Automatic vs Semi-Automatic Gun Control

Is there such a thing as sensible gun control? Is there an accommodation between some guns or no guns, some guns or all guns, some weapons or no weapons? This is the battle that always emerges with each side trying to turn the argument into all or nothing and no space in between. If the extreme liberal left had its way everything except single shot 22’s, bb guns and double-barrel shotguns would be prohibited. If the extreme right had its way only tanks, bazookas and flame throwers would be prohibited. So for the rest of us there is plenty of middle ground if we could just operate there. The last assault weapons ban had one major flaw; it did not exclude “assault” weapons. The liberal left had widened the definition of assault weapons into include semi-automatic weapons and as a result permitted the semi-automatic  rifles like the AR-15, the AK-47 and other military style weapons to be included in the vast arsenal of hunting rifles like Winchester and Mossberg semi-automatic weapons. In fact Diane Feinstein’s proposed weapons bill has 900 semi-automatic exemptions and grandfathers all current guns currently in private hands. Perhaps a simple change in definition could help the Congress come up with a sensible bill that could pass both Houses, preserve the Second Amendment and eliminate assault weapons in the public market. Instead of semi-automatic weapons, why not ban automatic weapons and those can be transformed into automatic weapons. (The AR-15 and the AK-47 are perfect examples that can operate in semi-auto and automatic mode.) For those who do not know the difference: Semi-automatic are rifles that automatically load and eject cartridges and require a finger pull to fire each round. Automatic weapons fire continuously as long as the trigger is in the firing position. This latter category is the weapon typically called an assault weapon. In contrast most modern hunter and sports models are semi-automatic, is it’s easy to see how the desire to ban all guns has confused the issue and made the prohibition of assault weapons unattainable. I think most people would agree that automatic weapons as well as bazookas, tanks and flame throwers are not sportsman or hunter weapons and could easily fit in an assault weapons ban. It would include the most dangerous automatic weapons that can operate in semi-automatic mode and make their possession illegal for most civilians. At the same time it would protect owners of the semi-automatic weapons in use by most hunters, sportsman and target shooters. Even this ban would not have prevented the carnage in Connecticut, but a ban of automatic weapons is overdue. However, if you team up a federal requirement for possession of a handgun with an assault weapons ban you have a real chance of limting the carnage that occurred last week. A national handgun requirement would mean that most people would only qualify to have rifles, which are much more difficult to hide than handguns and reduce the chances they can be used as they were in many of the public shootings that have occurred. I find myself very ambivalent on this topic, but I agree that we must start someplace.

Boehner Should Return to Regular Order

It strikes me starnge that John Boehner is bargaining with the President. There is a legislative procedure. The House sends legislation to the Senate and when both agree the President signs it and it become law. So why is the Speaker bargaining with the President? The House should be bargaining with the Senate in a House/Senate Conference Committee. Doing so will put the Reid Democratic Senate on the spot, which is where the spot belongs. The Senate has not passed a budget for four years and refuses to bring up House bills for debate. Obama is just covering for Reid and Boehner should restore the proper procedure so an agreement can be reached. Boehner should break off discussions with the President, call for regular order, and let the Senate take its rightful place in this mess. His response to the President should be "there is a procedure and I intend to follow it."

The Party of No Return

I feel as though I have awakened into a new world; A Bizarro world where everything is backwards and the past only a few weeks old. In the few weeks since the election the Republican party has become the party of raising taxes, which of course requires a complete eradication of history back to George Bush's famous "read my lips" speech. Somehow people have been convinced that over a ten year period $850 billion in new taxes on the top 2% is going to have a significant effect on $30 trillion dollars in spending. (For those of you who like math that's .028%.) You notice they tell us how much we are going to save, but not how much we are going to spend. The number between $850B and $30T is pretty big, so if you think you are going to get a tax break that is your brain on drugs. The point here is that through sheer trickery or Republican ineptness Speaker Boehner and company are now in the position of defending tax increases to pander to the class warfare crowd. Somehow it is beyond their ability to point out that while they fought to lower everyone's taxes in 2002 it was the Democrats who insisted on the Sunset rule that would end the tax cuts in 2008. That was the deal Bush 43 had to cut the get everyone's rates lowered. People's taxes must go up, not to punish the top 2%, but to pay for a government that is spending a $1 trillion more every year than it was before 2008, not including the stimulus of that year. Yes, your government is spending a trillion dollars more every year, and that is why the taxpayers need protection from this ever-expanding bureaucratic nightmare. That is why we must cut spending starting with the so-called Fiscal Cliff negotiations. The Democrats must not be permitted to increase taxes now and cut spending later because if they are there will never be cuts in spending. Republicans should be fighting to make all the Bush cuts permanent and put the stopper on uncontrolled government spending. There can be no backing off by Republicans who must stay in the fight to reduce taxes or forever become the Party of No Return.

Closing the Deal

Things Mitt Romney should not forget in the last 10 days:

• The President has ordered more than 20 of Irans oil largest customers to be exempt from trading sanctions including 10 European nations, China and Japan.
• He still has not explained in full detail the events surrounding the murder of our Libyan Ambassador and his security detail.
• He has not stated any revisions on his energy policy regarding the Keystome pipeline.

 These are things Americans should know before they go to the voting booth.

Romney Hits and Misses

While Mr. Romney held his own in this last debate I thought he missed a few items on which I would have not let the President slide.

• Why did the President tell the world at the United Nations that the video was responsible for Libya when it was apparent to almost everyone that it wasn’t?
• Why did Obama approve letting 11 of Iran’s major trading partners not apply sanctions for economic reasons, which he claimed is the entire reason for sanctions?
• Mr. Romney also failed to point out that as President, Mr. Obama has never gone to Israel despite his claims of friendship and support, and his criticism of Romney’s trip.

Romney did not win last night in my view, but he held his own. However, the President proved he can be an unpleasant, nasty adversary and small man even in circumstances where it is not required. Romney was defintely Presidential enough.

There is no point in telling Mitt Romney what to say or how to say it. I just hope he will remember some the following foreign policy issues:

• The expansion of Al Qaeda and its influence in the Arab Spring.
• Fast & Furious as gun control policy. 
• Events in Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt. 
• Our alliance with Israel
• Iran's nuclear ambition-Is it true, Mr. President, that you recongnize Iran's right to nuclear technology? 
• The importance of fossil fuel in America's national security.
• Support for oil exploration in South America and the prevention of exploration here. 
• Our influence in the UN and the world at large. 
• The importance of trade deals in our favor. 
• Reinvigorated support for our traditional allies.
• Ask Obama what he meant when he told the Russians he'd be more flexible after he was re-elected?

Mitt should be on his guard against Bob Schieffer, who is decidely liberal and can be a slick customer with Texas drawl and softpoken manner.

Two Cents for Romney

Since everybody has advice for Mitt Romney I thought I would offer a little. The kind he is likely to get from someone more likely to be in the audience rather than behind the curtain. Your cause is a righteous one. America is not cruising along. It is in trouble of all kinds. It has national and international problems of all types and, disappointingly so, there is no leadership. In the absence of leadership, the vacuum will be filled.


• When questioned about the 47% Romney should explain that it is the 47% of the electorate that experts predict will vote for Obama. It does not include all those who receive government assistance, but it does include those who game the system and are really not paying their fair share. You cannot say people aren’t gaming the system. I do not know how much of the 47% are, but I bet there are some. When Obama asks for a number say "Your President, what do you think?"

• When questioned about the declining unemployment rate Romney should point out that it is still very high and that Obama promised it would be no higher than 5% if Congress passed the stimulus. He should add that experts say unemployment will not reach pre-recession levels until 2020 if we do not act.

• When questioned about Social Security and ObamaCare, Romney should point out the country wants to re-discuss ObamaCare now that we are finally learning what is in it, and that many of our Social Security and Medicare issues can be dealt with increased growth, which creates more revenue for both programs.

• When Obama brings up GM it should be pointed out despite the bailout, all the original stock and bondholders were wiped out and that after a little more than a year, its new stock has lost more than a third of its value, not to mention the mediocre success of the Volt, whose production is on and off like a water faucet. Romney should also remind voters of the federal stake in GM stock and how much of the loan has not been repaid.

• If Obama says Osama Bin Laden is dead, Romney should say that Al Qaeda is alive and well and demonstrating it for us all the time, most recently in Benghazi. Romney should also hold Obama accountable for the confusion and coverup between the White House, State Dept. and intelligence services.

• When questioned about energy Romney should point out the $90 billion has already been poorly spent on green energy and it is still in the research phase and not an adequate solution at this point. In contrast fossil fuel, produces the cheapest, most efficient energy and is one of the biggest commercial sources of tax income to government at all levels. The Keystone pipeline, fracking, drilling and refining are vital to our energy security and means millions of new jobs in the energy sector. Romney should point out that Obama's failure to approve Keystone and his failure to reign in the power of the EPA on oil leases and fracking on government property is hurting the nation. Energy security and self-reliance are attainable and laudable goals for our nation.

Good Luck, Mitt.