NRA desperate for ways to pretend it’s under attack

When state Sen. Jeff Mullis stepped into the well Wednesday to explain Senate Bill 102 to his colleagues, the first few words of his introduction were blunt if a bit unusual.

“This is a gun bill, an NRA bill,” the Chickamauga Republican said. “You’re either for guns, or you’re against guns.”

In other words, you will vote yes on this bill or you will face the wrath of the National Rifle Association. If you do not bow to the whims of the NRA, no matter how nonsensical they might be, you will be deemed to be against guns and against the Second Amendment. No personal judgment on such matters will be tolerated.

To be fair, parts of the bill are fine. Among other things, it would repeal the state’s current ban on carrying firearms in a place of worship. (Gun advocates had tried to get the ban overturned in federal court, but were rebuffed.)

Personally, I don’t have a big problem with that particular change. Taking a deadly weapon to church seems an odd choice, but odd choices shouldn’t necessarily be outlawed. Besides, taking a handgun to church is certainly less dangerous than packing heat in a bar, which the state Legislature legalized just a year ago.

Furthermore, under the bill, religious institutions retain the right to ban weapons if they choose. That, too, seems appropriate. As Mullis noted, it’s a property rights issue, giving places of worship the same right to ban or allow firearms as other property owners.

However, other parts of the bill are considerably more problematic and puzzling. For example, current law makes it illegal to grant a concealed-carry license to a person who is charged with committing a felony. If the defendant is later found innocent, the permit can then be issued.

Under SB 102, felony defendants will be eligible to carry a gun legally.

In addition, concealed-weapon permit holders no longer would be required to have those permits with them when they’re packing a weapon.

I don’t understand the logic behind that provision. What happens if a law enforcement officer spots and intercepts a person carrying a concealed weapon? The person can claim to have a permit for the weapon, but would have no legal obligation to produce it. How does that help either the officer or the permit holder?

When questioned by a fellow senator, Mullis offered no real explanation for the change. “We believe the right to bear arms is the right to bear arms,” he said, presumably meaning that he doesn’t like the idea of permits in the first place.

During the debate, state Sen. Steve Thompson, a conservative Cobb County Democrat, questioned the necessity and the wisdom of that provision. He also bristled at the claim that anyone who dares question an NRA-backed bill is by definition against guns. (Of course, before doing so, he felt obliged to rattle off the eight hunting or antique weapons that he himself owns.)

“It seems like these groups just run out of things to introduce to try to justify their existence,” Thompson said.
That sounds about right. In fact, the NRA also is playing the same kind of game at the national level.

In the wake of the tragic Tucson shootings in which six people were killed and U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was seriously wounded, President Barack Obama has proposed to upgrade the criminal background-check system to make it easier to identify people with mental illness. The intent is to make it more difficult for people such as Jared Loughner to acquire weapons.

Surely, Obama wrote in an article in the Arizona Daily Star, we ought to be able to agree on that much. Surely there’s a consensus on that much.

But no, there isn’t.

Rather than take on the NRA and lose, Obama invited the group to work with his administration on making those minor changes. But NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre angrily refused.

“Why should I sit down with a group of people who have spent their life fighting the Second Amendment?” he said.

The sad truth is, LaPierre’s salary and the NRA’s bureaucracy and fund-raising depend on maintaining the illusion that there can be no consensus about common-sense gun laws. “You’re either for guns or you’re against guns,” as the saying goes, and if the test of being “for guns” is to support ever more nonsensical gun legislation, as it has become here in Georgia, the NRA is perfectly willing to make that claim stick.

– Jay Bookman

668 comments Add your comment

Jimmy62

March 18th, 2011
7:17 am

It seems like you are attacking the NRA. Did they perhaps make up this column, is Jay merely a figment of our imagination?

Road Scholar

March 18th, 2011
7:22 am

Does the law allow the carrying of weapons into the state house? It seems only fair since these bozos are putting us in jeopardy everywhere else…now churches. It seems so…so…so…christian! WWJD?

Jay

March 18th, 2011
7:26 am

Of course the law doesn’t allow concealed carry in the Capitol, Scholar.

National Hand Grenade Association

March 18th, 2011
7:30 am

You’re either for your sacred second amendment rights or you’re agin us. So when you lose your rights to bear armaments, don’t try to pin it on me. I tried to protect you.

Normal

March 18th, 2011
7:30 am

Roads,Jesus would pack a Glock…
———————
The NRA used to be a fun organization. Dad got me my first membership early in my life and I stayed a member for a long time. Now they seem crazed. Why fight magazine capacity? That is insane. The NRA seems to be nothing but a White Supremest Organization now…with political clout. I think they are very dangerous. My opinion, take it or leave it.

National Hand Grenade Association

March 18th, 2011
7:32 am

Clearly our Georgia Legislators are agin our second amendment rights to bear armaments within their Gold-Domed house. Where do they worship.

TnGelding

March 18th, 2011
7:32 am

No Rational Argument. Must resort to emotions. It wields way too much power for the size of its membership, although it does have many more sympathizers.

Why isn’t the GOP trying to stop funding for the DEA? Especially after the stunt it pulled here in Georgia. That would save some real money and legalizing the evil poison would bring in tens of billions in revenue.

Joel Edge

March 18th, 2011
7:34 am

They’re just trying to recapture lost ground, Jay. Best defense is a good offense. I would love to trust that the 2nd amendment fight is over and Americans won, but there seems to be someone out there ready with another law, restriction or other mechanism.

National Hand Grenade Association

March 18th, 2011
7:36 am

Can I get parking spaces made wide enough to park my tank under the equal access laws.

Jimmy62

March 18th, 2011
7:39 am

Hey Jay, with all the death threats and threats of violence being made by union members in Wisconsin (for instance, http://wtaq.com/news/articles/2011/mar/17/lawmaker-calls-meetings-over-vandalism-death-threa/), why aren’t you writing columns about the incivility of the left? Why isn’t your newspaper even reporting all these threats, which go far beyond anything that came out of various Tea Party protests that yours and other organizations highlighted so much and vilified whenever possible. Could it be that most of the media really is biased left? I know if you ask the average man on the street, they won’t know about these Wisconsin death threats since the media is ignoring them, but they will know all about the violence and threats at the non-violent tea party gatherings. At the very least, the media is doing a very poor job reporting the whole truth.

Jay

March 18th, 2011
7:40 am

In other words, Joel, there must be a boogeyman out there somewhere, even if we can’t find one.

National Hand Grenade Association

March 18th, 2011
7:43 am

Of course I should have a permit to carry grenades but it would be stupid of me to carry it on my person because it would be blowed to pieces if I had an accident and then I wouldn’t have my permit no more. Silly. Worse than that, what if I was to carry my permit and someone stoled it from me. Then it would be legal for them to keep my permit at their house and carry concealed weapons while they was out and about.

Normal

March 18th, 2011
7:46 am

A sane approach to this would be to allow households one pistol, one rifle, and one shotgun per adult. That is all you would ever need for home defense and/or hunting. Pistol and rifle should fire the same caliber ammunition.

TnGelding

March 18th, 2011
7:48 am

The British are coming! The British are coming!

National Hand Grenade Association

March 18th, 2011
7:48 am

Jimmy62 should be more concerned about all the students being taught by all those militant thug union teachers in Wisconsin. Think about the children being subjected to all that violence every day. Arm those poor students so they can protect themselves.

Granny Godzilla

March 18th, 2011
7:51 am

National Hand Grenade Association

Let’s arm babies!!!!

My little grandson Baby G would look so adorable in cammo with those criss cross bullet holder thingies and a couple of 45 calibers….

Certainly an Easter picture to remember…..”Hey Bunny, make my day!”

Seriously folks, it’s time to loosen the stranglehold the NRA has on this nation and enact some sensible gun control laws…..

National Hand Grenade Association

March 18th, 2011
7:53 am

Granny Godzilla,

You already have an unfair advantage over us more normal folks with them built in flame throwers that you all is born with. We need to level the battlefield by properly arming the rest of us.

Jimmy62

March 18th, 2011
7:54 am

National Hand Grenade: Pretty typical of lefties, violence and death threats are fine, worth joking about, as long as the left is making them. If a rightie is making them, however, they are evil and should be thrown in jail.

Enjoy your hypocrisy, I hope your moral failings keep you warm at night.

Granny Godzilla

March 18th, 2011
7:57 am

OH NOES….THE MORAL FAILINGS CARD…..

EEEK….what come’s next? The bad haircut card? The wedgie card?

To quote Sgt. Hulka….”Lighten up Francis”

National Hand Grenade Association

March 18th, 2011
7:58 am

We need to level the battlefield by properly arming the rest of us.

That didn’t come out right. I meant to say that we should level the playground by properly arming the rest of us. After all, if only teachers can tote, then it takes phrases like, “You’ll learn this or else,” to a whole new level. What’s a student to do.

Granny Godzilla

March 18th, 2011
7:58 am

No video…no incident…isn’t that how that works?

Joel Edge

March 18th, 2011
8:01 am

Jay@7:40
Yep. The trust is kinda thin. How long have we been fighting this battle, Jay? The “bogeyman” will reappear. I can pretty much guarantee you that. The nannies never sleep.

Real Scooter

March 18th, 2011
8:02 am

Normal

March 18th, 2011
7:46 am

Can’t agree on this one Normal. I have a shot gun that has been in my family for 3 generations and it isn’t safe to shoot. Which means I can’t hunt with it. By what you call a sane approach,I would have to turn in my great grand father’s shot gun so that I could legaly hunt with my newer shot gun.

Torpedo of Truth

March 18th, 2011
8:02 am

When Obama ran for the Illinois state senate the political group, Independent Voters of Illinois (IVI), asked him if he supported a “ban [on] the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns” and he responded “yes.”

Realizing how damaging this could prove in the general election, his presidential campaign “flatly denied” Obama ever held this view, blaming it instead on a staffer from his state senate race.

But then IVI provided Politico the questionnaire with Obama’s own handwritten notes revising another answer. Members of IVI’s board of directors, some of whom have worked on Obama’s past campaigns, told Politico that “I always believed those to be his views, what he really believes in, and he’s tailoring it now to make himself more palatable as a nationwide candidate.”

But the IVI questionnaire isn’t the only one out there.

In 1998, another questionnaire administered by IL State Legislative National Political Awareness Test didn’t ask about banning all handguns, but it did find that Obama wanted to “ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.”

Indeed, such a ban would outlaw virtually all handguns and the vast majority of rifles sold in the United States.

In addition, from 1998 to 2001, Obama was on the board of directors for the Joyce Foundation, which funded such anti-gun groups as the Violence Policy Center, the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence, and Handgun Free America. Both the Violence Policy Center and Handgun Free America, as its name suggests, are in favor of a complete ban on handguns. During his tenure on the board, the Joyce Foundation was probably the major funder of pro-control research in the United States.

Jay

March 18th, 2011
8:03 am

If and when it reappears, Joel, deal with it. Until then, fabricating boogeymen is rather silly.

National Hand Grenade Association

March 18th, 2011
8:05 am

Jimmy62 must have gotten a lot of paddlings in school from evil union thug teachers dressed in sheep’s clothing. And all this time, I thought that sort of thing was limited to Catholic schools. The stories I have heard about those nuns and their punishments! Now is the time to rally those Wisconsin school kids so we can hear their muted cries. Their class time must be unbearable. Those union thug teacher bullies up there must make their lives just plain miserable. Arm those little children so they can protect themselves. By the way, I hear their police are unionized too and they get to carry all sorts of guns legally. Legalized thuggery is all it is.

Granny Godzilla

March 18th, 2011
8:05 am

NRA Head Wayne LaPierre Doesn’t Want You To Know He Agrees With Obama On Guns

Now remember kiddies, we all know you’ll complain about the source but that really makes no difference if you can’t rebuke the data.

and y’all can’t….

National Hand Grenade Association

March 18th, 2011
8:09 am

The nannies never sleep.

They have nanny cams. There’s no escape.

Southern Comfort (aka The Man)

March 18th, 2011
8:09 am

Just when I had seen the most from the GOP. Walker started it off, then Snyder in Michigan upped the ante. Now Georgia wants to put their bid in for the most assinine use of legislative time and power. There must be some kind of cash prized offered for the jackass of the year solo politician or group at the CPAC convention. :)

AmVet

March 18th, 2011
8:09 am

“This is a gun bill, an NRA bill,” the Chickamauga Republican said. “You’re either for guns, or you’re against guns.”

Simplistic tripe and disgraceful, sophomoric pandering to the lowest common denominator , i.e. the far right wing, non-conservative base. And if not so pathetic and sad, fairly humorous.

To me, this is just more evidence of the immensely embarrassing fact that so many of these barely educated, elected “leaders” in Georgia are hard core, mid 19th century reactionaries, incapable of making cogent, well thought out arguments. The electoral mistake borne of the psychologically wounded bloodlusters and violence addicts in our society.

Always ultra frightened, their perceived enemies are everywhere. And virtually every trip to the gas station, grocery store or their beloved Walmart is running a deadly gauntlet of malevolent Islamohomicidists, groups of marauding thugs (usually Those People) and Mexican narcoterrorists.

And that is why the irrationally paranoid convince themselves that they simply must pack heat everywhere, all of the time. Even in church? My Gawd, Jesus must be shaking his head in wonder.

When did the terms *reasoned and reasonable* become anathema to this hijacked, loon-filled Republican Party?

Normal

March 18th, 2011
8:10 am

Come on Scooter. Antiques could and should be excepted…

SOUTHERN ATL

March 18th, 2011
8:12 am

Under SB 102, felony defendants will be eligible to carry a gun legally.

In addition, concealed-weapon permit holders no longer would be required to have those permits with them when they’re packing a weapon.

There are several felony gun packers and this bill enables them to broaden their scope!!

Normal

March 18th, 2011
8:13 am

AmVet,
I have no quarrel with Jesus, but I question men and women, who proclaim themselves followers of the Prince of Peace, the need to have weapons at all. Seems weird somehow…

Joel Edge

March 18th, 2011
8:14 am

Jay@8:03
Fabricating boogeyman? C’mon Jay, that’s part and parcel of media thought. You can’t generate support without fear and outrage. When I see some lessening of the media habit of overblowing a situation, then I’ll feel better. Have you been watching the panic fest on CNN? The Japanese are working to fix the disaster. We seem to be sowing fear and panic.

Real Scooter

March 18th, 2011
8:15 am

Come on Scooter. Antiques could and should be excepted…

Thanks for letting me keep my old shotgun Normal! :smile:

@@

March 18th, 2011
8:16 am

I’m a bit confused.

However, other parts of the bill are considerably more problematic and puzzling. For example, current law makes it illegal to grant a concealed-carry license to a person who is charged with committing a felony. If the defendant is later found innocent, the permit can then be issued.

Under SB 102, felony defendants will be eligible to carry a gun legally.

Same defendant or different defendant(s)?

Same? If a convicted felon is later found to be innocent, why shouldn’t their rights be restored?

Different? If they’re defendants, they’re innocent until proven guilty. Innocent people shouldn’t be allowed to have a gun?

If documentation proving citizenship is required to be carried, then a concealed weapon permit should be too. It’s a piece of paper fercryinoutloud. Can’t be that burdensome.

jay’s team is concerned about “mission creep” in Libya. No doubt, the NRA is concerned about the same thing when it comes to 2nd Amendment rights.

AND…..who gets to define “mentally ill”?

National Hand Grenade Association

March 18th, 2011
8:17 am

Dear National Rifle Association,

I am writing you this letter to offer to join forces. I feel that together, we can project ourselves even further and make our presence felt even more than ever thought possible. What do you say. By the way, I hear there’s a National Armored Transport Association looking to get in on the action. Where there’s a will, there’s money to be made. Just think of all those second amendment customers out there. We need to figure a way to tap into that market and grow our businesses at least 20 percent per year or we’ll perish. There just aren’t enough wars in the world to do that. We need more. We need to make fear work for our bottom line and what better way than through the Constitution. It’s our God-given right.

Yours Truly.

Doggone/GA

March 18th, 2011
8:17 am

“Seems weird somehow…”

Smacks of idol worship, don’t you think?

jt

March 18th, 2011
8:17 am

Like all impotent Federal laws and most state ones,…………………I SCOFF at them.

Ya’ll be herded to the slaughterhouse ifn you want.

jt

March 18th, 2011
8:18 am

kayaker 71

March 18th, 2011
8:19 am

Of course we second amendment advocates can trust Bozo and his minions to do the “right thing” when it comes to hand gun possession. All Sam Nunn had to do was to back the Brady bill then the bumper stickers came out…. “Sam Nunn Wants Your Gun”. His “retirement” came shortly after.
There is nothing wrong with sensible gun control legislation. Depends on your definition of sensible.

Granny Godzilla

March 18th, 2011
8:19 am

“You can’t generate support without fear and outrage”

Piffle, we all support stuff that doesn’t scare or outrage us….well at least the mentally healthy.

Senior Citizen Kane

March 18th, 2011
8:24 am

“There is nothing wrong with sensible gun control legislation. Depends on your definition of sensible.”

I’m a gun owner and a believer in gun rights, but I’ve never understood the attitude that the 2nd amendment is inviolate and not subject to some restrictions. After all, if you take the 2nd Amendment literally, we should all be able to own our own nuclear weapons; because it never mentions “guns,” it says “arms.”

Real Scooter

March 18th, 2011
8:25 am

I hope I never have to defend my life. But if I do,I would like to have more protection than a Bible.

USMC dawg

March 18th, 2011
8:27 am

NPR desperate for ways to pretend it’s under attack.

@@

March 18th, 2011
8:28 am

Normal:

I have no quarrel with Jesus, but I question men and women, who proclaim themselves followers of the Prince of Peace, the need to have weapons at all. Seems weird somehow…

Surely you don’t believe that Christians have been shielded from criminal activity. An older woman at my church had her house broken into while she was home. The burglar was none too kind to her. She now carries a gun…EVERYWHERE…even to the mailbox.

Would you diagnose her as mentally ill?

carlosgvv

March 18th, 2011
8:28 am

“I don’t understand the logic”

Jay, you understand the logic perfectly well. The NRA will funnell huge amounts of cash to the politicans who support them and will do everything they can to unseat those who oppose them. Profits for the gun manufactures mean far more to the NRA than human lives. I’s sure you understand that too.

Bob

March 18th, 2011
8:29 am

Everyone knows that strict gun control laws make places safer, Chicago and DC are good examples.

godless heathen

March 18th, 2011
8:31 am

Perhaps we should license journalists and then if we see them snooping around we could ask them to show their license.

Matthew

March 18th, 2011
8:31 am

Once, the NRA did propose common sense gun laws, it proposed that everyone be banned from carrying concealed. It was a different world then, politicians were being gunned down in the streets and magazines sold rifles through the mail.

But then you have to look at what the second amendment did, and did not do.

It did not grant anyone the right to bear arms. It did not create a militia. It did not grant anyone the right to walk around locked and loaded. It did not give someone the right to buy a gun.

What it did do is say to congress and the states, “You will not stop people from buying, or carrying, firearms.”

Why? Because the founders knew that the government was opposed to freedom and liberty. That given the chance the government would regulate everything, right down to your toenails. It knew that eventually the government would seek to disarm the population and make it impossible for them to retain control of their government, and that the government would grow to the point that it no longer accept the bindings placed on it by the constitution and that the people would have to reset it. They had seen it their entire lives, in making musket balls in the dead of winter around a fireplace, to weaving fabric to use as bandages later on when it was warm enough to fight again. They saw it in Concorde when the British tried to disarm the colonists and prevent them from being able to mouth a defense.

The NRA knows this. They may appear to be about money, but everyone has to think about money in our world or they would not exist. But what they ARE about is that the government is NOT your friend, and given the chance, they will strip you of everything.

Paranoid? I have about three thousand years of examples that say not.

Granny Godzilla

March 18th, 2011
8:32 am

….if Jesus had been packing would he have “hit” Pontius Pilate?

nope, it’s the lesson that separates the real from the faux belivers.

SonnyFab

March 18th, 2011
8:33 am

To @@ 8:16am. In Georgia, if you are innocent of a felony (as in not yet found guilty in a court of law) but there have been charges brought against you, you are disqualified from carrying a concealed weapon. Later if you are still innocent (as in still not found guilty) but no charges are pending, then your second amendment rights are restored. This change would treat innocent people as innocent people, until they are actually found guilty of something.

Doggone/GA

March 18th, 2011
8:34 am

“This change would treat innocent people as innocent people, until they are actually found guilty of something.”

Yeah, because it’s SO important for unconvicted felons like that guy that shot up the courthouse and killed a judge to be able to carry a gun until they are found guilty.

Starring Kam Fong as Chin Ho

March 18th, 2011
8:36 am

@ (ab) normal, I hunt all over the country and I hunt various animals in many varied terrains and situations that require (yes require) many different rifles and shotgun configurations. But in your mind I should be allowed a less varied arsenal that you would have eating utensils at a dinner party. I truly feel for your lack of knowledge of the art of hunting.

Normal

March 18th, 2011
8:36 am

@@,
There are stories like that one are all over, but she wasn’t killed and I assume, since you didn’t mention it, raped or anything. She has a gun now? All that will happen is if she gets attacked again, she will probably be killed with her own gun. Keep bringing up “Be afraid”…the Gun shops will love you for it.

kayaker 71

March 18th, 2011
8:37 am

Citizen Kane,

I don’t think that the average gun owner like yourself and myself would object to reasonable legislation when it comes to gun use and ownership. All the legislation in the world is not going to stop gun violence, however. And the liberal faction, people like AmVet and others, mock our right to own firearms with silly diatribes like those above at 8:09. It really comes down to trust. I don’t trust most liberals to be sensible when it comes to modifying my right to own arms. Neither do most advocates of the 2nd Amendment. Why would the NRA even consider sitting down with people like Bozo or Cynthia Tucker to discuss gun rights? That’s almost funny.

Normal

March 18th, 2011
8:37 am

Starring Kam Fong as Chin Ho…
Believe what you like…no rice out of my bowl.

Southern Comfort (aka The Man)

March 18th, 2011
8:38 am

NPR desperate for ways to pretend it’s under attack.

O’Keefe…. No pretending it’s under attack. Nice fail though…

Equal gun rights

March 18th, 2011
8:39 am

It seems that this gun bill further separates our politicians from the average law abiding citizen. It gives special treatment to elected officials in Georgia. Why do they think that they are above us instead or serving us?

Jay

March 18th, 2011
8:41 am

“I don’t think that the average gun owner like yourself and myself would object to reasonable legislation when it comes to gun use and ownership.”

I wish that were true, Kayaker. Unfortunately, the NRA fought tooth and nail against the instant background check. It continues to fight tooth and nail against using the background check at gun shows. It also continues to fight efforts to ban the 30-round magazine that Loughner used in Tucson, a device that exists for no reason other than to wreak mass carnage.

Typical Democrat

March 18th, 2011
8:41 am

We must ban all weapons.
Only the government should have weapons.
Never allow an armed citizenry or they may overthrow the government.

Jay

March 18th, 2011
8:42 am

That’s correct, Equal. I didn’t have space in the column, but the bill also gives all state and local elected officials the right to carry concealed weapons without needing a permit. Because while we’re all equal, they’re more equal.

Southern Comfort (aka The Man)

March 18th, 2011
8:43 am

I don’t think that the average gun owner like yourself and myself would object to reasonable legislation when it comes to gun use and ownership.

The problem with that is that what one person may consider reasonable, the next person may consider it to be inadequate, and a third may consider it overreaching. You’re right that all the legislation in the world won’t stop gun violence. However that doesn’t mean that you scare the beejeebus out of people causing them to buy unnecessary guns so that criminals can easily get their hands on even more guns.

John

March 18th, 2011
8:44 am

Bob – Are you kidding me? Stricter gun laws make pllaces safer like Chicago??? Have you seen how safe it is in Chicago. So when someone breaks into your house in these depressed and hard economic times to take what you’ve worked hard for, just threaten them with a knife of a frying pan. That will scare the robbers/murders like crazy as they laugh at you and blow you away with a .45 caliber hand gun.

Wake the hell up!!! How in the hell are people supposed to defend themselves if their rights are taken away in places like Chicago. I know, maybe you could try to sit down and talk the robber out of taking you and your families lives. Let me know how that works out for you.

Moderate Line

March 18th, 2011
8:45 am

I don’t understand the logic behind that provision. What happens if a law enforcement officer spots and intercepts a person carrying a concealed weapon? The person can claim to have a permit for the weapon, but would have no legal obligation to produce it. How does that help either the officer or the permit holder?
+++++++++++++++++=
The logic is the same as those who argue against the Arizona illegal immigrant bill maybe worse.

Let’s say a police officer pulls over a motorist who has a concealed weapon. Does the police officer has reasonable suspicion that the motorist committing a crime. No. It can not have reasonable suspicion until he ask for proof of a conceal gun permit.

Under the Arizona law can a police officer have reasonable suspicion that someone is an illegal immigrant by pulling him over. No. The only way that can happen is if the person doesn’t have a driver’s license then you could argue that there is reasonable suspicion.

The left would argue that just because someone is Hispanic doesn’t mean they have committed a crime. Thus burdening the legal Hispanics i.e discriminating.

The right would argue that just because someone owns a gun and has it in their car doesn’t mean they have the gun illegally. Thus burden the legal gun owners.

Same argument. Interesting you don’t see the logic since you have made it before. This reveals how emotions and loyality of both sides cloud their “logic”.

seabeau

March 18th, 2011
8:45 am

As usual Jan is only giving you the liberals side of the story! Please go to the NRA website and read the NRA’s response to Obama’s Arizona Daily Star PR piece.

Southern Comfort (aka The Man)

March 18th, 2011
8:45 am

Jay

*Full Disclosure: I’m a little more equal than others because I don’t need a permit when I’m carrying either. I’m also allowed to carry concealed in places that others are not allowed to.

National Hand Grenade Association

March 18th, 2011
8:47 am

What is a handgun if not a gun that is operated by hand. Besides, I can keep it completely concealed under this rather large and conspicuous robe. Concealed weapons, they’re not just for overcoats any more.

Should judges be able to carry concealed weapons into courtrooms. It could make it a lot easier for them to dispense justice.

As for hand grenades. They are carried easily in a hand and they’re operated by hand and they’re easily concealed and they certainly kill as well as any handgun so why shouldn’t we be allowed to carry concealed hand grenades. It is only logical. So, are you for your second amendment or are you agin it.

Jay

March 18th, 2011
8:48 am

Yes, SoCo. And as a member of law enforcement, you are also trained in the use of firearms in various situations.

@@

March 18th, 2011
8:48 am

Sonny:

In Georgia, if you are innocent of a felony (as in not yet found guilty in a court of law) but there have been charges brought against you, you are disqualified from carrying a concealed weapon.

All felonies or just violent felonies?

There are a lot of non-violent felonies. I was reading where some guy had his gun rights denied because he contributed to the preparation of a false federal tax return. Here’s the question he posed online at ExpertLaw.

My question involves criminal law for the state of: Federal, Georgia, Florida, and Texas.
While living in Georgia, I was arrested for Contributing to the preparation of a false federal tax return. The case was heard in Dallas, Texas. I now live in Florida. I did a plea bargain to one count and was sentenced to two years commuted to five years probation. This was completed in 1992 in Georgia and all rights were restored including the right to vote, but not the right to keep and bear arms. I now live in Florida. How do I go about getting my gun rights restored? It was a Federal charge. Do I also need to ask for restoration from the state of Florida?

straitroad

March 18th, 2011
8:49 am

With everything going on in the world, you still feel compelled to blog about the wimp mentality of being afraid of firearms. Is there an editor in the house?

seabeau

March 18th, 2011
8:49 am

The uprisings in the Middle East proves the necessity of the Second Admendment against an abusive government.

National Hand Grenade Association

March 18th, 2011
8:50 am

If legislators are given the right to carry concealed weapons without permits, everyone will want to be a legislator. This is just an evil ploy to get people more involved in government.

WOW

March 18th, 2011
8:50 am

“NRA desperate for ways to pretend it’s under attack”

As a member of the NRA I get calls all the time about how Obama and the Dems want to take gun rights away which is true, Jay.

midtownguy

March 18th, 2011
8:51 am

The right to bear arms and the NRA is “under attach” to the exact same extent that Christianity is “under attach” and white males are “under attach”, and the folks that believe one, believe all three. The definition of under attach is “I don’t get to hold all power and have everything the way I want it.”

WOW

March 18th, 2011
8:51 am

“It also continues to fight efforts to ban the 30-round magazine that Loughner used in Tucson’

Good! I always find it interesting that the left blames guns instead of people in their own party who go around shooting people.

Jay

March 18th, 2011
8:51 am

Right, seabeau.

The adolescent, overly romanticized fantasy of an armed uprising against a tyrannical American government.

WOW

March 18th, 2011
8:52 am

“The right to bear arms and the NRA is “under attach” to the exact same extent that Christianity is “under attach” and white males are “under attach””

Attach to what?

Equal gun rights

March 18th, 2011
8:52 am

The NRA tends to cave sometimes like the issue of the troops coming home after war and taking mild drugs to get over the horrors of war. They can fight for our country but are unfit to own a firearm because they are taking limited mind altering drugs. The NRA sided with the government on this so I left the NRA years ago due to their compromising on my rights. I am now a member of Gun Owners of America.

National Hand Grenade Association

March 18th, 2011
8:52 am

What kinda training can you possibly need to operate a firearm. You just point and shoot the thing at whoever you get mad at! What could be more simple.

midtownguy

March 18th, 2011
8:52 am

*dang, can’t tell my h from my k.

AmVet

March 18th, 2011
8:52 am

“…people like AmVet and others, mock our right to own firearms…”

Redact to read that AmVet mocks the fact-averse and silly misquoters.

WOW

March 18th, 2011
8:53 am

“The adolescent, overly romanticized fantasy of an armed uprising against a tyrannical American government.”

Just wait until some crazy disaster happens like in Japan.

WOW

March 18th, 2011
8:54 am

AmVet !!!!!!! I was wondering where you were!

kayaker 71

March 18th, 2011
8:55 am

Bookman,

If 2nd Amendment advocates could trust those with whom they negotiate with to be reasonable in gun control legislation, I really don’t think most would object. Loughner and other nuts like him still lurk in our neighborhoods, however. If someone at Ft. Hood had not been armed and shot that Muslim fanatic, many more would have died. If a good shooter would have been in Tuscon, perhaps fewer would have died. Banning ownership of handguns in this country would only open the door to much more uncontrolled violence by those who owned them illegally. Do you think that all of those brothers in the Hood are going to give up their piece just because some legislator says it’s illegal? Every day, the AJC has one or more headlines depicting some gang violence, home break in or some rapper group taking each other out in a night club. Do you think that that is going to stop? Neither do most NRA members and they want the right to protect themselves and their families against this wanton violence. There’s some bad s*it going on out there.

JKL2

March 18th, 2011
8:55 am

Bob- Everyone knows that strict gun control laws make places safer, Chicago and DC are good examples.

Don’t let facts get in the way of the liberal agenda. Guns are evil. I’m sure granny will come up with some link to huffington post telling you so.

National Hand Grenade Association

March 18th, 2011
8:55 am

Just wait until some crazy disaster happens like in Japan.

Shoot that nuclear reactor and put it out of its misery.

@@

March 18th, 2011
8:56 am

Normal:

He beat her up pretty badly…broke her nose and dislocated her shoulder. Stomped on her a coupl’a times. No doubt she feared for her life. I can only imagine.

I’ll be sure an tell her that you think her fear is unjustified.

WOW

March 18th, 2011
8:57 am

Hey Jay

Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the land and yet they have the highest gun crime in the land.

The government is incapable of doing anything about gun violence. You can have all the laws in the land but the federal and local governments can not do anything about it.

Joel Edge

March 18th, 2011
8:57 am

WOW@8:54
Yeah, I don’t expect the restraint of the Japanese from their American counterparts. I am in awe of the Japanese right now.

Jay

March 18th, 2011
8:57 am

I don’t doubt that you get calls all the time warning you about that, WOW. In fact, it confirms my thesis.

But what have the Dems and Obama actually done to justify that claim?

Remember when Obama first took office, and the NRA — backed by the gun industry — and the talk radio crowd started the hysteria that he was going to ban all guns and ammunition? It caused a buying spree on guns and ammo, just as the industry intended.

The gun crowd got played, badly, by its own supposed champions. They got used and abused and fooled.

Moderate Line

March 18th, 2011
8:58 am

Have you seen how safe it is in Chicago.
++++++
Here are the worse states for homicide. The south pretty much dominates this area.

Louisiana 11.8
New Mexico 8.7
Maryland 7.7
Tennessee 7.3
Alabama 6.9
Mississippi 6.4
Missouri 6.4
South Carolina 6.3
Michigan 6.3
Oklahoma 6.2
Arkansas 6.2
Illinois 6.0
Nevada 5.9
Georgia 5.8
Florida 5.5

WOW

March 18th, 2011
8:58 am

“nope, it’s the lesson that separates the real from the faux belivers.”

Never a dull moment in the life of Granny Godzilla.

Moderate Line

March 18th, 2011
9:00 am

Here are the best states for homicide rate. Not a single southern state in the mix.

South Dakota 2.6
Massachusetts 2.6
Wisconsin 2.5
Wyoming 2.5
Nebraska 2.2
Oregon 2.2
Maine 2.0
Hawaii 1.7
North Dakota 1.5
Minnesota 1.4
Idaho 1.4
Utah 1.3
Vermont 1.1
Iowa 1.1
New Hampshire 0.8

WOW

March 18th, 2011
9:01 am

“But what have the Dems and Obama actually done to justify that claim?’

Not much, which is why I rarely donate money.

“and the talk radio crowd started the hysteria that he was going to ban all guns and ammunition?”

Indeed I do and I remember going to a gun show in GA with a relative to buy a hand gun. One gun dealer told me that the greatest thing to ever help his business was Obama. I kind of laughed and then kind of looked away because he gave me an eat crap look.

“The gun crowd got played, badly, by its own supposed champions. ‘

Eh, not really Jay. You can never go wrong with stocking up on .50 caliber rifles and scopes.

Anyway, the same can be said about the left because Obama has done almost the exact opposite for the left.

IE: Carrying on Bush policies.

WOW

March 18th, 2011
9:02 am

“Have you seen how safe it is in Chicago.’

Chicago isn’t a state and isn’t the size of a state.

independent thinker

March 18th, 2011
9:03 am

Our legislature is a bunch of fools bought and paid for by the NRA -at least they are finally out in the open about the fact that they are just water carriers for the NRA. Until some governmental body regulates the licensure of guns separate from the seller there is no hope and any crazy or wholesale purchaser of “saturday night special” can get any gun they want in this state.
Those bozos in the legislature could care less about public safety. How many people have been attacked and killed in a church or the airport parking garage? Give me a break -go back to imprisoning women and doctors for miscarriages and abortions or gay marriage- to hell with the budget, jobs or education. That would involve some intelligence.

WOW

March 18th, 2011
9:04 am

Jay

OFF TOPIC question: Did you happen to see a spat between me and Keep up the Green Unicorn? You need to keep an eye out for him because of his weird threats to hack into computers etc. Also, there were several other folks who saw what I saw and they also told him to take a hike.

Bottom line: The guy reminds me of Jared Loughner.

Yota

March 18th, 2011
9:05 am

The NRA isn’t under attack. Gun ownership is. Every time we have a tragic shooting, nobody blames the NRA. All fingers point to the gun and how someone could have bought a gun. But Democrats are careful to not tread too deeply politically on the anti-gun topic when they run for election. They know that’s a political firecracker. But yeah, those anti-gun laws in Chicago and Washington DC have done wonders, haven’t they.

For the record, background checks should be a must and everyone I know who has a concealed permit always has it on his/her person at all times like a driver’s license whether or not they are carrying. Same thing for people with hunting licenses, fishing licenses, etc. that I know. But I’m a little confused befuddled on this scenario in Jay’s world:

“What happens if a law enforcement officer spots and intercepts a person carrying a concealed weapon?”

If it’s concealed, what does the cop have, X-ray vision? Now if it’s some redneck in a tank top and shorts, I just might see the concealment becoming unconcealed. Otherwise that argument makes no sense whatsoever. I’d challenge anyone to tell whether or not I’m packing a .25 strapped to my ankle in long pants or a .45 holstered under my arm while wearing a leather bomber jacket. Can anyone tell if the Secret Service is packing sub-machine guns under their suits? That’s what I thought.

And to Jimmy62: it will be a cold day in media hell before you ever see a Democrat liberal or the main stream [liberal] media report the death threats on Walker and those who support him. Look at how cute Time Magazine put it, and imagine if The Wall Street Journal had a similar headline over a Democrat who did something they didn’t agree with – the Left would be calling for WSJ resignations:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2058601,00.html

By the way, don’t we have more important things to discuss than the NRA these days? Like Obama’s bracket picking? Like a stuck ten percent unemployment figure? Food and oil prices spiraling upwards? A jobless non-recovery? Record unsustainable debt? Never mind the global calamities. It seems to me the left these days is adamant on deflecting the failures, indecisions, and incompetence of the current leadership by Democrats both in the White House and Senate. And then there’s Chuckie Schumer doing the cunning little typical liberal thing and morphing a new catch-phrase in an attempt to make a negative innuendo stick:

“‘The budget fight going on here is not really about budget cuts. The conservative Republicans in the House are showing themselves to be Scott Walker Republicans,’” Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said on a conference call March 15.”

“Scott Walker Republicans.”

Cute. I like it.

@@

March 18th, 2011
9:05 am

Doggone:

Yeah, because it’s SO important for unconvicted felons like that guy that shot up the courthouse and killed a judge to be able to carry a gun until they are found guilty.

I assume you’re talking about Brian Nichols. He was incarcerated the whole time.

Wonder of wonders…I’m opposed to people IN jail having guns although it would cut down on the cost of incarceration and legal representation.

J/K