This page was last updated on April 20, 2018.
Put an end to NRA ‘blood money’; Bernard Rabik (BR); Beaver County Times; March 6, 2018.
According to the BCT, “Bernie Rabik of Hopewell Township is an attorney and former Beaver County solicitor. He writes a column on legal matters for The Times.” In reality, BR appears to be just another lefty pundit. For example, “Does the truth matter anymore?” (11/17/2017) was no more than an anti-Trump rant.
In his inaugural piece of 7/1/2016, BR wrote, “Note that none of the answers to your questions will be editorials expressing the opinions of The Times through its editorial writers.” While BR’s articles may or may not “be editorials expressing the opinions of The Times,” they are loaded with his Democrat/leftist politics. Could BR be J.D. Prose v2.0? <g>
Reviews of previous BR pieces are here and here.
Below is a review of the subject column.
“Most Americans, according to a new Washington Post-ABC survey, fault President Trump and Congress for not doing enough to stop mass shootings.”
[RWC] “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.” - Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Please read my review of the Second Amendment. It addresses most of BR’s issues. Though BR is allegedly a lawyer, I don’t know if he understands the purpose of Amendment II.
At time of this column, President Trump (DT) had been in office 14 months. Then-President Obama (BHO) was in office for eight years and, during his first two years in office, Democrats could have passed any gun control bill they wanted without a single Republican vote, just as they did with Obamacare; they didn’t, however. Why? Are we to believe Democrats could shove Obamacare down our throats but not more gun control laws?
By the time you reach the end of BR’s column, you’ll find he proposes no solutions. You’ll also find that while BR bashes the NRA, he gives no details of the alleged misdeeds.
“Furthermore, it is simply not the case that the country is in any way evenly divided over this issue. In any popular vote, stricter background checks, waiting periods, bans on assault weapons and other reasonable gun-control measures win in a landslide.”
[RWC] What do the polls say when the questions include the exact details of those “reasonable gun-control measures” instead of vague statements? You’ll note BR didn’t provide the poll questions, the order in which they were asked, and so on.
“We have ignored that popular sentiment in the 19 years since Columbine for only one reason, and that is that the National Rifle Association has bought and paid for the votes of the Republican Party, which has let itself be held hostage for decades.”
[RWC] Again, BHO was in office for eight years and, during his first two years in office, Democrats could have passed any gun control bill they wanted, but they didn’t.
In the interest of full disclosure, I joined the NRA several weeks ago.
“The NRA puts its money where its mouth is. From 2010 through 2018 thus far, the organization has donated $111 million to political campaigns of federal candidates. Here’s a sampling:”
[RWC] For better or worse, $111 million for “2010 through 2018 thus far” is chump change. For the 2016 presidential campaign alone, Donald Trump (DT) received $408.4 million in contributions while Hillary Clinton received $794.8 million, nearly twice as much as DT. You’ll note BR didn’t mention how much anti-Second Amendment groups contributed and to whom.
“President Trump: The NRA spent more than $30 million to help elect Trump, including more than $19 million attacking Hillary Clinton. Note that in February 2017, President Trump scrapped an Obama-era regulation making it tougher for people with mental illnesses to buy a gun.”
[RWC] Another piece of BR’s deception is referring to the rule as an “Obama-era regulation;” that’s mostly false. The so-called “Obama-era regulation” wasn’t even finalized until 12/19/2016, only a month before BHO left office, and would have not taken effect until December 2017. And if it had been in effect? Unless the 19-year-old was receiving Social Security disability payments and needed help to manage them, the rule wouldn’t have helped. Besides, the FBI conceded it had enough info to question the killer but dropped the ball.
There’s a reason BR didn’t say why Congress and DT repealed the rule. In summary, the rule placed persons with certain mental illnesses on a “no buy” list without a court hearing. A person could challenge his placement on the list only after he was already on it. BR also failed to mention “the ACLU and 23 national disability groups” opposed the rule and the repeal had no effect on pre-existing laws. There’s more on this in the aforementioned Amendment II review.
“Sen. John McClain, R-Ariz.: NRA spending reached $7.7 million for McCain and against his Senate electoral opponents by 2016, placing him first among all members of Congress. McCain did not vote in favor of the 2015 bill mandating universal background checks.”
[RWC] How does BR define “universal background checks?”
Since he’s “an attorney and former Beaver County solicitor,” I’m sure BR knows federal law requires federally-licensed dealers to perform background checks using the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). When purchasing via mail, phone, or the Internet, firearms must be sent to a licensed dealer who performs the background check. Further, Pennsylvania requires state-licensed sellers to perform background checks using the Pennsylvania Instant Check System operated by the Pennsylvania State Police. Depending on the firearm, private sellers must use a licensed dealer to make a sale and the dealer must perform a background check as he would if he were the seller. PA gun laws apply whether you buy a firearm at a local dealer, at a gun show, or from your neighbor.
“Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.: By 2016, $1.3 million.
“Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla.: “Today is that terrible day you pray never comes,” Rubio tweeted minutes after the Valentine’s Day massacre in his home state. He is one of the golden boys of the NRA, being the beneficiary of $3.3 million in campaign spending by the NRA.
“A week after the deadly shooting, Rubio found himself on the hot seat. Cameron Kasky, a junior who survived the massacre, drew cheers and applause from the audience: ‘Sen. Rubio, can you tell me right now that you will not accept a single donation from the NRA?’ Rubio was not willing to give up the blood money.”
[RWC] Why should Sen. Rubio “not accept a single donation from the NRA?” As I noted previously, BR gives no details of the NRA’s alleged misdeeds.
“When we elect politicians to office, it’s with the expectation, or at least the hope, that they will do something to improve our lives. It’s time to vote the gun lobby out of office, standing up to extremists and industry lobbyists.”
[RWC] When did NRA members become extremists? According to the NRA, it had about five million members as of mid-2017. In the interest of disclosure, I joined the NRA about a month ago.
Who on Earth actually believes when “we elect politicians to office, it’s with the expectation, or at least the hope, that they will do something to improve our lives?” It’s this kind of “thinking” that, over time, will turn a free nation into something else.
“With midterm elections coming up this fall, America has a chance to get that message across. Candidates must realize that reducing gun violence is a winning and moral issue. There must be an aggressive turnout by voters who believe this issue can defeat the NRA at the polls. Until then, the bloodshed will continue.”
[RWC] Does BR really think NRA members don’t want an end to criminal gun violence? That sounds like something Mrs. Bill Clinton would say about U.S. citizens who had the good sense not to vote for her.
As noted above, BR claims “the bloodshed will continue” unless gals/guys like him “defeat the NRA at the polls,” but he stays clear of specific proposals. Why? Here’s the question BR needs to answer: specifically, how would you stop “the bloodshed?”
“In sum, morality should not be turned into something like the good china, which you take down from the high shelf only for special occasions.”
[RWC] It’s nice of BR to make himself an arbiter of morality. Of course “reducing gun violence is a winning and moral issue.” Who would say otherwise? The trick is to figure out how deal with “gun violence” within the rights affirmed by the Second Amendment.
© 2004-2018 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.