Wingnut tactic: when in doubt, intimidate

The right-wing in this country has been using intimidation as a means to their nefarious ends for decades. Whether it's poll taxes or literacy tests for voting back in the '50s and '60s, active intimidation at the voting sites as recently as last year, or threatening letters to voters and officials, trying to "scare" people is the wingnut trump card.

And they're doing it again in Naples, with the support and, likely, involvement of the crazed radicals at the National Rifle Association (NRA).

Naples mayor Bill Barnett recently joined a group called Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG), which seeks to rid America's cities of illegal weapons and to have gun owners comply with the law regarding registration and possession of firearms. The group, led by New York mayor Michael Bloomberg (a Republican), wants to work within the Second Amendment, recognizing a right to bear arms* but trying to ensure that the right is exercised legally.

More than a year and a half after Mayor Barnett joined MAIG, though, the NRA got wind of his involvement and sent out a "legislative alert" -- otherwise known as a "dog whistle," calling their followers to attack -- "warning" Naples citizens that their mayor was part of (gasp!) an anti-illegal-gun group. And predictably, the nutjobs who got the "alert" responded by confronting the mayor.

“I believe very strongly in the Constitution put forth by our forefathers, including the Second Amendment. I do not believe, for one minute, that Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his ‘MAIG’ group are doing what is best for the citizens of his community, and he is trying to expand the liberal New York mentality to the rest of the community,” Naples resident John H. Rothert said in a Sept. 14 letter to Barnett.

“As a member of NRA, I was sent notice that you have joined the group. Please don’t! What Mayor Michael Bloomberg is attempting to do fits right in with the extremely liberal establishment that is trying to get a choke hold on this country. I, for one, will not allow that to happen.”

Rothert wasn’t the only Naples resident to send Barnett an angry e-mail or letter about his decision to join.

Barnett’s office received hundreds of e-mails.

“I am saddened to learn of your enrollment in Gov. (sic) Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns. I can understand how you could consider this movement because of its title, which is very misleading,” Naples resident Wayne Jenkins said in a Sept. 10 e-mail to Barnett.

“I too, am opposed to illegal guns, but I also support lawful gun ownership of citizens. I would like to urge you to consider checking the facts, and if you agree with me that this is a disguised anti-gun organization, that you would withdraw your membership.”

That isn’t happening, Barnett said, even though the coalition has lost some members since the NRA began its campaign against the group.

Post said he was unsure how many of the 450 mayors have backed out of the organization, but said the coalition has continued to see its membership grow.

“I did this because I felt for the cause,” Barnett said.

A close cousin of intimidation, of course, is fear. Fear allows intimidation to be effective. And fear appears to be one thing Mayor Barnett doesn't feel in this instance, even if Neapolitans like John Rothert and Wayne Jenkins express their fear that their guns will be taken away (which they won't -- and can't) and that there's some "extreme liberal" takeover going on (which I would applaud, but which isn't happening). Even though the NRA has sent out the marching orders and their minions are responding, their intimidation tactics aren't working, and here's hoping they don't work.

The problem is that these ideological freaks, who see President Obama as evil incarnate and any attempt to regulate gun ownership as anti-American, have far too much of a voice in our country today. I urge Mayor Barnett and all members of MAIG to stand strong in the face of wingnuttery and recognize that these people, sadly, have a very skewed view of what's going on in our country today ... the kind of skewing that necessarily results from a steady diet of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh.

---

* I personally do not believe there is a constitutional basis for a right held by every citizen to own firearms, since the Second Amendment expressly makes such a right subject to the formation of a "well-regulated militia," but since that is how the courts presently interpret the Amendment, that's the law.

Blast Off! Radio RETURNS today at 4:00 pm EDT: The more things change ....

.... the more they stay the same. I know it's a cliché, but I think it's never been more true than it is right now.

Blast Off! Radio returns today after a summer hiatus of 2½ months, and not only are the right-wing crazies still around (and still getting an inordinate amount of mainstream corporate media coverage), they seem to be more rabid and violent than ever. I didn't even think that was possible ...

A lot has happened since I last inflicted my radical rantings on the webradio waves, and I'm not just talking about the Florida Bar exam. Why, this summer has seen the political seppuku of Sarah Palin, a precipitous and dangerous upswing in violence and hate from the Right (not the least of which is the ridiculous, disruptive displays at congressional health care forums nationwide), and more total disdain for American constitutional law from extremist Christians in northwest Florida. Indeed, it seems that as the temperature has risen, so too have the tempers of the fringe Right, most of whom just can't believe that a black man is president.

Well, I'm back to set things straight, and I hope you'll join me. Today on the show, we'll discuss the health care reform debacle and see if we can figure out why the president seems willing to back down on a public option. We'll also look at the prayer-in-school debate still raging in Santa Rosa County, Florida, as well as the gun nuts who think that a Scary Black Man™ will invade their homes and take away their guns (and, presumably, their masculinity as well ... and that's just the women gun nuts!). All that and more ... plus your calls, chats, and tweets.

How can you listen -- and participate? It's as easy as a click:

TIME: 4:00 pm Eastern TODAY

Click here to listen

Call in number: (646) 716-7543

E-mail: blastoffradio-at-gmail-dot-com

It's good to be back, and I hope you'll plan to be a part of the show this afternoon. There's an awful lot of pent-up ranting in here ...

(cross-posted at FPC Blog)

UPDATE (4:12 pm 8/17/09): The show has been archived here for your listening pleasure. Hope you'll listen -- it was a rollicking good time (although we never got around to talking about much besides health care reform).

Gun nut bestows "Quote of the Day" honors on Blast Off!

Well, seems I've earned yet another award from the wingnut blogosphere. Following up on last April's Asshat of the Month award from MilitaryPundits.com, now Blast Off! has provided the Quote of the Day from a pro-gun blog called "The View From North Central Idaho," appropriately subtitled "Ramblings of a red-necked, knuckle-dragging, Neanderthal on explosives, guns, politics, and sex." (Coincidentally, one of the hotbeds of neo-Nazism in America was until recently Hayden Lake, Idaho, in the north central part of the state. Just saying.)

Apparently Joe the Blogger took umbrage at my characterization of gun nuts as "barrel-strokers with small penises" and responded accordingly. I do have to give him credit for being fairly civil in his response, but I still reserve the right to disagree ... of course:

My primary objective of quoting this guy is to let you know what the other side thinks of you.

My secondary objective is to demonstrate how wrong he is.

The first thing that comes to mind about this guy is, "Does he thinks woman [sic] have infinitely sized guns?" Then I wonder how many penises he has measured and compared to gun sizes. If it were more than one or two my hypothesis would be it was because he was more interested in the penises than in the correlation with gun size. But my leading hypothesis at this time is that he has precisely zero data to support his claims. This is based upon the above collection of data about him. For example:

1. Buying a gun now, such as a so called "assault weapon" that was been banned from new sale to private citizens the last time Democrats controlled Congress, the Senate, and the White House, does "immunize" said buyers. There is no registration of firearms in most states. Hence after a month or two it becomes very unlikely that a judge is going to issue a search warrant for said gun based entirely on a 4473 because without other confirming evidence the owner could have sold or otherwise disposed of the firearm being sought. So, at that point what can they do to remove the gun from circulation?
2. In states where registration has been implemented, such as California, New York, and New Jersey, not to mention all the foreign countries with registration, there have been many examples of the government coming to take the guns. And even without registration guns were forcibly confiscated after hurricane Katrina. To say it won't or can't happen again, particularly when there are people, such as Sinfonian, advocating it is naive or duplicitous.
3. The gun rights community has long been aware of and fought against high taxes on ammunition. For example just on my blog alone you can see concerns over it here, here, here, here, and here.
4. Gross misreading of the Second Amendment? Did he read the Heller decision or just is he just parroting what the Brady Campaign or the Violence Policy Center told him? See also my blog post if you just want a dramatically abridged version of what Scalia said. In other words the highest legal authority in the nation agreed with what us "barrel-strokers with small penises" have been saying about the Second Amendment for decades.

What would be funny if it weren't so tragic is this guy confuses his imagination with reality.--Joe

Oh, Joe, everything is so cut-and-dried with you, isn't it?

First of all, the penis reference was a joke. Kind of like saying that someone who drives a sports car is, you know, compensating for something. Except with gun nuts, the compensation is just a little more phallic. No, seriously, I do think you folks who love guns so much must have something missing in your lives, something that makes you want to have a big ol' weapon at your disposal and, more to the point, resist any efforts to regulate or restrict your -- or anyone's -- access to those weapons. But, naturally, I don't have any data to back that up.

Which leads me to the allegation that I don't have data to back up what I say. First of all, I was giving my opinion -- I don't need "data" for that. However, it is pretty funny to see a wingnut going on about "data" and "facts," since they're usually allergic to both. Still, given the relatively sensible tone of the response, I figure I should respond with some facts of my own:

The statement that buying a gun now "immunizes" buyers is almost perfectly irrelevant to what I said. I said, first, that no one is going to take anyone's guns away. I grant you that point and, indeed, I think it's silly for the pro-gun lobby to prey on the fear of gun owners (which, after all, is why they buy guns in the first place, at least if they're not compensating for something), but I'm not sure what you're trying to immunize against. If it's taxation, as on ammunition, buying more guns isn't going to "immunize" you against that. So while I appreciate the strawman, I think it completely misses the point.

Second, as for the alleged confiscation of guns in states like California, New York, and New Jersey, I do find it interesting that Joe didn't link to any factual sources (reputable or otherwise -- World Net Daily and the NRA's own website are two examples of sources that would not be reputable for this purpose) for such allegations either. If it happened and it didn't make national news or send the NRA screaming over to the nearest federal courthouse, then I'm shocked.* But, more likely, I think it's more fear-mongering, keeping gun owners and lovers worried that someone's going to take away their precious protector. Whatever. Maybe Joe can give us legitimate sources. Or maybe I can Google it. Whatever.

And I responded via comment on Joe's blog regarding the Second Amendment, just as I've done on this blog a number of times. My basic point was that citing Justice Scalia, the Court's most notorious right-wing judicial activist, in support of Second Amendment jurisprudence that went wrong decades ago is incredibly self-serving. The "right" to bear arms is hardly a settled matter, and courts have been batting around that "well-regulated militia" phrase for years. My interpretation of it as a lawyer and amateur constitutional scholar is that it refers to "militia" as a military entity, which necessarily involved the citizenry in the Eighteenth Century but which today, put simply, does not. Moreover, even if one interprets the language to include all citizens, you can't just ignore the "well-regulated" part: the NRA and their sycophantic followers would prefer, though, that guns not be regulated at all. Hardly a "strict construction" of the Constitution there, eh, Justice Scalia?

So, no, Joe, I'm not confusing imagination with reality. Actually, I'm deciding the issue for myself, in my opinion, based on reality -- something the Right might do if it weren't for all those meddling facts.

But thank you for the Quote of the Day honor. I accept it graciously, on behalf of all my fellow DFHs.

---

* Even if there were gun confiscations after Katrina, that would be perfectly acceptable under emergency conditions, via the state's police power. One isolated instance in extraordinary circumstances doesn't logically lead to mass confiscations, especially when you have a president (I mean Obama) who seems to be altogether too disinterested in restricting the so-called right to bear arms.

Florida gun nuts: breaking records through paranoia

It should come as a surprise to no one that gun permits and applications in Florida are on a record pace, as barrel-strokers with small penises* throughout the state react to an alleged threat that has virtually no chance of happening -- and even if it does, they're not going to immunize themselves by buying now. Wow, talk about stupid ...

Anyway, here are the facts:

Florida gun owners are grabbing up concealed-weapon permits at a record pace.

It might be concern for President Barack Obama's record on guns or fear that a bad economy will cause crime to rise, or reaction to last year's guns-at-work law. Or maybe a combination of all three is behind the rapid rise in applications for pistol-toting permits, state officials say.

"We're still sitting on about 50,000 applications," said Agriculture Commissioner Charles Bronson. "We're getting in about 14,000 or 15,000 a month and whenever they get a good slug out, they're getting another 15,000 in."

Bronson went to the Legislature last spring for authorization to hire 61 temporary employees — bringing the total to 202 — who have helped whittle down a backlog that then stood at 90,000 for all types of concealed-weapon permits. The backlog, alone, was roughly equal to all the applications received in 2008 — 90,331 — and the department received 75,520 applications in the first six months of this year.

That puts the state on pace for nearly 150,000 concealed-weapon permit applications this year. Most applications are approved, department spokesman Terence McElroy said, because the law allows any law-abiding gun owner to get a license. Few crooks are dumb enough to plunk down the $117 application fee if they have a felony record.

Oh, wait, it gets better. Check out what the NRA has to say about this:

Marion Hammer, a former president of the National Rifle Association who has lobbied the Legislature on guns for decades, is not surprised by the jump.

A law passed last year prohibits employers from banning guns in the workplace as long as they're safely locked in employees' cars. That led many to seek concealed-weapon permits to allow them to do so.

Obama's record as an Illinois legislator and U.S. senator also was alarming, Hammer said, along with the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor and the congressional clout of Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Ca.

"It really shouldn't surprise anyone that the changes in the political landscape are driving a lot of these applicants," Hammer said. "There are over 6 million gun owners in Florida, people who care about freedom, who care about the Second Amendment, who are concerned about their ability to protect themselves."

Hold on ... I thought Obama was coming personally to take away everyone's guns? He's going to get help from Schumer and Pelosi? And Justice Sotomayor? Wow -- I hadn't heard that one yet.

The article goes on to quote a spokesman from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, who injects some much-needed sanity into the debate.

"It's a little bit absurd. It's paranoia to a certain extent," [the Brady Campaign's Peter] Hamm said. "We've seen nothing out of this administration whatsoever. Law-abiding citizens who are getting permits because they think the government is coming to take their guns away are just wrong — it's an absurd, cartoonish myth."

Yes. Precisely. I mean, the Obama administration has permitted concealed weapons in national parks, for crying out loud. Let me make this clear: No one is coming to take away your guns. (Even though I personally wouldn't mind if they did.) And you firearm fellators out there who think that getting your permits now will shield you? Granted, you won't lose your guns, but a higher tax on ammunition is just going to get you even more. Didn't think about that one, did ya?

But what would you expect from the state where the Agriculture Commissioner, who supervises the processing of gun permit applications, is named Charles Bronson? Or where a candidate seeking to replace Bronson in the 2010 elections, state Sen. Carey Baker (R-Eustis), owns a gun shop and is an NRA Life Member?

All this from a gross misreading of the Second Amendment. It'd be funny if it weren't so tragic.

UPDATE (3:39 pm 8/11/09): I seem to have struck a nerve out in Idaho.

---

* Based on my assumption that the vast majority of gun owners have, um, endowment issues; the size of their gun is inversely proportional to their penis size. I think.

Charlie Crist: careening to the right

I knew all along that as soon as he announced his candidacy for the U.S. Senate, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist was going to have to move to the right in order to burnish his conservative credentials in the primary battle against former state House Speaker Marco Rubio. After all, Rubio is trying to position himself as the true conservative Republican candidate, in an effort to cast Crist as too moderate. But I didn't really think ol' Charlie would move so far right so quickly.

Yesterday, when Crist signed into law SB 360, thus pleasing the corporatist Republican powers at the expense of regular Floridians like you and me, he showed that from this point forward, we can expect him to fall all over himself to prove that he's a worthy successor to the disasters legacies of folks like Jeb! Bush (whose seat he occupies) and Mel Martinez (whose seat he wants).

Of course, this isn't an isolated example. Just last week, he did the politically expedient thing with regard to the state budget. Never mind that the budget already cripples the state's public education services among other things: Charlie sought to win some votes by vetoing the 2% pay cut for state employees -- looks populist, but it's not*, because it helps the few (state employees) at the expense of the many (the rest of us) -- and, more egregiously, he buckled to pressure from the NRA and gun nuts and restored $6 million in spending for a program that expedites delayed firearms permits. Clearly, the governor must think that pissing off the NRA is no way to win the GOP Senate nomination over Rubio, let alone the Senate seat itself.

All I'm trying to say with all this is that if you're walking with Gov. Crist, stay away from his right side ... because otherwise, you're liable to get run over.

---

* I imagine many, including Bill Cotterell of the Tallahassee Democrat, disagree with me and see this move as counter to conservative doctrine, because it helps rank-and-file government workers; my take, though, is that it was more politically motivated -- to get votes -- than altruistic and generous. In short, I don't trust Charlie Crist.

On Twitter, you never know

Miss July just told me that she tweeted something last night asking me to drive by one of our old haunts in south Florida while I'm down here. Problem is, she used the words "drive by," so naturally she ended up being followed by some firearms and ammunition store.

Just goes to show you: be careful what you say, lest you arouse the wingnuts. Perhaps I should have learned that sooner ...

Here it is, your daily WTF?

Well, this is a real puzzler ... straight from Time's blog Swampland this morning and courtesy of Karen Tumulty (whom you can follow, as I do, on Twitter):

So after we've been reading all these stories about record sales of firearms and ammo, and how gun owners are stocking up because they think Barack Obama is going to take away their weapons, the NYT tells us:

WASHINGTON — Advocates of gun rights are poised to win a Congressional victory that eluded them under a Republican president.

To the frustration and discouragement of many Democrats, House and Senate lawmakers and aides say it now appears likely that President Obama will this week sign into law a provision allowing visitors to national parks and refuges to carry loaded and concealed weapons.

What exactly are you thinking, Mr. President? The Second Amendment says nothing about the right to arm bears, y'know ...

That's right, kids, Obama personally will come to your house and take away your guns

I almost have to laugh at the gun nuts who are caterwauling about how President Obama will ignore decades of (incorrect and politicized) Second Amendment jurisprudence and, presumably in person, come to their homes and "take away their guns." Almost. The only reason I don't laugh about it is because it's so fucking scary.

Never mind the fact that American courts routinely overlook half of the Second Amendment -- namely the first part, "a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state," which if taken at its word would severely curtail the gun-lovers' argument since most private firearm owners are not part of a militia, that is, the military as it was known in the 1780s -- the hysteria about Obama "taking" people's guns rivals that of the swine flu scare.

Take for example the weapon-fondlers at the Suncoast Gun Orgy Show in North Fort Myers this weekend. Why, they're almost beside themselves with fear of the Scary Black Man in the White House!

Sales of guns and ammunition jumped, as did applications for concealed weapons permits, when the election of President Barack Obama became increasingly apparent in October. Many fear Obama will increase firearms regulations, make ammunition more difficult to acquire and ban some guns outright.

Obama, the joke goes, is the gun salesman of the year. Firearms and ammunition companies have benefited greatly.

[...]

Local Wal-Marts ... limit customers to a six-box purchase of 9 mm boxes, but they still can’t keep the ammunition in stock.

Paul Ryan, 47, of Punta Gorda, was searching for .380-caliber and .38 special rounds, with little luck. Asked about the dearth of ammunition, he pointed to the election. But he said Obama’s power will be kept in check by Democrats from rural states and pressure from the National Rifle Association.

“The situation at hand is one of panic, not reality,” he said.

But if Obama is re-elected? Then he might make a move, Ryan figures.

“I hope the NRA maintains its pressure,” he said.

I love the "logic" of the shoot-and-spank crowd: Obama's going to take away our guns, so let's buy more guns. What, you barrel-fellators think that'll stop him? Can't he just make a second trip to your house?

There's plenty I could say about the Second Amendment and the alleged "right" to own firearms. Yeah, I'm a DFH, so of course I think assault weapons should be banned, more stringent background checks should be imposed, and regulations ought to be increased. But for now, I think the firearm fetishists' rampant Obama-fear says more than I could ever put down in pixels.

I don't get it

Okay, fine. I've given this a lot of thought, but at the end of the day, I'm forced to admit: I just don't get it.*

I don't get why Republicans think that tax cuts, especially for the wealthy, are supposed to be good for the economy when what it really needs is a significant infusion of revenue.

I don't get how they can blame Clinton, Obama, and pretty much everyone but the true culprit – Bush and his policies – for the nation's current economic woes.

I don't get why deregulation is so great; it didn't work for the last eight years, while the “invisible hand of the free market” was too busy jerking itself off to anticipate the predictable greed and ruthlessness of the billionaires who ran the biggest banking and investment firms.

I don't get why government is bad, except when it's poking into our bedrooms or women's bodies, or maybe when it's putting out house fires or arresting criminals.

Speaking of criminals, I don't get how Republicans can celebrate the “greatness” of George W. Bush, who had the last, best chance of preventing 9/11 and whose laissez-faire economic policies drove the American economy, while condemning Bill Clinton for getting a blow job in the White House. Even if Clinton lied about it under oath, is that really worse than lying before Congress and the country about the existence of WMDs in order to foment an illegal (and poorly managed) war?

I don't get why Republicans so vehemently oppose providing all Americans with access to health care, thereby bringing us in line with every other industrialized nation in the world. Are they that selfish that they don't care about those too poor to afford decent health care for themselves and their families?

I don't get why Republicans are so disproportionately involved in political corruption and sexual scandal, but still they're the “family values” party.

I don't get why Republicans believe a perpetual state of war is preferable to a perpetual state of peace.

I don't get how anyone can argue against the premise that the best way to support the troops is to bring them home.

I don't get what is so great about owning guns that, led by the NRA, they'll fight against even reasonable efforts to restrict access to assault weapons and the like.

I don't get why Republicans seem so intent on destroying public education.

I don't get what's so difficult to understand about "separation of church and state."

I don't get why those with the least income and education so overwhelmingly vote Republican when it is so obviously, so clearly against their interests to do so.

There's a lot more I don't get, but I think that about does it for now. Maybe someone can shed some light on it for me.

---

* Yes, I know this is all generalization, but if you're troubled by that, just substitute "so many Republicans" or "most Republicans" or something like that. Thanks in advance for not hammering me on that minute point.

Gun nuts targeting Florida college campuses: next up is FAU

Over a year ago, I told you about a movement in Nevada to allow state university faculty and staff to carry guns on their campuses. Absurd, right?

Well, just as I suggested when I said "I'm kind of surprised this didn't happen in Florida first," we may well be next. Except in Florida, being the batshit craziest state in America, the movement here is to allow students to pack heat on campus. And these whack-job gun nuts are hoping to set up shop right here in America's Glans™.

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus was created after the April 2007 shootings on the Virginia Tech University campus in Blacksburg, Va., where 32 people and gunman Cho Seung-Hui died.

The group, which now claims 30,000 members in 45 states, believes people with concealed weapons permits should be able to carry handguns to school, as they can to many other public places, as a way to protect themselves and others.

Two [Florida Atlantic University] students are spearheading a campaign to start the club on the school's Boca Raton campus, hoping to garner interest with a grass-roots campaign, including an "empty holster protest" in which students wear gun holsters to school.

"I've always been very much into constitutional rights and gun rights," said Ryan Faerman, an electrical engineering major at FAU who is working to start the SCCC chapter. "It seems retarded that you can't protect yourself on an open campus. It's ridiculous."

No, Ryan. I know you may be too young and inexperienced to understand this, but "protecting yourself" doesn't mean carting around handguns in your wasteband and going all vigilante and shit. Yeah, that's just what we need, the fucking Grand Theft Auto generation running around with concealed firearms. (Also, Ryan, "retarded" is pretty fucking objectionable. Does someone need a little counseling, little buddy? Hmmm?) And don't even get me started on the "constitutional rights" angle ...

Truly, it's just revolting that people continue to think having guns readily available will stop the crazies from shooting up a workplace or a campus. Has it not yet occurred to anyone that it's just as likely that a psycho killer student would have a concealed handgun as a "law-abiding" student? I don't get the "logic," and I don't think these idiot SCCC students do, either:

Matt Mesang, a 21-year-old FAU student who is working with Faerman to start the chapter of SCCC, said [an FAU shooting incident in April] shows that "gun-free zones" only deter law-abiding citizens.

Mesang, whose father is a retired Broward County sheriff's deputy, acknowledges that the club might stir controversy at FAU, but he said that's not the intention.

"There will obviously be people who are against it, and their thinking is that if there is a gun anywhere that there will be shooting," said Mesang, who sometimes practices at the Delray Shooting Center. "I believe every student has the right to defend themselves, including when they are in the classroom."

Hey, FAU -- welcome to the wild, wild west.

Today's Daily Schadenfreude: Marion Hammer

Who, you may ask, is Marion Hammer?

She's the past president of the National Rifle Association. Think of her, basically, as the grande dame of right-wing gun nuts. And she's got her panties twisted in a knot because of all the companies that are declaring themselves exempt from the Stupidest Law on Earth.

Georgia Pacific told its 1,000 workers in Palatka that the Department of Homeland Security is the reason its employees are prohibited from bringing guns to work, said Jeremy Alexander, a company spokesman.

Marion Hammer, past national president of the National Rifle Association, said the exemption is "ludicrous," adding "they cut down trees and make toilet paper."

But Alexander said, "It doesn't have anything to do with our products."

The explanation for the homeland security exemption is that the plant receives large amounts of oil, which are brought in by barge up the St. Johns River into Rice Creek, he said. Palatka is about 50 miles southwest of Jacksonville.

That means the plant is subject to the Maritime Security Act and its facility security plan, which bans guns at the plant and in the parking lot. The plan is approved by the Department of Homeland Security, he said.

The company sent out an internal memo on July 1, reminding employees of its weapons policies, the same day a new state law went into effect allowing most employees to keep their weapons in their cars, although there are several exemptions.

"We've had a policy for several years," Alexander said. "This is nothing new."

Alexander said several other Georgia Pacific facilities in the state are not exempt from the new law.

But Hammer said their explanation is wrong.

"Toilet paper does not come before the Second Amendment," said Hammer, referring to the U.S. Constitution's protection of gun ownership.

Are you willfully this ignorant, Ms. Hammer, or were you born that way? As Mr. Alexander pointed out, Georgia Pacific's exemption has nothing to do with the products they manufacture. In fact, the law you're so desperately trying to defend actually has nothing to do with the Second Amendment.

I'm going to assume you're not a lawyer, Ms. Hammer (if you are, you're an egregiously stupid one), so I'll spell it out for you: federal law trumps state law. It's called pre-emption. And what it means is that the state law allowing guns at the workplace (the Stupidest Law on Earth) is pre-empted, or nullified, by the contradictory federal law -- the Maritime Security Act -- which says no guns. C'mon, now -- I thought you wingnuts loved the Homeland Security Department! What -- you mean you only love them when their rules benefit you and your twisted worldview? Now, that's hardly fair, is it?

But Ms. Hammer wants to stretch her already ridiculous strawman to the point of absurdity.

"These corporate giants have no respect for the constitution. They have no respect for their employees and they obviously don't care about safety of their employees," said Marion Hammer, NRA.

[...]

"For crying out loud, they [Georgia Pacific] cut down trees and they make toilet paper and that's homeland security? Excuse me, the lives of the hardworking men and women at that plant are far more important than toilet paper," Hammer said.

Ms. Hammer raises the common fallacy shared by all the firearm fanatics: that having guns somehow makes you safer. Once again, because she's so dense, I'll explain it: this action has nothing to do with toilet paper -- or with employees' lives. It's a simple matter of federal law pre-empting state law -- nothing more. And, Ms. Hammer, if you think having a gun locked up in your car somehow protects you when you're at work, well, you're even dumber than you already appear.

Georgia Pacific joins Disney and Universal Studios, who claim exemptions based on an explosives permit and a public school, respectively, in telling the wingnut Florida Legislature to fuck off. And pretty soon, when the law is declared unconstitutional, we won't have to listen to the gun-nut idiots at all ... at least about the Stupidest Law on Earth.

In the meantime, though, Marion Hammer, you can crow about your latest honor, because today's Blast Off! Daily Schadenfreude is for you!

"G-U-N ... see you real soon!"

As reported here last week, Disney is telling the state of Florida that they're exempt from the state law permitting gun owners to bring their weapons to work. And some of the workers are, well, up in arms about it. (Yes, pun intended.)

But within the section concerning those who deal with explosives is an exemption for an "employer who has obtained a permit required under 18 U.S.C. § 842 to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in explosive materials on such property."

Said Suarez: "We have the permit. We deal in explosives every day."

But the NRA's chief state lobbyist, Marion Hammer, said the exemption should be read in the context of those employers whose "primary" business is explosives.

"Disney is a prime offender in denying people their rights under the Second Amendment and the laws of Florida," said Hammer, adding that the law was drafted in response to Disney firing an employee for having a gun in his car.

Now Attorney General Bill McCollum, whose office is tasked with enforcement, must interpret what it all means. Spokeswoman Sandi Copes said the office is still reviewing the case and the legislation.

Until and unless McCollum sides with Fiore or someone successfully sues to stop Disney, employees are being told to keep the firearms at home.

Disney security guard Edwin Sotomayor protested his employer's policy by announcing to the news media last week that he would lawfully bring his weapon in his car to work. He was promptly fired. Sotomayor, 36, said it was worth it to "prove a point" and pave the way for the numerous other employees who keep their mouths shut about the guns they have in their cars.

He said the Orlando area's crime rate makes pistol-packing a must for many.

"If you're going to let the Mouse rule the world, it's not worth it," he said. "There are two worlds: the world of Disney, and the real world. This was for the real world. It can be scary."

Fiore is among those who worry. But while she appreciates the attempt to give her the right to protect her life, she said she doesn't want to lose her livelihood by bringing a weapon onto Disney property.

"I'm not going to make a point and get fired," she said. "But if I need protection to and from work, it's my constitutional right."

Yep, that's the answer. Carry guns to work. I mean, having guns readily available to every rent-a-cop and soccer mom in America sure has kept the crime rate down ...

I hate to bring it to the NRA's attention, but their interpretation is all well and good ... and wrong. The Legislature could have written the statute to cover only those businesses whose "primary" business is explosives, but they didn't. In fact, the original bill did say that, but the Legislature changed it to cover businesses with federal explosives licenses -- to make the exemption broader. Therefore, the legislative intent is clear and indeed the final version of the bill, which became law, evinced their desire NOT to limit the exemption to businesses primarily engaged in the explosives business.

Of course, the problem is that we have to rely on one of the batshit craziest wingnuts in Florida, Bill McCollum, to make a ruling on this. Hopefully even he can't ignore legislative intent in this case ... but I'm holding my breath that he'll do the legal and correct thing.

I don't know which wingnuts are the most rabid, but the Second Amendment crazies are definitely finalists for that award. They're motivated solely by fear, and that permeates their entire world view. How sad. How pathetic. How batshit crazy.

Today's Daily Schadenfreude: gun nut Republicans in the Florida legislature

Forget about Take Your Child to Work Day. How about a Take Your Gun to Work Law?

Unbeknownst to many Floridians, I imagine, let alone people outside America's Wang™, a new law went into effect on July 1 that allows citizens to bring guns to their workplace. Yes, in a state renowned for asinine legislation, this may take the cake as the Stupidest Law Ever.

Essentially, the law states that as long as you have a valid permit, you can take your gun to your workplace, no questions asked.

Under the new law, businesses cannot prohibit employees or customers from keeping a legally owned gun locked inside their cars, as long as the owner has a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

Guns will still be off limits at some sites: schools, prisons, nuclear power plants, military facilities and buildings that store explosives.

So, in a society where workplace shootings happen on a disturbingly regular basis (for example, anyone remember six dead in Henderson, Ky., a couple of weeks ago?), Florida irresponsibly thinks that bringing guns to work will help, rather than exacerbate, the situation. Supporters of the law think that psychos like the dude in Henderson will be deterred by the concern that, while he's inside killing people, someone will be able to run out to their car, retrieve their weapon, and save the day. Of course, said Henderson dude was suicidal and obviously didn't give a shit about his own safety, which, um, significantly lowers the alleged deterrent factor of having guns out in the parking lot ... but, you know, Right to Bear Arms! and NRA! and God Bless America! and shit. But I digress ...

Anyway, if you notice, I emphasized "buildings that store explosives" in the excerpt above. You see, the psycho wingnuts in the Florida legislature are beside themselves for having expanded the exceptions to any business that holds a federal explosives license. That can include fireworks, and so that can include the massive Walt Disney World complex. In the words of Nelson Muntz (left), "Ha ha!" (Hmmm ... maybe the Daily Schadenfreude has a new logo ...)

The giant resort has declared that much of its sprawling property is exempt from a new state law that allows Floridians with concealed-weapons permits to keep firearms locked in their cars at work.

Disney, which has 60,000 employees and a long-standing policy against allowing guns on its land, cites an arcane -- and late-added -- loophole in the new law, which took effect Tuesday.

The company's position stunned backers of the new law, who said Wednesday that they never intended to exempt Florida's largest single-site employer.

"You've got to be kidding me," said state Sen. Durell Peaden, a Panhandle Republican and one of the authors of the bill.

[...]

The NRA reacted quickly.

The organization issued an alert Wednesday to members under the heading, "Disney Thumbing Nose at the New Florida Gun Law," accusing Disney of being a "prime offender when it comes to firing employees for exercising Second Amendment rights."

Disney cites language within Florida's newly enacted "Preservation and Protection of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in Motor Vehicles Act of 2008" that creates an exception for companies whose primary business is to manufacture, use, store or transport explosives regulated under federal law.

"I intended it to exempt places like defense plants, Air Force bases, things like that," said Peaden, who sponsored the bill in the Senate. "But not Disney. Not at all."

But on the same day that the House took its final vote on the gun bill, the exemption for explosives companies was revised so that it also includes "property owned or leased by an employer who has obtained a permit" under federal law for such explosives.

Disney has such a permit, for the extensive fireworks used in its theme parks.

State Rep. Stan Mayfield, a Vero Beach Republican also involved in crafting the final legislation, said lawmakers had agreed to insert that exception at the request of a small group of lawyers representing several businesses and business groups -- including Disney.

But Mayfield said nobody ever intended for the language to spare so much of the Disney resort, which covers about 30,000 acres.

"I don't think anybody that voted for that bill expected Disney to be exempt," Mayfield said.

Oh, this is great! Peaden and Mayfield, the wingnut gun nuts themselves, are shocked -- SHOCKED -- that someone is using dirty Republican tricks (loopholes, interpretations of laws, deranged readings of the Second Amendment*) to skirt their idiotic idea to let folks strut around with their Big Guns (and Small Dicks) so that they can feel like they're defending themselves against ... something. (Terror? Liberal wackos? Mean people? The boogeyman?)

You know what, Durell and Stan? You got snookered. Plain and simple. And pretty soon, your ridiculous little law will be overturned in the courts and you'll have nothing ... except your own guns to make you feel adequate and sexually powerful. Because, when it comes right down to it, you gun nuts are all the same -- you're really just trying to compensate for, um, shortcomings in other areas.

But there's one good thing about this: there's new evidence showing that you can be sexually powerful now without guns, but with the recognition of one sucky left-wing blog ... because today's Blast Off! Daily Schadenfreude is for you!

---

* Yes, I know the Supreme Court just ruled that the Second Amendment protects individual gun ownership rights. But I also know that the majority in that decision is made up primarily of extreme right-wing assholes.

Ready, fire, aim: Crist to sign bill allowing guns at workplace

Forget about "Take Your Daughter to Work Day." Soon, in Florida, every day will be "Take Your Gun to Work Day."

Proving once again that America's Wang™ really, in its heart of hearts, wants to be a western state circa 1880 or so, the Legislature approved a bill yesterday that will allow Floridians to take guns to their workplace, provided that the weapons remain locked up in their vehicles. Apparently the "shoot first, ask questions later" Stand Your Ground law and concealed carry permits aren't enough for the gun nuts.

Lest we delude ourselves into thinking that Gov. Crist isn't so bad ("for a Republican," we often add), he plans to sign the bill into law -- which figures, since he's a proud member of the National Rifle Association.

Under the legislation, employees would be required to have concealed-weapon licenses to bring guns to the workplace. But those records are secret under state law, and employers would have no way of verifying who holds the permits.

The bill, backed by the gun lobby, also would allow shoppers and diners to leave their weapons locked in their cars at malls, restaurants and other retail establishments. They, too, would be required to have a concealed-weapon license.

"People being protected is most important to me," said Crist, a member of the National Rifle Association.

The bill allows some businesses, including defense contractors and explosives manufacturers, to bar guns on the premises.

While public schools are excluded, critics say the exemptions do not go far enough because workers would be allowed to carry weapons to day-care centers.

That's right, folks. Basically, unless you work at a school or a fucking fireworks factory (yep, actually excluded), you'll be able to take your gun to work. Day care, too. Gotta watch out for those preschoolers with Glocks.

Sure, you've got to have a concealed carry permit, but considering that enforcement of that is lax to begin with, it's really no safeguard at all. I'm so sick of the gun nuts saying that you've got to have the right to have a gun in order to protect yourself. What is it about Republicans always championing the right to put people in harm's way? Whether it's a "war" in Iraq or shootouts on the streets, the wingnuts are the first to vote for it, then find ways to avoid it themselves. Fucking hypocrites ...

Anyway, enjoy the New West, Florida. And remember that the crazy co-worker in the next cubicle just might be packing heat in his or her car. Have a great day!

Charlton Heston (1923-2008)

Although I'm sure I'm not the first, in true Blast Off! spirit, let me contribute my tasteless joke to commemorate the death of überconservative icon Charlton Heston:

Time to pry the gun from his cold, dead hands!

Guns don't kill people; however, faculty might

I have a friend who is a professor at the University of Nevada-Reno. I ought to call him and ask about this:

The University of Nevada system is one step closer to letting professors, faculty and staff carry guns on campus.

It's a controversial plan that the Board of Regents agreed to on Thursday. Some students and staff are concerned it may not be the best idea.

The tragedy of Virginia Tech is still fresh in the minds of many in the collegiate world and campus police departments from Reno to Las Vegas are trying to find a better solution. But students are dumbfounded by the plan to arm teachers.

"So there would be no reason for a teachers to run around, just try to play hero with a gun," said Chris James, junior.

Still the Board of Regents plan would allow faculty take a 21-week course in Carson City. That class would cost more than $3,000 per person and the universities would pick up the tab. But it would use a legal loophole to essentially deputize the employee. That way they wouldn't break the law.

Right now it's a Class E felony to carry a gun on campus.

I have never understood the logic whereby gun violence can be reduced by arming more people. The deterrent factor, in my opinion, is vastly overrated.

I also think the argument that Virginia Tech or Columbine or any other such tragedy could have been avoided or mitigated if teachers or faculty had been armed is flawed: no one knows what might have happened, and besides, it's hard to believe anything would have stopped the attackers (especially if they've locked the armed faculty in classrooms).

Actually, I'm kind of surprised this didn't happen in Florida first. After all, we're the home of "Shoot first, ask questions later."

People with guns kill people

The Virginia Tech tragedy (I hate that the networks are calling it "Massacre at Virginia Tech." Insensitive bastards ...) is yet another reminder of the horrible consequences of our gun-happy society.

Would Cho Seung-Hui have been able to kill 32 people with a knife, or his bare hands, or really any other weapon besides a gun? A bomb, maybe, but that's about it.

The gun lobby always says "Guns don't kill people; people kill people." No, people with guns kill people, at least more readily and more effectively than people without guns. The logic doesn't hold up.

And we look like a lawless society to the rest of the world.

There was harsh condemnation for U.S. gun control laws. In Sydney, Australian Prime Minister John Howard said Tuesday the university shooting in Virginia showed that America's "gun culture" was a negative force in society.

Howard, who staked his political leadership on pushing through tough laws on gun ownership in Australia after a lone gunman in his country killed 35 people in a spree, said the Virginia university shooting was a tragedy of a kind he hoped would never be seen again in Australia.

"You can never guarantee these things won't happen again in our country," Howard told reporters. "We had a terrible incident at Port Arthur, but it is the case that 11 years ago we took action to limit the availability of guns and we showed a national resolve that the gun culture that is such a negative in the United States would never become a negative in our country," he said.

He offered his sympathies to the victims of the Virginia shooting and their families. In India, which has some 80,000 students in the U.S., commentators called for greater protection and stricter gun laws.

"It's not a question of an Indian professor getting killed in the firing. This is related to the American gun laws," said K. Subrahmanyam, a former member of India's National Security Council. "We can't do anything about it. It is something which has happened in the United States. They have got to change the law."

But as long as there are gun nuts who twist the Second Amendment into support for arming every man, woman, and child in America, there will be no change to the law. Never mind that the Second Amendment's dependent clause refers to the right to bear arms because "a well-regulated militia" is "necessary," meaning that said right is one for the military, or perhaps the National Guard, but not every freaking citizen.

No, this sad scene will be repeated over and over again, thanks to those misguided, fearful people who think the answer is more, not fewer, guns. How tragic. How stupid. How wrong.

Shorter Florida Legislature: "Shoot first, ask questions later"

Just when you think it's safe to come out from the Schiavo-related loony bin that is Florida, here comes another masterpiece of wingnuttery:

People in Florida will be allowed to kill in self-defense on the street without trying to flee under a new law passed by state politicians on Tuesday that critics say will bring a Wild West mentality and innocent deaths.

The Florida House of Representatives, citing the need to allow people to "stand their ground," voted 94-20 to codify and expand court rulings that already allow people to use deadly force to protect themselves in their homes without first trying to escape.

The new bill goes further by allowing citizens to use deadly force in a public place if they have a reasonable belief they are in danger of death or great bodily harm. It applies to all means of force that may result in death, although the legislative debate focused on guns.

Yes, folks, all it takes is a "reasonable belief" that there is danger - you got that, then fire away. Incidentally, there are 36 Democrats in the House ... and if you think that's bad, well, the Senate passed it unanimously.

Finally, guess who the sponsor was in the House? (You're not going to believe this ...) Yep, it's our old friend, Rep. Dennis Baxley (R-Out There), whom you may recall was the sponsor of the bill to stamp out academic freedom so none o' them librul ideas get spread around.

Baxley may be the single most frightening legislator in America right now - including certain ones named DeLay, Cornyn and Santorum. Which of course means he'll probably be running for governor soon.

(Tip o' the Blast Off! hat to GreatScat! for the referral.)

UPDATE (4:56 pm 4/5/05): Just to clarify, Florida law already permitted the use of deadly force to defend one's self in one's home and, in fact, even one's car or workplace. This law dangerously lowers the legal standard for self-defense anywhere, though:

Outside the home, however, courts have ruled that most victims must at least attempt to escape before using deadly force, a provision gun advocates say puts victims at greater risk. The proposal removes that requirement if a person has a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm.