundup on recent gun cases I haven’t had time to read yet. (Hat tip: Shall Not Be Questioned.)
  • Beaver County, PA Sheriff has around 700 guns seized from his home for violating a court order. Guess what party he’s from? Hint: The media decline to name the party when reporting the story. (Hat tip: Ditto.)
  • Two men rape and murder four women in California while wearing GPS tracking bracelets.
  • Detroit homeowners kill seven intruders in seven weeks.
  • Dumbass in Tuscaloosa finds out once again that gun beats machete.
  • Four pro gun bills (including a preemption bill) make their way through the Arizona legislature. (Hat tip: Alphecca.)
  • Pull The Other One, Wendy

    Thursday, February 6th, 2014

    Normally I would applaud a member of the Democratic Party supporting Second Amendment rights. But Wendy Davis supporting open carry?

    Right. Pull the other one.

    After all, this is the same Wendy Davis who voted against concealed carry by authorized CHL holders on college campuses, keeping Texas campuses fictive “gun free zones.” She also tried to do what Austin is trying to do: force gun shows to impose additional background checks on private citizens.

    The fact that Davis hasn’t been universally opposed to gun rights may be explained by the fact that she’s a state senator in Texas, one with significant suburban and rural constituents and who only won her last election with 51% of the vote and thus one for which a hard-left gun control position would be a career-ending exercise. It’s also possible that, like Arlen Specter, another former Republican, she may have no fixed political positions whatsoever beyond the belief she should hold political office (or perhaps none beyond support for unlimited abortion).

    Davis’ open carry pander is the worst kind of pander for a politician: a ham-handed, ineffective and incompetent one. Since Davis is already running as a liberal darling, and Abbott has already embraced open carry, there’s no chance this move will win her real converts among single-issue Second Amendment supporters, but a very real chance it will alienate her national liberal fundraising base.

    Wendy Davis is a credible leader on Second Amendment rights the way Danny DeVito is a credible NBA center.

    Why I Rejoined the NRA

    Monday, December 31st, 2012

    Back during the Clinton Administration, I joined the National Rifle Association. With the “Assault Weapon Ban” passed and other anti-Second Amendment legislation under consideration, it seemed like a good time to join the one organization capable of slowing the Democratic Party’s gun-grabbing agenda.

    When I let my membership lapse, it was obvious new gun control legislation was going nowhere with George W. Bush in the White House and Republicans controlling the House of Representatives. But the main reason I let it lapse was that I was pissed off that the NRA had sent me a video tape (younger readers: ask your parents what a “video tape” was) I hadn’t asked for, and expected me to go out of the way and return it at my expense if I didn’t want to subscribe to whatever video series it was.

    Over the years I’ve had differences with the NRA, especially their willingness to compromise on other fundamental freedoms by cutting deals with Nancy Pelosi. But as Sebastain at Shall Not Be Questioned noted:

    You still need what NRA can bring to the table, which is specifically a huge network of people who tend to only be peripherally involved in this issue (and this goes beyond their 4 million dues paying members), and access to lawmakers that no other gun rights groups can match, and really no or few other lobbies in DC and the 50 state capitols can match….

    NRA is the only organization that has the capability to fight on this ground. So if you have some money to donate to NRA, or can spare the dollars to buy a membership do it!

    We’re going to war, and this is the NRA we have, and more importantly, this is the NRA we can win with. But only if we hang together, because our alternative is to surely hang separately.

    And that’s why I sent my check in this week to rejoin the NRA. American’s fundamental Second Amendment rights are under siege right now. If you care about maintaining America as a nation whose freedom is guaranteed by its’ citizens inalienable rights, then this is the fight you need to join. It’s a fight we can and should win. The NRA is an integral part of that fight.

    If you care about liberty and the Second Amendment, you should seriously consider joining as well.

    Texas Rep. Ruben Hinojosa (D-umbass) Actually Forgets the Second Amendment

    Thursday, October 25th, 2012

    There’s this thing called the Constitution. Perhaps you’ve heard of it. Fundamental law of the land, guiding document for the federal government, etc. Sorta important.

    There’s this section of it called “The Second Amendment.” “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Gives citizens the right to bear arms. Kind of a big deal. Especially in Texas.

    Perhaps someone needs to tell that to Texas Rep. Ruben Hinojosa (D-umbass), who actually managed to forget what the Second Amendment was during a debate:

    “I’m drawing a blank on the Second Amendment, but I think it’s the weapons, isn’t it? The NRA?”

    Note: This being the Internet and all, I think I should emphasize that the above actually happened. My snarky self didn’t invent it out of whole cloth. An incumbent Democratic congressman from Texas, who’s been in office since 1997, forgot the Second Amendment. “I’m drawing a blank on the First Amendment, but I think it’s the churches, isn’t it? The Pope? Any maybe newspapers?”

    There shouldn’t be a high school senior who doesn’t know what the Second Amendment is, much less a United States Congressman. Either Rep. Hinojosa is woefully ignorant of the Constitution, or else he’s suffering from some sort of debilitating mental illness. In either case, he’s unfit for office.

    Rep. Hinojosa has a Republican challenger in Dale Brueggemann. He has an uphill struggle against an entrenched incumbent in a district that went 57% for Obama, but I doubt he expected his opponent to make such a huge gaffe. I’m sure he would appreciate any help fans of the Second Amendment could throw his way.

    Texas Senate Race Update for January 31, 2012

    Tuesday, January 31st, 2012
  • A testy exchange between Ted Cruz and Tom Leppert at last week’s Texas Republican Assembly Biennial Endorsing Convention Biennial Endorsing Convention on Leppert’s gay rights parade and ACORN baggage that I, Matt Dowling and whoever was behind the now-silent Race to Replace KBH dug up.

  • Last week Ted Cruz was on the Glenn Beck Show:

    Glenn Beck: “There’s no way you’re ever going to get elected. You make too much sense.”

  • Cruz was also named as one of the Top Ten Conservative Challengers in Texas by New Revolution Now.
  • Craig James appeared on WFAA (again, apologies for their crappy, non-YouTube video embedding):

  • Ted Cruz, Lela Pittenger and Ben Gambini all appeared at the North Shore Republican Women’s forum in Montgomery County.
  • Craig James is just fine with a later date for the primary. That piece isn’t particularly information, but I thought I would put it up since they do actually manage to mention all the Republican and Democratic candidates filed for the race, a sharp contrast with other news stories I could name…
  • The Texas Association of Business will have another Senate candidate forum in Austin tomorrow from 200-3:30 PM. Scheduled to attend are Ted Cruz, David Dewhurst, Tom Leppert and Craig James. I’ve been sending email back and forth with the James campaign to try a find a time to interview him while he’s in town, but it doesn’t look like we’ll find one that matches both our schedules. (It’s a busy time for my day job.) So we might end up doing an email interview instead.
  • The National Association of Realtors endorses Dewhurst. I’m sure this is a shocking turn of events completely unforeseen by anyone following the race.
  • Texas Sparkle lends her blog to Kevin Jackson so he can make the case for Craig James. His upshot seems to be that James is a tough competitor. Well, great. But getting your chin stitched up without anesthetic is probably a skill that will never be needed on the senate floor, and Mr. Jackson’s piece seems to be devoid of any actual discussion of political positions.
  • The AP takes a look at three of the five Democrats in the race.
  • Of them, Paul Sadler gets endorsed by the AFL-CIO. So that’s a second traditional Democratic interest group Sadler has in his corner along with the legacy news media.
  • Profile of Democratic candidate Jason Gibson. “Gibson considers himself a mainstream Democrat who believes in lower taxes and efficient government and who supports the Second Amendment. He’s pro-labor, he said, with an abiding interest in worker safety, but still is working to fill in the blanks on most issues. Jobs and the economy, he said, are key. He has hired several well-regarded campaign consultants and has said he is willing to spend into the seven figures.”
  • Glenn Addison raised $17,606 in Q4. That’s down significantly from the $35,059 he raised in Q3.
  • Brief Candidate Profile: Jason A. Gibson, Pistol Packing…Democrat?

    Monday, December 19th, 2011

    I just got off the phone with newly-filed Texas Democratic senate candidate Jason A. Gibson. (I called when his law firm’s email bounced for some reason.) He says his website,, will be up live in a day or two.

    I asked him why he was running. He said he was “tired of Washington being dysfunctional” and “tired of being on the sidelines.” He also said “I get things done.”

    He says his family has a long history in the Democratic Party, and that his grandfather a union organizer. However, when I noted that my blog was on the conservative side of the spectrum, he mentioned support for two policies not often voiced among modern Democratic candidates: lower taxes and the right to bear arms. Indeed, he said he was a Texas CHL holder, which must surely be an uncommon thing among Democrats these days.

    There was a time, of course, when the Texas Democratic Party had numerous conservative politicians among their ranks. But by the 1980s, the party that had once been home to Allan Shivers and John Connally found itself to be captive to the ideological likes of Jim Hightower and Lloyd Doggett, causing the exodus of conservative Democrats like Phil Gramm, Kent Hance and Rick Perry to the Republican Party, which goes a long way toward explaining why it’s been over a decade since the Democrats held a single statewide office in Texas. The majority of Democratic partisans at both the state and national level have nothing but contempt for “Blue Dog Democrats,” and I doubt Gibson can buck the trend.

    But we’ll see.

    Ezell vs. Chicago: An Extremely Lazy Blogger’s Roundup

    Wednesday, July 6th, 2011

    So Ezell vs. Chaicago has been decided, and the three-judge panel basically bitchslapped Chicago into the 21st Century. Basically, Chicago was saying 1.) You have to get firearms training at a licensed firing range to own a gun, and 2.) We don’t need no stinking firing ranges within the city limits, and the court tore them a new asshole for blatantly disregarding DC vs. Heller.

    Even more dramatically, the ruling makes explicit parallels between first Amendment and Second Amendment restrictions, which the Brady Bunch and their liberal Democratic co-conspirators have been denying for years.

    I think any decision where the gun-grabber ordinance in question is actually derided in the decision as “thumbing of the municipal nose at the Supreme Court” has to count as a pretty overwhelming victory for the Second Amendment.

    If I were a hardcore gun blogger, I’d read the entire judgment, quote chunks from it and offer closely reasoned, pithy insights.

    If I were a semi-hardcore gun blogger, I’d skim the decision and offer some quick insights.

    However, because I’m feeling very lazy tonight, I’m merely going to link to the writeup over at Snowflakes in Hell, since Sebastian has provided a far better, and more insightful, post than I could on the subject.

    As a bonus, in the post just below that, he tears into Rahm’s ridiculous shooting range ordinance, another blatant attempt to deprive Chicago residents of their Second Amendment via absurd regulations, such as:

  • Requires that range operators inspect every gun brought into the range for safety, and that the caliber is appropriate for an indoor range.
  • You must have a range master for every three shooting patrons. That range master must be on duty at all times. [Even by the standards of Chicago union featherbedding this is outrageous.]
  • Ranges may only sell ammo for use onsite, and must ensure no one leaves the range with unauthorized ammo.
  • Et Freaking cetera. “Rahm’s ordinance is basically a joke, and an insult. I can’t imagine anyone would even try to operate a range under these ridiculous standards, and I suspect that’s the whole idea.”

    Read the whole thing, on both posts.