Sitting late on a Sunday evening and reflecting back on the past week, it’s almost hard to imagine the Senate rejection of gun-control legislation was passed last Wednesday. After the Boston Marathon bombing and ensuing four-days of drama, it seems almost like it was weeks, not days, ago.
Yesterday, I sat in with my friend Tom Gresham as a co-host on his Gun Talk radio show and had a chance to visit in real-time with listeners and newsmakers about all the happenings. Tom’s been in town for the past week taping new episodes for the fifth season of Guns & Gear. Since we’ve been working on that all week, I guess he figured it only fair that if he worked the weekend, I did, too.
After three hours of visiting with callers from across the country, it was obvious to me that gun owners of America are feeling energized and engaged following the Senate’s tabling of anti-gun legislation. Granted, parliamentary tactics say the majority leader can bring up the bills at a later date, but the demonstration of political power by gun owners- not just arm-twisting by NRA and industry lobbyists- are what chocked the wheels of what anti-gun politicians thought would be a lay-down victory.
It’s important to note that this was not a victory by a political machine. The NRA-ILA’s Chris Cox put out a statement late last week that gave credit to the real power that stopped the passage of any gun bills: the average citizens who called, sent email, wrote letters and showed up to tell their elected officials that the passage of any more gun laws simply wasn’t acceptable.
Yep, you won this fight. When I have encouraged you to get active, it wasn’t because I was being encouraged to try and produce membership for organizations, or even to demonstrate that the wires could turn out readers. It was to encourage each of you to get engaged in the discussion.
And you have, so as far as I’m concerned, if you helped defeat that legislation, you start your week with an attaboy.
But it’s important to remember the words of President Obama when he took to the White House steps leading to the rose garden to deride your actions by telling the Senate it should be “ashamed” for its action. “This fight isn’t over,” he said, “not by a long shot.”
And he’s right in that respect. What he called “round one” in the fight to put more laws into effect to regulate gun owners, however, might be given a significantly higher number. It’s not round one, round ten or even the fifteenth round of a title fight. It’s a battle that’s been raging since the first gun regulations in the early twentieth century.
But this administration seems to only date calendars beginning with their first day in office. If that is the case, then they know that when it comes to pushing gun laws down our collective throat, their days truly are numbered.
That doesn’t take their foot off the accelerator pedal, it makes them want to go pedal-to-the-metal after guns. So, they’re shifting the battlefields.
Today -and going forward- it’s important to note that those laws that were rejected in Washington were mild compared to laws passed in Hartford, Connecticut, Denver, Colorado, and Albany, New York. The state and municipal levels are where the fight will be waged going forward.
That might seem like a good strategy to anyone who believes they have the majority of Americans behind them. But I’d respectfully disagree. There really isn’t any political leverage that can be brought to bear against a U.S. Senator that will sway them to vote against their party, especially when the party’s leader has made this a top-priority issue.
Bucking up against the party can have consequences; but ignoring the collective will of the people in your constituency can lead to unemployment. Mr. Obama took to the “bully pulpit” in Washington to use lofty rhetoric to tell Senators they should be “ashamed” of their actions.
Their constituents, however, delivered a much more direct message: “No more gun laws.”
Message delivered-at least in Washington.
But the March 16 brouhaha in Temple, Texas over a father accompanying his son on a ten-mile hike for a Boy Scout merit badge points out the fact that the fight’s not over. The problem wasn’t that Army Master Sargeant C.J. Grisham was accompanying his son on the hike, it was because he was exercising the right of open carry and was carrying his AR-rifle on a sling.
Seems someone called the Temple PD and an officer came out to investigate. “It started out as a civil conversation,” Grisham said, “then the officer reached for my rifle”. And at that point, Grisham says he pulled away, told the officer he wasn’t going to disarm him, and things got un-civil.
And at that point, the Temple PD’s version of the confrontation and Grisham’s differ. The Temple, PD spokesperson says Grisham yelled at the police officer and, essentially, provoked the incident.
Grisham says at that point the officer then let go of the rifle, pulled his service pistol and cuffed Grisham. That part of the confrontation is a matter of opinions, but the rest of the confrontation was videotaped by his son.
From there, it became a confrontation that has caused a YouTube sensation.
Grisham was jailed for resisting arrest and still faces criminal charges- despite the fact that he was not violating the law by carrying the rifle. The police say they were within their rights and the officers felt threatened, first by Griffin’s rifle; then by his confrontational attitude.
Looks like a jury will decide that difference of opinion. The Temple prosecutor’s office says it’s not dropping the charges against Grisham, and Grisham says he’s not backing down.
He was also quick to tell me that he’s not slamming the Temple PD. “They’re a great police department,” he was quick to say, “but there was no reason -or point of law- that gave the officer the right to order me to give up my rifle.”
That, says Grisham, is the point of his refusal to back down. “My father taught me,” Grisham said, “that sometimes the right thing is hard, and the easy thing might be wrong. Dropping this would be wrong-and might cause the same thing to happen to someone else.”
So he’s in this one for something more than an apology from officials or an acquittal by a jury -“it’s not for me” he says, “it’s to send a message to others that they don’t have to give up their guns simply because a policeman says so.”
We’ll keep you posted on this one.
–Jim Shepherd
Yesterday, I sat in with my friend Tom Gresham as a co-host on his Gun Talk radio show and had a chance to visit in real-time with listeners and newsmakers about all the happenings. Tom’s been in town for the past week taping new episodes for the fifth season of Guns & Gear. Since we’ve been working on that all week, I guess he figured it only fair that if he worked the weekend, I did, too.
After three hours of visiting with callers from across the country, it was obvious to me that gun owners of America are feeling energized and engaged following the Senate’s tabling of anti-gun legislation. Granted, parliamentary tactics say the majority leader can bring up the bills at a later date, but the demonstration of political power by gun owners- not just arm-twisting by NRA and industry lobbyists- are what chocked the wheels of what anti-gun politicians thought would be a lay-down victory.
It’s important to note that this was not a victory by a political machine. The NRA-ILA’s Chris Cox put out a statement late last week that gave credit to the real power that stopped the passage of any gun bills: the average citizens who called, sent email, wrote letters and showed up to tell their elected officials that the passage of any more gun laws simply wasn’t acceptable.
Yep, you won this fight. When I have encouraged you to get active, it wasn’t because I was being encouraged to try and produce membership for organizations, or even to demonstrate that the wires could turn out readers. It was to encourage each of you to get engaged in the discussion.
And you have, so as far as I’m concerned, if you helped defeat that legislation, you start your week with an attaboy.
But it’s important to remember the words of President Obama when he took to the White House steps leading to the rose garden to deride your actions by telling the Senate it should be “ashamed” for its action. “This fight isn’t over,” he said, “not by a long shot.”
And he’s right in that respect. What he called “round one” in the fight to put more laws into effect to regulate gun owners, however, might be given a significantly higher number. It’s not round one, round ten or even the fifteenth round of a title fight. It’s a battle that’s been raging since the first gun regulations in the early twentieth century.
But this administration seems to only date calendars beginning with their first day in office. If that is the case, then they know that when it comes to pushing gun laws down our collective throat, their days truly are numbered.
That doesn’t take their foot off the accelerator pedal, it makes them want to go pedal-to-the-metal after guns. So, they’re shifting the battlefields.
Today -and going forward- it’s important to note that those laws that were rejected in Washington were mild compared to laws passed in Hartford, Connecticut, Denver, Colorado, and Albany, New York. The state and municipal levels are where the fight will be waged going forward.
That might seem like a good strategy to anyone who believes they have the majority of Americans behind them. But I’d respectfully disagree. There really isn’t any political leverage that can be brought to bear against a U.S. Senator that will sway them to vote against their party, especially when the party’s leader has made this a top-priority issue.
Bucking up against the party can have consequences; but ignoring the collective will of the people in your constituency can lead to unemployment. Mr. Obama took to the “bully pulpit” in Washington to use lofty rhetoric to tell Senators they should be “ashamed” of their actions.
Their constituents, however, delivered a much more direct message: “No more gun laws.”
Message delivered-at least in Washington.
But the March 16 brouhaha in Temple, Texas over a father accompanying his son on a ten-mile hike for a Boy Scout merit badge points out the fact that the fight’s not over. The problem wasn’t that Army Master Sargeant C.J. Grisham was accompanying his son on the hike, it was because he was exercising the right of open carry and was carrying his AR-rifle on a sling.
Seems someone called the Temple PD and an officer came out to investigate. “It started out as a civil conversation,” Grisham said, “then the officer reached for my rifle”. And at that point, Grisham says he pulled away, told the officer he wasn’t going to disarm him, and things got un-civil.
And at that point, the Temple PD’s version of the confrontation and Grisham’s differ. The Temple, PD spokesperson says Grisham yelled at the police officer and, essentially, provoked the incident.
Grisham says at that point the officer then let go of the rifle, pulled his service pistol and cuffed Grisham. That part of the confrontation is a matter of opinions, but the rest of the confrontation was videotaped by his son.
From there, it became a confrontation that has caused a YouTube sensation.
Grisham was jailed for resisting arrest and still faces criminal charges- despite the fact that he was not violating the law by carrying the rifle. The police say they were within their rights and the officers felt threatened, first by Griffin’s rifle; then by his confrontational attitude.
Looks like a jury will decide that difference of opinion. The Temple prosecutor’s office says it’s not dropping the charges against Grisham, and Grisham says he’s not backing down.
He was also quick to tell me that he’s not slamming the Temple PD. “They’re a great police department,” he was quick to say, “but there was no reason -or point of law- that gave the officer the right to order me to give up my rifle.”
That, says Grisham, is the point of his refusal to back down. “My father taught me,” Grisham said, “that sometimes the right thing is hard, and the easy thing might be wrong. Dropping this would be wrong-and might cause the same thing to happen to someone else.”
So he’s in this one for something more than an apology from officials or an acquittal by a jury -“it’s not for me” he says, “it’s to send a message to others that they don’t have to give up their guns simply because a policeman says so.”
We’ll keep you posted on this one.
–Jim Shepherd
