It took me blogging at RedState pointing out that the NRA was missing in action on Sotomayor for the NRA to do anything about her nomination.

And when the NRA engaged, it did so by sending out a letter publicly telling Sotomayor what she needed to say so the NRA would not score her vote.

Apparently, it worked.

The NRA knows it cannot support Sotomayor’s confirmation. After all, Sotomayor actually said she did not know if there was such a thing as a “right to self defense” in the United States Constitution — don’t worry, she knows for sure there is an abortion right there.

Sotomayor believes that states can ban ownership of nunchucks by individuals who don’t want to own a handgun for self-defense.

In fact, Sotomayor is to the left of Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the issue of self-defense.

But while the NRA knows it cannot support Sotomayor and must oppose her, the NRA also knows that Senators will not pay attention unless the NRA “scores” the vote, i.e. negatively impacts a Senator’s gun rating if the Senator votes for Sotomayor.

The NRA, if you will recall, fell all over itself to avoid saying anything negative about Eric Holder, the most anti-gun Attorney General to ever reside at the DOJ. The NRA did not want to put Democrat Senators in awkward positions against their newly elected President.

In the same way, the NRA does not want to put Senators in awkward positions when it comes to Sonia Sotomayor. The NRA values its bipartisan reputation more than it values the second amendment.

For the first time in the NRA’s history, the NRA will oppose a nomination to the United States Supreme Court without scoring the vote.* In other words, Senators can vote for Sotomayor — the most anti-gun and anti-self defense nominee ever — and face no repercussions from the NRA.

David Keene of ACU, who has been in some hot water lately, is on the board of the NRA. If he wanted to really make amends quickly with conservatives troubled by the FedEx flap, he should push the issue with the NRA.

Let’s not hold our breath, however. We must keep our perspective. The National Rifle Association actively opposed legislation that would allow individuals to carry rifles into national parks. Perhaps it is time to become life members of Gun Owners of America instead of the NRA.

Charleston Heston rolls over in his grave today.

*I regret the error. I’ve found I cannot defend the claim and must retract it. My apologies. Notwithstanding that, the overall point remains — the NRA has capitulated on Sotomayor and has totally refused to put up a fight, just like with Eric Holder. If the NRA is not going to aggressively combat anti-2nd Amendment judges, why should we give them money?

While a little late and lacking an official position against her, the National Rifle Association has expressed its “very strong concerns” with the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the United States Supreme Court.

In a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy and Republican Ranking Member Jeff Sessions, the NRA used particularly harsh language for an organization often hesitant - to say the least - to appear partisan. To wit:

But the organization’s letter is far from partisan - rather, it focused intently on Judge Sotomayor’s dismal record regarding, and lack of respect for, the Second Amendment and the right of American citizens to keep and bear arms.

The National Rifle Association, whose oft stated aim is to protect our Second Amendment rights, is missing in action in the confirmation battle over Sonia Sotomayor, the most anti-gun nominee that President Obama could have nominated to the Supreme Court. In the two cases to come before her on the Second Circuit (an unpublished opinion and the more recent Maloney v. Cuomo case), she made clear her “fundamental” view that unlike all of the other amendments contained in the Bill of Rights, the right to keep and bear arms “is clearly not a fundamental right” and a restrictive New York weapons law did not “interfere[] with a fundamental right. Even the infamously liberal Ninth Circuit disagreed with her.

In the Maloney case, Sotomayor’s ruling would allow the states to completely ban the possession of guns, a radical view that should scare the living daylights out of the NRA and its membership. After all, the Heller decision by the Supreme Court striking down the District of Columbia’s gun ban was decided by only one vote. In other words, the Court came within one vote of completely writing the Second Amendment out of the Constitution.

This matter is likely to come up before the Supreme Court in its very next term. The NRA is appealing the decision of the Seventh Circuit in NRA v. Chicago, a case over the City of Chicago’s restrictions on handguns. This case will decide whether the individual right to bear arms that the Supreme Court recognized in Heller as applying to the federal government in the District of Columbia also applies to the states through the incorporation doctrine of the Fourteenth Amendment. If this case is lost through a close vote on the Supreme Court, the constitutional gun rights of Americans will vanish in the foreseeable future – except in the District of Columbia.

Read More →

NRA members, keep an eye out for your copy of May’s American Rifleman, if it hasn’t already arrived. According to the latest edition of the magazine, Bob Reynolds, gunsmith and owner of Templar Consulting LLC, will make a special presentation at the NRA Foundation Banquet on May 14.

It’s a modified AR-15 (civilian version of the milspec M16 rifle), specially customized in honor of Gov. Sarah Palin and dubbed “The Alaskan Hunter”:

Read More →

Note plural.

Mistake #1: picking an Attorney General and administration spokesman who doesn’t even know current firearms law.

Eric Holder was on today announcing that the Obama administration was going to bring back the “assault weapons” ban. As Purple Avenger of Ace of Spades notes, this is the same guy who called for making armor piercing bullets (”cop-killers”) illegal…

Read More →