Quite a few of you have sent me various links on this, and it's the talk of the gun blogs today. I'm not going to rehash what you'll read elsewhere, as my goal is to attempt originality. So without opening up the great NRA Sell-Out/GOA Misrepresentation debate that is no doubt occurring on innumerable sites right now, I'd just like to offer a few simple observations:
In a battle, the initial object is to keep the invading enemy from gaining a foothold in the defended territory. If they can't establish a front on the beach, they can't mount an assault against your positions on the cliffs above.
As the admittedly "partisan" Oregon Firearms Federation notes:
At this point, it's a done deal, so I'm not inclined to focus on a screaming match over who will prove to be right. My thoughts on mental health--that anyone who can't be trusted with a gun can't be trusted without a custodian--have been a matter of record for years now, but it is what it is.
The political reality is this is here and will be with us, and that because the perceived impact on most of us will be minimal, revisiting it will not be a matter of priority.
In a battle, the initial object is to keep the invading enemy from gaining a foothold in the defended territory. If they can't establish a front on the beach, they can't mount an assault against your positions on the cliffs above.
As the admittedly "partisan" Oregon Firearms Federation notes:
The NRA and the Brady Campaign are now issueing [sic] press releases praising the same bill. If this does not give you chills, you are not paying attention.In the interests of fairness, here is NRA's admittedly "partisan" take:
After months of careful negotiation, pro-gun legislation was passed through Congress today. The National Rifle Association (NRA) worked closely with Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) to address his concerns regarding H.R. 2640, the National Instant Check System (NICS) Improvement Act. These changes make a good bill even better. The end product is a win for American gun owners.NRA embracing this erodes the argument that gun control is not an effective means of crime control. It's not, and this won't stop further incidents or further calls for citizen disarmament, but there you have it.
At this point, it's a done deal, so I'm not inclined to focus on a screaming match over who will prove to be right. My thoughts on mental health--that anyone who can't be trusted with a gun can't be trusted without a custodian--have been a matter of record for years now, but it is what it is.
The political reality is this is here and will be with us, and that because the perceived impact on most of us will be minimal, revisiting it will not be a matter of priority.