Last night, MSNBC agitpropagator Rachael Maddow made a big deal of Paul Ryan’s sharp exit from an interview. Maddow went to great lengths to contrast the aspiring VP’s respect for President Obama’s stance on gun laws (noted at TTAG) with the NRA’s recent ad attacking the Prez for “chipping away” at American gun rights. The kicker: Maddow’s assertion that President Obama wanted to grab guns like Nadege Dabrowski wants to study nuclear engineering. Yes, well, Gun Talk Radio guy Tom Gresham’s Tweeted link to change.gov puts paid to the idea that Obama is “hands-off” when it comes to gun registration or confiscation. Now it IS an old page, created when our current POTUS was box-fresh. But there it is. Or rather, here it is . . .
Address Gun Violence in Cities: Obama and Biden would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent.
meanwhile in Massachusetts…
At any gun show I’ve been to in Florida you can not conduct a private sale within the gun show. Obviously, it’s an easy matter of just meeting elsewhere to conduct the sale. So it should be called the “private sale loophole”, which happens everywhere, and stop slandering the gun shows.
The “gun show loophole” is code for eliminating private sales.
IMHO…I don’t think most Libs understand this term or even care. They’ve been trained to start frothing at the mouth when the term Gun-Show-Loophole is uttered… They get all emotional and logic goes out the window… “Think of the children… Quack, Quack….This is common sense, how dare you object… Quack, Quack”.
In NH we can do private sales at gun shows or the toys’r’us parking lot.
Liberal/Brady Campaign Logic:
0.7% of inmates who used a gun during their crime got it from a gun show. 39.2% of criminals who used a gun during their crime got it from an illegal/street source. One point the Brady has whined about incessantly is “closing the gun show loophole.”
So why are they so interested in disarming citizens, rather than criminals?
For those interested, link to statistic: http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp (Skip to “Gun Shows”under section “Background Checks and Criminals’ Sources of Guns”). Tons of other good stats in there, too.
FLAME DELETED
TTAG’s commenting policy: no flaming the website, its authors or fellow commentators.
Please address all comments about TTAG’s editorial stance or style to [email protected]
What in the hell is the Tiarht Amendment? I don’t think I’ve ever heard of that/read about it on TTAG.
From Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Tiahrt
“Tiahrt Amendment
[William Todd Tiahrt former U.S. Representative for Kansas’s 4th congressional district] Tiahrt is the author of the Tiahrt Amendment, which prohibits the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) from releasing information from its firearms trace database to anyone other than a law enforcement agency or prosecutor in connection with a criminal investigation. Additionally, any data so released is inadmissible in a civil lawsuit.[5] Some groups, including the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition, believe that having further access to the ATF database would help municipal police departments track down sellers of illegal guns and curb crime. These groups are trying to undo the Tiahrt Amendment.[6] Conversely, the Tiahrt Amendment is supported by the Fraternal Order of Police, as it allows municipal police departments full access to ATF trace data in any criminal investigation.”
In a nutshell, the ATF can’t release any info from their firearms trace database to anyone unless they are an LEO or prosecutor connected with a criminal investigation, and all released data is inadmissible in civil suits.
Basically, unless there is a criminal investigation going on, they can’t release the data to anyone.
Pulling up old news clips, speeches, and web pages and touting them as news and “proof” is really starting to get on my nerves. I’m on your side, Tom, but this makes you look like you’re grasping at straws.
You wouldn’t want to use his own words against him!
Sharing them like it’s new news is just tiresome.
Thank you gentlemen. Finally some sane voices out there. Also some who pay attention to what is REALLY going on. Kudo’s to your homework on Romney. That mealy mouth will say anything. Then turn around and do the opposite.
There’s no difference b/t Romney and Obama on the gun control issue. Just like there was no difference b/t Bush and Obama on the gun control issue. Bush opposed Heller; Obama opposed McDonald. And Romney has a long history of supporting restrictive gun legislation — going all the way back to his support of the ’94 AWB and the Brady Bill. Hell, he signed MA’s version of the same and did more than his part to roll back gun rights in that state.
I was at a gun show this weekend — all the “Join the NRA and Vote Romney” propaganda, t-shirts, and stickers made me want to puke.
Which is why I’m not planning on renewing my NRA membership after this year. If they had any integrity, they’d be promoting Gary Johnson – and with 75 million or so gun owners in the country, it would give Gary a fighting chance at winning and improving gun laws.
Exactly! I was an NRA member for years (I never did the “Life” member thing because I never trusted that their positions would remain consistent with mine) but I let it lapse back in ’02 or ’03 when the NRA did everything it possibly could to stop the Cato Institute from bringing the Heller case in the first place.
That said, if they’d endorsed Gary Johnson I would have rejoined in a heartbeat. That would have been the best press he could possibly get. And its not like Romney is going to do the NRA any favors b/c they endorsed him.
yeah, because Gary Johnson is such a winner…
He has about as much a chance as Ron Paul or Ralph Nader.
+1 NRA is in dire need of new blood and less political hackery. Romney signed a permanent “assault weapon” ban eight years ago–NRA takes his membership dues with open arms and endorse him.
I wonder what the NRA would do if Obama tried to become a member?
Gary Who?
When is he debating on TV?
How much money and air time does he have again?
You’re better off voting for None of the Above.
For 236 years good men have died for your right to vote; voting “none of the above” insults their efforts and sacrifice. Vote.
I don’t know about bush but Romney isn’t as bad as the media has made him out to be.
http://www.goal.org/newspages/romney.html
I must respectfully disagree with the conclusion reached by your source. Your source states that during his tenure as governor of Mass., “no anti-Second Amendment or anti-sportsmen legislation made its way to the Governor’s desk.” That’s simply not true at all. Romney signed MA’s AWB in 2004 — and it is among the worst AWBs in the country, no matter how he tries to spin it.
I also respond by directing readers to the below link, which sets forth Romney’s publicly represented positions on gun control since 1994 or so.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2012/Mitt_Romney_Gun_Control.htm
In all honesty, until there is an outspoken opponent of gun control that openly wants to repeal the laws that are unconstitutional, they are all bad. The status quo isn’t what we should be backing.
Ralph has repeatedly posted comments at this blog noting the same thing that Romney is not as bad as the media has made him out to be. Ralph, who lives in MA, wrote how the MA gun-rights groups have spoken well of Romney’s actual actions being pro-gun rights.
Also: “common sense” is two words, not one.
‘How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?’ -George-Orwell (1984)
I think it is interesting that TTAG chooses to parrot the line that Ryan had a “hissy fit” during the interview in question. As I understand it, the interview had already gone over its allotted time when the reporter began an incoherent line of questioning.
I watched the video. The reporter asked Ryan about gun violence….specifically he asked if Ryan thought we had a “gun problem”. Ryan answered at length that we have a crime problem and proceeded to give his thoughts on how to fix that. Then the reporter said something to the effect of “…and you would fix all that with a great big tax cut.” Ryan looked at him as though he had begun spouting gibberish…because the reporter was speaking gibberish, and simply noted “that’s strange” and “those are your words, not mine”. Then Ryan’s handler said the interview was over and Ryan got up to leave.
The whole time Ryan was calm the whole time. He did not raise his voice, was not rude to the reporter who was clearly trying to get a rise out of him.
So, Mr. Farago, did you watch the interview? If so I think we might have a different idea of what a Hissy Fit is.
Here is the Ryan interview, note how Esquire makes sure to include “hissy fit” in the headline. :http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/paul-ryan-local-reporter-video-13541378
Nary a hissy fit to be found in that.
Now THIS is a Hissy Fit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcWNsS6wEps
Point taken. Text amended.
Steve,
Thank you. I did not watch the video though I’ve read about it. I’m now going to watch it.
I have to agree, Ryan was very calm and collected, and spoke intelligently.
My personal opinion is Maddow was grasping at straws in order to make ratings or something along those lines.
God, guns, and gays. That’s how the RepubliCONs get your vote. The sky is not falling. It’s BS made up so you’ll vote against your own interests. You may think you are protecting your guns, but you’re giving up YOUR social security YOU paid into, YOUR medicare YOU paid into, etc.
Sure the Republicans play to people’s fears and worries. In the case of Obama and gun control it happens to be true that Obama has supported strict gun control legislation (admittedly the most egregious examples are in the past, not so much lately). But let’s not forget that Obama has also appointed two justices to the SCOTUS that are diametrically opposed to the 2nd amendment.
Sure, I would say that the NRA and some Republicans overstate Obama’s intentions and ability to enact gun control, but overstatement is in the eye of the beholder.
All politicians try to play to people’s fears. Most folks see it for what it is.
You also seem to be under the impression that everyone who reads TTAG is voting Republican. I am afraid that is not the case. At least until they get with the program and support Freedom and not expanding a Police State. Until they swear off War for profit. Until they come up with a credible plan for getting health care costs in line. Until they do those things… there are at least some of us that will take our votes elsewhere.
With an online name like TRUTHY what else can one expect?
Who cut $716 billion out of the Medicare trust fund?
They did not cut $716 billion from medicare! They cut waste, and decreased payments to hospitals (which agreed to the cuts) because if more people are covered with insurance less folks will use the ER’s for free healthcare. And they cut the payments to third party providers (supplementals and advantage plans) that are used by millions (like me) for their medicare! Which has had no effect on my medicare!!!!!
Gun show loophole = eliminating private gun sales.
Child Proof = crappy safety device which ruins functionality.
Alright Obama supporters, care to spin this one away?
On one hand, I agree that at first glance this looks like a pretty definitive anti-2A position.
On the other hand, it’s part of a package of pre-election campaign promises, and particularly where Presidential elections are concerned, those have a way of dropping by the wayside once the election is over. (This is true for Presidents from both parties, there’s no monopoly on this behavior.)
My position remains that actions speak louder than words (no legislation passed, nor has there been any call for anti-2A legislation by POTUS) and that Supreme Court judges are not at all reliable when it comes to predicting their rulings after they’re appointed. I’ll flip over to the “Obama is anti-2A” position the moment he calls for gun control legislation in a public statement. I have yet to see credible evidence that this has happened since he’s taken office.
His website *is* a public position.
AlphaGeek, difi already has a permanent AWB waiting in the wings. You and I live in California so for us the originol AWB never went away. But a vote for barry is helping to spread the pain to all the places that still have a skosh more freedom than we do.
I think AlphaGeek is determined to find out the hard way. Feinstein / Clinton / Holder and co. will get a whole lot more support from Obama than Romney, and they are definitely anti-gun.
AlphaGeek, thank you. Right on. It seems everyone is playing Chicken Little. ” Oh help me, the sky is falling”. Why is it so hard for people to pay attention to what the politicians DO!!! Not what they say.
Case in point earlier expressed. Romney’s record in Mass., nuff said there.
Obama signing two bills expanding gun rights…….plus executive order to strengthen penalties on illegal bulk sales.
Good article on the actions of both in the Christian Science Monitor.
Romney’s VP yesterday just said there are enough gun laws as there are, and today we see a quote from Obama’s website stating support for a renewed AWB alongside a private sales ban.
I don’t know where these people supporting Obama are getting their dope from, but they need to share the wealth.
The child safety thing is really annoying. If they really want to make children safe, try banning hotdogs, buckets, parents who let infants sleep on their stomachs, and having infants/toddlers sleep with their parents. That would save at least a thousand times more children than making guns kid safe. Not to mention the fact you can teach your kid to not touch a firearm without a parent but that would be parenting (something democrats think gun owners are incapable of doing I guess).
Just ban accidents.
Well the Supreme Court is thinking about outlawing garage sales or to be more specific it’s a tax on anything that wasn’t made in the USA… Even your used car if it’s not American made car could be subject to a tax when you go to sell it. This doesn’t surprise me that the Obama administration would like to make most guns outlawed and then have some POS that is childproof, shoot what is childproof? I think childproof means adult proof because the kids still get into what they are not supposed to or you hand that bottle of pills to your kid to open it. Can we just ban being a liberal and make liberalism against the law? I think that would fix so many problems and solve quite a bit of BS that is floating around in our government! Also we can’t blame the libs for everything, just 80% of it…
And, perhaps a little blame for the voters?
I have been reading all of the comments regarding this story, frankly it is a bit obnoxious to listen to. “Romney is just as bad as Obama on gun issues, Romney did this in MA, Romney did that when he was Governor” blah. blah. blah. Give. Me. A. Break. If you think Obama WON’T do those things in the next four years, you’re up in the night. You go right ahead and throw your vote away to some independent *cough* RonPaul *cough* hack that doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell in winning. For the rest of us in real-ville, I’ll take Romney.
…Oh, wait, is Ron Paul an Independent this week?… He was running as a Republican…, but now he is an Independent… even though… how many times has he changed his political affiliation?… and Romney is the flip-flopper on issues? Pish.
Some of you drink too much Alex Jones cool-aid.
First of all, whomever someone decides to vote is NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS! Keep on believing some R is better than some D, both of them have done such a good job running this country that everyone has a good paying job and the country is debt free. Oh wait, in real – ville we are on the verge of complete economic collapse. Who do you work for? The federal reserve?
Make firearms childproof/idiot proof/crazy proof/criminal proof? That legislation should be a doozy. Don’t think we got politicians that think much further than ban them all, guns that is. There, we made a law, problem solved.