The Computer Wore Menace Shoes

Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.), yells, "You lie!" during President Barack Obama's speech to Congress Wednesday. Democratic leaders are considering a resolution condemning his outburst, even though Obama accepted an apology.

Democratic leaders in Congress are threatening to proceed with a resolution condemning Rep. Joe Wilson’s “You lie!” outburst during President Barack Obama’s health care address to the legislature Wednesday.

Uh, Democrats … do you realize what you’re doing? You’re acting like the stereotypical Republican you’ve been so glad to get a majority over because now you can get things done. By focusing on Wilson’s heckling, which he already apologized to Obama for, you’re not working on the health care debate.

And if you aren’t working on the No. 1 national priority, then you aren’t getting things done.

“How great it’ll be to have a president from our party and a majority in Congress,” you thought. “Imagine all the wonderful, socially responsible things we can accomplish,” you whispered excitedly among yourselves.

Yet here you are, stuck on two words yelled out during the president’s speech.

“I am not going to apologize again. I apologized to the president on Wednesday night. I was advised then that, ‘Thank you, now let’s get on to a civil discussion of the issues,’” Wilson said. “I’ve apologized one time. The apology was accepted by the president, by the vice president, who I know. I am not apologizing again.”

Not all Republicans are sticking up for Wilson, either. Texas Sen. John Cornyn acknowledged Wilson was out of line.

“Well, there’s a time and a place for everything, and that was not the time or the place for that kind of comment,” he said. “This is not the time to be demonizing anybody, calling anybody names on either side. This is a time to try to work together to solve a practical problem.”

And if that’s not enough for Democrats, all they need to know that Obama is over it and ready to get back to a civil health care debate instead of stew over something so insignificant in comparison.

“See, this is part of what happens. I mean, it just – it becomes a big circus instead of us focusing on health care,” Obama said on “60 Minutes.”

So get over it already, Democrats. There are bigger fish to fry, and every time you defer to such a ticky-tack issue rather than shrugging it off and returning to the real matter at hand, you stir up doubt in your ability to be the “ruling party.”

Legislation calling for concealed weapons permit reciprocity among states with such laws failed to pass in the Senate today by only two votes, 58-39. Two more votes would have made the amendment to a defense spending bill filibuster-proof.

The roll call showed Democrats are divided on gun control, with 20 voting “yes” and 35 voting “no.” Republicans overwhelmingly supported the amendment, with 38 in favor and only two opposed.

Had the measure passed, a concealed weapons permit would be valid in any of the 48 states with laws permitting them, regardless of differences in requirements between the issuing state and others. Read that again, then think about the fact that most senators thought that was a good idea.

Requirements for concealed weapons permits vary widely among the states, and you can get a feel for how tough they are by checking states’ Brady Campaign score for gun control. Higher-scoring states tend to have stricter requirements, so just imagine what would happen if California had to honor permits issued by Louisiana.

The Senate vote begs the question: how did we become a nation of gun nuts? Say what you will about Second Amendment rights, but Americans love their guns more than any other country’s citizens. Nearly four in 10 American households own a gun, compared to about three in 10 Norwegian and Canadian ones and hardly any UK or Dutch ones.

The measure’s sponsor, Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., pointed out persons carrying concealed weapons in another state must abide by that state’s rules and prohibitions. That’s all well and good, but there are plenty of subtle variations among the states regarding many other laws that aren’t followed. Is Thune suggesting gun owners will be aware of concealed weapon law variations everywhere they go and follow them to the letter when hardly anyone knows how many sips of beer are legal while standing in the state of Texas?

But really, Thune is just parroting the “Wild West” values that distinguish the United States from other countries. When Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., called the measure “the most dangerous piece of legislation to the safety of Americans when it comes to guns since the repeal of the assault weapons ban,” Thune countered by saying a if a South Dakotan were carrying in New York, “Central Park will be a much safer place.”

This is where we are as a nation when it comes to gun control? Thune’s – and presumably other supporters’ – “shoot first, ask questions later” attitude may cut it in action movies, but this is real life we’re talking about. Not only would forcing reciprocity on states potentially endanger traveling gun owners and citizens of the states they visit, but it would also run roughshod over the laws of California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and the District of Columbia, which don’t allow concealed weapons permit reciprocity.

Fifty-eight senators voted to challenge the laws of these governments! The Second Amendment is always thrown about during gun control debates, but what about the Tenth Amendment?

If you look at what’s gone through Congress this year, then you’d realize the legislature, despite having a Democratic majority, is moving toward loosening gun control. Americans are again allowed to carry loaded weapons in national parks, laws in the District of Columbia have been butchered and there’s been no response to President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder’s requests to reinstate the ban on military-style weapons that expired in 2004.

Maybe the uptick in gun sales after 9/11 has something to do with the legislature’s reluctance to act counter to public perception of the rights the Second Amendment grants. Maybe it’s a consequence of a homogenization of opinion on gun control across party lines. Maybe it’s due to Democrats deciding it’s too controversial an issue to take a stand on without jeopardizing re-election.

Whatever the cause for relaxing gun control laws, I think America is still reading too much into the Second Amendment. Everyone can recite “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” but few people pay attention to the words that precede them: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State.”

People are allowed to keep and bear arms because a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of the nation, and the U.S. Code establishes who may be a part of it: American citizens or persons with declared intent to become citizens aged 17-45.

If Congress wants to continue loosening gun control laws, then it should start using the laws that are already laid out concerning who may keep and bear arms. If, however, Congress wants to continue adhering to the popular interpretation of the Second Amendment, then it needs to stop easing gun control laws.