Gun law-related stories need to substantiate claims

Rep. Todd Tiahrt

Two stories came out yesterday that are spreading quickly through the gun-rights activist community. They both make some pretty definitive claims which I think need to be fleshed out.

Is NRA "agreeable"?

The first report is from Amie Parnes of Politico.com.

"NRA, mayors agree on gun change," reads the headline:

The National Rifle Association and big-city mayors have rarely agreed on gun laws. But they’ve found something they may both support: the Obama administration’s call for full law-enforcement access to data from traces of guns used in crimes.

She's writing about the so-called "Tiahrt Amendment," which we've talked about before here at Gun Rights Examiner. As I wrote back in January:

Aside from the fact that the Congressional Research Service has found trace data cannot be used for statistical purposes, we're not being given the straight story here. Trace data most definitely can be used by law enforcement "in connection with and for use in a bona fide criminal investigation or prosecution."

And guess who opposes repeal? None other than BATFE and the Fraternal Order of Police, not exactly known to be gun owners' best pals. It's entirely a matter of self-interest--they know from experience that ongoing investigations could become compromised, and officer lives could become endangered.

Parnes' basis for claiming NRA "agreement"?

Christopher Cox, an NRA spokesman, stopped shy of endorsing the reform but did not oppose it: “While we do not believe any change is necessary, we appreciate the President’s decision to support law enforcement and not gun control activists.”

So they didn't "agree." And the "support law enforcement" meme is SOP. This seems a heck of a leap.

What it sounds like to me is mediaspeak, but in fairness, we'd need to know the context in which the Cox quote was made. Still, I would be surprised--astounded, actually--if NRA changed their long-established position on Tiahrt:

The "Tiahrt Amendment" on Firearms Traces: Protecting Gun Owners' Privacy and Law Enforcement Safety...

...There are good reasons for keeping this information confidential, and for strengthening the Tiahrt Amendment and making it permanent...

I just don't see how they could make such a fundamental change in policy. And for what? The Politico story makes no sense to me. I hope I'm not wrong.

------------

Is the turning of Kirsten complete?

I've written before about Kirsten Gillibrand. And how.

For those of you new to Gun Rights Examiner, she was a New York democrat representative who was picked to replace Hillary Clinton in the senate. Once introduced to greater power and a larger stage, she shed her previous "pro-gun" ways and joined the "gun control" camp.

Now from Kurt Nimmo at Prison Planet we get a rather unequivocal prediction:

Former Top Rated NRA Senator to Introduce Gun Ban This Week

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat and member of the so-called Blue Dog Coalition, plans to introduce an assault weapons ban this week.

I understand there will be no shortage of knee-jerk attacks on the Alex Jones site as a source--as well as vocal defense of it. What I care about is the truth of the matter at hand.

Having observed and written about Gillibrand's "transformation" over the past few months, I have to admit such a move will not surprise me. And colleague Kurt Hofmann who writes the St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner column speculates on Gillibrand support for a semiauto ban being "a test" to mollify Carolyn McCarthy and her coalition of citizen disarmament fanatics.

Candidly, I just don't know how to call this one. Gillibrand has screaming zealots she must appease, but the party also needs to maintain a fi...uh...faction of "pro-gun Democrats" for political reasons, so the elders may give her the green light to oppose a new bill and silence her critics. They may not rescind that permission unless and until the final vote is close, and then they'll assess who can flip with the least real political cost.

I cede that Nimmo may have exclusive information, but he did not share how he knows with us. Without attribution, or even the hint of it, I just can't accept his prediction on face value.

We'll know shortly. "This week."