I, for one, don't think an Obama administration would be that much different than a McCain administration on gun-control issues. Both candidates have come out in support of closing the gun-show loophole in the Brady Law background-check requirement. McCain is against assault-weapons regulation, but most people know that the 1994-2004 assault-weapons ban didn't do much but change the way a few weapons were configured (in order to get around the simplistic express definitions of the ban). Most importantly, D.C. v. Heller (pdf) has been decided, so the most basic question — Is there an individual right to bear arms in self defense? — has been answered affirmatively. As the Brady Campaign has opined, Heller, which takes the extreme positions of both sides of the gun-control debate off the table, should help clear some of the wedge politics that have marked the debate. Whether there's much federal movement on gun control probably has more to do with 1) whether the Dems get a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and 2) whether the Dems really want to take on this relatively toxic issue.
But don't bother telling that to Dan Cooper.
Mr. Cooper, co-founder and president of Cooper Firearms of Montana, Inc., was asked by his board of directors to resign "after word that he supports Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama led to calls on pro-gun Web sites to boycott the company’s products." Mr. Cooper went along with the request in an attempt to help the company and its 40 employees avoid a backlash over his personal views.
So much for clearing some of the wedge politics… Of course, people have every right to boycott. By the same token, I suppose Obama supporters in the market for a beautiful long gun should consider making their next purchase from Cooper Firearms. Maybe Biden could buy one to put in his gun safe next to those Beretta shotguns of his…
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
Mr. Moritz,
Heller has come far from coming close to even remotely settling this issue. First of all, the slim majority of one vote that gave us this ruling is unsettlling, in my opinion. It tells me that pro-gun, law-abiding citizens like myself must remain vigilant and persevere.
Secondly, Supreme Court rulings mean very little, it seems, these days. Right off the bat, Washington D.C. denied Dick Heller the right to register his semi automatic handgun because they said the SCOTUS ruling did not adress specific types of weapons. Mind you, this is the same handgun that he carries everyday at his job defending a Federal Facility. Now, we start the interpretation process of the whole ruling. "They meant this. They meant that. They didn't mean automatics. They meant revolvers." The City of Chicago maintains that the ruling is only valid in the D.C. case. Some municipalities and states believe that the ruling applies to Federal enclaves.
If you think it is settled, then go get caught with a handgun in the City of Chicago and see how Dick Daley's troops treat you.
All of this is above me, as I am a lowly engineer, and have not cracked the law books much in my life.
What I do know is that the local gun stores are packed and selling handguns and "assault" rifles at a break neck pace. At my local gun store, there is a massive increase in the number of first time gun owners paying for handgun courses. I have spoken with many of these people and they are not the stereotypical "hick" with rotten teeth and bad breath. They are middle aged, professional couples, men, women, doctors, lawyers, whites, blacks, etc., buying their very fist handgun. Wonder what has them so spooked? Anyhow, the people seem to be voting with their dollars.