You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
NRA challenges gun-control Dems
2007-06-28

For the first time since taking control of Congress, gun-control Democrats are taking on the National Rifle Association. The NRA seems to be nipping the effort in the bud. At issue is whether Congress should loosen restrictions on local law enforcement agencies' ability to gain access to gun-purchasing data to trace the movement of illegal guns around the nation. The restrictions on such "trace data" began almost four years ago when Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., succeeded in limiting the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, or ATF, from publicly revealing information from its gun trace database.

On Thursday, the battle shifts to the Senate Appropriations Committee, where Sens. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., and Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., are among those trying to repeal or weaken the gun data restrictions when the panel acts on the ATF's budget. Pro-gun rights stalwarts including Richard Shelby, R-Ala., and Ben Nelson, D-Neb., are pushing back hard and seem poised for victory.

The NRA says the data-sharing restrictions protect gun owners' privacy, but mayors around the country such as New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg contend they hamper law enforcement authorities' ability to trace illegal guns and arrest weapons traffickers. The mayors say gun trace data helps local police departments figure out where illegal guns are coming from, who buys them and how they get trafficked into their communities. Most guns used in crimes are sold by a small number of rogue gun dealers.

"The fight is between the nation's mayors and law enforcement leaders on one side, and the gun lobby on the other," said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. "The individuals who benefit most from the Tiahrt restrictions are corrupt gun dealers and illegal gun traffickers."

Bloomberg, who recently left the GOP amid speculation he may run for president, has sued numerous out-of-state gun dealers in an attempt to reduce the flow of illegal guns into New York. The NRA-backed restrictions block cities from getting ATF data for such lawsuits. The NRA says it would limit the release of the information to criminal investigators, and keep the information away from antigun activists, headline-hungry politicians and opportunistic trial lawyers.

Gun control advocates have had little success on Capitol Hill since a Democratic-controlled Congress muscled through an assault weapons ban in 1994. Many Democrats credited the ban for losses in rural seats as the party took a drubbing at the polls that year. "A major contributing factor to the Democratic loss of the House in 1994 was the broad gun control measure that was passed in that year," said Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Va., an NRA ally. "I think that's widely acknowledged and the same mistakes are not going to be made again."

This year, Democrats owe their narrow majorities in the House and Senate to freshmen from rural and Republican-leaning areas. Such pro-gun members include Sens. Jim Webb, D-Va., and Jon Tester, D-Mont., and numerous moderate "Blue Dog" Democrats elected to the House last year.

The difficult route to overturn the gun trace data restrictions contrasts sharply with the smooth path through the House of legislation aimed at correcting flaws in the national gun background check system that allowed a Virginia Tech student who killed 32 others to buy guns despite his diagnosed mental health problems. That legislation would require states to automate their lists of convicted criminals and the mentally ill, who are prohibited under a 1968 law from buying firearms, and report those lists to the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System

The difference is that the NRA endorsed the background check improvements, boosting its chances of becoming the first major national gun control law in more than a decade.

The House has yet to debate companion legislation. But West Virginia Democratic Rep. Alan Mollohan, chairman of the appropriations panel funding the ATF budget, has announced plans to stick with the current restrictions on ATF gun trace information.
Posted by:lotp

#13  Cancel that - different spelling.
Posted by: lotp   2007-06-28 21:11  

#12  That the same Jason Walters who was XO of D/SE recently?
Posted by: lotp   2007-06-28 21:09  

#11  Whoops! Well, what the heck - I guess I'm not "Secret Master" anymore!
Posted by: Secret Master   2007-06-28 20:55  

#10  Jason Walters

You've got another long time NRA member right here. I'm also a member of the Second Amendment Foundation, Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms, and for many years the California Pistol and Rifle Organization.

It costs very little to belong to an RTKBA organization, and they routinely and successfully fight out of their weight class across the country. Please donate to them if you can.
Posted by: Secret Master   2007-06-28 20:54  

#9  NRA Life Member here, BH6.
Posted by: Mac   2007-06-28 19:09  

#8  Reminds me of the old joke about the bar that's so tough they check everybody at the door for a gun or knife, if you don't have one, they'll loan you one.
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2007-06-28 18:08  

#7  I WANT THAT SHIRT.
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2007-06-28 17:59  

#6  If you're a gun owner or a 2d rights advocate (imho) - you should join the NRA &/or one of the many great grass roots RKBA organizations out there. If not, you might as well put yourself in the minus column on the issue.
Posted by: Broadhead6   2007-06-28 14:15  

#5  Any government that disarms its citizens assumes strict liability to protect them from crime. How about that, John Edwards?
Posted by: Gary and the Samoyeds   2007-06-28 08:49  

#4  If, like me, you've stopped sending money to the GOP, consider sending it to the NRA instead...
Posted by: M. Murcek   2007-06-28 07:57  

#3  The police, by their presence, do offer a passive form of protection against crime. Not an active one.

The primary job of the police is to deal with crime after the fact - investigation, arrest, prosecution. This isn't a hit on them - I believe that for the most part they work hard at these things - but it isn't active protection.

I agree with McZoid, but I'll go further. Not only do you have the right to protect yourself and your family, you have a responsibility to do so, rural or not.

The true test in this struggle will be whether or not the freshman "conservative, pro-gun" democrats in Congress really are what they said they were during their campaigns. I'm skeptical, but I'll be happy to be proven wrong.
Posted by: no mo uro   2007-06-28 06:00  

#2  Google "no duty to protect" and you will get all the classic literature on US case law on police protection. SCOTUS has repeatedly ruled: cops have no duty to protect individuals unless it arises in the act of a crime against person, to which a cop has a present ability to respond. Even there, "officer safety" overrides your need for armed or other protection.

Ergo: you have a common law right to protect yourself, and a constitutional right to bear arms in that regard. Frankly, I don't know anyone living in a rural area who does not own a gun. And if they didn't, I would buy one for them.
Posted by: McZoid   2007-06-28 02:52  

#1  The NRA needs to hammer the issue publically every chance it gets. The ATF, FBI and local law enforcement have total access to this data. What keeps getting squished is politicians getting the data. Bloomberg RUINED a number of active investigations by using this data in his lawsuits against gunshops. The problem is keeping idiot politico's out of it. They have no need or reason for being allowed access to the data and there's lots of reasons against it.

So anytime they claim law enforcement can't get it, it's a FLAT OUT LIE.
Posted by: Silentbrick   2007-06-28 02:32  

00:00