The Gun Lobby's Two Faces on Judge Sotomayor

With confirmation hearings for Judge Sonia Sotomayor scheduled for next month, it is worth noting the gun lobby's disingenuous -- and surprisingly muted -- reaction to her nomination so far.

On the eve of those hearings, the National Rifle Association still has not decided whether to score Senate votes on her confirmation.

Up to now, the NRA has instead taken a more timid official line against Judge Sotomayor, while apparently outsourcing a much harsher line of attack to members of its Board of Directors who speak on behalf of other organizations which have comparatively little to do with guns.

For example, one official NRA spokesperson said, "The rulings [Judge Sotomayor] has made are troubling, and concern us," while their top lobbyist has said,

We still have serious concerns about positions she's taken in the past, and the answer as far as following precedent [in the Supreme Court's Heller decision] is somewhat meaningless, because it does not answer the question of where she stands on the fundamental right of law-abiding Americans to keep and bear arms.

These statements are remarkably weak, especially compared to the vitriol coming from prominent members of the NRA Board of Directors.

Take Ken Blackwell, for example, who recently wrote that President Obama's nomination of Judge Sotomayor "declares war on America's gun owners."

Pulling no punches, Blackwell said "President Obama has nominated a radically anti-Second Amendment judge to be our newest Supreme Court justice" and warned that red state Democratic "senators will jeopardize their seats if they vote to support an anti-gun radical for the Supreme Court."

While Blackwell -- a former officer holder in Ohio and unsuccessful candidate for Chair of the Republican National Committee -- now identifies himself as a Senior Fellow of the American Civil Rights Union or the Family Research Council in this context, he neglects to disclose that he is also an elected NRA Board member.

Meanwhile, a letter submitted by an organization calling itself the "Third Branch Conference," calls on Republican Senators to filibuster Judge Sotomayor's nomination. Among the co-signers of this letter are David Keene -- the NRA's newly-elected first vice president and president of the American Conservative Union -- and Grover Norquist, longtime NRA Board member and president of Americans for Tax Reform. Neither notes their high-level NRA connection in this context.

NRA officials seem to say one thing while their surrogates say another, indicating that either NRA leaders are afraid of showing their weakness on this vote, or they have lost control of their message -- or both.

So far, the only open and direct anti-"gun control" opposition to Judge Sotomayor's nomination seems to be from Gun Owners of America, who call her "a politically correct lover of centralized government power" and a judge who "has racked up an anti-Second Amendment record and has displayed contempt for the rule of law under the Constitution."

Echoing Ken Blackwell, GOA Executive Director Larry Pratt said, "A vote for her says you don't really support the Second Amendment."

Make no mistake, the gun lobby's histrionics about Judge Sotomayor ignore her record as a distinguished jurist who practices judicial restraint and who interprets the Second Amendment narrowly -- unlike the activist majority in the Heller case.

As a former prosecutor who saw the effects of easy access to guns up close, her experience promises to bring a real-world understanding of the effects of gun violence to the Supreme Court.

That said, given the National Rifle Association's alleged power to rule Congress "with an iron fist," I am pleasantly surprised that their official position is so weak and apparently divided on a nominee who many gun advocates -- including NRA Board members -- are certain is a grave threat to Second Amendment rights.

We'll see during Judge Sotomayor's confirmation hearings how much stock, if any, NRA officials take in their legendary influence over Congress -- this time, whether they have the spine to score Senators on a vote that really matters.

(Note to readers: This entry, along with past entries, has been co-posted on bradycampaign.org/blog and the Huffington Post.)

Comments

[Thirdpower]

Fairfax, Va. – Two-thirds of the nation’s attorneys general have filed an amicus brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to grant certiorari in the case of NRA v. Chicago and hold that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This bi-partisan group of 33 attorneys general, along with the Attorney General of California in a separate filing, agrees with the NRA’s position that the Second Amendment protects a fundamental individual right to keep and bear arms in the home for self-defense, disagreeing with the decision recently issued by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit..

The Seventh Circuit claimed precedent bound it from holding in favor of incorporation of the Second Amendment. However, it should have followed the lead of the recent Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Nordyke v. King, which found that those cases don't prevent the Second Amendment from applying to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. The Seventh Circuit opinion upholds current bans on the possession of handguns in Chicago and Oak Park, Illinois.

California attorney general Edmund G. Brown Jr. is filing a separate brief arguing that the Supreme Court should take up NRA’s appeal and hold that the Second Amendment is incorporated against the States.

http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=12654

[Thirdpower]

The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S.

Britain's violent crime record is worse than any other country in the European union, it is revealed today.

Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa - widely considered one of the world's most dangerous countries.

The figures comes on the day new Home Secretary Alan Johnson makes his first major speech on crime, promising to be tough on loutish behaviour.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html

How's that gun control working out for them?

[Allaboutlinoge]

This has been debunked soooo many times.

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2003/10/1020.php

[kaveman4]

Uh, I clicked on your link and then on the 2 hyper links in the story. This is what I found.

"Footballer jailed for life years after being cleared new
It was the first case under new rules in which a defendant has been convicted after having been acquitted

Jealous partner guilty of strangling his lover "

"October 20, 2003
EVAN COYNE MALONEY'S NEW VIDEO, When Protesters Attack (from the Palestinian rally at Rutgers where there was officially no violence or disorder) is up. View it and judge for yourself."

How this is relevent, I'm not sure.

[Thirdpower]

Hmm. Data compiled by the European Commission From 1997 through 2007 compared to a post from 2003, before the time it had been discovered that the UK police were fabricating their crime data.

[mike102]

"This has been debunked soooo many times."

No it hasn't, Jade. The last time you tried, you presented the same incomplete info that jimbob is trying to get away with. As I recall, you got clobbered in a similar manner.

You're getting lazy.

But Happy 4th, or happy May Day Parade (whichever applies), anyway.

[djkrlsn]

Since the British laws are bans on complete classes of firearms, and the Australian laws are as bad--not only are these laws unconstitutional, they have done nothing to reduce crime. Other than the fact that you are obviously being petty, is there a logical reason for you to have had posted as much as you have on laws that would not survive constitutional challenge?

[Thirdpower]

Lumberton, North Carolina

From the Fayetteville Observer of June 29, 2009

Business owner shoots intruder

A store owner shot and wounded a man who broke into his business on West Fifth Street Monday morning, police said.

The names of the men involved were not available.

The shooting was reported between 3 and 4 a.m. at The Auction House, said Lt. Johnny Barnes of the Lumberton Police Department.

The man who broke in threatened the store owner with a tire iron, Barnes said. The owner then shot the man in the leg, Barnes said.

The wounded man was taken to Southeastern Regional Medical Center, Barnes said.

The wounded man will be charged with breaking and entering, Barnes said.

[Thirdpower]

Clarksdale, Mississippi

From My Fox Memphis of June 18, 2009

Clarksdale Store Owner Kills Robber

A Clarksdale, Miss. convenience store owner shot and killed an armed robber Wednesday evening.

According to Captain Robbie Linley with Clarksdale Police, 31-year old Joey Barron held up a store with a handgun on the 1600-block of N. State Street. Barron took cash and some prescription drugs, and was then shot once by the store's owner.

Barron was transported to the Northwest Mississippi Regional Medical Center where he later died.

The store owner will not face any charges.

[Thirdpower]

Holly Hill, South Carolina

From the Times and Democrat of June 30, 2009

Homeowner shot intruder, police say

A security alarm went off at a Holly Hill accountant’s residence in the pre-dawn hours Tuesday, rousing the sleeping homeowner who grabbed his gunshot, confronted an intruder standing in his doorway and shot the burglar in the shoulder.

L. Glenn Littlejohn, 71, of 1244 Peake St. interrupted the suspect, Roosevelt Elmore Jr., at around 4:55 a.m. as Elmore stood in the doorway of Littlejohn’s home, according to police.

Holly Hill Police Chief Robert Wunderlich said an unarmed Elmore allegedly forced his way though a doorway into the kitchen of the victim’s home.

Littlejohn, after being awakened by the alarm, “grabbed his shotgun, went out the back door and went around to the side of the house where the suspect made entrance and confronted the suspect in the doorway,” Wunderlich said.

He said Littlejohn shot Elmore in his right shoulder with a 12-gauge shotgun. The wounded Elmore fled the scene, and Littlejohn called 911, the chief said.

[Thirdpower]

Millions of crimes are being left out of official Government statistics, it is claimed.

The British Crime Survey ignores many crimes against people who have been repeat victims, according to the Civitas pressure group.

The survey caps the number of times a victim can be targeted by an offender at five incidents a year.

So, if anyone interviewed says they have been targeted more than five times a year, the sixth incident and beyond are not included in the report.

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=54591&in_page_id=34

[jimtom]

Source: guninformation.org

"MYTH: The crime rate has been skyrocketing in the UK since stricter gun control laws were enacted in 1996-1997.

TRUTH: The truth is that the UK police has changed its system for recording crime since implementing new gun control laws. This change in recording crime made it appear that the crime rate went up. The British Crime Survey, which was unaffected by this change, shows a decrease in crime. Go to the section under violent crime in the British Crime Survey. "The increase in violent crime recorded by police, in contrast to estimates provided from the BCS, appears to be largely due to increased recording by police forces. Taking into account recording changes, the real trend in violence against the person in 2001/02 is estimated to have been a reduction of around five percent." (from Chapter 6- "Violent Crime in England and Wales" of Crime in England and Wales 2001/2002- pdf file) Between 1997 and 2002, the overall UK crime rate fell by 27%.

Comments?

[Thirdpower]

Have more out of date anti-gun nonsense to copypaste?

[jimtom]

Do you have British data since 2002?

[Thirdpower]

Violent crime up 22% as Home Office admits police have been under-recording serious offences for ten years

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1079927/Violent-crime-22-Home-Office-admits-police-recording-offences-years.html

Public trust in crime statistics has been dealt a devastating blow after ministers admitted the figures have been downplaying serious violence for up to a decade.

The Home Office admitted that as many as one in five of the worst attacks has been wrongly classified in published figures.

[fishyjay]

The laws that the UK enacted were bans and confiscations of all civilian handguns and all civilian pump action and semiauto hunting shotguns. Your site calls these "stricter gun control laws." So when gun control advocates call for "stricter gun control laws," they may mean bans and confiscations of all civilian handguns and all civilian pump action and semiauto shotguns.

Hmm -- I often suspected as much. Thank, jimtom.

[djkrlsn]

Jay--I am surprised jimmy doesn't realize that the British and Australian laws have do major strikes against them--namely the laws would not survive constitutional challenge and said laws were complete FAILURES in terms of reducing crime

[fishyjay]

The gunowner advocates supported their claims at the time by linking to articles in almost every major British newspaper reporting that the crime rate had been skyrocketing in the UK. The British government responded to the public outcry by claiming that it had changed its system for recording crime. Editorials sneered at that response.

jimtom, there were several issues in which most major US newspapers reported stories that were at odds with the claims by the Bush administration. Whom did you believe?

[Thirdpower]

Especially now that they admit they've been fabricating the data for the last decade.

[fishyjay]

Rising crime, falling accuracy

The Telegraph
05 Apr 2003

What has happened to crime statistics? Once they were the gold standard of the criminal justice system.

We relied upon recorded crimes - those reported to the police - as a guide.

But, increasingly, the Government has come to rely upon the British Crime Survey.

Ministers began to notice that the BCS told a different story to the recorded crime figures: it was registering a decline. So, the survey became the new guide for the Government, talked up as the only true measurement of crime.

Total recorded crime rose by more than four per cent over the quarter. The Government finesses this by "adjusting" the figures to account for the new recording standard. And, lo and behold, they then go down. Instead of the four per cent increase, we discover that it has, in fact, miraculously fallen by seven per cent.

Needless to say, the Home Office highlights the two estimated measures of crime - the BCS and the new recording standard, which show a decline - and ignore the recorded crime figures that show an increase.

Or take violent crime, which the Home Office said "appears to have levelled off". The recorded crime figures show a 28 per cent rise in the final quarter of 2002. Yet after "adjustment", this declines almost to zero. Adjustments are always made to make the figures look more positive.

This statistical jiggery-pokery is making it almost impossible for observers to know what is going

[MajorTom125]

Didn't we go through all of this with Jade a while back?

"The increase in violent crime recorded by police, in contrast to estimates provided from the BCS, appears to be largely due to increased recording by police forces. "

Right. They are counting more types of violent crimes as violent crimes these days, like 'assault against a police officer', and others that you'd think they would have been counting all along.

This evidence was compiled by the Australian DOJ, not the NRA.

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/cfi/cfi115.html

Violent crime took off in the UK after '97.

[djkrlsn]

we did--and Guy got it wrong then as well

[jimtom]

Source: guninformation.org

"MYTH: Guns are used defensively 2.5 million times each year in the US.
TRUTH: Gary Kleck conducted a survey which concluded that 2.5 million people in the US each year use guns to defend themselves. One percent of the US population is between 2 and 3 million. So if only one percent of the survey respondents had answered the survey dishonestly that would make the results of the survey inaccurate by millions. According to the NCVS (National Crime Victim Survey) guns are used defensively less than 100,000 times each year (source). The NCVS surveyed over 90,000 people. In contrast, Kleck only surveyed about 5,000 people. Thus it would be reasonable to conclude that the NCVS provides a more reliable estimate of the number of defensive gun uses in the US. An article published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (Northwestern)87 (1997): 1430 revealed that using methods similiar to Kleck's, it could be concluded that nearly 20 million Americans have seen aircraft from another planet and that one million Americans have had contact with aliens."

Comments?

[JimInHouston]

Partial quote from the guncite.com website:

There are approximately two million defensive gun uses (DGU's) per year by law abiding citizens. That was one of the findings in a national survey conducted by Gary Kleck, a Florida State University criminologist in 1993. Prior to Dr. Kleck's survey, thirteen other surveys indicated a range of between 800,000 to 2.5 million DGU's annually. However these surveys each had their flaws which prompted Dr. Kleck to conduct his own study specifically tailored to estimate the number of DGU's annually.

Subsequent to Kleck's study, the Department of Justice sponsored a survey in 1994 titled, Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms (text, PDF). Using a smaller sample size than Kleck's, this survey estimated 1.5 million DGU's annually.

There is one study, the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which in 1993, estimated 108,000 DGU's annually. Why the huge discrepancy between this survey and fourteen others?

Dr. Kleck's Answer

(continued)

[JimInHouston]

Why is the NCVS an unacceptable estimate of annual DGU's? Dr. Kleck states, "Equally important, those who take the NCVS-based estimates seriously have consistently ignored the most pronounced limitations of the NCVS for estimating DGU frequency. The NCVS is a non-anonymous national survey conducted by a branch of the federal government, the U.S. Bureau of the Census. Interviewers identify themselves to respondents as federal government employees, even displaying, in face-to-face contacts, an identification card with a badge. Respondents are told that the interviews are being conducted on behalf of the U.S. Department of Justice, the law enforcement branch of the federal government. As a preliminary to asking questions about crime victimization experiences, interviewers establish the address, telephone number, and full names of all occupants, age twelve and over, in each household they contact. In short, it is made very clear to respondents that they are, in effect, speaking to a law enforcement arm of the federal government, whose employees know exactly who the respondents and their family members are, where they live, and how they can be recontacted."
(continued)

[JimInHouston]

"It is not hard for gun-using victims interviewed in the NCVS to withhold information about their use of a gun, especially since they are never directly asked whether they used a gun for self-protection. They are asked only general questions about whether they did anything to protect themselves. In short, respondents are merely give the opportunity to volunteer the information that they have used a gun defensively. All it takes for a respondents to conceal a DGU is to simply refrain from mentioning it, i.e., to leave it out of what may be an otherwise accurate and complete account of the crime incident."

"...88% of the violent crimes which respondents [Rs] reported to NCVS interviewers in 1992 were committed away from the victim's home, i.e., in a location where it would ordinarily be a crime for the victim to even possess a gun, never mind use it defensively. Because the question about location is asked before the self-protection questions, the typical violent crime victim R has already committed himself to having been victimized in a public place before being asked what he or she did for self-protection. In short, Rs usually could not mention their defensive use of a gun without, in effect, confessing to a crime to a federal government employee."

[JimInHouston]

Kleck concludes his criticism of the NCVS saying it "was not designed to estimate how often people resist crime using a gun. It was designed primarily to estimate national victimization levels; it incidentally happens to include a few self-protection questions which include response categories covering resistance with a gun. Its survey instrument has been carefully refined and evaluated over the years to do as good a job as possible in getting people to report illegal things which other people have done to them. This is the exact opposite of the task which faces anyone trying to get good DGU estimates--to get people to admit controversial and possibly illegal things which the Rs themselves have done. Therefore, it is neither surprising, nor a reflection on the survey's designers, to note that the NCVS is singularly ill-suited for estimating the prevalence or incidence of DGU. It is not credible to regard this survey as an acceptable basis for establishing, in even the roughest way, how often Americans use guns for self-protection."

(Source: Gary, Kleck and Marc Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 1995, Vol. 86 No. 1.)

[djkrlsn]

good posts JiminHoust­on--jimtom seems to think surgically implanting computer chips in people's lower arms to activate dumbguns will pass Constitutional muster.

[jimtom]

Source: guninformation.org

"MYTH: Keeping guns in the home increases personal protection.
TRUTH: Obviously, self defense is not a good argument against gun control since those who own firearms are actually more likely to be victims of homicide. Two studies published in The New England Journal of Medicine revealed that keeping a gun in the home increases the risk of both suicide and homicide. Keeping a gun in the home makes it 2.7 times more likely that someone will be a victim of homicide in your home (in almost all cases the victim is either related to or intimately acquainted with the murderer)" "Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home," New England Journal of Medicine, October 7, 1993

[Thirdpower]

OMG Kellerman. You can't be serious.

According to the same 'study', you're more likely to be a victim of homicide if you rent than if you own a firearm.

[jimtom]

That's right, shrug off the "source" not the data.

[MajorTom125]

TP, you beat me to it. I can't believe jimtom, of all people, has resorted to quoting Kellermann.

[Ohio9]

Dude it's so easy to see the flaws in the Kellerman study.

First of all, he never asked if any of the people in his study had a criminal record or histories of violence. Ignoring that factor alone is enough to ruin the study,

He also only counted incidents of someone getting shot for self defense, ignoring the fact that most gun self defense incidents don't involve shots fired or fatal hits if they are.

Finally, he never checked to see if the homicides in his study were actually committed with a gun kept in the homes of the victims, vs a gun brought there by someone else to commit a crime.

What good is a study that doesn't factor in those important issues?

[jimtom]

Source: guninformation.org

"MYTH: The crime rate has been skyrocketing in ...Australia since stricter gun control laws were enacted in 1996-1997.
TRUTH: The claim that following the gun ban Australia experienced big increases in crime has been refuted as an urban legend at www.snopes.com, a website that is devoted to exposing urban legends. "Given this context, any claims based on statistics (even accurate ones) which posit a cause-and-effect relationship between the gun buyback program and increased crime rates because 'criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed' are automatically suspect, since the average Australian citizen didn't own firearms even before the buyback." (source). Australia's homicide rate is lower than the homicide rate in the US and there has been little variation in Australia's homicide rate since their gun buyback (source). Attorney-General of Australia, Daryl Williams, pointed out in letter to Charlton Heston that "firearms are being used less often in murder, attempted murder, assault, sexual assault and armed robbery in 1998 compared with 1997." He also stated in his letter, "The 54 firearm-related homicides in Australia in 1998 equate to a rate of only 0.28 per 100,000 people. I have been advised that this compares to a rate which is in the order of 4 per 100,000 in the United States. Now that you have the facts, I request that you withdraw immediately the misleading information from your latest campaign." "

Comments?

[Thirdpower]

Beyond the fact that the website your copypasting from is a bunch of anti-gun nonsense?

http://www.gunsandcrime.org/auresult.html

Poor JT. Why do you feel the need to change the subject? Having problems defending your 'biometric' gun foolishness ?

[jimtom]

Poor JT. Why do you feel the need to change the subject? Having problems defending your 'biometric' gun foolishness ?

I see, everyone self-identified as pro-gun rights on this blog is perfectly free to "change the subject" by adding a new thread, but I'm not? As I expected, when specific data is offered, you guys would label the source with some unpleasant moniker, but not provide counter data and the source(s) of said data. Don't just refer us to some other site, cite the data you think counters Austrailia's data. Remember, it's Australia's data, it's just being cited by a source you dislke.

[Thirdpower]

http://www.cdnn.info/news/travel/t050417.html

Poor JT.

[jimtom]

From guninformation.org

"MYTH: The crime rate has been skyrocketing in the UK ...since stricter gun control laws were enacted in 1996-1997.

TRUTH: The truth is that the UK police has changed its system for recording crime since implementing new gun control laws. This change in recording crime made it appear that the crime rate went up. The British Crime Survey, which was unaffected by this change, shows a decrease in crime. Go to the section under violent crime in the British Crime Survey. "The increase in violent crime recorded by police, in contrast to estimates provided from the BCS, appears to be largely due to increased recording by police forces. Taking into account recording changes, the real trend in violence against the person in 2001/02 is estimated to have been a reduction of around five percent." (from Chapter 6- "Violent Crime in England and Wales" of Crime in England and Wales 2001/2002- pdf file) Between 1997 and 2002, the overall UK crime rate fell by 27%.

I'm sure there are people on this blog who would care to comment.

[Thirdpower]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/uk/4112427.stm

Most police forces in England and Wales are still not recording crime properly, an Audit Commission report says.

Just 17 of the 43 forces have reached standards set by the Home Office, with four giving serious cause for concern.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1086172/Serious-violent-crime-going-NOT-Home-Office-chief-admits.html?ITO=1490

Serious violent crime is going up NOT down, Home Office chief admits

See, that's 'truth'.

[twogunmojo]

for jimtom....per your snide comment downthread...you know we had a transformer at the verizon hub in nashville go bad...and everyone who had verizon lost service for a day....are you telling me that you don't support such a device in all gun-free zones..that way you could take your gun to the school but it would be deactivated when you got within a hundred yards of the perimeter.....you lost this argument jimtom...you lost all of them with the heller decision...

[djkrlsn]

Jimtom forgets that the Heller decision was not the first time that SCOTUS held that the RKBA is an individual right (it was about the 40th time) and that his militia argument was discussed and DISMISSED

[djkrlsn]

To get back to Judge SotoMajor--it seems that of the 7 appellate decisions that went to SCOATUS that she had a hand in, looks like 6 were overturned--so it appears her claim to being a "wise Latina" is either premature or a tad overblown

[kaveman4]

How long will it be before the BC comes out and calls anyone who opposes Sotomoyor a racist?

How many of these same people praised everyone who opposed Clarence Thomas?

[Toonadude]

Remind me here.
What did G.W. Bush call people who opposed his G.W.O.T. policies?

[kaveman4]

More goodies in their own words...

"Under Federal law, gun dealers may sell .50 caliber rifles to buyers 18 or older who pass a Brady background check."

Uh, why is that a problem?

I thought the whole idea of the Brady background check was to make sure weapons were only sold to those who...uh..­.well...pa­ssed the Brady background check.

Are you now saying that Americans who DO pass the Brady background check still aren't qualified to buy legal firearms?

Very telling.

[SchecterDV4]

"Under Federal law, gun dealers may sell .50 caliber rifles to buyers 18 or older who pass a Brady background check."

Since NO crime has ever been committed with a .50 caliber rifle, I am not too worried. I can't say I've heard of any 18 year-olds shooting down 747s from 6 miles away.

But I wonder. Are these the very same 18 year-olds who should have been marching in formation around the White House by now, carrying "military-style assault weapons"? They aren't doing that either, I'm afraid....­..........­..the little slackers!

But at least they have to go through a background check, unlike Sarah Brady's grandson. Grandmother went out, bought him a rifle, and went through the background check herself. This took place in Delaware (home of Joe Biden), where it is legal. But, according to the BC mantra, this type of transaction a straw- purchase.

"Do as I say, not as I do".

[djkrlsn]

The BC seems to have difficulties in the truthiness department, difficuties in understanding the term "reasonable gun laws" (exemplied by jimtom's wanting to require dumbgun tech needing surgery to function in combination with denying a right to self defense), and in general--the BC seems to have extreme difficulty in understanding the BOR.

[fishyjay]

SchecterDV4: "Since NO crime has ever been committed with a .50 caliber rifle"

Beware of saying that -- gun control advocates are fond of finding someone who ran a red light with one in their car, and claiming that it proves you to be a liar.

[OdinsEye]

It should be called the NRA background check since the NRA was the group who first lobbied Congress to study it.

[Ohio9]

"Under Federal law, gun dealers may sell .50 caliber rifles to buyers 18 or older who pass a Brady background check."

Uh, why is that a problem?"

Apparently you arn't familiar with the proud Brady tradition of complaining the most about weapons that are the least likely to be used in crime.

.50 caliber rifles have existed for over 100 years, but recently the Brady Bunch selected a particular target of their ire, the Barrett .50 cal. This is despite the fact that in over 25 years on the civilian market in America, the Barrett .50 has never been used in a single homicide!

You would think everyone on both sides of the gun debate would be proud of that track record. But that would require the gun control lobby to use logic and common sense. We know that would be too much to ask for.

[OdinsEye]

Not to mention that the Barrett .50 BMG rifles were originally made for civilians and only adopted by the military after seeing them in competition.

Or that the current caliber limit was put into place after the .50 BMG cartridge was well established and well known to Congress.