Census Grills Me Twice, But Not About Guns

I refuted last year the silly meme that the United States Census was coming to count your guns. (For an afternoon of entertainment, Google "Census" and "guns"... or just rent Red Dawn.)

A little more evidence: an agent of the federal government, cleverly disguised as a mild-mannered Midwestern woman (why isn't al-Qaeda this smart?), came to my door a couple weeks ago to administer a detailed survey to my wife and me about our house, education, income... all sorts of information! I received a callback message from a shy-sounding headset jockey with poor breath control (she paused to take a breath in the middle of my name). When I called back Sunday (Sunday! Uncle Sam works on Sunday!), a younger woman asked to take a few minutes to double-check the questions from the in-house survey. She even ingratiated herself to me when she read my name by mentioning she'd visited Heidelberg and loved the castle. I thought for sure she was just trying to lull me into surrendering details about my intricate home defense plans.

But no. Neither woman asked about guns, knives, booby traps, RPGs, or any other arguable Second-Amendment equipment that might be of interest to tyrants bent on oppression.

I could be wrong. This is South Dakota. Maybe the Census just assumes by default that we all have guns in our homes. I nonetheless await proof from anyone that the 2010 Census asked anyone about guns.

Kristi Noem Can't Stop Lying: Repeats Inaccurate GOA Rating

See that skinny image to the right? It's a lengthy Facebook conversation from Kristi Noem's page on the social networking site. Click on it to read the text.

The conversation began with an individual who asked why GOP candidate for U.S. House Kristi Noem had claimed to have the NRA endorsement when really the NRA has endorsed Democratic Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin. Now as we have discussed here, that statement isn't technically accurate: the infamous Noem guns flyer never uses the exact words, "The NRA endorses Kristi Noem" (although her Teabagger backers from Texas do spread that lie) but it uses the NRA logo twice and commits marketing tricks of omission and false comparison to deliberately create the impression among casual readers that the NRA backs Noem. The verbal and visual trickery is sufficiently obvious that my conservative counterpart Mr. Sanborn recognizes it as "intentionally published to mislead."

The Noem Guns flyer also incorrectly lists SHS's rating from the Gun Owners of America as a D rather than a B-. Even if I generously excused this false statement as shoddy, wishful research, it remains false, and should be corrected by the Noem campaign.

Yet with the B.S. flag thrown quite visibly in the South Dakota online press, Noem keeps saying what she now knows is wrong. As documented by these Facebook screen captures from about 14:30 CDT Friday afternoon, October 22, 2010, Kristi Noem writes the following lie:

Just to clarify, our mailer highlighted my A-rating with the NRA and Congresswoman Herseth Sandlin's D from GOA and her support for F-rated Nancy Pelosi. All those ratings are a matter of public record.

You can click on the skinny image above to see the full conversation as of Friday mid-afternoon; below is the Noem comment in question:


My friend John Hess wonders why I spend so much time supporting Herseth Sandlin. John, it's not so much that I want to be on the SHS bandwagon. She's still too much of a Blue Dog for me. Give me a Weiland Wildcat in 2012, and I'm there.

But I have yet to catch Stephanie Herseth Sandlin lying to me or to the public. Stephanie and I have differing opinions, but we can agree on facts. Kristi Noem is lying to me and to all of my fellow South Dakotans. Kristi Noem's disrespect for plain, simple truth disgusts and alarms me. We must not allow any person willing to commit such willful deception to become our lone voice in the U.S. House of Representatives.
---------------------------------
Editor's Note: The long Facebook screenshot is several screen caps spliced together. I have omitted none of the comments and edited none of the text that was present at the time I copied the page.

Refuting the Noem-bots One Lie at a Time

On Facebook yesterday, one Donovan Wendling attempted to divert attention from Kristi Noem's persistent lies about Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin's record on the Second Amendment with this red herring:

Can't say I have ever seen a picture of SHS holding any firearm. Makes me wonder!!

Wonder no more, Mr Wendling:

photo from Stephanie Herseth Sandlin's Facebook page, 2010.10.22

That's Lars Herseth and his daughter Stephanie, out menacing our state bird on an idyllic October day in South Dakota. Yesterday, actually. Happy hunting, everyone.
----------------
Update 2010.10.24 08:40 CDT: Rod Goeman takes the political Rohrschach test and sees a doctored photo. I shake my head and post the other hunting snap Lars and Stephanie's Friday shotgun stroll:

Look like Stephanie's got a pretty firm grip on a pretty real gun. But never underestimate the capacity of Noem apologists to misinterpret reality.

NRA Repeats: Vote for Herseth Sandlin

Noem's Misrepresentations "Unfortunate"

Repeat after me: The National Rifle Association wants you to vote for Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin.

Conservative friends, if that really bothers you, feel free to declare the NRA an irrelevant bunch of Beltway elitists. Repeat that as often as you like. I know I will.

But Kristi isn't saying the NRA is irrelevant. She's stamping the NRA logo on her mailings like two big seals approval. Team Kristi is a whisper shy of a lie and they know it.

So does the NRA. From Roll Call:

“The one thing that is clear to our members in South Dakota is that we did endorse Stephanie Herseth Sandlin,” NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said. “It’s unfortunate that there are efforts to try to insinuate otherwise” [Anna Palmer, "Herseth Sandlin Takes Issue with Noem's NRA Mailing," Roll Call, 2010.10.14].

The NRA spokesman could have stopped with that first sentence. That second sentence suggests that the NRA's endorsement of Herseth Sandlin is more than mere pro forma adherence to its "incumbent-friendly" endorsement policy. If the NRA really had its fingers crossed behind its back for Noem, it could have withheld any endorsement. And it could have withheld that second sentence, a pretty clear slap at Team Kristi's marketing trickery.

The NRA is a single-issue organization that distracts us all with John Wayne fantasies (and Constitutional misreadings, and outright lies) from discussing real solutions to real problems. Their endorsement of Congresswoman Herseth Sandlin doesn't make me like her any more.

But Kristi Noem's counterfactual insinuation that the NRA actually prefers her makes me like Noem even less. Watch out, Kristi: the NRA may feel the same way.

Noem Misrepresents NRA Endorsement of Herseth Sandlin

Did I say Noem lies? No... but I'm tempted....

Hey, if the Noem campaign can put up a fake anonymous blog, so can the Herseth Sandlin people. And at least the Dems (a) save money by using Blogger and (b) tell the truth!

Exhibit A on "Kristi vs. Kristi": Noem's misleading guns flyer that pretends to have the National Rifle Association's endorsement.

I received this flyer in my mailbox last week and wondered what the NRA thinks of Noem's using the NRA logo when the NRA is clearly behind Herseth Sandlin. Noem's only gun rights endorsement comes from a few stray gun nuts who want to carry firearms in kindergartens, courthouses, and bars. If I ran a nationwide organization that endorsed a candidate, and that candidate's opponent then co-opted our brand and logo and portrayed them as a stamp of approval on their propaganda, I'd be irate. But maybe that's just me being oversensitive....

Note also Noem's slick use of language, avoiding any mention of Herseth Sandlin's "A" rating with the NRA. (I got two more flyers in my box today that try to make me think Nancy Pelosi is on the South Dakota ballot.) Noem also stretches the heading about hunting: she ignores Herseth Sandlin's status as a fellow hunter and gunowner by inserting the adjective "lifelong."

By the way, that back image there...

...Did Noem check with her brother-in-law to make sure none of those critters were poached? And there's that NRA logo again. Oh, the word/image games Noem plays....

National Rifle Association Endorses Herseth Sandlin; Noem Nets Nut Nod

Here's the endorsement the Noem campaign desperately tried to to distract you from yesterday: the National Rifle Association has endorsed Stephanie Herseth Sandlin in South Dakota's U.S. House race.

"The National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund supports Stephanie Herseth Sandlin because she has defended the Second Amendment freedoms of law-abiding gun owners, hunters and sportsmen in South Dakota and across America," said NRA-PVF Chairman Chris W. Cox. "On November 2, I urge all South Dakota NRA Members and gun owners to vote Stephanie Herseth Sandlin for Congress" [Michael O'Brien, "Key House Dem Snags NRA's Backing in Reelection Effort," TheHill.com, 2010.09.28].

In a September 23 letter, the NRA's Political Victory Fund informed Congresswoman Herseth Sandlin that the NRA was endorsing her and maintaining her "A" rating.

NRA endorsement of Herseth Sandlin, 2010.09.23. [click to enlarge]

The Noem camp responded by touting an endorsement from a gaggle of South Dakota gun owners for whom even the NRA isn't nutty enough about guns. Her gun-owning endorsers include the likes of Second Amendment Sister Nancy First, who thinks we should let everyone carry guns in kindergartens, courthouses, and bars.

The Noem peanut gallery is desperately trying to spin the NRA's endorsement of Herseth Sandlin as insignificant. Some commenters are crying that the NRA is required by its by-laws to endorse incumbents. Not true. While the NRA-PVF's endorsement policy is "incumbent-friendly" (a logical position for an organization interested in maximizing leverage via seniority in Congress), the NRA is still free to withhold endorsements from incumbents it feels aren't doing its bidding. For example, the NRA is not endorsing incumbent Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in Nevada. If the NRA thought Herseth Sandlin was bad for its interests, the NRA could easily send that message.

Now I don't consider an NRA endorsement cause for celebration. Just a few weeks ago, I gave some poor telemarketer an earful for reading Wayne LaPierre's scripted lies to me over the phone in a push poll (don't these people keep track of past calls?). The NRA's gun-worship distracts us from solving real problems. I look forward to the day when someone who gets an F from the NRA can win an election in South Dakota.

But I can also acknowledge the political climate for what it is and revel in watching conservatives now blaspheme their usual electoral God. Gun advocates, you may think Kristi Noem is your little Annie Oakley, but the great and powerful National Rifle Association recognizes that Democrat Stephanie Herseth Sandlin is the right choice for making sure no one comes to pry your guns out of your hands.

Extremist views, ill-considered publicity stunts, sinking poll numbers, failure to grasp practical policy... Kristi Noem is turning out to be nothing more than Bruce Whalen in cowgirl boots.

Amish Invade South Dakota, Challenge Civic Religion

The South Dakota blogosphere hosts a couple threads of discussion of the Islamic Center developers want to build in an old Burlington Coat Factory rendered "hallowed" by 9/11 landing gear. While some worry about Muslims in our midst, South Dakota is experiencing another religious infiltration that challenges our civic religion: the Amish are coming!

Tom Lawrence discusses this new influx in the Tripp neighborhood in today's Mitchell Daily Republic:

More than 50 Amish people have come to the area this year. So far, six families have bought 720 acres of land and planted crops and roots in southeast South Dakota [Tom Lawrence, "The Amish Arrive in Southeast South Dakota," Mitchell Daily Republic, 2010.09.04].

120 acres per family? What kind of farmers are these folks? How can any farmer support a family on less than a whole section or two? Don't they pray the mantra of Saint Butz, Get big or get out? If these weren't Amish, I'd think they were getting their farm advice from some liberal hippie blog on the Interwebs.*

They are a traditional people who eschew most modern conveniences. They rely on old-fashioned horsepower — horses — for their field work and travel.

...The Amish use traditional farming methods, including putting their corn up in shocks, instead of combining [Lawrence, 2010].

What? These folks won't come in to the blessed showrooms of Jim River Equipment to buy a big combine, or Prostrollo's to buy a big F-350? Blasphemy! South Dakotans have a sacred duty to shop and boost those sales tax revenues! If we let the Amish in, they'll start converting people to their ways and drive this state into deficit and decline.

The Amish don’t believe in confrontation or fights and have declined to serve in the military. Borntreger said his wife’s grandfather was drafted into the military during World War I and when he refused to serve, he was held as a prisoner of war.

They are conscientious objectors, he said, and are now treated that way by the American government [Lawrence, 2010].

The Amish won't serve alongside our best and bravest? They don't even believe in using guns for personal protection. More blasphemy!

Big farms, big business, big technology, big patriotism and guns—these are the central tenets of our culture. The Amish clearly challenge these tenets. Ought not we be alarmed at the presence of this challenge to our civic religion in our midst?
-------------------------
*Cultural note: The Gracevale Hutterites brought their kids in to the library one day last week. Some of the kids were checking their Facebook pages.

Gun Intimidation Forces Wyoming Sales Tax Suspension

This is not how guns and democracy are supposed to go together: yahoos at Wyoming gun shows have caused the Wyoming Department of Revenue to suspend tax collections at gun shows:

Dan Noble, director of the department's excise tax division, said Friday that an incident at a gun show triggered the decision.

He added, however, that resistance from gun show sponsors and participants has been a recurring problem statewide.

"I have 10 field reps throughout the state, and every one of them has experienced some animosity," he said. "Folks are nervous anyway because there are guns there. I don't want to put my people at risk" [Joan Barron, "State Suspends Tax at Gun Shows," Casper Star-Tribune, 2010.07.04].

I stand corrected: I guess guns can check the government. Unfortunately, this check isn't on some previously untrammeled tyranny, but a perfectly lawful tax, the very sort of sales tax that some of my conservative friends think is the fairest tax of all.

The gun goonies cry that taxing their gun show sales infringes on their Second Amendment rights. If that's the case, then taxing my purchases of paper, pens, computers, and Internet service infringes on my First Amendment rights. Of course, even if I thought that argument might fly, I wouldn't use threats of gun violence to get my way; I'd just write letters to Secretary Kinsman and Senator Olson.

Democracy at the point of a gun isn't democracy. Wyoming gun nuts, man up, pay your taxes. And try settling your political differences without relying on the threat of force.

--------------------------
Update 12:06 CDT: conceivably related: reported assaults and threats against U.S. Census workers so far this year are more than double the number of such incidents in 2000.

Tea Party Rejects Judicial Activism, Expansion of Federal Power in Gun Ruling

...right? Right?!?

The Tea Party seems awfully quiet lately. BP turns the Gulf of Mexico in an oil holding pond, and the Tea Party has nothing to offer as citizens' anger rises at government for not doing enough.

Maybe the Tea Party can get back in the headlines by attacking the judicial activism and federalization of power in yesterday's McDonald v. City of Chicago gun rights ruling. Five men in Washington stripped power from your local and state governments and gave more power to the federal judiciary. Those five conservatives also engaged in the very sort of judicial activism that Republicans allegedly loathe as they look for a reason to quash Elana Kagan's nomination. Justices Alito, Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy have grafted a new individual right, self-defense against common crime, onto a Second Amendment predicated entirely on the principle of common defense against invaders and possibly an illegitimate government. (McDonald v. Chicago can't be about the "well-regulated Militia"—how can a ruling that only extends pistol rights as far as your front door help you play Red Dawn*?)

If I understand the Tea Party—if there is any Tea Party philosophy to understand—McDonald v. Chicago represents everything these angry conservatives hate: a power-hungry federal government violating the Founders' intent to expand its dominance over our duly elected local officials. But the Tea Party won't go there, because they are not a party of principle. They aren't even a party. They're just a writhing mass of inchoate rage with no coherent plan for practical governance.

But maybe deep down the Tea Partiers really do want anarchy. Ugh.
----------
*Oh my: there's a remake coming. Get you pistols ready for Chinese paratroopers!

Gun Rights Predicated on Regulation

Among other juicy topics, the Supreme Court is expected to hand down a ruling on gun rights today. That got me wondering: does the Second Amendment contradict itself?

I doubt that: the Founding Fathers were smart enough not to write illogical statements into the Constitution (well, except for that three-fifths clause). The contradiction I feel coming lies more in the irrational reasoning of folks like the Second Amendment Sisters, who think you ought to be able to pack heat anywhere, anytime, or Governor Rounds and far too many of our state legislators, who think you should be able to make and use guns and ammo in South Dakota without any federal regulation.

Did someone say regulation? Let's review the Second Amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

First phrase: well regulated Militia. The Founding Fathers framed the proper keeping and bearing of Arms in the context of regulation. The Constitution gives Congress the power to call up, organizing, arm, and discipline that militia. Our right to bear Arms appears to exist, in the Founding Fathers' minds, under the assumption that Congress gets to regulate those Arms.

Compare the phrasing of the Second Amendment with its neighbors. No other Amendment feels the need to explain itself. The First Amendment does not say why we need freedom of religion and speech ("A well exercised and expressed conscience, being necessary to the functioning of a free Democracy and personal integrity..."); it goes right to business, saying "Congress shall make no law...." Same with the other amendments: Washington, Franklin, Hamilton, et al. don't explain why the government can't quarter soldiers in peacetime or search without a warrant or impose excessive bail. The later amendments don't go there, either: the Constitution doesn't tell use why we can't have slaves or why we should have an income tax or why we should not or should have a stiff drink.

The Second Amendment is an anomaly, specifying the context motivating its protection. And that context is not individual self-defense or pheasant hunting or a God-given right to blast old buckets with your AK-47 (that happens here at Lake Herman). The Second Amendment explicitly assumes our guns exist in a framework of regulation to serve the State. If you want to posit other gun rights and oppose gun regulation, you can't rely on the Second Amendment; you have to hope for judicial activism.

Democrats Craft Special Exception to Campaign Finance Law for NRA

Can I get a witness? Can I get a Democrat with some guts?

The National Rifle Association sent me a membership card this week (bad data quality management on that mailing list). Just like Wayne LaPierre's lying phone calls, the recruitment letter flings vague and unsupported accusations that hundreds of wild-eyed liberal politicians are coming for my guns.

Reality check: the National Rifle Association is, alas, as powerful as ever. I just learned on NPR's Morning Edition that my dear Congressional Democrats have rewritten a campaign finance bill (the DISCLOSE Act) specifically to exempt the NRA. The Humane Society and AARP also qualify for the exemption, but the AFL-CIO, Chamber of Commerce, and MoveOn.org do not. But the rewrite was intended primarily to keep the NRA from wielding its lobbying clout to block the bill, which responds to this winter's egregious Citizens United Supreme Court ruling by requiring corporations to disclose their funding for political ads.

The DISCLOSE Act isn't even a Second Amendment issue—it's First Amendment!—yet the NRA can wield effective veto power over chicken-hearted Dems, whose Congressional gains have come thanks in large part to recruiting candidates beholden to the gun lobby.

Don't believe the NRA propaganda. Your guns are not in peril. The NRA's DISCLOSE Act exemption shows it can stop legislation at will.

Rounds Joins Census Conspiracy; Still No Gun Questions

Governor M. Michael Rounds has apparently joined the vast ACORN-led conspiracy masquearding as the United States Census. He exhorts us all to fill out our Census forms.

Of course, part of being a good American is being a wise guy. PPP's Bob Mercer notes that the Census makes an undue call for clairvoyance and declines to submit until April Fools' Day. I had my daughter help complete her first Census response Monday. We even filled out the racial information, something I often skip. 'What color are you?" I asked the young 'un.

"Pink," she said, ignoring the purple jelly on her fingers.

P-I-N-K, I entered in the boxes.

I considered entering how many guns we have, but the Census isn't asking about guns. The Census isn't asking about much else: Governor Rounds points out that this is one of the shortest Census forms in history.

Passed by SD Legislature: Teacher Standards, Guns, Pickles, Charter School

Some bills headed for the Governor's desk:

• Senate Bill 24 isn't a diktat to include Radioactive Chief in climate science curriculum, but it still smells of Pierre encroaching on local control in education. The Legislature is directing the Department of Education to establish statewide teacher evaluation standards. Now I kow he who has the gold makes the rules... but if Pierre is going to make these rules, couldn't it come up with a little more gold?
• Legislators were just a touch more leary about SB 89, but it still passed easily. This bill exempts from federal regulation any firearms made and kept within South Dakota's borders. The measure will thrill the gun manufacturers Governor Rounds chatted up in Vegas in January and may even help lure a few of them here to make bang-bangs. But think about this: do you think gunmakers will come to South Dakota to make unregulated guns that they can only sell to South Dakotans? Do we really buy that many weapons? (Oh, well, maybe....)
• The real slam dunk was HB 1222, a bill to clarify rules for farmers markets. Not one legislator cast a nay on this sensible legislation to promote local food production and local business. Governor Rounds, don't even think of vetoing this bill, or it's no pickles for you!
• The Legislature delivered SB 63, a bill to establish a pilot charter school for American Indian students... just in time to learn Uncle Sam rejected our application for the federal grant that was to fund it. (Hey, wait a minute: the charter school was to be a residential school... weren't boarding schools bad for Indians? Well, that's complicated....)
  

Obama Loosens Gun Laws Tomorrow

The Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility, and Disclosure Act comes in with a bang tomorrow. But the bang won't be layoffs at Premier or Citi. An eager reader points out the bang comes in an odd amendment, Section 512 of P.L. 111-24, which allows firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges.

So even if Premier takes you to the cleaners with new annual fees and more 79.9% interest rates, you can still run to the wilderness, pin your credit cards to a tree, and do some target practice. Backpack with your Baretta! Camp with your Colt! Hike with heat!

And be sure to thank President Barack Obama for his continued defense of the Second Amendment.

-----------------
Update 2010.02.24: Understanding Government further refutes the NRA propaganda that President Obama is anti-gun.

Legislative Notes: House Says Yes to Usury, Maybe to Education, No to Guns at Work

How's the Legislature doing?

Not so good in the eyes of the Lord... or at least of a faithful servant. Father Timothy Fountain Logan unloads Proverbs 28:8 on the Senate Commerce Committee and our usury-addicted state for once again declining to rein in predatory payday lenders. Whither South Dakota values....

Not so bad on education. Yesterday the House unanimously tabled HB 1050, the Governor's proposal to change the school funding formula and give our schools zero increase in state aid in FY 2011. I learned from Gary Ellenbolt on SDPB yesterday that, in our Legislature, tabling is actually a harsher sentence than deferral to the 41st day. Deferral at least allows supporters to speak their piece; tabling does not allow debate. After six days of kicking the can, the House evidently realized the Governor's proposal was so bad it didn't even warrant discussion. Ouch.

Of course, they still have to come up with a plan of their own. If they need to save money, perhaps they should look at shortening high school to two years (Yes! shout thousands of bored sophomores).

O.K. on Second Amendment sensibility. Half of the House plus one realized they didn't have to worry about their NRA ratings over public safety yesterday with the defeat of HB 1169. Rep. Lederman spoke of the right to keep a gun in your locked car. Rep. Engels won the day with his sensible argument that some employers—like hazardous chemical manufacturers, schools, mental health facilities—may have a countervailing right to keep guns a safe distance away. This bill was another lawsuit waiting to happen, as its application to public employers would have violated the federal gun-free zones around schools. District 8's reps split, with Fargen voting aye and Lange voting nay.

Improving, slowly but surely, on bicycles. They couldn't pass SB 70, but most of the drivers I deal with already have figured out they ought to leave three feet when they pass me on my bicycle (assuming they can pass me—zoom!). But the legislators are learning: check out the featured audio of Senator Mike Vehle on MinusCar! Senator Vehle pointed out that South Dakota state law entitles bicycles to the full lane and that SB 70 would actually have reduced the safety buffer for cyclists.

And whither the Blog Control Acts? House State Affairs has yet to set a hearing date for HB 1277 and 1278. According to the legislative calendar, these bills have to pass the full House by the end of business Tuesday to stay alive. Rep. Hamiel, you didn't forget these bills on your desk again, did you? I call one rule-suspension per bill!

Gary SD Shoots for Tourism and Economic Development

Rule #47 for small town econoic development: know your market. News comes out that South Dakota saw a record jump in concealed weapons permits in 2009, and not a week later, what does the Buffalo Ridge Resort in Gary advertise?


The Concealed Carry Getaway Weekends, February 6 and March 27. Training, classes on gun laws, snowmobiling, coyote hunting, and ice fishing (no, you cannot use your firearm on the fish).

A lot of my neighbors may think Gary will be the safest town in South Dakota that weekend. The coyotes may disagree.

Of course, coyotes get a whole 'nother weekend in their honor:


Look out, varmints! Gary has an economic development plan, and it's target is you!

Concealed Weapons Permits Hit Record in South Dakota

O.K., Osama, before you try anything funny here in South Dakota, I should point out that we are packing. Heat, that is. Secretary of State Chris Nelson reports South Dakota sheriffs issued a record number of concealed weapons permits last year, 16,907. That’s up 15.6% from 2008 and up 68% from 2005.

55,770 South Dakotans have concealed weapons permits. That means if you’re in a restaurant with 14 other South Dakotans, odds are 2 out of 3 that there’s at least one gun in the room. Make that a crowd of 50 South Dakotans, and there’s a 97% chance that at least one person is armed.

Funny: I thought that Obama fella was coming to take our guns. Full year in the White House, and he's not even counting them. Hmm... maybe that was the other fella....

But consider: if you think carrying a pistol around will make you safer, why hide it? Cops on the beat and Marines in Baghdad generally make no secret of their armed status. Wouldn’t a Smith & Wesson in full view on your hip send a much clearer “Don’t mess with me” message than a vague lump in your pants? Or is the idea of a concealed weapon to lure dopey bad guys in, get them to make the first move, and give you an excuse for live target practice?

I'm just asking. Commenters, fire away....

p.s.: Hankering for a little Wild West gunplay? Check this study by Robert McGrath of crime rates in gun-totin' Bodie, California, during the 1870s silver boom.

Gun Laws Getting Looser Under Obama

Seems like I heard somewhere that that durned Obama was coming to take our guns.

Reality check:

A nationwide review by The Associated Press found that over the last two years, 24 states, mostly in the South and West, have passed 47 new laws loosening gun restrictions.

Among other things, legislatures have allowed firearms to be carried in cars, made it illegal to ask job candidates whether they own a gun, and expanded agreements that make permits to carry handguns in one state valid in another [Erik Schelzig, "Gun Laws Are Getting Looser Across Much of U.S.," AP via Yahoo News, 2009.12.11].

Among the new laws: Arizona will let you bring your gun into a bar. Great.

Update 2009.12.13 14:55 CST: Similar thoughts from responsible gun owner Kevin Woster at Mount Blogmore.

Hurst: Guns Are Intimidation, Not Political Speech

Remember the lockdown-freakout in Tea last week? Remember the honyockers with guns outside Presidential speeches this summer? The Dakota Day's Sam Hurst puts two and two together:

So my first anxiety is not just that goofballs are parading around in public with their guns. It is their proximity to impassioned political debate and their proximity to a President who they ideologically and racially hate, that makes nightmares of past assassinations flash through my brain. These are not armed men at a gun show, or a shooting range, or even the parking lot of Cabela's. These men are at political rallies. If an armed man appears in the neighborhood of Central High School the school goes into lock down, and the SWAT Team is called in. But if the same man appears at a political rally, outside a presidential appearance, where ideological tensions are already high, he is simply expressing his Second Amendment rights [Sam Hurst, "August Gun Strutting Opens a Terrifying New Constitutional Frontier," The Dakota Day, 2009.09.30].

Hurst goes on to make an even more important point about guns and the Constitution. We can argue about whether we have a right to our guns to hunt, to pick off criminals, or to play Chuck Norris in Invasion U.S.A. But it's downright scary to think that anyone has a right to carry weapons as an act of political intimidation. If you need a gun to make your point, you must not have much of a point.

Update 08:33 CDT: I think Hurst is sensing the same frightening vibe that Thomas Friedman senses. The NYT columnist compares the increasing hateful disunity in America to the "poisonous political environment" he saw in Israel in 1995 right before the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin. Dr. Newquist hears something similar in John L. Perry's call for an American coup d'etat. Wake up, America. We're better than this.

Census Counting Guns? No.

"Bob" from Aberdeen, SD, just called in to NPR's Talk of the Nation to contribute to a conversation about suspicion and animosity toward the U.S. Census. Bob complains that the 2000 Census form asked him how many guns he owns and what rooms he keeps them in. Bob says he's no gun nut, but he feels such questions are inappropriate.

Such questions on the Census form are also imaginary. The program guest says he can't recall seeing any such question on the Census long form. Check for yourself: I search the 2000 long form and find neither gun, weapon, nor firearm. Ditto the individual Census report. Ditto the 1990 form. And ditto the 2010 form.

I may have missed something, and I'm open to verifiable information to the contrary.

And don't forget: there is not one documented instance of anyone being fined for declining to respond to the Census... and declining to respond will do you and your community more harm than good.