http://www.ankrum2010.com/
Be sure to pay his campaign a visit, especially if you live in the 10th Congressional District. Thanks!
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Friday, January 15, 2010
Farouk Shami campaign's statement on the Second Amendment
Taken from the website of Farouk Shami, Democratic candidate for Governor of Texas:
Farouk unequivocally supports the Second Amendment rights of all Texans.
Farouk will fight any effort to restrict the ability of Texans’ to carry concealed weapons. However, he believes Texas’ higher educational institutions must be gun free.
Farouk unequivocally supports the Second Amendment rights of all Texans.
Farouk will fight any effort to restrict the ability of Texans’ to carry concealed weapons. However, he believes Texas’ higher educational institutions must be gun free.
Daniel Boone running for Texas SBOE
Those of you who attended the Gun Owners Caucus meeting at the 2008 State Convention in Austin probably remember seeing Daniel Boone pay us a visit while running for House District 73. I have just learned that Boone is running as a Democratic candidate for state office once again, this time for the Texas State Board of Education, District Five.
Boone is competing against Rebecca Bell-Metereau, Robert Bohmfalk, and Josiah James Ingalls in the Democratic primary for the SBOE seat.
Boone is competing against Rebecca Bell-Metereau, Robert Bohmfalk, and Josiah James Ingalls in the Democratic primary for the SBOE seat.
Ted Ankrum for Texas' 10th Congressional District
If your representative in Congress is Michael McCaul, take heart. Despite the news that Jack McDonald has dropped out of the race for Texas' 10th Congressional District, there is a Democrat running against McCaul who could use all the help you can give him. His name is Ted Ankrum, and he was the Democratic nominee for the seat back in 2006.
Ted is also a pro-RKBA Democrat, as witnessed by his responses to a 2006 questionnaire from Amendment II Democrats:
http://www.a2dems.net/campaign2006/speakout-tx.htm
Here's Ted commenting on why he chose to run for Congress at the last minute:
http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/9821
No campaign website yet, but he's setting up a Facebook page, and his mailing address is available from the BOR article. I hope to bring you more information on the Ankrum campaign soon.
Ted is also a pro-RKBA Democrat, as witnessed by his responses to a 2006 questionnaire from Amendment II Democrats:
http://www.a2dems.net/campaign2006/speakout-tx.htm
Here's Ted commenting on why he chose to run for Congress at the last minute:
http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/9821
No campaign website yet, but he's setting up a Facebook page, and his mailing address is available from the BOR article. I hope to bring you more information on the Ankrum campaign soon.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Holiday wishes to all
It's been fairly quiet over here, so I'd like to wish everyone Merry Christmas, Happy Chanukah, Joyous Solstice, Festive Kwanzaa, and best wishes for a happy and prosperous new year!
Daniel
Daniel
Monday, November 16, 2009
Proposed Changes to Texas Democratic Party Caucus Rules
The next meeting of the TDP State Democratic Executive Committee (SDEC) will be held on Saturday, November 21 at the Double Tree Hotel in Austin, Texas. On the agenda for the SDEC meeting are some proposed rule changes that will have a significant impact on the ability of the Gun Owners Caucus to develop and maintain an official presence within the TDP.
If these changes are adopted, our caucus can still hold meetings at the State Convention and as otherwise required by our Bylaws, but the new rules will affect our ability to obtain official recognition by the SDEC, let alone a place at the SDEC table. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it will be a challenge to our caucus, and the proposed rules do offer some minimum standards for what qualifies as a "caucus" in the eyes of the SDEC.
A summary of the pertinent changes that will be considered at the November 21 meeting:
1. An official caucus must hold two consecutive, officially scheduled caucuses at the State Convention. (No problem here, as our Bylaws mandate an Election Meeting during every State Convention.)
2. Minimum membership in an official SDEC caucus will be 250 members statewide, with 16 senatorial districts providing at least five members each.
3. All caucus members must vote in the Democratic primary and be eligible to serve as a State Convention delegate or alternate.
4. Caucus Bylaws must be approved as adequate by the Rules Committee of the SDEC.
I'll post any further details as they become available.
If these changes are adopted, our caucus can still hold meetings at the State Convention and as otherwise required by our Bylaws, but the new rules will affect our ability to obtain official recognition by the SDEC, let alone a place at the SDEC table. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it will be a challenge to our caucus, and the proposed rules do offer some minimum standards for what qualifies as a "caucus" in the eyes of the SDEC.
A summary of the pertinent changes that will be considered at the November 21 meeting:
1. An official caucus must hold two consecutive, officially scheduled caucuses at the State Convention. (No problem here, as our Bylaws mandate an Election Meeting during every State Convention.)
2. Minimum membership in an official SDEC caucus will be 250 members statewide, with 16 senatorial districts providing at least five members each.
3. All caucus members must vote in the Democratic primary and be eligible to serve as a State Convention delegate or alternate.
4. Caucus Bylaws must be approved as adequate by the Rules Committee of the SDEC.
I'll post any further details as they become available.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Open letter to Richard Ward, Mayor of Hurst
BACKGROUND: Richard Ward has served as Mayor of the city of Hurst, Texas, since May 2004. Mayor Ward is a US Army veteran with a background in medical technology, human resources, and youth activities. He is also a current member of Mayors Against Illegal Guns and has written an editorial for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram dated September 27, 2009 to explain his involvement in MAIG:
Mayors group wants to make it harder for criminals to get guns
I sent Mayor Ward the following response on September 30:
Good morning, Mayor Ward:
In my current role as Chair of the Gun Owners Caucus of the Texas Democratic Party, one of my duties is to keep abreast of gun politics in Texas to the best of my ability with a view towards serving my fellow Texas Democrats. It is therefore within said capacity that I respectfully submit this open response to your Fort Worth Star-Telegram editorial published on September 27, 2009.
I know that serving as Mayor can wear on you at times. You have a lot of pressing issues to juggle - municipal services, public education, law enforcement, utilities, and the constant battle to reconcile all of the above with your annual budget. The same goes for any Mayor worth his or her salt, and I appreciate your efforts.
While discussing your membership in Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG), I read where you "fully support the rights of law-abiding citizens under the Second Amendment," and I appreciate those sentiments greatly. There are, however, ongoing concerns that I have with the policies and long-term objectives of MAIG that must be addressed.
By their own admission, MAIG supports using a secretive "watch list" to deny sales of firearms to law-abiding citizens if their names somehow wind up on this list:
http://mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/federal/closing_gun_gap.shtml
I have seen numerous reports of innocent civilians being denied the ability to fly on commercial airliners because their names have been placed on a "no-fly list" by some faceless bureaucrat. Even the late Senator Ted Kennedy fell victim to this list, which is by design secretive, unreviewable, and virtually unimpeachable. I do not want terrorists obtaining firearms or explosives, either - and I am glad that the FBI did their job in keeping that kid from blowing up the Fountain Place skyscraper in downtown Dallas - but curtailing the rights of innocent Americans without notification, without review, and without due process is not the way to do it.
In addition, MAIG's opposition to the Thune Amendment also touches on the notion of right-to-carry reciprocity between states, including Texas that issue concealed handgun licenses (CHLs):
http://mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/downloads/pdf/7_14_09_maig_letter.pdf
Although I acknowledge your own concerns about the Thune Amendment, I still hold out hope for a workable CHL reciprocity system between the several states. One of the reasons our nation scrapped the Articles of Confederation in favor of the Constitution was because the Articles denied Congress the ability to regulate interstate commerce, as evidenced in the ill-fated Jay-Gardoqui Treaty and the runaway inflation in Massachusetts that brought about Shay's Rebellion in the absence of any state or Federal intervention.
National CHL reciprocity could never have been enacted (let alone enforced) under the Articles, but it can work under the Constitution, and should be given diligent study on Capitol Hill in view of the Constitution bestowing upon Congress some ability to regulate firearm sales as interstate commerce (Article I, Section 8, as reflected in the National Firearms Act of 1934). The issue of minimum standards is a valid one, but it should not be used to derail all discussion of CHL reciprocity.
As for the "closing the gun show loophole," while I am confident that mandatory background checks for all sales at gun shows will not have any significant financial impact on these shows, I am concerned that the push for universal background checks could lead to criminal charges against any parent who bequeaths a firearm to a child of sufficient age and maturity to take possession of the gun, nor am I confident that legislation such as Senator Frank Lautenberg's S. 843 will have any appreciable effect on illegal trafficking or smuggling of firearms.
In addition, MAIG has voiced support as recently as December 27, 2007 for a new Federal ban on civilian ownership of semi-automatic firearms:
http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/media-center/pr015-07.shtml
Obviously, I cannot and will not lend my support to such a wholesale assault on our Constitutional rights. If I legally own a semi-automatic M1 carbine, a Kalashnikov, an AR-type rifle, or even a Smith & Wesson pistol that holds 11 rounds instead of 10, I have a responsibility to do everything I could to keep my gun safe from theft, but I need reassurance that my elected officials, even if they disagree with my choice of firearm, will continue to defend my Second Amendment right to own it.
I recognize that you consider the safety of Hurst residents your top priority, which is commendable. I also recognize your statement that you do not wish to be associated with any organization that is considered anti-Second Amendment. And I'm not going to suggest that you resign from MAIG if you truly feel that your respect for our Constitutional rights is in harmony with the goals and objectives of MAIG. Nevertheless, I feel that the concerns I stated above are still valid, legitimate, and of great interest to my fellow Texas Democrats, especially those who own guns.
On the other hand, your own voice within MAIG could do much to temper some of the more far-reaching proposals of your coalition partners and renew the focus on combatting illegal gun trafficking and violent crime without threatening the rights of innocent, law-abiding Americans. This, I believe, would be a laudable objective.
Thank you for taking time out of your admittedly busy schedule to reflect upon my concerns.
Sincerely,
Daniel Barnett
Gun Owners Caucus of the Texas Democratic Party
NOTE: Mayor Ward has kindly informed me that he is interested in composing a response. I will keep you posted on any further details.
Mayors group wants to make it harder for criminals to get guns
I sent Mayor Ward the following response on September 30:
Good morning, Mayor Ward:
In my current role as Chair of the Gun Owners Caucus of the Texas Democratic Party, one of my duties is to keep abreast of gun politics in Texas to the best of my ability with a view towards serving my fellow Texas Democrats. It is therefore within said capacity that I respectfully submit this open response to your Fort Worth Star-Telegram editorial published on September 27, 2009.
I know that serving as Mayor can wear on you at times. You have a lot of pressing issues to juggle - municipal services, public education, law enforcement, utilities, and the constant battle to reconcile all of the above with your annual budget. The same goes for any Mayor worth his or her salt, and I appreciate your efforts.
While discussing your membership in Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG), I read where you "fully support the rights of law-abiding citizens under the Second Amendment," and I appreciate those sentiments greatly. There are, however, ongoing concerns that I have with the policies and long-term objectives of MAIG that must be addressed.
By their own admission, MAIG supports using a secretive "watch list" to deny sales of firearms to law-abiding citizens if their names somehow wind up on this list:
http://mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/federal/closing_gun_gap.shtml
I have seen numerous reports of innocent civilians being denied the ability to fly on commercial airliners because their names have been placed on a "no-fly list" by some faceless bureaucrat. Even the late Senator Ted Kennedy fell victim to this list, which is by design secretive, unreviewable, and virtually unimpeachable. I do not want terrorists obtaining firearms or explosives, either - and I am glad that the FBI did their job in keeping that kid from blowing up the Fountain Place skyscraper in downtown Dallas - but curtailing the rights of innocent Americans without notification, without review, and without due process is not the way to do it.
In addition, MAIG's opposition to the Thune Amendment also touches on the notion of right-to-carry reciprocity between states, including Texas that issue concealed handgun licenses (CHLs):
http://mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/downloads/pdf/7_14_09_maig_letter.pdf
Although I acknowledge your own concerns about the Thune Amendment, I still hold out hope for a workable CHL reciprocity system between the several states. One of the reasons our nation scrapped the Articles of Confederation in favor of the Constitution was because the Articles denied Congress the ability to regulate interstate commerce, as evidenced in the ill-fated Jay-Gardoqui Treaty and the runaway inflation in Massachusetts that brought about Shay's Rebellion in the absence of any state or Federal intervention.
National CHL reciprocity could never have been enacted (let alone enforced) under the Articles, but it can work under the Constitution, and should be given diligent study on Capitol Hill in view of the Constitution bestowing upon Congress some ability to regulate firearm sales as interstate commerce (Article I, Section 8, as reflected in the National Firearms Act of 1934). The issue of minimum standards is a valid one, but it should not be used to derail all discussion of CHL reciprocity.
As for the "closing the gun show loophole," while I am confident that mandatory background checks for all sales at gun shows will not have any significant financial impact on these shows, I am concerned that the push for universal background checks could lead to criminal charges against any parent who bequeaths a firearm to a child of sufficient age and maturity to take possession of the gun, nor am I confident that legislation such as Senator Frank Lautenberg's S. 843 will have any appreciable effect on illegal trafficking or smuggling of firearms.
In addition, MAIG has voiced support as recently as December 27, 2007 for a new Federal ban on civilian ownership of semi-automatic firearms:
http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/media-center/pr015-07.shtml
Obviously, I cannot and will not lend my support to such a wholesale assault on our Constitutional rights. If I legally own a semi-automatic M1 carbine, a Kalashnikov, an AR-type rifle, or even a Smith & Wesson pistol that holds 11 rounds instead of 10, I have a responsibility to do everything I could to keep my gun safe from theft, but I need reassurance that my elected officials, even if they disagree with my choice of firearm, will continue to defend my Second Amendment right to own it.
I recognize that you consider the safety of Hurst residents your top priority, which is commendable. I also recognize your statement that you do not wish to be associated with any organization that is considered anti-Second Amendment. And I'm not going to suggest that you resign from MAIG if you truly feel that your respect for our Constitutional rights is in harmony with the goals and objectives of MAIG. Nevertheless, I feel that the concerns I stated above are still valid, legitimate, and of great interest to my fellow Texas Democrats, especially those who own guns.
On the other hand, your own voice within MAIG could do much to temper some of the more far-reaching proposals of your coalition partners and renew the focus on combatting illegal gun trafficking and violent crime without threatening the rights of innocent, law-abiding Americans. This, I believe, would be a laudable objective.
Thank you for taking time out of your admittedly busy schedule to reflect upon my concerns.
Sincerely,
Daniel Barnett
Gun Owners Caucus of the Texas Democratic Party
NOTE: Mayor Ward has kindly informed me that he is interested in composing a response. I will keep you posted on any further details.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
