Moonage Political Webdream

An article today pointed to the fact that not all National Rifle Association members are against Obama.  Heck, Obama even has the support of the American Hunters and Shooters Association.  Hey, since it has the words “hunter” and “shooter” in its title, it’s got to be about guys who like to shoot things with guns, and therefore a competitor to NRA. Right?

Not so fast.

This is not the Hunter’s Shooter Association.  That’s where the buck drops.  For that matter, it’s not about shooting guns at all.  It’s about protecting the places where a person might hunt.  And, it’s about hunting without guns, since they are very vocal anti-gun activists, while stating very publicly otherwise.  The damning evidence to me personally is this statement:

Today, Justice Scalia confirms what AHSA has long advocated:  Americans enjoy an individual right to keep and bear arms, but that right is not unlimited.  As Justice Scalia wrote: 

“Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited…

They crop off the rest.  The rest is more important legally than the part they quote.  It defines the limitations.  And, those limitations are very distinct and clear.  It does not limit a person’s ability to OBTAIN a firearm, it defines what conditions a person might LOSE that firearm.  It also defines what might be considered “unusual weapons”.  This folks, is about as deceptive as you can get while quoting the Supreme Court.

They then go on to support the FBI’s ability to screen gun applicants.  Now, that sounds fine and good, but, that puts control over who does, and does not have, the right to bear a firearm directly in the hands of the federal government.  Which is EXACTLY what Heller vs DC decided, of which they quoted Judge Scalia.  The right to bear arms is unlimited, the right to KEEP arms is limited.  So, which is it AHSA?

Basically, this bunch strikes me as being a front for a bunch of elitist gun control activists.  They have their guns, but want the ability to make sure some people can’t have theirs.  And, they think it’s just as important that hunters be kept OFF as much hunting terrain in the US as possible.  And, of course, felons, mentally handicapped, and other undesirables just can’t have any guns at all.

That folks, just ain’t how it works.  Either the Second Amendment guarantees the right to milita or not.  It doesn’t fudge that issue.  It is damned impossible to form a militia if the average citizen does not have a firearm.  Granted there can be limitations to what a “firearm” is.  But, in the day the authors wrote the Constitution, it would have either been a rifle or pistol.  Those two in my opinion are off the table for debate.  Now, in my perfect world even a felon could have the gun of their choice.  Since they were in prison, it wouldn’t do them much good.  Mentally handicapped people having guns has never been an issue.  It just made political sense since most of them can’t vote the bastards out.  So, what is the point of the American Hunters and Shooters Association, which is not the Hunters and Shooters Association, and does not advocate the rights of shooters?

My guess?

“Our party will never be the choice of the NRA and I’m not looking to be the candidate of the NRA,” “Courage means standing up for gun safety, not retreating from the issue out of political fear.”  - John Kerry, September 2, 2003

The Democrats were tired of being beaten to death by the NRA.  So, wanna guess who this mysterious American Hunters and Shooters Association is endorsng?

The main purpose of the news conference was to tell outdoor writers that AHSA has endorsed Barack Obama for President and plans to raise millions of dollars to aggressively work to help him win several key states, including some western states. “We think hunters and shooters could make the difference in some of these states,” he said.

Of course, in the article, Schoenke refuses to name how many members he has or how many states he plans to target.  But, he will raise a million bucks to support the candidate with a proven history of supporting gun control laws against the candidate with a history of opposing gun control.  The logic he uses to base this support for Obama?  The fact that McCain supported background checks on gun-show sales.  Which, is exactly what they want and what upsets NRA.  That folks, merits a multi-million dollar all-out blitz for the candidate who has supported NUMEROUS total gun bans and lives in a community, happily, that bans personal handguns in the home.

This couldn’t get any weirder if I tried to make it up.

Bottom line, this is the bizarro-NRA that CNN and others is using as evidence that the pro-gun crowd is split between Obama and McCain:

ABC News’ Sunlen Miller and David Wright Report: Timing is everything in politics and, for Barack Obama’s campaign, today’s endorsement by the American Hunters and Shooters Association showed both good and bad timing.

The good news, for Obama: the support of this gunowners’ rights group may help him overcome the controversy over his suggestion that small voters “cling to guns and religion” because they’re “bitter.”

And as long as people just look and say “Hey, gun owners love Obama too!”, the media will once again tell you how to think if you don’t fact-check what they are saying.  And if you refuse to do so, don’t come whining to me about big brother.

Technorati Tags: 527, ABC, american hunters and shooters association, barack, cling, cnn, constitution, democrat, fbi, federal, gun, hunter, hunting, mccain, militia, obama, president, rifle, safety, scalia, vote

Tags: 527, ABC, american hunters and shooters association, barack, cling, cnn, constitution, democrat, fbi, federal, gun, hunter, hunting, mccain, militia, obama, president, rifle, safety, scalia, vote

3 Comments »

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed