Video: NRA adds 100,000 paid memberships in 18 days

posted at 2:01 pm on January 10, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Surprised? I’m not, after the full-court press that has more closely resembled a witch hunt than a policy debate in the media. The overwhelming unfairness of how gun owners have been vilified in the past three weeks and the aggressiveness of policymakers to demand laws that still can’t get majority support in the wake of the Newtown shooting make this outcome all but inevitable. If one wants to see what a political backlash looks like, keep watching:

The National Rifle Association has gained more than 100,000 new members in the last 18 days, the organization told POLITICO’s Playbook on Thursday.

The number of paid new members jumped from 4.1 million to 4.2 million in that time frame.

“Our goal is to get to 5 million before this debate is over,” the NRA told POLITICO’s Mike Allen. …

“We are willing to talk to policymakers about any reasonable proposals and plans,” an NRA official said in the Playbook report, regarding the upcoming meeting with Biden. “However, the NRA is hearing not just from Beltway elites and the chattering class, but real Americans all over the country that are hoping the NRA is not going to compromise on any of the principles of the Second Amendment, nor are we going to support banning guns. But we’re willing to listen.”

Politico had earlier reported low expectations for the NRA-Joe Biden tête-a-tête, but perhaps this might drive them even lower:

Vice President Joe Biden and the NRA are sitting down Thursday morning to talk gun control. Up next for a talk: Wal-Mart.

But don’t be fooled that the high-profile meetings are going to get much done.

The National Rifle Association doesn’t want new gun laws. And Wal-Mart sells a lot of guns, and has a lot of gun owners for customers, so the retail giant doesn’t want to look too close to the White House’s anti-gun push either, one source familiar with the company’s stance said.

“Gun sales are going through the roof after the shooting. It’s one of the fastest-selling items right now,” the source said. Wal-Mart wants to be helpful to the White House, but “when it contradicts sales, that’s where it stops.”

Wal-Mart spokesman David Tovar disputed the source and his claim. “We have been and continue to be very engaged in the discussions as the administration and Congress work toward a consensus on the right path forward,” Tovar said. “We are prepared to comply with whatever the law says.”

The NRA publicly has committed to engaging policymakers on reasonable proposals.  When the debate becomes more reasonable and less hysterical and demagogic, the NRA will be easy to find.  They’ll be the group that keeps getting more popular with each demand for gun grabs.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:11 PM

Read, above, the last part of the quote, from article which’s link doesn’t go through – the NRA were a big threat to Obama’care’ and Reid placated them.

Thus, the NRA is culpable in passing Obama’care’.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:13 PM

To reiterate, that tiny statement in Obama’care’ can be removed by inserting a line in any law, at any time. It’s as easy to remove as it was to insert back then.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:14 PM

So, the NRA could have stopped Obama’care’, but didn’t?

May Reid and they go to Hades.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:09 PM

Exactly, what the NRA negotiated, can be removed by executive order with a stroke of the pen…but it won’t, a bigger bill, with even greater sanctions will be pushed, and pushed, and pushed…until it passes…and the NRA could have stopped Reid.

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:14 PM

But you have to be present in order to make the argument, not sitting in a corner writing outraged OpEds on the Internet.

JohnTant on January 10, 2013 at 3:13 PM

Condescention is indignant.

The NRA has all the fourms it wants, without meeting with crazy uncle Joe, who s/b in a creche, with McCain, in Depends.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:16 PM

Or how about this :

The regime is only concerned about ” gun violence” now because white kids got killed in CT. There are black and latino kids dying in Chicago and Oakland and LA and DC and Baltimore etc . everyday , for years, and Obama never concerned himself with that gun violence. Not even in Chicago :(

burrata on January 10, 2013 at 3:09 PM

Obama doesn’t care about them. He also hates suburbia and the Midwest, so those are the ones he wants to disarm. He has said so, and I take that very seriously.

I’m not allowed to say all I wish here, but Oligula’s own words speak for themselves.

Marxism has never been about the rich. It’s always been about destroying the middle class.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 3:17 PM

forums

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:17 PM

To reiterate, that tiny statement in Obama’care’ can be removed by inserting a line in any law, at any time. It’s as easy to remove as it was to insert back then.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:14 PM

Someone stated the next multi-thousand word document will have that sentence vacated, check mated…it’s just a sentence.

But worse, the new laws that will be presented will be worse…it could have been stopped last election.

Now true, Romney did not court the NRA, nor any other “conservative” interest group…thus was the loss of someone like Perry, btw, Perry inherited his budget from Bush also…

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:18 PM

My God, you people are just aching for the opportunity to start shooting cops and National Guardsmen. Question: In your feverish fantasies of yours, what’s the endgame? Do you keep shooting until all law enforcement officers are dead? If your children survive these shootouts you dream of, what kind of country would they grow up in? Will it still be a free country, or will America be a land of armed camps?

Drew Lowell on January 10, 2013 at 2:19 PM

I know a lot of cops and military people who will be on our side of the line – upholding their oath to defend the Constitution – should it ever come to that.

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 3:18 PM

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:14 PM

Your argument assumes they would not have pushed, and pushed, and pushed ZeroCare until it passed, and that the NRA is an inherently conservative organization. I don’t see that in their mission statement.

stvnscott on January 10, 2013 at 3:18 PM

Marxism has never been about the rich. It’s always been about destroying the middle class.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 3:17 PM

Obama hates the middle like no other. He also had them snookered ahead of Nov. 6. Too late now.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:18 PM

Condescention is indignant.

The NRA has all the fourms it wants, without meeting with crazy uncle Joe, who s/b in a creche, with McCain, in Depends.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:16 PM

Not trying to be condescending. I’m trying to point out that if you want to be a policy driver, you have to deal directly with the policy drivers. The NRA doesn’t have much sway if they aren’t willing to go into the lion’s den and stand up for its members.

Being absent from the fight, even if the deck is stacked, isn’t helpful. It actually sends exactly the wrong message, especially to the low-info voters.

JohnTant on January 10, 2013 at 3:19 PM

With our right to keep and bear arms already terribly infringed and government already guilty of creating gun free killing zones more infringement is wrong.

I am not your subject.

Speakup on January 10, 2013 at 3:20 PM

And concilitory how?

This:

“We are willing to talk to policymakers about any reasonable proposals and plans,” an NRA official said in the Playbook report, regarding the upcoming meeting with Biden.

The argument has to be made, to their faces, that the 2A is a right and no EO can reverse it.

JohnTant on January 10, 2013 at 3:13 PM

They’re not making the argument….that’s the problem.

I’m not trying to be an ass here…you’ve obviously thought this through in detail…I’m just going to have to repectfully disagree.

The NRA really squandered an opportunity IMO.

Tim_CA on January 10, 2013 at 3:20 PM

Marxism has never been about the rich. It’s always been about destroying the middle class.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 3:17 PM

I get it…but maybe a little more accurately, Marxism never cared about the rich besides themselves…Marxists leaders have been plenty “rich”…it’s always about power and money. The middle class takes from the wealthy, because in a free society they can displace them.

But, you gist is correct, it was never to protect the other “rich”, but only about creating power and wealth for themselves.

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:20 PM

The NRA doesn’t have much sway if they aren’t willing to go into the lion’s den and stand up for its members.

JohnTant on January 10, 2013 at 3:19 PM

Biden should never be acknowledged as a “lion”. He s/b shut up. For that the NRA could go on any show.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:20 PM

My God, you people are just aching for the opportunity to start shooting cops and National Guardsmen. Question: In your feverish fantasies of yours, what’s the endgame? Do you keep shooting until all law enforcement officers are dead? If your children survive these shootouts you dream of, what kind of country would they grow up in? Will it still be a free country, or will America be a land of armed camps?

Drew Lowell on January 10, 2013 at 2:19 PM

I watched a movie once where only the army and he police have weapons.

It was called Shindler’s List.

Agent of the Cross on January 10, 2013 at 3:21 PM

you people
Drew Lowell on January 10, 2013 at 2:19 PM

on top of being dubious and insincere and an imbecile, drew is racist.

tom daschle concerned on January 10, 2013 at 3:21 PM

Also, JohnTant, Biden is not “negotiating”. It’s all a done deal from the tyrannical end. Wake up, not only you.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:21 PM

Your argument assumes they would not have pushed, and pushed, and pushed ZeroCare until it passed, and that the NRA is an inherently conservative organization. I don’t see that in their mission statement.

stvnscott on January 10, 2013 at 3:18 PM

I hate Obamacare like few do, but even I would have raised my eyebrows at a gun rights organization doing battle against a health care bill.

JohnTant on January 10, 2013 at 3:22 PM

Exactly, what the NRA negotiated, can be removed by executive order with a stroke of the pen…but it won’t, a bigger bill, with even greater sanctions will be pushed, and pushed, and pushed…until it passes…and the NRA could have stopped Reid.

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:14 PM

An executive order cannot nullify a law. It has to go back to congress and be removed by legislation.

Solaratov on January 10, 2013 at 3:23 PM

on top of being dubious and insincere and an imbecile, drew is racist.

tom daschle concerned on January 10, 2013 at 3:21 PM

and “my people” are insulted.

Tim_CA on January 10, 2013 at 3:24 PM

An executive order cannot nullify a law. It has to go back to congress and be removed by legislation.

Solaratov on January 10, 2013 at 3:23 PM

True, but they can undo it as easily as it was inserted, via any law.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:25 PM

My God, you people are just aching for the opportunity to start shooting cops and National Guardsmen. Question: In your feverish fantasies of yours, what’s the endgame? Do you keep shooting until all law enforcement officers are dead? If your children survive these shootouts you dream of, what kind of country would they grow up in? Will it still be a free country, or will America be a land of armed camps?

Drew Lowell on January 10, 2013 at 2:19 PM

Project much, lefty?

Solaratov on January 10, 2013 at 3:26 PM

Obama hates the middle like no other. He also had them snookered ahead of Nov. 6. Too late now.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:18 PM

That presupposes that most of his supporters are truly middle class, people who worked their tails off to get a little ahead. There some such, to be sure. Then they started to complain when they saw their paychecks were smaller.

I say to them: Welcome to the reality you wanted but didn’t expect.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 3:26 PM

2013 STATE OF WYOMING 13LSO-0426

HOUSE BILL NO. HB0104

Firearm Protection Act.

Sponsored by: Representative(s) Kroeker, Baker, Burkhart, Jaggi, Miller, Piiparinen, Reeder and Winters and Senator(s) Dockstader and Hicks

A BILL for AN ACT relating to firearms; providing that any federal law which attempts to ban a semi-automatic firearm or to limit the size of a magazine of a firearm or other limitation on firearms in this state shall be unenforceable in Wyoming; providing a penalty; and providing for an effective date.

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:

Section 1. W.S. 6-8-405 is amended to read:

6-8-405. Offenses and penalties; defense of Wyoming citizens.

(a) No public servant as defined in W.S. 6-5-101, or dealer selling any firearm in this state shall enforce or attempt to enforce any act, law, statute, rule or regulation of the United States government relating to a personal firearm, firearm accessory or ammunition that is owned or manufactured commercially or privately in Wyoming and that remains exclusively within the borders of Wyoming.

(b) Any official, agent or employee of the United States government who enforces or attempts to enforce any act, order, law, statute, rule or regulation of the United States government upon a personal firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition that is owned or manufactured commercially or privately in Wyoming and that remains exclusively within the borders of Wyoming shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, shall be subject to imprisonment for not less than one (1) year and one (1) day or more than five (5) years, a fine of not more than five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), or both.

(c) The attorney general may defend a citizen of Wyoming who is prosecuted by the United States government for violation of a federal law relating to the manufacture, sale, transfer or possession of a firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition owned or manufactured and retained exclusively within the borders of Wyoming.

(d) Any federal law, rule, regulation or order created or effective on or after January 1, 2013 shall be unenforceable within the borders of Wyoming if the law, rule, regulation or order attempts to:

(i) Ban or restrict ownership of a semiautomatic firearm or any magazine of a firearm; or

(ii) Require any firearm, magazine or other firearm accessory to be registered in any manner.

Section 2. This act is effective immediately upon completion of all acts necessary for a bill to become law as provided by Article 4, Section 8 of the Wyoming Constitution.

http://legisweb.state.wy.us/20…ntroduced/HB0104.pdf

claudius on January 10, 2013 at 3:26 PM

Your argument assumes they would not have pushed, and pushed, and pushed ZeroCare until it passed, and that the NRA is an inherently conservative organization. I don’t see that in their mission statement.

stvnscott on January 10, 2013 at 3:18 PM

That’s why I put quotes around “conservative” when talking about the NRA, it’s considered a “conservative” because it takes a stand counter to the general liberal, regarding gun control.

But because it isn’t a political conservative group, they allowed Reid to skate, and now they will pay for it…

Your argument is valid, but removing Reid, the most powerful dem now, would have been monumental and a huge setback for Obama…

The fact is, good or bad, you can’t take a stand regarding gun control, and not take a stand either politically liberal or conservative…the NRA is going to have to become either a liberal political group, or a conservative political group, because that is the way this gun control (like Obama, Reid, Pelosi, et al) is being forced on us, two sides of the aisle…on an issue, like abortion, that should not be “liberal or conservative” but Constitutional or not.

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:27 PM

When the debate becomes more reasonable and less hysterical and demagogic,

Ain’t happenin’.

And there can be no negotiation or compromise with people who act in bad faith. We all know the gun grabbers don’t want anything “reasonable” that isn’t just a stepping stone to confiscation.

novaculus on January 10, 2013 at 3:28 PM

An executive order cannot nullify a law. It has to go back to congress and be removed by legislation.

Solaratov on January 10, 2013 at 3:23 PM

Well, assuming we have a government that follows the Constitution or at least has someone in that government who is willing to enforce the Constitution and stop the dictator from doing whatever he wants.
I’m not so sure we have anyone in the federal government right now who would stop Obumble from doing that. Reid sure won’t allow the Senate to stop or impeach Obumble. Boehner? I don’t think so.

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 3:28 PM

claudius on January 10, 2013 at 3:26 PM

I saw that earlier, isn’t that great?

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:29 PM

Same basic post as I’ve done earier (and hat tip to Mark Levin.) Where in the heck is the Republican leadership on this? Every news story that comes across my desk involves Biden & Co. getting all their ducks in a row, lining up their sympathizers and quislings in the media to push and promote their anti-gun meme. Why aren’t McConnell and Boehner parading all those individuals who were able to save themselves or others because of their access to firarms up and down capital hill? Where are the billboards showing the horrendous murder rates in cities like Chicago that are already fettered with these stringent anti-gun laws?

Our ‘leadership’ does nothing. They allow the liberals to set the tone and then they dance to it.

Disgusting.

CaptFlood on January 10, 2013 at 3:30 PM

Drew Lowell on January 10, 2013 at 2:19 PM

Dopus americanus

claudius on January 10, 2013 at 3:30 PM

But, you gist is correct, it was never to protect the other “rich”, but only about creating power and wealth for themselves.

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:20 PM

I really don’t think the elites hold any political doctrine. They’re about themselves only and alone. The results will be political definitions, to be sure.

But they think they are end-all and be-all. It’s not politics, but more about THEM.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 3:30 PM

“It’s the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of Needs” — Levin

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:31 PM

I can only respond to what you wrote, you thought getting in bed with Reid was “Pretty damn impressive”…and I stated, you were snookered to think that is impressive, when it’s something that will be gone in months, and Reid will be around for years, the NRA and you were pwnd…if you didn’t get that point, it’s only because you didn’t want to.

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:11 PM

Not2Bright, you obviously didn’t understand or didn’t even want to understand what I wrote and jumped to insults before and even after I explained it to you. Which is what you are obviously here for. You are obviously just butthurt that your anti NRA circle jerk was interrupted. The NRA is a special interest group. Not an elect Romney group. Not an elect only republicans group. Not a ideological purity group for ideas that extent beyond guns. The rate of gun ownership is increasing fastest in blue states. The NRA is winning the argument, you are just arguing for the sake of arguing.

MechanicalBill on January 10, 2013 at 3:31 PM

claudius on January 10, 2013 at 3:26 PM

This may be the final straw that convinces me and the hubby to move 12 miles over the border into the “wilderness”.

Lily on January 10, 2013 at 3:32 PM

http://legisweb.state.wy.us/20…ntroduced/HB0104.pdf

claudius on January 10, 2013 at 3:26 PM

I may just have to move up to Wyoming.

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 3:32 PM

I saw that earlier, isn’t that great?

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:29 PM

It made my day! Hopefully Montana, Idaho and Texas to follow.

Don’t comply, nullify!

claudius on January 10, 2013 at 3:34 PM

Drew Lowell on January 10, 2013 at 2:19 PM

You might recall, Drew, that it was one of “your people” – Bill Ayers, friend, mentor and ghost writer for lil barry obama – who, with no guilt, no regret and no mercy, declared that 25,000,000 or so people would have to be executed because they would not submit to communism in America.
And Ayers assumed that – logistics aside – it would be a fairly simple job, because the people would have been disarmed.

Twenty-five million people, Drew. To bring on the communist paradise that awaits all true believers.

Solaratov on January 10, 2013 at 3:34 PM

This:

“We are willing to talk to policymakers about any reasonable proposals and plans,” an NRA official said in the Playbook report, regarding the upcoming meeting with Biden.

On December 21 I think the NRA made clear what it thinks is a reasonable proposal and plan – training and placing armed guards in every school in America. Heck, the NRA even offered to pick up the tab for any school who wants to put together an effective defense program. That’s exponentially more than the Brady’s have ever offered in support of their gun grabs.

I just don’t read that statement as saying they’re willing to give up the store.

They’re not making the argument….that’s the problem.

I’m not trying to be an ass here…you’ve obviously thought this through in detail…I’m just going to have to repectfully disagree.

The NRA really squandered an opportunity IMO.

Well, they did earlier. The thing is, what should they be arguing against then? No proposals have yet come out of the Administration, and the NRA has already soundly rejected the Feinstein proposal. Just arguing against a hypothetical already has the potential of looking like Alex Jones did on Piers Morgan. :(

I see a negotiating strategy here…let the first guy come to the table with an offer and then you rip it to shreds. Right now I see the NRA making the same argument it always has, that 2A rights are what they are and any kind of a ban would be unacceptable. They can make more refined arguments once the farce releases its laundry list.

And I don’t think you’re being an ass.

JohnTant on January 10, 2013 at 3:37 PM

An executive order cannot nullify a law. It has to go back to congress and be removed by legislation.

Solaratov on January 10, 2013 at 3:23 PM

Yes it can, it can be written to override the law, and than the Senate has to take it up as an issue or accept it…what do you think the Senate will do, btw, a simple majority is all it needs.

Obama could make an Executive Order that all guns, greater than 22 cal. must pass a mandatory federal state test to determine their safety.

Or a Executive Proclamation, saying that all firearm manufactures must pass new stringent requirements established by the feds.

Simply making it all but impossible to produce a firearm that is effective.

An Executive Proclamation that no greater than 15 grains of powder in any bullet. Could be made.

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:37 PM

Biden should never be acknowledged as a “lion”. He s/b shut up. For that the NRA could go on any show.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:20 PM

Oh, I think you know what I meant. :)

Also, JohnTant, Biden is not “negotiating”. It’s all a done deal from the tyrannical end. Wake up, not only you.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:21 PM

Of course he isn’t negotiating…with the NRA. But this isn’t about negotiating with each other, it’s about preparing the political battlefield.

Biden and Obama know what they want to do, and they aren’t going to listen to the NRA, agreed. But for the NRA to have any clout with the Joe/Jane Sixpacks, they have to be seen as willing to talk to them, if only so they can go back and say “Hey, we sat in that room and told Biden you weren’t going to give up your gun, and he refused to listen. So here’s the next step….”

But if the NRA didn’t even bother to try, why should Joe Sixpack?

JohnTant on January 10, 2013 at 3:40 PM

I really don’t think the elites hold any political doctrine. They’re about themselves only and alone. The results will be political definitions, to be sure.

But they think they are end-all and be-all. It’s not politics, but more about THEM.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 3:30 PM

Yes, good one, the only political definition/doctrine they have are the ones that keep them in power…one doctrine they all subscribe to, and this takes us back to the topic…is to disarm the citizens.

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:41 PM

Right now I see the NRA making the same argument it always has, that 2A rights are what they are and any kind of a ban would be unacceptable. They can make more refined arguments once the farce releases its laundry list.

I sure hope you’re right…I guess we’ll see.

And I don’t think you’re being an ass.

JohnTant on January 10, 2013 at 3:37 PM

Appreciated…Nor I you…I just don’t share your optimism at this point…again, I truly hope you’re right.

Tim_CA on January 10, 2013 at 3:42 PM

MechanicalBill on January 10, 2013 at 3:31 PM

I was right…you don’t get it…move on and support the NRA supporting Reid, that has worked so well.

The NRA is great, but they need to learn a lesson…sleep with dogs and you get fleas…what was so “impressive” they will now have to work 10 times harder to undo.

They will stop Reid, but it will cost them and the membership dearly, when they could have stopped it a year ago…pay me now, or pay me later as the saying goes. And they will have to pay dearly now. But with 100,000 more people on our roles, they have that much more money to give to Reid and Reid will back off…for a price.

Want to know what that price is?? I would bet it’s not going to be to support a conservative bill. Maybe make sure someone is elected in an area they may lose, whatever it is, it will be costly to conservatives.

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:46 PM

I’ve said this before on other posts and got chastised for it, but here it is. I can absolutely envision a time within the next five to ten years where a standing Red State governor calls out his National Guard and State Police to fend off what he or she believes is a Constitutional encroachment by the Federal government.

I’m not saying this issue will of necessity be the catalyst, nor whether such a conflict would end in bloodshed, or in a reassesment of what constitues a state versus a federal right. I can, however, think of no other issue so likely to ignite that level of commitment and potential sacrifice.

CaptFlood on January 10, 2013 at 3:48 PM

The NRA is great, but they need to learn a lesson…sleep with dogs and you get fleas

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:46 PM

Exactly the point I’m trying (poorly) to make.

Well said.

Tim_CA on January 10, 2013 at 3:49 PM

My God, you people are just aching for the opportunity to start shooting cops and National Guardsmen. Question: In your feverish fantasies of yours, what’s the endgame? Do you keep shooting until all law enforcement officers are dead? If your children survive these shootouts you dream of, what kind of country would they grow up in? Will it still be a free country, or will America be a land of armed camps?
Drew Lowell on January 10, 2013 at 2:19 PM

The irony eludes Drew.

Cleombrotus on January 10, 2013 at 3:50 PM

Boycott the azzes at Costco and Wal-Mart.

[Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 2:13 PM]

Boycotting isn’t enough for businesses who actively assist the government in infringing on the unalienable rights of individuals. If a business is not willing to respect the rights of others there is no reason to respect the rights of the businesses.

Having a “big box” store is not a right. A big box store is nothing more than an assault weapon used on innocent, small and weaker businesses in the community. They wantonly kill Mom & Pop’s everywhere they go. They should be banned or maybe their capacity limited or both.

Certainly high capacity businesses should be limited. Sensible capacity laws should be enacted. There’s no good reason for one store to sell everything and anything they want. What’s with these stores who sell toys, clothes, appliances, entertainment, gardening stuff, and food, all in one store. It like some huge arsenal used to kill off other businesses. There should be limits how many different commodities in one store and high capacity stores should be eliminated or strictly regulated to prevent the senseless killing of other businesses.

The same can be said of high capacity banks and other financial institutions, media conglomerates, health organizations, etc. The vast majority of the public never exercise their right to have a big business and that is sufficient justification to restrict the right of those who do to sensible limits, especially if a minority, or even a majority, are afraid of the consequences of big businesses being in the wrong hands.

Dusty on January 10, 2013 at 3:54 PM

New thread up on Biden/Obama new implementation line

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:55 PM

The NRA publicly has committed to engaging policymakers on reasonable proposals. When the debate becomes more reasonable and less hysterical and demagogic, the NRA will be easy to find.
– Ed

The NRA (via Wayne LaPierre) has been just as hysterical and demagogic on this issue as anyone.
It’s sweet that Ed feels they’re oh so willing to discuss ‘reasonable proposals’ – but of course he knows they’ll be the sole arbiters of what constitutes one.
Here’s the first ‘reasonable proposal’:
Get rid of Wayne LaPierre.

verbaluce on January 10, 2013 at 4:02 PM

you people
Drew Lowell on January 10, 2013 at 2:19 PM

on top of being dubious and insincere and an imbecile, drew is racist.

tom daschle concerned on January 10, 2013 at 3:21 PM

Whenever I hear the words “you people” I think of Archie Bunker and this scene from All in the Family (paraphrasing):

Lionel Jefferson: “Who are these “you people” you keep talking about?”

Archie: “You people are you people.”

UltimateBob on January 10, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Reasonable argument, courtesy of RWM

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 4:10 PM

Here’s the first ‘reasonable proposal’:
Get rid of Wayne LaPierre.

verbaluce on January 10, 2013 at 4:02 PM

How moronic you are…ger rid of Biden, Reid, Obama?

Can you see your idiocy?

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 4:10 PM

The NRA (via Wayne LaPierre) has been just as hysterical and demagogic on this issue as anyone.
It’s sweet that Ed feels they’re oh so willing to discuss ‘reasonable proposals’ – but of course he knows they’ll be the sole arbiters of what constitutes one.
Here’s the first ‘reasonable proposal’:
Get rid of Wayne LaPierre.

verbaluce on January 10, 2013 at 4:02 PM

Get rid of Obama.

Night Owl on January 10, 2013 at 4:11 PM

Get rid of Wayne LaPierre.

verbaluce on January 10, 2013 at 4:02 PM

Why? Because you think his “armed security guards at schools” is unreasonable and hysterical?
Funny – Bill Clinton implemented the COPS program specifically to put armed guards in schools. Why do you libtards not regard Clinton as a hysterical gun nut for that response to Columbine?

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 4:12 PM

How moronic you are…ger rid of Biden, Reid, Obama?
Can you see your idiocy?

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 4:10 PM

Actually – I like your suggestion. Looks pretty reasonable to me.

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 4:13 PM

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 4:12 PM

Gregory and Obama’s kids are guarded. Some are just more equal than others in the leftists’ minds.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 4:15 PM

Archie: “You people are you people.”

UltimateBob on January 10, 2013 at 4:07 PM

I’m actually ok with that.
Viewed from the other direction, “you people” becomes “we the people“….

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 4:15 PM

Gregory and Obama’s kids are guarded. Some are just more equal than others in the leftists’ minds.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 4:15 PM

Of course.

Ya funny how the libtards hate the idea of armed security in schools – when all the top libs have their kids in schools with armed security.

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 4:16 PM

Here’s the first ‘reasonable proposal’:
Get rid of Wayne LaPierre.

verbaluce on January 10, 2013 at 4:02 PM

How moronic you are…ger rid of Biden, Reid, Obama?

Can you see your idiocy?

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 4:10 PM

It’s verbaluce, Schad.

Think about it.

Solaratov on January 10, 2013 at 4:18 PM

So, the NRA could have stopped Obama’care’, but didn’t?

May Reid and they go to Hades.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:09 PM

I doubt the NRA could have stopped Obamacare.

Resist We Much on January 10, 2013 at 4:20 PM

The NRA (via Wayne LaPierre) has been just as hysterical and demagogic on this issue as anyone.

verbaluce on January 10, 2013 at 4:02 PM

The Second Amendment says what it says; and means exactly what it says.

How “demagogic” is that?

Solaratov on January 10, 2013 at 4:22 PM

letget on January 10, 2013 at 3:04 PM

Thank you for posting this list. Looks like I have to make adjustments where I can. Will also advise others.

bluefox on January 10, 2013 at 4:26 PM

Why? Because you think his “armed security guards at schools” is unreasonable and hysterical?
Funny – Bill Clinton implemented the COPS program specifically to put armed guards in schools. Why do you libtards not regard Clinton as a hysterical gun nut for that response to Columbine?

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 4:12 PM

Perhaps verbaluce would feel better about it if Los Angeles, New York City, etc., took their cops out of the schools…since they already have cops assigned to patrol inside of the schools.
If it’s such a bad idea, maybe someone should tell Bloomberg about it.

Solaratov on January 10, 2013 at 4:27 PM

Get rid of Wayne LaPierre.

verbaluce on January 10, 2013 at 4:02 PM

For what? Winning the argument? You don’t understand that the NRA is only as strong as its membership, don’t you?

NotCoach on January 10, 2013 at 4:30 PM

NotCoach on January 10, 2013 at 4:30 PM

You do understand…*

NotCoach on January 10, 2013 at 4:33 PM

NRA adds 100,000 paid memberships in 18 days

I’m one of them.

tgharris on January 10, 2013 at 4:37 PM

Archie: “You people are you people.”

UltimateBob on January 10, 2013 at 4:07 PM

I’m actually ok with that.
Viewed from the other direction, “you people” becomes “we the people“….

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 4:15 PM

In that context, yes. But Archie was talking about black people. The Jeffersons were his black neighbors.

UltimateBob on January 10, 2013 at 4:43 PM

A lot of people are arguing about the provision in the Obamacare. Here is the provision in it’s entirety so that people know exactly what is said and not what other people tell you it means:

23 ‘‘(c) PROTECTION OF SECOND AMENDMENT GUN
24 RIGHTS.—
25 ‘‘(1) WELLNESS AND PREVENTION PROGRAMS.—
26 A wellness and health promotion activity imple2038
HR 3590 EAS/PP
1 mented under subsection (a)(1)(D) may not require
2 the disclosure or collection of any information relat3
ing to—
4 ‘‘(A) the presence or storage of a lawfully5
possessed firearm or ammunition in the resi6
dence or on the property of an individual; or
7 ‘‘(B) the lawful use, possession, or storage of
8 a firearm or ammunition by an individual.
9 ‘‘(2) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION.—None
10 of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the
11 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an
12 amendment made by that Act shall be construed to
13 authorize or may be used for the collection of any in14
formation relating to—
15 ‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of
16 a firearm or ammunition;
17 ‘‘(B) the lawful use of a firearm or ammu18
nition; or
19 ‘‘(C) the lawful storage of a firearm or am20
munition.
21 ‘‘(3) LIMITATION ON DATABASES OR DATA
22 BANKS.—None of the authorities provided to the Sec23
retary under the Patient Protection and Affordable
24 Care Act or an amendment made by that Act shall
25 be construed to authorize or may be used to maintain
2039
HR 3590 EAS/PP
1 records of individual ownership or possession of a
2 firearm or ammunition.
3 ‘‘(4) LIMITATION ON DETERMINATION OF PRE4
MIUM RATES OR ELIGIBILITY FOR HEALTH INSUR5
ANCE.—A premium rate may not be increased, health
6 insurance coverage may not be denied, and a dis7
count, rebate, or reward offered for participation in
8 a wellness program may not be reduced or withheld
9 under any health benefit plan issued pursuant to or
10 in accordance with the Patient Protection and Afford11
able Care Act or an amendment made by that Act on
12 the basis of, or on reliance upon—
13 ‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of
14 a firearm or ammunition; or
15 ‘‘(B) the lawful use or storage of a firearm
16 or ammunition.
17 ‘‘(5) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION RE18
QUIREMENTS FOR INDIVIDUALS.—No individual shall
19 be required to disclose any information under any
20 data collection activity authorized under the Patient
21 Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment
22 made by that Act relating to—
23 ‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of
24 a firearm or ammunition; or
2040
HR 3590 EAS/PP
1 ‘‘(B) the lawful use, possession, or storage of
2 a firearm or ammunition.’’.

This is what was in the this pdf of the bill purported by the website to be a certified copy of what was passed.

Now you can argue that it is a protection of the second amendment against government doing something or a law restricting the governemtn from ding something, but in effect it only says the Secretary of HHS can’t do certain things and, as such, doesn’t prevent Congress from thinking that another department should do what HHS can’t do.

In effect, all this provision did was postpone legislating something for the purpose of getting something else done.

Dusty on January 10, 2013 at 4:55 PM

I checked out this site that 44Magnum on January 10, 2013 at 3:06 PM posted. They have up to date actions going on in Congress about various gun control and info on who to contact. Great site with a lot of good info. Don’t know if similar info is on the NRA site or not.

http://www.gunowners.org/

Seems the Senate wants to change some rules. This brings us to the “nuclear option.” Your senator’s vote on the “nuclear option” may be the most important gun-related vote he casts during the 113th Congress. It may be the difference between whether Obama can secure Senate passage of gun bans, magazine bans, gun show bans, and bans on private gun sales.

I plan on contacting as many as I can. If they pass this rule change which would require only 50 votes instead of 60, then they can pass almost any gun control they want.

bluefox on January 10, 2013 at 5:04 PM

True, but they can undo it as easily as it was inserted, via any law.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 3:25 PM

Isn’t that the truth! They do it all of the time. I read most of the “fiscal cliff” amendment that Reid attached to the previous House bill (157 pages) They amended so much it was almost a completely different bill, LOL

If we put anything past Reid it’s at our peril.

P.S. Rand Paul said the bill appeared online 3 minutes before the vote!!!! 3 minutes.

bluefox on January 10, 2013 at 5:14 PM

In that context, yes. But Archie was talking about black people. The Jeffersons were his black neighbors.

UltimateBob on January 10, 2013 at 4:43 PM

I know – I grew up watching that show.

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 5:17 PM

claudius on January 10, 2013 at 3:26 PM

AWESOME!!!

bluefox on January 10, 2013 at 5:17 PM

Our ‘leadership’ does nothing. They allow the liberals to set the tone and then they dance to it.

Disgusting.

CaptFlood on January 10, 2013 at 3:30 PM

Oh, I agree. Seems the only time you would even know there are Republicans in Congress is when they want a vote, or they cast a vote with the Dems!!! Disgusting, indeed.

I wish Levin had a transcript of last night’s program. It was about the 2nd Amendment and the various States ratification and discussion on the 2nd Amendment.

bluefox on January 10, 2013 at 5:22 PM

I was right…you don’t get it…move on and support the NRA supporting Reid, that has worked so well.

The NRA is great, but they need to learn a lesson…sleep with dogs and you get fleas…what was so “impressive” they will now have to work 10 times harder to undo.

They will stop Reid, but it will cost them and the membership dearly, when they could have stopped it a year ago…pay me now, or pay me later as the saying goes. And they will have to pay dearly now. But with 100,000 more people on our roles, they have that much more money to give to Reid and Reid will back off…for a price.

Want to know what that price is?? I would bet it’s not going to be to support a conservative bill. Maybe make sure someone is elected in an area they may lose, whatever it is, it will be costly to conservatives.

No, you don’t get it. They don’t exist to elect conservatives or die trying. You might wish that was there job, I might wish that was there job. But that is not their job. They exist to defend and promote gun rights. They don’t exist to stop obamacare even if a majority of them want to do that. They are single issue SIG. If you want to attack other issues then go join those SIGs. If you want an ideologically conservative gun sig then go join one. But They aren’t going to alienate a percentage of their members by attacking something not related to their issue. But they can put all those members on one important issue and can’t be dismissed by detractors as political partisans.

MechanicalBill on January 10, 2013 at 5:23 PM

No proposals have yet come out of the Administration, and the NRA has already soundly rejected the Feinstein proposal….
JohnTant on January 10, 2013 at 3:37 PM

Have you seen what the Senate & House are working on now? Reid is up to his dirty tricks.

http://www.gunowners.org/a01042013.htm

http://www.gunowners.org/a01082013.htm

bluefox on January 10, 2013 at 5:29 PM

right2bright on January 10, 2013 at 3:46 PM

Reid will not back off of anything that is right. Why you even suggest that or think it is beyond me. Good grief!!!

bluefox on January 10, 2013 at 5:36 PM

100,001. Well renewal anyway.

Bmore on January 10, 2013 at 5:38 PM

A few famous quotes, which are permanently etched in American history:

“Don’t give up the ship.”

“Damn the torpedos, full speed ahead.”

“Remember the Alamo.”

“Let’s roll.”

and one that soon will be:

“I am not your subject.”

Mr. Grump on January 10, 2013 at 5:43 PM

But don’t be fooled that the high-profile meetings are going to get much done.

All they can get done in this time frame is look at plans people already had when Sandy Hook happened. Which means: gun bans, registration, more background checks, microstamping, imaginary “smart guns”, etc.

You know: The same BS they’ve been peddling for the last 30 years that has never worked.

Socratease on January 10, 2013 at 5:45 PM

My God, you people are just aching for the opportunity to start shooting cops and National Guardsmen. Question: In your feverish fantasies of yours, what’s the endgame? Do you keep shooting until all law enforcement officers are dead? If your children survive these shootouts you dream of, what kind of country would they grow up in? Will it still be a free country, or will America be a land of armed camps?

Drew Lowell on January 10, 2013 at 2:19 PM

Didn’t something like this happen in the past? Hmmm, I guess I’m old but I recall something in history class about the Presbyterian Revolt. Folks shot the representatives of the government and in the end it was all good… look it up… you may find it listed as the American Revolution.

Wackyg on January 10, 2013 at 5:51 PM

My God, you people are just aching for the opportunity to start shooting cops and National Guardsmen. Question: In your feverish fantasies of yours, what’s the endgame? Do you keep shooting until all law enforcement officers are dead? If your children survive these shootouts you dream of, what kind of country would they grow up in? Will it still be a free country, or will America be a land of armed camps?

Drew Lowell on January 10, 2013 at 2:19 PM

I know a lot of cops and military people who will be on our side of the line – upholding their oath to defend the Constitution – should it ever come to that.

dentarthurdent on January 10, 2013 at 3:18 PM

Yeah, these candy-ass libs who think the active duty military, National Guard and local police are just itching to start grabbing guns are going to be in for a rude awakening.

Kevin71 on January 10, 2013 at 6:02 PM

The NRA (via Wayne LaPierre) has been just as hysterical and demagogic on this issue as anyone.

verbaluce on January 10, 2013 at 4:02 PM

LMAO!

Drama queen, much?

Who said this, verbaluce?

“Banning guns is an idea whose time has come.”

Resist We Much on January 10, 2013 at 6:06 PM

Again, our forefathers did not author the 2nd amendment so we could shoot a turkey for dinner. The amendment is to protect citizens against a corrupt government.

Amjean on January 10, 2013 at 2:09 PM

My God, you people are just aching for the opportunity to start shooting cops and National Guardsmen. Question: In your feverish fantasies of yours, what’s the endgame? Do you keep shooting until all law enforcement officers are dead? If your children survive these shootouts you dream of, what kind of country would they grow up in? Will it still be a free country, or will America be a land of armed camps?

Drew Lowell on January 10, 2013 at 2:19 PM

Research history. Don’t think this country is immune to tyranny.
Look at our government. Not the voice of the people, that’s for sure. And who is going to protect your children? You? With a
table knife and pepper spray no doubt. Good luck with that.

Amjean on January 10, 2013 at 6:49 PM

will America be a land of armed camps?

Drew Lowell on January 10, 2013 at 2:19 PM

I was born in Colton, California, which is sixty miles east of Los Angeles, in San Bernardino, Riverside, Redlands area. And we had a grocery store in Colton, my parents were barbers, and we ran a pool hall and a bathhouse, for the railroads that ran through the opposite city of Colton, Union Pacific and Southern Pacific railroads.

I finished my high school in Redlands, and in December we just had opened the store and I listened, heard on the radio that Franklin Roosevelt says that Japan had bombed Pearl Harbor and I couldn’t believe that happened. This affected us through the fact that, we had a curtailment that we could not travel within three miles of our area. We had to just stay home and do what we could, and then we had orders that we had to either, prepare to go to relocation centers, or, actually it’s just a barbed wire fence all around the camp. It had guard towers on each corner, and machine guns were pointing in to camps.

I volunteered for the Air Force in 1943. But my draft card says 4C. 4C was listed as enemy alien. Cause they wouldn’t take me, so then when all of the campaign finally started, and the hundredth battalion was in such a good job, therefore President Roosevelt, crossed off the decree of 4C and classified it as first draftees, and so I was able to join the Army again, so I volunteered for the Air Force again. 1943, end of 44. I was called for duty, and I was on a train going east and came to this camp landing Florida. And I looked out, and I was looking for the airplane, and there was no airplanes in sight. No, this is the infantry. You are now in the infantry.

And President Roosevelt came to visit the camps, and the, all the Japanese soldiers, American soldiers, put them in a barracks, had machine guns around them, ’til the President left. Now, they’re already in the Army, why should they do this? I figured this is my country, I’m an American, I should be allowed to join the Army. So therefore that’s why I volunteered, to show my loyalty to the United States, this is, when my, kids, when I do have kids that grow up, at least they can be, looked up to, rather than downgraded as being a Jap. And I figured well, this will help to build our country up. Not only this for, Italians, Germans, they were, they didn’t go to camps, but some of them did I hear.

So, in order to prove our loyalty, I volunteered into the service. And my parents said, just don’t bring disgrace to the family. If you’re gonna fight for your country, you fight for your country. But don’t do anything, like, doing extra bombing things – or things that you shouldn’t be doing. And, so respect your country, and everything will be all right. So, this is why we tried to do, to show our loyalty. This is America. I’m an American and I want to be respected as an American, even though I look like the enemy. But, this is what we tried to do.”

- George Sakato

Remember: It’s Already Happened Here!

Resist We Much on January 10, 2013 at 7:10 PM

The NRA publicly has committed to engaging policymakers on reasonable proposals. When the debate becomes more reasonable and less hysterical and demagogic, the NRA will be easy to find.

Ed Morrisey

.
The NRA (via Wayne LaPierre) has been just as hysterical and demagogic on this issue as anyone.
It’s sweet that Ed feels they’re oh so willing to discuss ‘reasonable proposals’ – but of course he knows they’ll be the sole arbiters of what constitutes one.
Here’s the first ‘reasonable proposal’:
Get rid of Wayne LaPierre.

verbaluce on January 10, 2013 at 4:02 PM

.
Here’s my proposal:

Civilian, semi-auto models of military light weapons with military-capacity MAGAZINES, are the best firearms for the common citizen to check government dominion.
That means they are the best firearms to fulfill the INTENT of the Second Amendment.
.
Keep Wayne LaPierre, and get rid of Progressive Liberals.

listens2glenn on January 10, 2013 at 7:52 PM

I’m one of them. Yes, I finally joined right before Christmas. It was my Christmas gift to America.

Dollayo on January 10, 2013 at 7:57 PM

I’m one of them. Yes, I finally joined right before Christmas. It was my Christmas gift to America.

Dollayo on January 10, 2013 at 7:57 PM

Thank you for your service and I am sorry for the despicable treatment you and your community received.

Resist We Much on January 10, 2013 at 8:09 PM

I just joined for the three year plan…

elihu on January 10, 2013 at 9:00 PM

Marxism has never been about the rich. It’s always been about destroying the middle class.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 3:17 PM

davidk on January 10, 2013 at 9:54 PM

My God, you people are just aching for the opportunity to start shooting cops and National Guardsmen. Question: In your feverish fantasies of yours, what’s the endgame? Do you keep shooting until all law enforcement officers are dead? If your children survive these shootouts you dream of, what kind of country would they grow up in? Will it still be a free country, or will America be a land of armed camps?

Drew Lowell on January 10, 2013 at 2:19 PM

“Kid, see the psychiatrist, room 604.”

And I went up there, I said, “Shrink, I want to kill. I mean, I wanna, I wanna kill. Kill. I wanna, I wanna see, I wanna se blood and gore and guts and veins in my teeth. Eat dead burnt bodies, I mean kill, Kill, Kill, Kill.” And I started jumpin’ up and down yelling, “KILL, KILL,” and he started jumpin’ up and down with me and we was both jumping up and down yelling, “KILL, KILL.” And the sergeant came over, pinned a medal on me, said, “You’re our boy.”

davidk on January 10, 2013 at 10:01 PM

Tread Lightly Government Man.

Bmore on January 10, 2013 at 11:14 PM

verbaluce on January 10, 2013

….why do you embarrass yourself?

KOOLAID2 on January 10, 2013 at 11:28 PM

Marxism has never been about the rich. It’s always been about destroying the middle class.

Liam on January 10, 2013 at 3:17 PM

You and others still don’t get Marxism. Sadly so. It is nothing but about the rich. Those in power becoming rich and then dictating to the masses.

And commies are suing this naivete to their own advantage.

riddick on January 10, 2013 at 11:48 PM

The NRA (via Wayne LaPierre) has been just as hysterical and demagogic on this issue as anyone.
It’s sweet that Ed feels they’re oh so willing to discuss ‘reasonable proposals’ – but of course he knows they’ll be the sole arbiters of what constitutes one.
Here’s the first ‘reasonable proposal’:
Get rid of Wayne LaPierre.

verbaluce on January 10, 2013 at 4:02 PM

First line of defense for a Liberal: Both sides are at fault.

Second Line of defense: He hit me back first!

Last of line of defense: You’re just a doody head.

Verb just hit all three here kids.

Fighton03 on January 11, 2013 at 1:32 AM

Certainly – their job is to inform all what the 2nd stands for, starting with Obama, Biden and the media, on-going, with NO exceptions.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2013 at 2:54 PM

They only need to appear to inform those guys. They’re the enemy and ‘education’ will not help that. We need to educate middle and younger america. Start with the ones who aren’t locked in yet. But without a media mouthpiece that will be hard. Teach your neighbors kid firearm safety. Best way to preserve the right.

Fighton03 on January 11, 2013 at 1:36 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3