Gun Sense

On my morning talk radio show, I am regularly bedeviled by a black conservative who detests President Barack Obama and parrots extreme arguments he’s heard on right-wing radio.

The caller identifies himself as H.S., which tells you everything you need to know. He says it stands for House Slave.

Recently, H.S. was insisting Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett would have to scale back his opposition to concealed carry and support of gun control to stand a chance in the statewide governor’s race against conservative Republican Scott Walker.

One of the ironies, of course, was that H.S. assumed he knew where Walker stood on concealed carry. No one can be sure this week.

When he was in the Legislature, Walker co-sponsored a concealed carry bill. However, when he decided to run for Milwaukee County executive, in order to attract urban voters who believe we already have quite enough guns on our streets, thank you, Walker reversed himself politically and opposed concealed carry.

Now that he’s in a statewide race, will Walker flip-flop again and once more proclaim support for concealed carry to try to pander to gun-totin’ rural voters? If he did, why in the world would anyone believe him?

Taking a Stand

Barrett has joined with New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and more than 500 other mayors across the country to strongly advocate for common-sense restrictions on the guns flooding city streets.

Barrett will get far more credit for taking a strong political stand on an important issue cowardly politicians prefer to duck than he would by changing positions and looking like just another politician who will say anything to get elected.

Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold has demonstrated the political strength of being a politician who is not afraid to take an unpopular stand. After 9/11, when a fearful public was ready to abandon many of our constitutional freedoms and go to war against anyone with imaginary weapons of mass destruction, Feingold was one of the few senators with the courage to vote against the Patriot Act and the War in Iraq.

Politicians with real convictions are so rare these days that Feingold’s maverick reputation is a political asset. Feingold’s voters may not agree with him on every issue, but they admire him for standing up. Besides, he keeps turning out to be right.

Contrary to what other politicians cowering under their desks think, Barrett’s national leadership on guns could turn out to have far more support among gun owners in Wisconsin than the National Rifle Association (NRA) wants us to believe.

E.J. Dionne Jr., the columnist for The Washington Post, quoted Barrett recently in a column reporting the surprising results of a national poll of gun owners and NRA members. The poll was commissioned by Mayors Against Illegal Guns and actually conducted by Republican pollster Frank Luntz, a supporter of the NRA. Luntz surveyed 832 gun owners nationwide, including 401 members of the NRA.

And guess what? Extremist leaders of the NRA who oppose any government regulation of gun ownership as the first step onto the “slippery slope” of confiscation of guns from citizens do not speak for most gun owners or NRA members.

In fact, 69% of all the gun owners surveyed favored closing the gun show loophole by “requiring all gun sellers at gun shows to conduct criminal background checks of the people buying guns.”

Another proposal advocated by the mayors, “requiring gun owners to alert police if their guns are lost or stolen,” was supported by 78% of gun owners.

Both of those proposals are aimed directly at guns used in crimes. When police trace guns used in crimes back to a purchaser, the purchaser often claims the gun was either lost or stolen. If gun owners were required by law to report the loss of a gun to police, those who provide guns used in crimes would no longer be able to masquerade as legitimate gun owners who just happened to misplace their deadly weapons.

Legitimate gun owners have no interest in protecting criminals. Murderers give gun owners a bad name.

Perhaps that’s why an overwhelming 86% of gun owners and NRA members surveyed supported the statement: “We can do more to stop criminals from getting guns while also protecting the rights of citizens to freely own them.”

One pretty obvious way would be to require private sales of deadly weapons between individuals to be reported to the state exactly the same way the private sales of automobiles are now reported.

State Sen. Spencer Coggs from Milwaukee for years has advocated such a law in Madison. Fearful of the NRA, legislators have never had the courage to pass such a law.

Sorry, H.S. But Barrett doesn’t see anything wrong with keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. Neither do the majority of legitimate gun owners and members of the NRA.

REPLY TO THIS COMMENT

anonymous

Hey McNally, I have a challenge for you. Can you go one week without using the terms "extreme" or "extremist"? I know you are an unhappy and bitter socialist, I mean, really, for god's sake look at yourself, nonetheless let me, once again, clue you in on something.........YOU CAN'T LEGISLATE MORALITY AND NO AMOUNT OF GUN CONTROL LAWS WITH PREVENT CRIMINAL THUGS FROM GETTING OR USING GUNS!!!!!! I can not wait until Walker wins the gubernatorial race just to hear you bitch and moan like the ineffectual and lazy leftist you are. One other point about your reference to the black caller that detests Obama, does that make him a racist? I love destroying you liberals/socialists with my superiority.

Instead of listening to the loud, reactionary voices on talk radio -- voices which I am convinced do not represent most of Milwaukee -- I suggest people of conscience turn instead to the excellent programming available from Wisconsin Public Radio, found locally on WUWM and WHAD. Tune out these cartoonish name-callers. Drowned out by the loud apologists of failed GOP policies, there exists, I am convinced, a great, quiet groundswell just waiting to be tapped by a local Barack Obama-type leader.

Joel McNally is the ultimate extremist, except for one thing- all he does is engage in a one-sided rant. I've listened to Joel on his "talk show". It is unbearable- even the callers seem bored. His talk show is the reason that liberal talk radio fails everywhere. Maybe Joel thinks he'll succeed on urban radio because he knows what's best for African-Americans. He thinks that they just can't make it without a white man giving them a "hand up"- the ultimate in racism.

As usual, McNally starts off in one direction and then ends up somewhere else after an elusive string of comments. The Gun Sense article started off talking about concealed carry and ended with some unsurprising poll results stating that 86% of gun owners and NRA members supported the notion of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. Who wouldn't support that? It has absolutely nothing to do with a concealed carry law. McNally would have the casual reader believe that all these gun owners agree that we don't need or want a concealed carry law, but that's not the case or the question that was asked of them. By the way, criminals would not pass the strict background check, conducted by the FBI, in order to get a carry permit. Also, tell Bloomberg to spend a few of him millions on solving some of the murders and other crimes in New York. Obviously, his strict gun law isn't doing much to curb crime there. In fact, it probably enables criminals to be more bold, knowing citizens cannot protect themselves. Oh yeah, just dial 911. When seconds count, police are only minutes away.

I am all in favor of reasonable gun control, including barring concealed carry and mandating background checks at gun shows. So basically, I apprreciate your editorial. However, I find it quite amazing that you cite Sen Russ Feingold as an example of political courage in this context. A few months ago he voted in favor of allowing guns in our national parks. I have written him, asking him to provide a rationale for that vote. His response provided no such explanation. As a result, my opinion of him has plummeted from extremely favorable to quite unfavorable.

And his vote on that measure only INCREASED my support for him. Can you explain the rationale for baring law abiding citizens from carrying in national parks? Did this law stop a single criminal from doing as he/she pleased? The problem with your mentality is that you seem to think that somebody carrying a gun is somehow more likely to commit a crime than somebody who isn't. There is ZERO evidence to support this mindset. You would have law abiding citizens be unable to defend themselves effectively while criminals, who have little care for such things as the law, continue to carry firearms. You're off base and out of touch on this issue, just as Mayor Barrett is. I do respect people with strong resolve and convictions, but if their resolve is to support the wrong side of an issue, it's counter productive at best. The VPC itself has produced evidence (unwittingly) that concealed carry permit holders are significantly less likely to commit a crime than those who are not permit holders. By their own numbers, 85 people have been killed by concealed carry permit holders over the last 2.5 years (an average of 34 per year out of 4 million CCW holders nation wide). You have a greater chance of being killed by lightning (which kills an average of 90 people a year, though the last couple of years have been usually low) than by a CCW permit holder. I applaud Senator Feingold for standing up to the party line on this issue. There is nothing progressive about barring concealed carry.

The major problem with the poll data is that it came from Word Doctors. I suggest you google the name to see what they are about. I'm also curious as to how any progressive minded person can be in favor of making use of the much maligned "Terrorist Watch List," a Bush era civil rights nightmare, as any determining factor of somebodies free exercise of a constitutionally protected right. There's no due process involved whatsoever when it comes to that list, and that is the major issue. Also, given that your H.S. was speaking about concealed carry, exactly what did the rest of that claptrap have to do with that particular issue? The Mayor is simply wrong on this issue. If he were to look at the numbers and admit so, he WOULD be better off morally and politically.

Gun Sense

Related content

Also in Taking Liberties:

Also from Joel McNally: