Friday, February 29, 2008

Gun-Owners and Obama

I feel that I should clarify the fact that there is presently little or no connection between my support for Barack Obama's campaign for President and my support for Second Amendment rights. Some people have gotten the mistaken impression that I represent a part of some 'sportsmen for Obama' type of group.

Barack Obama's record on Second Amendment issues starts out poor and improves to the point of murkiness.

As a State Senator representing Chicago, Obama spoke in support of banning all semi-automatic firearms. A position that I find so ludicrous that I have trouble believing that a person as intelligent as Barack Obama could actually believe in it once he had been provided with thorough information about the technical details and history of those firearms. In my experience, the most absurd or radical anti-gun proposals are typically rooted in simple ignorance of the technical facts rather than a fundamental difference in philosophy.

However, since coming to Washington Obama has backed off of gun issues. He's not said a word about gun control as a candidate and is clearly trying to tiptoe around the whole thing. The underdog victories of challengers like John Tester, Jim Webb and Brad Ellsworth in 2006 demonstrated that support for Second Amendment rights was not only compatible with Democratic party politics but that it could be the key issue that pushes elections in the reddest of red states over to Democratic party wins. If Obama becomes President, he has certainly sought no mandate even from his own party in the primary for an anti-gun agenda.

This does not mean that I trust Obama on gun issues. Really, I don't. However, it's not as if I would ever even consider trusting Hillary Clinton with this issue over Obama. Obama at least makes it plain that he's seeking to get things done with the consent and cooperation of people from across the political spectrum, a la Reagan. Most new gun control measures that you could think up would not be consistent with that. Hillary Clinton's approach is more one of seizing and exercising power however she can. Doing whatever will get her ahead at that moment, regardless of who she steps on. That is the sort of person who might try to ram through new gun control measures even in the face of 49.9% opposition. Obama seeks consensus while Clinton does not.

As for John McCain, he has been no great friend of gun owners, either. His record in Washington on gun issues has been mixed and he's suggested that he might be willing to support federal licensing and registration of all firearms. And this was as a Senator from Arizona, where he had no need to ape anti-gun rhetoric for political reasons. At least Obama had the excuse of having represented Chicago when he made his anti-gun statements.

As far as I am concerned, none of these candidates for President are great friends of gun owners and the field is essentially a wash. Gun-owners should make up their minds about whom to support based on other criteria.

Yet I feel quite up-beat about the future of Second Amendment rights in Washington over the next few years. No matter who wins the White House, the House and Senate are not going to be changing hands in 2008 and the leadership of both houses has chosen to stay away from new gun control measures. Harry Reid has an 'A' rating from the NRA, while some Democratic House leaders such as John Murtha also have 'A' ratings. The unusually large freshman class of 2006 in Washington is, by and large, pro-gun and knows that doing an about-face on that issue would probably cost them their seats in what were otherwise 'red' districts. It's been a full year since Democrats took control of Capitol Hill and the leadership has not allowed any efforts to renew the so-called 'assault weapons' bill to make it out of committee. Gun owners now have the Brady campaign checkmated by electing allies in both parties.

Should Barack Obama choose Jim Webb as his running mate (rumors are flying everywhere that Webb is on the short list), my position as a gun-owner towards his campaign will change. Jim Webb is himself an NRA member, has a concealed carry permit and has introduced and pressed for legislation to allow legally possessed firearms to be carried in national parks and forests. He is certified as a 1911 instructor and demonstrates a personal commitment to the Second Amendment that I do not doubt. The addition of Jim Webb to the ticket would allow me to endorse Obama/Webb '08 as a hunter and a gun owner with a clear conscience.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Eh, you're often right, but I think you missed on this one. I think you wanted it to be true, which is understandable. I want it to be true, too. But the fact is, Jim Webb ran between two and four points behind Kaine's numbers almost everywhere in the Commonwealth. I agree that being pro-2nd Amendment and pro-Sportsman isn't inherrently anti-Democrat, but there isn't any empirical evidence to suggest that Webb's pro-gun stance won him an election. Rather, the evidence seems to suggest that a stronger, better organized, better-financed campaign on Kaine's part in the Republican-leaning parts of the state boosted his support in those areas in spite of being the initiating force behind Project Exile.

Anonymous said...

I should clarify that I was refering specifically to your assertion that Webb's victory "demonstrated that support for Second Amendment rights was not only compatible with Democratic party politics but that it could be the key issue that pushes elections in the reddest of red states over to Democratic party wins." Let's call a spade a spade: the election was about the war in Iraq.

Jack Landers said...

anonymous,

The wonderful thing about election results with a razor-thin margin of victory is that one can point to pretty much any factor, no matter how small, and call it 'decisive.' But your point is taken in that we have no firm data that tells us for sure how much good Webb's pro gun positions did him.

By the way, Project Exile was fully endorsed and supported by the NRA. It was a major effort to crack down enforcement of existing gun laws against possession of handguns by convicted felons, which is something the NRA favors generally.

I think Tim Kaine had shown that he was friendly enough on gun issues that gun owners didn't have a very compelling reason to vote against him. Kaine's race was very different all around from Webb's. Kaine was up against a weak, effeminate-sounding opponent while Webb was taking on a very well-entrenched incumbent who more or less had the trust of gun-owners. Kaine pulled a lot of undecideds to get his win, which he could do since both he and Kilgore started out as not being household names and neither of them was consistently over 50% until the end. Whereas Jim Webb had to actually convert some people away from George Allen in order to squeak out his victory. Proving he was on their side on gun issues was part of how he did that. It wasn't a whole lot of votes that he got like that, but then his margin was only something like 10,000 votes so every little bit counted.

Anonymous said...

While it is true that NRA supported Exile, nearly every other pro-gun organization lined up against it (though you will correctly point out that their collective memberships are still eclipsed by the NRA).

I'm not disagreeing with your point that being pro-gun probably helped Webb a bit out in your neck of the woods--I do think however that the point is eclisped by the simple fact that Kaine's campaign was better-financed and better organized outside of Northern Virginia. In other words, if Webb had put the same sort of focus on narrowing the Republican margin in the non-rural Republican congressional districts around Virginia, he wouldn't have won by such a narrow margin that every little thing looks like it was "decisive."

There's this notion that Webb couldn't have won by more than 0.1%against Allen. There isn't really any evidence to suggest that's true or not true, we just take it at face value. And we shouldn't.

The Safety Officer said...

Remember, Vice President Chaney seems to have very little effect in influencing President Bush's support of the Second Amendment. Chaney is a hunter and Bush's Second Amendment support has been slightly above dismal. At least he did not come after us.

Historically, Vice President's are used to collect votes in presidential elections but normally very little else.

Gringo_Malo said...

GOA doesn't seem to think much of Obama. Of course, if you're a law-abiding gun owner, then you probably have a job and pay taxes. If you're going to base your vote on some other criterion than the 2nd Amendment, then you should probably choose the candidate who will rip off the least part of your meager wages. Between the Hildebeest, Obama, and McCain, that would be NONE OF THE ABOVE.

I expect I'll be voting for some third party candidate. And no, I won't be wasting my vote. Voting for any of the aforementioned candidates would be a waste of my vote.

Anonymous said...

my wow gold buy wow power leveling cheap wow gold cheapest wow power leveling
replica replica rolex
CHEAP wow power level
BUY power leveling
CHEAPEST power leveling l

Custom Search