The NRA is winning
With all of that as backdrop, there are at least two major reasons to think the NRA will emerge from the national debate on guns as a winner.
1. The NRA is already in the midst of a membership boom, as the actions taken by Obama — and, in particular, his executive orders — convince people that the threat of the government seizing guns or limiting gun ownership is real and, because it is, a counter-weight to that government is needed. (To be clear: Obama has never said anything that would suggest confiscation of guns is a possibility.)…
2. The likelihood is that whatever passes through Congress will be small, not big. While the NRA is fighting on all fronts at the moment — including opposing the executive orders signed by Obama — the organization almost certainly recognizes that some sort of measure(s) restricting gun rights is likely to be made law.
Given that, the NRA’s goal — unstated, of course — is likely to keep what Congress passes on the small side in terms of impact. So a ban on high capacity ammunition clips might be acceptable, but a new version of the assault weapons ban wouldn’t be.
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 Next »
and?
rob verdi on January 18, 2013 at 3:02 PM
The only reasons Obama hasn’t suggested confiscation are 1)it’s politically toxic and 2)it’s logistically impossible.
Doughboy on January 18, 2013 at 3:04 PM
Thank god for that.
Gatsu on January 18, 2013 at 3:05 PM
Acceptable to whom?
The Rogue Tomato on January 18, 2013 at 3:05 PM
Don’t worry, the creeps only seized the main gate. We still hold the towers so quit worrying, or something like that.
Limerick on January 18, 2013 at 3:05 PM
I agree with this, but, a caveat: the NRA is allowing **itself** to become the issue, which is not a good thing. They need to keep their lobbying campaign focused on the 50 million gun owners out there, and particularly, they need to play up the people who have used firearms to deter attacks on body, home, property.
Robert_Paulson on January 18, 2013 at 3:05 PM
Obama has done more to arm a million more Sandy Hook shooters in the past 30 days than any law will ever prevent.
Chuck Schick on January 18, 2013 at 3:06 PM
And the nra has a higher approval than bho in a poll!
L
letget on January 18, 2013 at 3:06 PM
Southern by choice22 on January 18, 2013 at 3:08 PM
If anything passes, I’ll be disappointed in the NRA.
Then again, I’m consistently disappointed with the NRA, so maybe WaPo is right.
Nessuno on January 18, 2013 at 3:08 PM
I dunno. Sounds like the NRA got its balls back and doesn’t care if anyone calls them racist for going up against Obama.
The Rogue Tomato on January 18, 2013 at 3:10 PM
Both reasons means that they must first push for registration while Lying that it won’t lead to the inevitable confiscation.
Galt2009 on January 18, 2013 at 3:11 PM
As I said, I’m all for a ‘ban on high capacity ammunition clips’. Since that won’t impact MAGAZINES, I think it’s a great idea!
michaelo on January 18, 2013 at 3:11 PM
Bill Clinton taught the WaPo to parse well.
A+
Del Dolemonte on January 18, 2013 at 3:11 PM
A ban on so-called “high capacity” ammunition clips is not acceptable.
FloatingRock on January 18, 2013 at 3:12 PM
Again, they’re referring to magazines as “clips.”
WaPo has no credibility on the issue.
UltimateBob on January 18, 2013 at 3:12 PM
There is no equally organized advocacy group promoting gun bans unfortunately. So like all advocacy groups, like the NAACP, the SIERRA club, and NOW, the NRA’s whole existence is to act politically and put political pressure on representatives.
So on one side, you got 50 million rednecks all chanting the same slogan. On the other side, you got what, Piers Morgan?
That is why nothing will ever be done. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. And while 50 million is certainly not a majority in a democracy, it doesn’t have to be. It is a loud enough minority to put more than enough pressure on the system.
keep the change on January 18, 2013 at 3:13 PM
Fixed that for you.
Gatsu on January 18, 2013 at 3:15 PM
I’ll be shocked if anything passes Congress. It’ll have to start in the Senate and they have to be terrified of 2014.
In the meantime, the anger of gun owners everywhere will build and will be taken out on Congressional Democrats everywhere. Add ObamaCare jacking up insurance rates (Aetna CEO said last week that some markets will see a ONE HUNDRED PERCENT HIKE) and you could have another red wave.
Chuck Schick on January 18, 2013 at 3:16 PM
And there you have it.
There is no difference between Adam Lanza and the other 50 million gun owners out there – to this crowd we’re all the same.
The fact that in a country of three hundred million, of which eighty million own two hundred and eighty million guns, the fact that roughly 17 mass shootings has taken place in the last 20 years PROVES we’re all Adam Lanza’s waiting for our opportunity.
It is YOU Chuck Schick that is an Extremist and an Idiot.
jaydee_007 on January 18, 2013 at 3:18 PM
Sure there is. It’s called the Democratic party with its many tentacles.
ddrintn on January 18, 2013 at 3:21 PM
The NRA is winning because despite the never-ending propaganda puked up by the media, the organization represents the wishes of the people. It’s Obama, the Left and the media who are pathetically out of touch with the reality of mainstream Americans. And when it comes to Second Amendment rights, there are plenty of Democrats who in agreement. The power of the NRA comes from the membership, ultimately. That’s why Obama will lose this fight. And all he and the rest of the Left-wing horde will manage to do is to reunite all wings of the GOP, especially libertarians. This is what’s at stake. Bring it!
cicerone on January 18, 2013 at 3:23 PM
I just read in an ‘online news source’ (I’m not gonna link, because is is so stupid) that you can buy a M134 General Electric Minigun online with no background check, no questions, no problems.
Gee, in that case, I’d get one……
But I don’t think I can afford the ammo.
LegendHasIt on January 18, 2013 at 3:24 PM
Hardly any democrat representatives want to touch this subject. It’s like social security.
keep the change on January 18, 2013 at 3:24 PM
Whoa! You really misread me there, or I didn’t word it well.
To OBAMA and his ilk, Adam Lanza and law-abiding gun owners are the same – theyre both criminals.
As a gun owner myself (including a gun banned by the 1994), we all know what a joke high-capacity bans are to anyone commiting to walk into a school and gun down children. The massive run up in sales underscores the point.
Chuck Schick on January 18, 2013 at 3:27 PM
I own a rifle banned by the 1994 AWB, I meant to say.
Chuck Schick on January 18, 2013 at 3:28 PM
And the lack of balls among your fellow libs is the fault of all them thar rednecks?
ddrintn on January 18, 2013 at 3:30 PM
Single payer has proven to be logistically unsustainable. That doesn’t stop him from advocating it. What I think you mean is he wouldn’t personally survive giving such an order.
Random Numbers (Brian Epps) on January 18, 2013 at 3:35 PM
I own a pistol banned in MA. It was banned because it was really cool looking. That’s the official reason not mine. You see, here in MA if a gun is cool looking it is claimed it will be more desirable to commit a crime with. So now I’m stuck with a 22 cal semi-auto target pistol that I can’t sell or transfer. At least it looks cool.
Dr. Frank Enstine on January 18, 2013 at 3:37 PM
Obama Executive Order Quietly Removes 1995 Ban On Using Federal Funds To Advocate For Gun Control…
Akzed on January 18, 2013 at 3:39 PM
In my case, I have a Mini-14 with the collapsible stock and pistol grip, as that’s what the A-Team used. Sort of ironic, as no one was ever killed on the A-Team. They just were thrown through the air.
Chuck Schick on January 18, 2013 at 3:40 PM
NY Mayor Warns Of “Waco-Style Standoff” Over Gun Control Laws
“Most people are law-abiding citizens and may go ahead and sell those or turn those over, but you’re going to have a fraction of people that are going to take a stand, and I can just predict a Waco-style standoff in some rural area and it’s not going to end well,” Gloversville, New York Mayor Dayton King (I) said about New York state’s new gun control laws that Gov. Cuomo recently signed into law. (source: WXXA-TV)
I’m sure they are hoping for hundreds of these.
Akzed on January 18, 2013 at 3:50 PM
Apologize, mistook you for a troll.
jaydee_007 on January 18, 2013 at 3:51 PM
The NRA is Everything that the Seria Club wishes it were.
jaydee_007 on January 18, 2013 at 3:54 PM
No, he’s only stated outright that he has a problem with people “clinging to their guns,” ergo he’d be fine if they had no guns to which they might cling.
What is it about well-adjusted law abiding citizens owning guns that makes these people so nervous?
CurtZHP on January 18, 2013 at 3:54 PM
you know, if it were to fall out of the boat on a fishing trip, someone from another state could “hook” it and take it home with them.
jaydee_007 on January 18, 2013 at 3:55 PM
S’alright.
Chuck Schick on January 18, 2013 at 3:57 PM
Notice they always assume a confrontation will happen in a rural area. In other words, it’s us mouth-breathing rubes in flyover country who won’t accept the dictates of our betters and go down without a fight. Notice they never say that about the gang bangers firmly ensconced within their urban borders. Notice too how their gun grabs never seem to affect that particular demographic.
CurtZHP on January 18, 2013 at 3:59 PM
You came across as a total douchebag. I was about to blast you pretty hard but jaydee got there first. I’m glad to see you just left something out of your original post.
single stack on January 18, 2013 at 4:01 PM
“Mολὼν λαβέ,” -Buck Ofama (R-Pennsyltucky)
Akzed on January 18, 2013 at 4:05 PM
What did I leave out?
Chuck Schick on January 18, 2013 at 4:10 PM
Being unfamiliar with 4th Generation Warfare, they live in a dreamworld where they can’t lose.
“Front? What front?” -Buck Ofama (R-Pennsyltucky)
Akzed on January 18, 2013 at 4:10 PM
65% see gun rights as protection from tyranny
…and let that be a lesson to you, MSM, at least two thirds of people realize you are a bunch of hack propagandists for the state. You can’t steam-roll us now anymore than you could in the tea party days. If anything, less so.
FloatingRock on January 18, 2013 at 4:20 PM
Leaving the clip/magazine issue aside, they are not “high capacity”. Since nearly all medium to full size frame semi-automatic pistols come with a 13+ round magazine, they are “standard” as in typical, normal, what comes with all the friggin’ guns outside of the nanny-states.
I found the NY restriction to 7 rounds quite interesting. Same round count as historic 1911s although now full size 1911 usually have 8 rounds. I’m trying to figure out if that is a case of some politician screaming, “My grandfather only had 7 round magazines in his handgun at Iowa Jima/D-Day/other historical military event” or if it was chosen as the round count that would disqualify almost everything.
deepdiver on January 18, 2013 at 4:22 PM
Just like their never-ending search for the elusive “violent Tea Partier.” This is a liberal fantasy.
rockmom on January 18, 2013 at 4:39 PM
/Sarc
jaydee_007 on January 18, 2013 at 5:14 PM
Can’t think of any good reason.
VegasRick on January 18, 2013 at 5:14 PM
Exactly. One of my weapons is a Springfield XDM 9mm. It comes standard with a 19 round magazine. Do these dolts think I am going to only put 7 rounds in each of my magazines?
VegasRick on January 18, 2013 at 5:19 PM
Don’t they know a Henry rifle holds 16 rounds? (.22LR)
“Load it on Sunday. Shoot all week.”
CurtZHP on January 18, 2013 at 5:24 PM
I think you spelled “America” wrong in the headline.
Washington Nearsider on January 18, 2013 at 5:28 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »