redstate.com has some inside baseball stuff on the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) lobbying efforts in our nation’s capitol. Unless you’re a beltway boy, it’s pretty esoteric stuff. Suffice it to say, “Shocking new e-mails obtained by RedState show that the National Rifle Association actively opposed and sought to undermine gun-rights legislation offered in the Senate by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK).” The key communication [after the jump] reveals that the NRA worked to make sure that the law allowing firearms into national parks excluded rifles. To prevent poaching. Yes, well, handgun – bear. AR – bear. Know what I mean?
From: NRA
To: Congressional Aide
Sent: Mon May 18, 2009
Subject: Re: Congress Poised to Restore Common Sense Second Amendment RightsThe Coburn amendment to H.R. 627 is open to criticism and potential problems since it is not limited to concealed firearms, or even concealable firearms. Rifles, shotguns, legally possessed machineguns or destructive devices, could all be carried if the person is not prohibited and the person complies with state law.
Two very important points to consider on the language:
1. Limiting to concealed handguns squares with the motive for the federal rule change to legalize self-defense in national parks and wildlife refuges – i.e. the growth of right to carry states.
2. Concealed (and therefore concealable) handguns are less likely than rifles or shotguns to be used for poaching – unlike in national forests and BLM lands where hunting is frequent and legal.
So the same NRA that wants to endorse Harry Reid because it supposedly only looks at his gun record wants to ban rifles in national parks because they care about poaching? Weird stuff.
Anyway, I bet a lot of us are thinking the same thing. If I'm in a national park, I'm probably more worried about big freakin' animals attacking me than anything else. Oh well, I'm sure my 9mm will be more than enough….
Comments are closed.