As if all the coverage of the presidential campaign wasn't a warning, today's MSJ gives another sign that elections season is fast approaching, if not already here. The story is about the pandering of state legislators to the NRA and their paranoid members. The state Assembly has already passed and the Senate is expected to pass a bill that would put severe limitations on authorities to confiscate guns from people acting poorly.
The bill was sponsored by Rep. Scott Gunderson (R-NRA's right pocket) who said, "I just think it's important that if there ever is a disaster similar to Katrina, that citizens are able to defend themselves, their families and their property and not be worried about government coming and confiscating their firearms." Yeah, right. I clearly remember the hurricane of '83 that wiped Sheboygan right of the face of the map. And if there was such a calamity to hit Wisconsin, I'd be a bit too worried to worry about whether my gun rights were protected.
As one might expect, the local gun enthusiasts are more than pleased with this. Dad29 has even put up a NRA film showing interviews and even a lady get taken down by police, because she wouldn't give up her gun. When I challenged Dad on that, he threw up the predictable straw man challenging me to prove that the NRA was less than honest with their propaganda. Well, I can't. Most states with CCW and under the NRA's thumbs also having laws that forbid the public knowledge of data such as how many gun crimes were committed by licensed owners.
So instead, I looked a little into why the cops were taking peoples guns. As you could imagine, I found tons of articles about Katrina and guns. About two thirds were by the NRA or gun enthusiast sites echoing the NRA verbatim.
The other third were stories about the chaos, the violence and the troubles faced by the police and the National Guard members that were trying to restore order, rescue workers being shot at by looters or by freaked out homeowners, and stores being pillaged for their guns.
I can't speak for Dad29 or any of the other gun enthusiasts, but if I am trying to help someone, I'd be less inclined to if they started shooting at me. And if I was trying to help restore order in the face of such devastating and unimaginable chaos, I wouldn't be taking time to see if the people shooting at me were legal gun owners.
But that's just me looking at the other side of the equation.
And before the rabid NRA acolytes come after me with their pitchforks and torches, I am not advocating for the complete abolishment of guns. First of all, the right would have more luck cleansing the country of illegal aliens that the left would be getting rid of all the guns. Secondly, I do own some shotguns and a rifle that I inherited, that I use at our place in the country. So far, I have only had to worry about a rabid raccoon and two rattlers in six years. No looters, no thugs. (And yes, I keep them unloaded and locked up.)
So why is the legislature taking going through the motions of passing an unnecessary bill? I can only think of two reasons. One, it's a step closer to concealed carry law, which I would oppose. Two, it's an election year and the NRA has deep pockets.