FirearmsCoalition.org

Manassas, VA --(Ammoland.com)- As magazines containing ballots for the 2012 NRA Board of Directors Election have been arriving in people’s mail boxes over the past week (if you got a ballot, you’re eligible to vote if you didn’t you aren’t).

I have been receiving requests for guidance as to which candidates I feel are worth supporting.

This year I am only endorsing one candidate, Maria Heil, and asking voting members of NRA to cast ballots with only Mrs. Heil’s name marked. While I do not know Mrs. Heil personally, she comes highly recommended by friends whose opinions I deeply respect. I think Mrs. Heil would be a diligent worker for our rights as gun owners and as NRA members within the Board of Directors. I believe she would bring some much-needed new energy to the board.

While there are several incumbent directors up this cycle who I think have done a good job of serving the members, I am disinclined to offer endorsements. I believe all of those good directors will easily win reelection without my help, or yours, and every vote cast for someone else dilutes any vote cast for Maria Heil. This technique is called “Bullet Voting” – voting for only one or a few candidates rather than an entire slate.

The 25 candidates with the highest number of votes win seats. Since there are only 31 candidates running, attempting to vote for a full slate invariably boosts the chances of another candidate bumping your favorite out of a seat. Just one vote difference can cost a seat.

There are 76 seats on the NRA Board of Directors. Each year 25 seats are up for election to a 3-year term and one seat is filled for a 1-year term by a vote of members present at the Annual Meeting. There also might be one or two “out of cycle” seats that need to be filled due to a resignation or death, but there are none of those this year so there are only 25 seats up for election. As usual, most of those seats will be filled by reelected incumbents, but this year there are a handful of Directors who either decided not to run again or who have fallen out of favor with Wayne and company and were snubbed by the Nominating Committee.

Either way, this creates an opportunity for a petition only candidate like Maria Heil to actually win a seat. The odds are still long, but not as bad as usual when 24 of the 25 seats are almost certain to go to incumbents.

It is an embarrassment that the greatest political action organization in the country generally gets participation from only about 7% of their members eligible to vote, but that’s the case. While that is a sad testimony to how seriously flawed the NRA election process is (and NRA’s unwillingness to address the problems) it also represents an opportunity.

In years past, my father and other dedicated NRA members have been able to shift the makeup of the NRA Board by running a short slate of alternate candidates and getting some of the 83% who normally don’t vote at all to Bullet Vote for that slate. Control over the NRA publications by Wayne and company, and their willingness to play dirty pool, made winning those seats almost impossible, but things are changing. The power of the internet could overcome the iron grip of the NRA-created millionaires who control the organization, but it would require cooperation and coordination among committed rights activists. Most importantly, a group of qualified, willing, reform candidates must be found and promoted. Those interested in putting together such an effort for 2013 and beyond are invited to contact me about it.

Until such a broad-based effort can be mounted, the best we can hope for is to try and keep good directors serving and get an occasional independent voice like Maria Heil inserted into the mix.

Jeff Knox Director, The Firearms Coalition Founder, GunVoter.org NRA Endowment Member.

About:
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition is a project of Neal Knox Associates, Manassas, VA. Visit: www.FirearmsCoalition.org

FirearmsCoalition.org

Manassas, VA --(Ammoland.com)- Copy the text of the email below or rewrite it in your own words and email it to: oira_submission@omb.eop.gov

The comment period for the ATF’s proposed “temporary,” emergency regulation requiring firearms dealers to file reports every time someone purchases more than one semi-auto long gun was reopened, but that comment period closes this Tuesday, May 31.

During the last comment period on this gun owners were outnumbered by the prohibitionists. That should NEVER happen! We outnumber them 10 to one and our response to outrageous proposals like this should reflect that numbers advantage.

The ATF claims the reporting is necessary to combat the flow of firearms across the border into Mexico, but in light of the “Gunwalker” scandal currently being investigated in Congress and by the Justice Department Inspector General’s office, it looks like ATF is the problem, not the solution.

Some implications of the Project Gunwalker scandal are that ATF has already been receiving significant, voluntary cooperation from gun dealers in the border states, but that the agency has used that cooperation more to build inflate the numbers of illegally “trafficked” weapons as a way of justifying their existence.

Beyond the complications of Project Gunwalker, the idea of requiring reporting of multiple long gun sales is clearly in conflict with established congressional mandates and restrictions on ATF’s authority. By attempting to push through this major regulatory change without congressional approval (which they could not get), ATF is seriously overstepping their legal authority.

Please copy and paste the following note into an email or write your own and get it submitted as soon as possible. Also, please do the following: Cc info@FirearmsCoalition.org so we have some record of responses; Send copies to your Senators and Representative and ask that they send their own notes of opposition to ATF; Be sure to repost this Alert to all of your friends and every pro-gun forum you can find. We must have an overwhelming response to this.

Sample comment:

To: oira_submission@omb.eop.gov

Subject: Oppose Regulation Expanding Multiple Sale Reporting

I am writing to oppose the Information collection action to register multiple sales of certain rifles with BATFE from the 04/29/2011 Federal Register: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-04-29/pdf/2011-10355.pdf

This information collection is both illegal and unnecessary.

* The action proposed is outside the statutory grant of authority to record information about multiple sales of firearms. Title 18 U.S.C. § 923(g)(3)(A) specifically grants the authority to collect multiple sale information on handguns and revolvers. Other firearms are excluded and there is no implied authority to extend this reporting requirement to rifles or any other type of firearm.

* Analysis of the number of firearms seized shows that Mexico is being primarily supplied with firearms by South American countries, NOT the United States. In fact, a STRATFOR report indicates that fully 90% of of the firearms traced in Mexico are NOT coming from the United States, contrary to assertions in the mainstream media: http://wwwprod-1756134246.us-west-1.elb.amazonaws.com/index.php?q=weekly/20110209-mexicos-gun-supply-and-90-percent-myth.

Additionally, Wikileaks cables have shown the US Government is at least partially responsible for supplying Mexico from the United States: http://narcosphere.narconews.com/notebook/bill-conroy/2011/02/pentagon-fingered-source-narco-firepower-mexico. These firearms are NOT from the US commercial market.

* Source documents of the BATFE uncovered by US Senator Grassley and US Representative Issa show that BATFE has been complicit in supplying Mexican Narco-terrorist forces with firearms: http://www.scribd.com/doc/49971654/2011-03-03-CEG-to-DOJ-ATF.

* ”FFL” holders are already required by law to respond to BATFE requests for information on firearms distribution pursuant to criminal investigations: Title 18 U.S.C. § 923(g)(7).

* The regulation contains no provision for the destruction of information collected, which establishes a nationwide registry of “certain types of firearms” as proposed. Because of this the regulation, as proposed, is illegal under Title 18 U.S.C. § 926(a). ”No such rule or regulation … may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established.”

There is a grave potential for this regulation to unduly burden citizens who are collectors or must obtain purchase permits at the local or state level to possess firearms. The proposed regulation does not say what the agency intends to do with the information but ostensibly it would be for criminal investigations. Subjecting law abiding gun owners to this type of investigation under the guise of “information collection” is an overt attempt to prevent them from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights to purchase and own firearms.

This regulatory action should not be approved.

# # #

Whether you use this specific language, edit it, or compose a letter of your own, please take action immediately! Do not put off sending a comment!

Comments must be received by Tuesday May 31, 2011

About:
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition is a project of Neal Knox Associates, Manassas, VA. Visit: www.FirearmsCoalition.org

FirearmsCoalition.org

Manassas, VA --(Ammoland.com)- During a typical state-mandated defensive firearms class there comes an hour – usually during that sleepy time after lunch – where the instructor gives some obligatory advice on what to do should you ever be forced to use the skills you’re learning.

Generally the advice comes down to two points:

• Call 911
• Don’t Say Anything

The reason you call 911 is to demonstrate your human concern and compassion for the dirtbag whose chest you just ventilated as he threatened you or your family with death or grievous injury, and so that you can get police officers on-site to investigate a homicide or physical assault – an act that you just carried out.

So as a potential felony defendant, you are now expected (if not strictly legally required) to call the police and speak into the police recorder, ever keeping in your adrenalin-charged mind that “anything you say will be used against you.”

After You Shoot: Your gun’s hot. The perp’s not, Now What? – By Alan Korwin

Alan Korwin, principle author of the indispensable Gun Owner’s Guide series of books, has earned a reputation as a guy who thinks creatively and speaks his mind. In his latest project, After You Shoot, he tackles the issue of how, after defending yourself with lethal force against a criminal attack, you need to be prepared to defend yourself against the criminal justice system, starting with how you notify the authorities. According to Korwin’s sources, about half of the convictions arising out of self- defense incidents stem from unwise statements made in a frantic 911 call. With sometimes startling insight, and a sharp sense of the ironic, Korwin explores different paths through the treacherous legal terrain that can face anyone who uses deadly force in self-defense.

Just as there is no single, universally correct combination of the “right” gun, caliber, and carry rig to guarantee a successful defensive outcome, neither is there a single set of “right” after-action procedures or magic words to say that guarantee you won’t be arrested and face a trial. After You Shoot explores possible options, some of them controversial. Korwin is not shy of controversy, and proves it in his book by airing a broad variety of knowledgeable viewpoints, a few of which hold that some of Korwin’s approaches are all wet. As with other “holy wars” in the field – 9mm vs. .45 ACP, revolver vs. automatic, shoulder holster vs. belt holster – this debate is unlikely to ever be completely wrapped up. But there are important points to be raised, points that a defensive shooter needs to keep in mind. The book is, in many ways the overdue opening round of what could be a long conversation.

The conversation starts with fundamental rights, focusing on what Korwin calls the Adnarim Statement. Word game buffs will notice that Adnarim is Miranda spelled backwards. The crux of the Miranda warning is that “anything you say will be used against you” (Korwin always italicizes that last, very important bit). The Adnarim statement literally turns the Miranda warning around. It is an assertion of Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights saying, in effect, “I have a right to remain silent and not to be searched, and I choose to exercise those rights.”

The mindset of the Adnarim statement is in sharp contrast to the Miranda warning, which amounts to permission from the investigators to be silent. Korwin cites lawyers who have printed the warning on the back of their business card for their clients to use if arrested. The idea is to cause police to back off and not try to lead the defensive shooter to say something incriminating.

But the Adnarim statement isn’t unanimously accepted by experienced firearms lawyers as a good idea. A defensive shooter who presents the card to an investigating officer and clams up, says the contrary view, is likely to antagonize on-scene cops, and a possible red flag for a prosecutor who would rather see a civilian dead than using deadly force in self-defense.

Korwin’s out-of-the-box thinking only begins with the Adnarim statement. Needing an example of how to professionally handle the aftermath of a shooting, he looks at the policies developed by police, a very straightforward process that protects the shooting officer from the press, open microphones, and his own very human urge to talk that may come along with such a traumatic event . He offers a solution that, combined with the Adnarim statement, could be practical, but, like a home defense plan, it needs to be put in place well in advance of a defensive encounter.

As a defensive planning guide, After You Shoot fills an important gap in any gun owner’s library. Korwin flags specific risks that face the defensive shooter, and suggests strategies to mitigate or avoid those risks. Just as there is no single ideal gun for every situation, neither is there a single legal approach that is right for every person or situation. Like any good defensive book, After You Shoot lays out the problems to be solved in clear, common-sense language. If you keep or carry a gun for self-defense, you need this book.

After You Shoot: Your gun’s hot. The perp’s not, Now What? By Alan Korwin Publisher: Bloomfield Press ISBN: 978-1-889632-26-1 List Price: $14.95 Format: 160 pages, trade paperback found here

About:
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition is a project of Neal Knox Associates, Manassas, VA. Visit: www.FirearmsCoalition.org

FirearmsCoalition.org

Manassas, VA --(AmmoLand.com)- Conditions have lined up for 2010 to be the year of the perfect electoral storm. But in order to create the kind of storm the Republic needs, one that cleans out an insubordinate and defiant Congress, GunVoters and pro-rights activists need to get organized.

The time to start is now.

Just as my friend, noted author and radio host Dave Ramsey says about saving money, it’s never too early to get involved in politics, but it’s better to get involved late than not to get involved at all. Whether you’re reading this in May, or next October, you need to take action.

There are many ways to participate in the political process and all of them are important. The first, and most fundamental, is to vote. Make sure that you are registered to vote and that you show up on Election Day. Dismiss the excuses. I’ve heard them all and they are all lame.

“Voting conflicts with Opening Day.” Do you want to keep your “sniper” –uh- deer rifle? Get a mail-in or absentee ballot.

“They draw jury pools from voter registration rolls.” We need more gun people on juries. Besides, most states draw jury pools from driver license rolls.

“I don’t want to be on a list.” You’re already on a passel of lists. Deal with it. Don’t cower. Stand up and take your country back.

“My vote won’t make that much difference.” Nonsense. America entered the 21st Century with the closest Presidential election in history in 2000. That and other momentous elections have been decided on razor thin margins. Comedian Al Franken won a Senate seat by 312 votes. A few votes can make a huge difference.

As important as it is to vote in the November general election, it is even more important to vote in the primary. In many districts, the primary is the real election. With a smaller pool and a lower turnout your vote has more effect. If you follow the primary campaign, you’ll develop a feel for the issues, and you’ll get to know the candidates. The world of politics is a small town and you’ll see the same faces. Last year’s losing legislature candidate could be next year’s winning county commissioner.

Voting matters, but your vote matters more when you bring votes with you. Not only do you need to make sure you’re registered, you need to make sure that the people around you are registered as well – your family, friends, club members, guys at the range. When you find a candidate you can support, you can help that candidate get elected by talking to your friends. Just telling a friend that you know a candidate who is running, that you think he’s a good guy, and suggesting that he deserves their vote can make a huge difference, especially in a tight race.

An extra step you can take is to become a Deputy Registrar and register voters yourself. In some states you have to take a class, but in others you simply fill out a form, swear an oath to abide by the rules and grab a stack of forms. Every gathering of gun people is a gathering of potential GunVoters. Gun shows, matches, club meetings, all can benefit from the added dimension of registering voters. Contact your county clerk for details.

If you follow the primary campaigns and get to know the players, and like to meet people and network, you may want to take the step into the wider world of party politics. Political parties are built around precincts, which are the very lowest political subdivision. If you look at the very bottom of your general election ballot you will probably see a few names running for the office of Precinct Committee Member. It’s not unusual to have several blank spots. Quite often membership on a precinct committee can be yours for the asking.

What party you choose to join is up to you, but it is a choice not to be taken lightly. Both major parties richly deserve the contempt they receive, particularly from the independent voters. But the system is rigged to favor the parties. The Libertarian Party is a great movement, but regrettably, has demonstrated little ability to put candidates in office. Few other “third” parties are worth consideration.

All political parties should be well-salted in their rank and file with GunVoters, so make your choice and run with it. The precinct committees manage all their party’s political activities in their neighborhood. Pitching in and helping can create goodwill and can give you a level of influence that might surprise you.

The precinct committees also have a great deal of influence on candidates and the campaigns they run, as well as on the politicians once they are elected. “All politics is local.” So said past-master politician Tip O’Neill. The precinct committees are not only a source of volunteers for campaigns, they are also sounding boards for new issues. Every politician picks a few bellwether constituents from their district to provide feedback and advice as to what the folks at home think.

Regardless of how distasteful, boring, or frustrating you might find our political process, it is what we have and ignoring it won’t make it any better. As a matter of fact, ignoring it will make things a lot worse.

Order Neal Knox – The Gun Rights War today and receive a free subscription to the Knox Hard Corps Report newsletter. Go to www.NealKnox.com

Copyright © 2010 Neal Knox Associates – The most trusted name in the rights movement.

About:
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition is a project of Neal Knox Associates, Manassas, VA. Visit: www.FirearmsCoalition.org

FirearmsCoalition.org

Manassas, VA --(AmmoLand.com)- In politics, like baseball, there is a time to bunt and a time to swing for the fence.

This year is ripe for home runs. The political climate this year offers a unique opportunity for rights advocates to make major gains – both legislatively and politically.

To make those gains we need to pull out all of the stops and go big.

The election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts was clear proof that voters are unhappy. Politicians who were already concerned about disgruntled voters are now terrified as they look toward the November elections. Pundits and analysts can spin the Brown victory any way they wish but the facts are clear.

Voters are not happy with the way Democrats have exercised control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency. The backlash won’t stop at congressional elections and the local politicians know it. Many state legislators rode the wave of Democrat ascendancy to gain control of their state legislatures and as they watch that wave crashing on the rocks, they know they have a serious fight on the way this November.

Rights groups go to great lengths to maintain a non-partisan position, supporting and endorsing candidates based on their positions rather than their party affiliation. But the fact is that the official position of the Democrats is to restrict firearms while the official position of the Republican Party is to support individual gun rights. That means that Democrats being in trouble is good news to the rights movement. The trend is anti-incumbent with an emphasis on Democrats so all of those politicians coming up for reelection, regardless of party affiliation, are desperate to make friends and avoid stirring up enemies.

What this means for grass roots rights activists is unprecedented influence. Few issues can stir up more voters than the gun issue – and unlike most other hot-button issues, only one side of the gun issue can deliver large numbers of voters – our side. In 2004 the Democrats downplayed “gun control” for the first time since the assassination of NRA Life Member John F. Kennedy. Since the Kerry run for the presidency, Democrats have carefully tiptoed around the gun issue, offering lip-service to both sides of the fight, declaring support for the Second Amendment, and using back-room deals and parliamentary tricks to quietly sideline all but the most innocuous gun bills. The strategy has worked well, effectively neutering pro-rights forces by lulling GunVoters to sleep. Well GunVoters are not asleep this year, but without clear votes on major, well publicized gun legislation – either pro or anti – there will be little to energize and activate them leading into the November elections.

2010 is the year to change the trend.
With politicians scrambling for support wherever they can find it, rights activists are finding a warmer reception in more political offices than ever before. Republicans are ready to actively back much stronger pro-rights legislation than they have been willing to support in the past and pro-rights Democrats are more willing to demand that their party leaders give them an opportunity to go on the record with pro-rights votes they can use to bolster their support with the GunVoters back home.

This is a strategic opportunity. This is the year to introduce and force record votes on bold pro-rights legislation. In this environment, getting critical votes is more likely than in recent years and the chances of passage are as good as anyone has ever seen. But the real beauty is that even if pro-rights legislation fails, as long as we get the record vote, we win!

Having a clear record vote on a strong, widely supported rights bill provides ammunition needed to stir up our troops and get them involved in working to defeat those who voted against us. It allows GunVoters to take credit when those politicians are replaced by new folks who are more rights-friendly. A new legislature with new leadership and a bunch of new politicians who owe a debt of gratitude to GunVoters is unlikely to take a chance on offending that important support base when the same (or an even better) pro-rights bill is introduced next year.

The bases are loaded and we have players in the outfield who have bet heavily on our team. This is a game-changer moment. It’s not a time to bunt. We need to swing for the fences. Taking an easy single – getting some marginal tweak to bad legislation – might be an easy score, but it would also give cover to the enemies of the Second Amendment. Now is not the time for timid, baby-step proposals. 2010 should be a year of rights activists swinging for the fences in every state legislature in the country.

About:
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition is a project of Neal Knox Associates, Manassas, VA. Visit: www.FirearmsCoalition.org

FirearmsCoalition.org

Manassas, VA – -(AmmoLand.com)- I recently wrote about the need for preaching to the choir – too many of our own friends, family members, and fellow shooters are woefully uninformed about the fight for liberty.

A chance conversation in a hardware store this week really brought home just how much work there is to do beyond the choir room doors. At the hardware store I got into a conversation with a fellow shopper. As conversations with me tend to do, it wasn’t long before we were talking about guns and gun laws. The fellow’s wife had joined the conversation by this time and while his reaction was troubling, her reaction was down right scary.

This was a nice couple in their 50’s, fairly conservative, into classic cars, and in the market for a .38 for home protection. They were not loony-tune lefties by any means. They also mentioned a good friend who owns many guns and reloads. The conversation rolled along smoothly until the topic of “Uzi’s and machineguns” came up.

As you can imagine, it wasn’t me talking about “Uzi’s and machineguns.”

I explained that there is little difference between an Uzi and any 9mm handgun or carbine and that legal machineguns are virtually never used in crime. That so called “assault weapons” are also rarely used In crime and that millions and millions of them are owned and used every day without hurting anyone. That the Second Amendment isn’t about duck or deer hunting, it is about being able to defend yourself, your family, your community, your state, and your country.

That is when the woman said something really chilling. She said that those crazy people who want all of those military weapons and think they have a right to that kind of capability just infuriate her and scare her to death and even though she doesn’t think people should have machineguns, those crazy people make her wish she had a machinegun to just shoot them all.

What on earth do you do with something like that?
I explained that those “crazy people” weren’t radical nut-jobs hoping for an opportunity to shoot a terrorist. They are ordinary people – her neighbors – who believe they have a right and an obligation to be prepared to defend our way of life. I told her that those guys aren’t “those guys,” they are me. I tried to get her to understand that these gun owners are asking nothing more than to be left alone, and that trying to disarm them for no reason would result in tragedy. Nothing I said could penetrate her resolve or her husband’s support for her position. She was absolutely convinced that no one should “be allowed” to own more than a couple of guns or more than a little ammunition and that anyone who refused to conform to such restrictions deserved whatever they got in the way of government agents forcing compliance.

The whole encounter shocked me. I have had arguments with anti-gun zealots over the years and their ability to ignore facts and embrace irrational fear has always amazed me, but these folks didn’t fit the mold. These folks were asking my advice about gun stores and training, but they were ready to employ the Marines to forcefully disarm – or kill – people like me.

I’ve talked with conservatives who just didn’t get the whole “gun thing” and I’ve talked to gun owners who didn’t see why anyone should have an “assault weapon” or a .50 BMG or a little-bitty handgun, and I’ve almost always been stunned by their myopia. But this is the first time I have ever met a reasonable, thoughtful, intelligent person who was ready to declare war on her countrymen simply because they wanted to have the means to effectively defend themselves from just such an assault.

I have resolved that I am going to find a way to reach this woman and others like her. I am going to formulate arguments that will breach her hoplophobia and help her understand my position – and her own. At this point I’m not sure what those arguments will be, but I do know that it won’t be easy.

I’m afraid that there are a lot more folks like this couple out there. Folks who are afraid of me because I believe in the right to arms. I don’t know yet how I’m going to allay those fears, if I can allay them, but I do know that we need answers for these folks and we have a whole lot of work to do.

About:
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition is a project of Neal Knox Associates, Manassas, VA.  Visit: www.FirearmsCoalition.org.

FirearmsCoalition.org

Manassas, VA – -(AmmoLand.com)- The Federal Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit recently accepted the Second Amendment as valid grounds for reversing a conviction under the infamous Lautenberg Amendment, barring possession of firearms from anyone ever convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

That’s good news, but don’t fire up the band just yet.

The actual conclusion of the 7th Circuit panel was that prosecutors had failed to effectively argue that Lautenberg does not violate the Second Amendment – which is a far cry from declaring the law unconstitutional and throwing the case out.  The court reversed the guilty verdict and sent the case back to the lower court to give federal prosecutors another chance to build a better case.  Included in the decision are rather detailed instructions explaining what arguments the prosecution needs to make if they wish to prevail.  Like a child’s game, the court said, “You forgot to say ‘Mother may I’ so try it again – and this time say ‘Mother may I.’” If prosecutors carefully apply the lessons laid out in the 7th Circuit’s order, the case should result in another conviction that would then be upheld on appeal.  On the other hand, the court also dropped a hint or two for the defense.

The case against defendant Steven Skoien, who was sentenced to probation in 2006 for misdemeanor domestic violence, is pretty straightforward.  After being alerted by the game department that Skoien had purchased a deer tag, police went to his home where, in his pickup parked out front, they found a freshly killed deer, a shotgun, and ammunition.  Skoien admitted that he had been hunting that morning.

In court Skoien argued that he only possessed the gun for hunting and that denying him the right to arms was a violation of the Second Amendment.

Prosecutors pointed to a comment made in the Heller opinion to the effect that the decision “should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill.” They argued that this should be recognized to include persons prohibited under Lautenberg, and that the government had a compelling need to restrict guns from domestic violence abusers because such abuse is an indicator for future acts of violence.

The three-judge panel of the 7th Circuit rightly pointed out that a person convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor is not a felon, and concluded that the government’s arguments supporting the assertion of “compelling need” simply weren’t good enough.  The panel also concluded though that since the defendant claimed to only possess the shotgun for the purpose of hunting and did not assert a self-defense argument, his situation did not warrant the full protection of the Second Amendment.

The important issues in this case all hinge on two problematic positions taken by the panel:

1. That the extraneous comments made in Heller are binding.
2. That guns possessed for self-defense deserve more protection from the courts than those involving guns possessed for other purposes.

There are three standards a court uses in judging arguments, referred to as levels of scrutiny.  The highest and most rigorous of the three is “strict scrutiny” - applied to issues of fundamental rights – wherein prosecutors must demonstrate a compelling need to interfere with a person’s rights, with minimal interference to meet that compelling need, and prove that the governments action effectively does meet the stated need.  “Intermediate scrutiny” is applied when there is only limited involvement of civil rights and no direct impact on any fundamental rights.  The government is given much more leeway under this standard.  The third, “rational basis” is applied when neither civil nor fundamental rights are at issue.  Under this standard the government has little requirement to prove need or effect.

In the Skoien case, the 7th Circuit concluded that intermediate scrutiny was appropriate because self-defense was not raised as an issue.  They also suggested that if the issue of self-defense had been raised, the court would have to move up to a strict scrutiny standard for reviewing the case.  This conclusion begs anyone wishing to use the Second Amendment as a legal defense to be sure to invoke the right to arms in a self-defense context and suggests that the court has injected the words “for self defense” into the Second Amendment.

If the remanded case is not dismissed, prosecutors will no doubt build a case tailored to the court’s instructions for stricter scrutiny, and the defense will assert that Skoien also possessed the shotgun for self-defense purposes.   Meanwhile, it is to be hoped that the Supreme Court will have rendered a favorable decision in the McDonald v. Chicago case and that that decision will clear up some of the ambiguities surrounding Heller.

About:
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition is a project of Neal Knox Associates, Manassas, VA.  Visit: www.FirearmsCoalition.org.

FirearmsCoalition.org

Manassas, VA --(AmmoLand.com)- Mike Bloomberg and his group of gun grabbers, Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG), caused quite a stir in the gun rights community recently when they released a poll declaring that gun owners and NRA members support the group’s gun control agenda.

The poll was conducted by Frank Lutz’s company “Word Doctors.” The media gleefully reported the poll as indisputable fact while NRA and others cried “Foul”, pointing out flaws in the pollster’s methodology and challenging the results.

The flaws and distortions are undoubtedly real, but it is important for rights activists to carefully examine this poll to find data we can use to help our cause.  In spite of its flaws, this poll demonstrates a serious failure on the part of rights groups and supporters in efforts to educate our less activist brethren.  We’re not preaching to the choir enough and not getting the right messages through to them.

This fact is clearly shown in the results for poll question number 25 which asked, “How familiar would you say you are with the Supreme Court case Heller v. DC?”.  I would venture that the vast majority of people reading this column would respond “Very familiar” or at least “Somewhat familiar.”

Since the Heller decision was without a doubt the biggest gun rights story of the past 2 decades, with extensive coverage in both the gun press and the general media, I would further expect my readers to predict that most average gun owners would be at least “Somewhat familiar” with the case.  The responses in the MAIG poll fell well short of such expectations.  Among those who identified themselves as NRA members, only 17% said they were “Very familiar” with the Heller case.  Non-NRA gun owners responded with a dismal 3% saying “Very familiar.” Only 34% of NRA members and 10% of non-NRA gun owners claimed to be “Somewhat familiar” with 19% and 17% respectively saying they were “Only a little familiar” with the case.  A full 30% of NRA respondents and 70% of non-NRA respondents said that they were “Not familiar at all” with the case.

Even with skewing, distortion, and “cherry-picking” participants, these results should be disturbing to the gun rights community.  The results attributed to NRA members are about what I would have expected from the general gun owning population and the answers posted by non-NRA gun owners are worse than I would have expected from a random sample of citizens who don’t own guns.  Those numbers are actually almost exactly the inverse of what I would expect the answers would be from our regular readers.

What this demonstrates is the mistake of assuming that our friends, family and fellow citizens are as interested, concerned, and knowledgeable as we are.  We must always remember that we (those of us who pay attention to politics and rights issues) are freaks.

Most people – even gun owners – are much more interested in what’s on TV than what the Supreme Court has to say about the Second Amendment and we need to act accordingly.  We must find the best words to frame each of our issues in the most understandable way and get that message in front of as many people as possible as frequently as possible.

No organization has the wherewithal to do the job all by themselves.  It must be a group effort and you are the most important part of the group because you have more influence with those around you than any organization does.  One of the ways this particular poll was skewed was by disproportionately loading the sample with females.  While there are many female gun owners and activists, there is nothing close to the almost 50/50 split depicted in the polling sample and women tend to be less involved in gun rights matters.  That’s not sexism, just fact.

The Executive Director of our organization is a female and she agrees with my contention.  What the numbers suggest is that the polling was conducted during the day with participants qualifying based on their household gun ownership as much as their individual gun ownership, and that an important target audience in need of education is within arms reach while we’re sleeping.

The pollster who developed this poll for MAIG, Frank Luntz, is on the record saying that it is easy to get a person to endorse conflicting ideas by asking the right questions and using the right words.  He demonstrated that with this poll, but he also demonstrated that we, the engaged rights activists, need to be doing a better job educating those around us about the critical issues of the day.

Perhaps this poll can be used as a teaching tool.  I am going to post the entire poll along with some alternate questions and some correct answers to help with that idea.  Look for it at www.FirearmsCoalition.org and see if you can use it to start an important conversation with someone close to you.

About:
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition is a project of Neal Knox Associates, Manassas, VA.  Visit: www.FirearmsCoalition.org.

FirearmsCoalition.org

Manassas, VA --(AmmoLand.com)- The Firearms Coalition yesterday issued a scathing denunciation of legislation proposed by the National Rifle Association for the state of Iowa saying that Iowa is the latest instance of the NRA cavalry riding in to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

In Iowa, Sheriffs have broad discretion in the issuance or denial of permits to carry concealed weapons and Iowa GunVoters have been rallying support for removing that discretion and moving the state to a “shall issue” system.

In the last legislative session an Alaska-style bill, pushed by local grass roots rights activists led by the group Iowa Gun Owners, fell just one vote short of passage in the Iowa House. In response to that impressive achievement the NRA has decided to get involved in the state. They have proposed a bill that shifts the law from “may issue” to “shall issue,” but their bill also raises the minimum age from 18 to 21, retains extensive mandatory training requirements, enhances penalties for possession of a firearm while “under the influence” of alcohol – without defining exactly what “under the influence” means – and expands the list of things which make a person ineligible to receive a permit – including an arrest for a violent crime, even if the arrest was erroneous.

The combination of activated grass roots supporters, politicians fearful of Obama backlash in the November elections, and the NRA’s experience and resources should equate to a perfect storm for passage of serious rights reform legislation in Iowa. Instead NRA is lowering the bar with a bill that all but the most committed anti-rights politicians can happily support. Primary opposition to the NRA proposal is coming not from the gun haters, but from strong Second Amendment supporters.

Details of the Iowa problem, and NRA’s misguided solutions, can be found on The Firearms Coalition’s main web site at www.FirearmsCoalition.org.

About:
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition is a project of Neal Knox Associates, Manassas, VA. Visit: www.FirearmsCoalition.org

FirearmsCoalition.org

Phoenix, Arizona --(AmmoLand.com)- Thanksgiving is a time for reflection on our blessings, including the blessings of liberty and on the sacrifices our forebears made for us.

With that in mind, son Brandon and I wrapped up our Thanksgiving observations slung into battle rifles on the firing line at the beautiful, newly remodeled and re-christened Joe Foss Shooting Complex near Buckeye, Arizona.

As I concentrated on sight picture, breathing and trigger control, I was truly thankful.
Over the past four years, as regular readers of this space will be aware, a group that goes by the delightfully seditious name of “Revolutionary War Veterans Association” has spread across the country with a simple but ambitious goal: To turn the United States once again into a nation of riflemen. Barely on the radar of the mainstream shooting organizations, and totally off the major media’s screen, the RWVA’s Applessed Project has quietly grown at exponential rates.

The Appleseed shoots are superficially similar to any other shooting clinic. There’s a lot of shooting and a lot of discussion of sight picture, breathing and trigger control. But Appleseed adds another dimension: One of historical perspective. Between each relay, along with the shooting fundamentals, there’s a discourse on events in and around Lexington and Concord, Massachusetts on April 19 and 20, 1775. Along with the history lesson, comes a discussion of what it means to be a rifleman, what riflemen have meant to America, and what our rifles should mean to us.

It’s strong stuff. But there’s not a whiff of extremism. It’s simple application of the Second Amendment: The Right to Keep and Bear Arms only takes on meaning if we are skilled in the use of arms. Come to think of it, some politicians might consider the Appleseed message dangerous. Good. That’s exactly how they should perceive it.

The message is resonating – and gathering momentum. In 2006, the first year of the program, there were 18 events with just over 1000 participants. 2007, the year I shot my first Appleseed, saw 47 events and nearly 1900 participants and everyone was amazed at the growth of the project. In 2008 there were 138 events training some 3700 participants. 2009 should close out with nearly 400 events in 46 states training 10,000 participants. The goal for 2010 is to double 2009’s record.

This past October saw the biggest single event in Appleseed history when RWVA volunteer instructors trained some 600 members of the South Carolina National Guard at Ft. Stewart, Georgia. These citizen-soldiers had been working regular jobs but had been mobilized for deployment to Iraq. A member of the battalion staff did not feel that the troops had been adequately trained in riflery and asked the RWVA for assistance. National Guard troops view themselves as inheritors of the minuteman tradition, so the historical perspective of the program had special significance for these soldiers as they prepared for deployment.

The mechanics of the shoot are straightforward. The objective of the course is to get participants to a “Rifleman” level – that’s scoring a 210 or better out of a possible 250 on a modified Army Marksmanship Qualification Test (AQT) target. Most of the shooting is at an AQT target with multiple silhouettes scaled to simulate distances out to 400 yards. The reduced AQT target allows the entire course to be fired at 25 yards with any rifle from full-sized battle rifles to .22 caliber rimfires. The reduced range also allows for more shooting, and practice on the 25-yard course, with whatever rifle, has been proven to improve shooting at real distances with centerfire.

Brandon and I banged away at our targets with a couple of historic rifles, he with an M1 Garand, I with an M1903 Springfield. We had demonstrated early in the day that both rifles would shoot, turning in some promising groups, but neither of us managed to put together a string that would earn a Rifleman patch. But “a rifleman is persistent,” as the Appleseed instructors constantly reminded us. The day will come. Meantime, I’m going to invest in some battle sights and a sling for my 10/22.

The future of the Appleseed Project looks bright. With over 170 events already scheduled for 2010, there will be an Appleseed shoot within a few hours of just about anywhere in the lower 48 states. Check their calendar at http://www.appleseedinfo.org/ and start planning your Appleseed weekend. Get a few buddies together or take the family.

The cost is modest and the shooting instruction is outstanding, and geared to any level. But the bonus is the historical view that puts shooting in a context that “sportsmen” or competitive shooters may not have thought about. Shooting is not golf. Appleseed reminds participants of the purpose of the rifle: To secure liberty.

Neal Knox Associates – The most trusted name in the rights movement.

About:
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement.

FirearmsCoalition.org

Manassas, VA - There has been a close association between sexually transmitted diseases and the military for as long as the two have existed, but the focus of this article is not Venereal Disease, but a different kind of VD that has shocked the military community and the nation.

The VD which currently plagues the military and puts our soldiers at grave risk is the policy of Victim Disarmament which has been increasingly prevalent even as laws in the civilian world have been moving in the opposite direction.

While some have pointed to regulation changes during the Clinton administration as the turning point, VD on military bases has been the trend since at least the 1960’s and to a lesser extent even before that. In military society, so heavily steeped in discipline and control, it is only natural that those in power would be inclined to drift in the direction of micro-management and centralized control. Commanders in the modern military seem to have gravitated toward a paternalistic role and that paternalism runs all through the chain of command and seems to apply to all subordinates regardless of their age, rank, or experience.

When a Muslim major decided he was on the wrong side in the War on Terrorism and began shooting soldiers and civilian workers in a premeditated attack at a Ft. Hood processing center, we were all shocked. Shocked that anyone in the U.S. military could turn on his brothers- and sisters-in-arms with such viciousness. Shocked that a commissioned officer could hold such radical religious views and not be recognized as a threat.

But we were especially shocked that anyone could go on a killing spree in the middle of a busy Army base and not run into any armed resistance for over 10 minutes.
The public was dumbfounded to learn that virtually everyone on all military bases outside of war zones is required to disarm while on base. Even officers and senior NCOs who are licensed to carry concealed in the state where the base is located are forbidden to have a readily accessible firearm virtually anywhere on base. Only MP’s and contract security guards may legally go about a military installation armed and even they are generally forbidden to carry when not on duty.

But who could have imagined that anyone would ever dare to attack soldiers on an Army base? Well, just as the “unimaginable” idea of using commercial aircraft as guided weapons had been widely publicized in popular novels and was officially included in national threat assessments as a likely scenario, the idea of attacking personnel on a military installation was not novel or new. A group of home-grown wannabe Muslim terrorists made elaborate plans to do just that back in 2007. After their plot was uncovered, many in the rights community pointed out the huge vulnerability created by the Army’s Victim Disarmament policies and called for changes, at least to allow qualified officers and senior NCOs to keep weapons handy. Those calls went unheeded. Some commands went in the opposite direction with commanding officers tightening restrictions on weapons in base housing units and even forbidding soldiers from legally carrying when off-base and out of uniform.

In the wake of the atrocity at Ft. Hood the Army says it – along with the other branches – will be reviewing security policies and procedures. I don’t expect to see them give up their VD policies. It is much more likely that they will conclude that they need to hire more civilian security guards and perhaps implement some sort of alert system similar to those implemented by universities, based around text messages sent to cell phones.

After all, what if the Army allowed soldiers to be armed and they used them to commit crime, or to shoot each other over traffic disputes? What about the danger of police mistaking an armed defender for the active murderer or an armed defender accidentally shooting innocent bystanders?

We’ve heard all of the “what if” arguments in every state that has ever debated concealed carry legislation or talked about extending the right to carry to college campuses. For some reason the fact that none of the dire “what ifs” have ever materialized and that armed defense is consistently demonstrated to be safe and effective, just carries no weight with paternalistic authoritarians who don’t fully trust their charges.

More than two years after the Army received a dramatic warning about the vulnerability created by their VD policies, that vulnerability has been horrifically exploited. And in the face of that experience, soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines remain helpless in the face of threats of armed attack.

Unlike Venereal Disease, Victim Disarmament can be easily eradicated, particularly in the military. All it takes is the will and a little bit of trust.

Visit www.FirearmsCoalition.org where you can also order your copy of Neal Knox – The Gun Rights War.

To receive The Firearms Coalition’s bi-monthly newsletter, The Knox Hard Corps Report, write to PO Box 3313, Manassas, VA 20108.

About:
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement.
©Copyright 2009 Neal Knox Associates – The most trusted name in the rights movement.

FirearmsCoalition.org

Phoenix, AZ --(AmmoLand.com)- It’s a Republican sweep in Virginia. Bob McDonnell has the election locked up along with fellow Republicans winning the Lt. Governor and Attorney General offices. The Republican victory in Virginia was overwhelming, with the GOP netting a combined 60 percent of the vote over Democrats in the three races.

In New Jersey, an unpopular (and Brady Bunch-endorsed) Democrat lost to what passes for a conservative Republican in that part of the world.

Meanwhile in New York’s 23rd District, the Republican leadership had an opportunity to learn something about party discipline when their anointed candidate Dede Scozzafava, a genuinely liberal Republican, was pushed out of the race by an upstart conservative candidate who claimed Glenn Beck as his mentor. The Democrat appears to have won, but with the upstart Hoffman making a splash. The chin-stroking started immediately that the New York results are the harbinger of a gathering “civil war” within the Republican Party. Maybe.

The really good news is that this election may be the first green shoots of a renaissance of republican (lower-case R) politics. By a “republican renaissance” I mean that classical republican ideas like the rule of law, limited government with checks and balances, as laid out in the U.S. Constitution, may be gaining a new currency in the political marketplace.

It was Gerald Ford who accurately noted that, “A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have.” A smaller government promises less, but it is also less of a threat to individual liberty. A small federal government is not something that will happen overnight – frankly I doubt that I’ll see it in my lifetime. Even the “cuts” of the Reagan Revolution were only modest decreases in the rate of growth. The key questions moving forward are whether the Republican Party can field candidates to satisfy the growing demand for limited government, and whether Democratic voters are willing to support candidates who will rein in government expansion, reversing the trend toward federal control. Few viable limited-government candidates have appeared from either party, but demand should eventually generate supply.

To make sure that yesterday’s election results become an ongoing trend in the right direction, GunVoters must get involved now. The first place to start is www.GunVoter.org. See what information is there for your state and what is missing and then start trying to fill the gaps. Get together with your club or state association’s political guy. Take him to lunch and ask questions. Find out who’s running, who deserves help, and whose balloon needs popping. Get involved with your local political party of choice so you can participate in selecting candidates from the ground floor. When you find answers, the next step is to go back to GunVoter.og and build the knowledgebase so others can be more effective.

Keep in mind that although federal elections are important, it’s in state legislatures and city councils that tomorrow’s senators and representatives are groomed. You can wield much more influence in those races and with those candidates than you can in federal campaigns.

As my brother Jeff likes to say, little politicians grow up to be big politicians – catch them while they’re small.

“The Belgian Corporal,” the story I chose as the prologue to the recently released compilation of Neal Knox’s writing, Neal Knox – The Gun Rights War, is a wrenching story of a Nazi atrocity in Belgium and a cautionary tale regarding the dangers of gun registration. The story was told to Dad by a Belgian-American corporal who was with him in the Texas National Guard. We released the story on the Internet (www.NealKnox.com) when the book came out and it has gained a gratifying amount of circulation.

While the praise has been overwhelming, there are some dissenting voices suggesting that the massacre in the story never happened – at least not in Belgium. We have no way of knowing for sure, though I continue to research into it. What we do know for certain is the impression that the story made on a young (just turned nineteen) Neal Knox. For him, the Belgian Corporal’s story rang true. He believed it in his bones and it changed his life.

If you haven’t ordered your copy of Neal Knox – The Gun Rights War, I hope you will. It’s raw history written as it happened by someone who was often a key participant. I can’t promise you’ll read a story that changes your life, but I’ll bet you’ll learn something. To order a copy, go to www.NealKnox.com or www.FirearmsCoalition.org.

To receive The Firearms Coalition’s bi-monthly newsletter, The Knox Hard Corps Report, write to PO Box 3313, Manassas, VA 20108.

Neal Knox Associates – The most trusted name in the rights movement.

About:
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement.

FirearmsCoalition.org

Washington, DC --(AmmoLand.com)- The US Senate has voted 68-30 in favor of a measure which would deny $1.6 Billion taxpayer dollars for the beleaguered Amtrak passenger train system unless they change their “No Guns” policy.

Since the Madrid commuter train bombing in 2004 Amtrak has maintained a policy of no guns or weapons on their trains – even locked in checked baggage. The amendment passed by the Senate today was sponsored by Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) says that Amtrak must accept checked baggage containing firearms or starter pistols as long as the passenger declares the firearm at the time of check in and the gun is unloaded and locked in a hard-sided case. The measure also provides for the lawful transport of ammunition in checked baggage.

Opponents raised objections based on the cost of implementing the liberalized regulations, but those arguments rang hollow and the measure passed easily.

Now for the shenanigans:
Even though the amendment passed easily – with a few surprising (and suspicious) votes in favor – this is not a done deal. Since the Senate version of the underlying appropriations bill is now different from the version passed in the House, there must be a Reconciliation Conference to bring the two versions into line. For a conference, both houses select a number of representatives who are supposed to go sit down together and hash out their differences, settling on a final bill they believe will be acceptable in both houses. That version of the bill is then sent to the floors of the House and the Senate where it receives an up or down vote. No amendments are accepted for a reconciled bill. (Read More and see Vote Count)

About:
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. Visit: www.firearmscoalition.org

FirearmsCoalition.org

Manassas, Virginia – -(AmmoLand.com)- As we reported in our bi-monthly newsletter, The Knox Hard Corps Report, voting records, especially those for final passage, don’t tell the full story of where our elected servants stand on a particular issue. And the fact is that those servants occasionally take pains to conceal their true position from the people who sent them to office.

This year’s poster boy for obfuscated voting is Senator Mark Pryor a second-term Democrat from Arkansas.

In the July Senate vote for nationwide concealed-carry reciprocity, Pryor first voted against the measure but then, when Republicans Lugar of Indiana and Voinovich of Ohio cast their votes against their party line, he changed his vote to a nominally pro-gun vote.

Pryor’s changed vote gives the Democrats twenty allegedly pro-gun vote that they can point to when the inevitable charges come that the Democratic Party is the anti-gun party. It also gave them a pair of anti-gun Republican votes they can point to when Republicans try to claim a pro-gun mantle. In other words, it keeps the whole issue foggy and enables politicians to come down firmly on whichever side of the fence seems most advantageous at the time. I don’t know, but I would bet that had another Republican defected, another Democrat would have seen the light and voted for passage.

Muddy or downright misleading votes are a tradition as old as public deliberation itself. My father, Neal Knox, focused much of his reporting on the play-by-play of such votes, particularly on the seemingly minor procedural and committee votes, for that’s where the legislation that eventually makes headlines is formed. One column that I included in Neal Knox – The Gun Rights War, the recently released compilation of his writing, was especially instructive. The piece is from October of 1984 and is titled “How To Read A Congressional Vote.”

The vote in the 1984 column was a procedural vote on whether to consider the McClure-Volkmer Firearms Owners Protection Act as an amendment to a massive must-pass appropriations bill. The procedural vote passed 63-31. Focusing on the 31 Nay votes against accepting the amendment for consideration, he found that eight of the Senators routinely opposed any “non-germane” amendments to appropriations bills. He set those votes aside since they were principled votes and had history to back it up.

The remaining 23 votes were another matter. Those senators had voted to consider another similarly “non-germane” amendment which they wanted to pass, but they voted against the pro-gun McClure-Volkmer bill which they did not want to pass. Yet a couple of days later, half a dozen of the senators (among them now-Vice-President Joe Biden) voted for the McClure-Volkmer bill on a meaningless reconsideration vote. Even more misleading, at least three of these same senators had co-sponsored McClure-Volkmer in its standalone form.

In fact, co-sponsoring legislation is not a sure sign of support. Throughout most of the fight over McClure-Volkmer it had the co-sponsorship of a majority of the Senate, yet the bill stayed bottled up in committee. When Neal Knox started to press the Republican leadership to get the bill to the floor, he ran straight into a brick wall of opposition. That’s another story, but it’s also included in the book, by the way.

In addition to the late-changing vote and the all-important procedural and committee votes, there are other ways that a member of Congress can leave a record that he hopes will be more palatable than the positions he actually holds. One is “taking a powder” – literally not showing up for a vote, or voting Present which is a non-vote. Both John McCain and Barack Obama caught flak as senators for either failing to show up or for voting Present. But they were able to avoid hard votes that way.

Another game politicians play is to “pair” a vote with someone across the aisle, agreeing to cross-cancel each other. Such pairings are often orchestrated by the leadership to give cover to vulnerable party members and can give the appearance of a closely divided Congress where in reality the deal was in the bag long before the quorum call went out.

The brutal fact is that most elected servants, like any other salesman, will show you the face and the record they think you want to see. Citizens can counteract the obfuscation with careful scrutiny. Knowing how to decipher the record – read Neal Knox – The Gun Rights War – and reporting what you discover – by posting questions, answers, and discussion on GunVoter.org – shines light on the shenanigans and serves as a force multiplier in the gun rights war.

About:
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. Visit: www.firearmscoalition.org