Some analysis of the recent November 6th Elections (2007)

[NineseveN]

I took the liberty of analyzing some of the election results from November 6th to see what the impact was, if any, from the "pro-gun vote" and what implications remain going forward. I hope some find this interesting or worthy of some thought.


In the race for Justice of the Supreme Court:

Electing 2

Candidate Votes Percent
MCCAFFERY, SEAMUS (DEM) 1,218,288 30.1%
TODD, DEBRA (DEM) 1,071,193 26.5%
LALLY-GREEN, MAUREEN E. (REP) 983,799 24.3%
KRANCER, MIKE (REP) 774,654 19.1%

Todd and McCaffery were the favorites here already, Seamus partly due to him being a media darling due to his blue-collar back story and the fame from running the "Eagles Court". Krancer has never held a judicial seat on anything but an environmental hearing board, so his climb was definitely uphill to begin with having no discernible experience. What might have hurt us here is the split between the NRA and our state RKBA groups; the NRA endorsed Krancer, FOAC endorsed Lally-Greene. Todd's margin over Green was so slim that perhaps if the NRA backed Green instead of Krancer (or if the FOAC had backed Krancer instead of Green), that may have been enough to close the gap and secure us another seat by an RKBA-endorsed candidate. If I recall correctly, the FOAC initially endorsed Krancer in the primaries, why the switch was made to Lally-Green, I don't know. But the fact that the NRA backed a candidate that was as unlikely to win as Krancer is even more mystifying, especially considering that they have much more penetration with their endorsement communications than any of our state or local groups do.



Concerning the Judge of the Superior Court seats:


Electing 3

Candidate Votes Percent
DONOHUE, CHRISTINE (DEM) 1,087,154 19.4%
SHOGAN, JACKIE (REP) 964,917 17.2%
ALLEN, CHERYL LYNN (REP) 958,512 17.1%
FOLINO, RON (DEM) 918,083 16.4%
YOUNGE, JOHN (DEM) 842,192 15.0%
BRATTON, BRUCE F. (REP) 825,623 14.8%


Donohue was a favorite and highly recommended by the PA Bar Association, so it's no surprise to me that she's in the top tier, but what I am most pleased with is that Allen and Shogan have also made the cut. They were the only 2 judges to respond to my individual inquiries on their merits as judges and both fashion themselves as individual rights/strict constructionists. The FOAC endorsed both of them. Allen received a highly recommended rating from the PA Bas Association as well, while Shogan only managed a "recommended" rating. Ron Folino, who came in 4th and missed the cut by about 40,000 votes or so managed a "highly recommended" rating. Since these races were a little tighter than those for the Supreme Court seats, it is possible that the so-called "gun-owner vote" actually had an impact here, especially considering two Republican judges won as opposed to only one Democratic candidate in an election that heavily favored the Democratic side (according to the mainstream media anyway). It's hard to tell, but I think that this may be the only area where the RKBA vote can claim to have made a significant difference (in judicial elections anyway), though that claim is a bit foggy.


On the retention elections, all of the justices were retained by good margins, so the impact there isn't measurable without some additional information. Also, keep in mind, it is very rare that a judge loses a retention election here, as I believe that only 1 or 2 have ever not been retained in my lifetime.

As for the Sheriff elections (the people who run the offices concerning the PA Licenses to Carry Firearms), there were a couple that were high on the radar, but most notable of them was the race in Allegheny County between current Sheriff Bill Mullen and challenger Ed Kress. Mullen is particularly notorious among internet-savvy gun owners as the guy that has shut down the office on Saturdays (meaning most have to take a day off of work to apply for an LTCF), supports Assault Weapons Bans and has made it more time consuming and difficult to get an LTCF. Under the previous Sheriff (Pete DeFazio who retired due to corruption charges and as a result, Mullen took over for the rest of the term) permits were issued generally within 5 minutes, under Mullen, it takes anywhere from 2 weeks to the full 45 days allowed by law. Given that we're in an age of instant background checks, there is simply no excuse for this, and gun owners should know that. But did they? Mullen won by a solid margin (more than 57,000 votes).

BILL MULLEN (DEM). . . . . . . . 147,102 62.02
EDWARD KRESS (REP) . . . . . . . 89,941 37.92
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 143 .06

Unless a gun owner spent a lot of time online or has had to apply for or renew their permit this year, they would have had absolutely no idea about Mullen and his mostly anti-gun actions. Ed Kress did a terrible job of getting out there to energize the one group that might have saved him, gun owners. Allegheny County is pretty much a Democrat enclave, getting a Republican elected there requires more than showing up and filing the papers. The gun owner vote here could have been a goldmine, but it just wasn't capitalized on. Furthermore, the RKBA groups that did endorse Kress never let us know why. Kress doesn't have a background that one could easily discern his RKBA views from, and without saying why Kress was so much better than Mullen, I think the endorsement mainly fell on deaf ears (except, of course, if you already knew about Mullen's antics). In a race such as this, I would honestly suggest to the groups that endorse such a candidate to offer reasons why Kress is being endorsed to give gun owners ammo to convince other gun owners not in the loop. It's hard to convince someone by saying "vote for this guy, XXXX says we should", gun owners have been burned in the past by that and I think that without a compelling reason to vote, they either stay home or vote based on what little info they can find via the MSM. Again, with Allegheny County being almost wholly Democratic in terms of who they vote for, this was an uphill battle and the lack of action to mobilize the one subset of people that could have been an equalizer doomed the efforts to elect Ed Kress to utter failure.

However, all is not lost with Mullen, or so he'd have us believe. There was a discussion about the race between Mullen and Kress on www.pafoa.org (http://www.pafoa.org/forum/allegheny...t-holders.html) that prompted a representative of Mullen's to post some rebuttal information on some of the things we gun owners are accusing him of.

"I am posting this on behalf of Bill Mullen. I am not just posting something that I have been told by his campaign. I am Sheriff Mullen's, Solicitor and I have personal knowledge of the facts presented by Sheriff Mullen in this post.


Allow me to respond to Alert Allegheny Residents firearm permit holders, regarding my position on permits to carry firearms in Allegheny County.

First and foremost, let me be absolutely clear that I fully support the Second Amendment and the rights of all law-abiding citizens to carry a firearm. The Sheriff’s Office has the responsibility, however, of ensuring that individuals receiving a license to carry a concealed firearm are not a threat to our citizens or the communities where they live and work.

Recently, our office, while checking firearm applicants for criminal records, identified an individual applying for a permit who was on the FBI terrorist watch list and who had made false statements on the application.

In these threatening times, it has become necessary for Sheriff Offices to conduct checks on firearm permit applicants utilizing the computer technology now available to law enforcement, so that individuals like the one I have just described do not receive a firearms permit. To do less would be irresponsible.

Regrettably, It is true that the firearms unit of the Allegheny County Sheriff’s Office is no longer operating on Saturdays. Unfortunately, in these difficult fiscal times, our office must operate under an extremely tight budget, and we no longer are able to pay the overtime associated for providing this service. The office is, however, exploring the prospect of operating the firearms unit on some evenings or Saturdays each month in 2008 to accommodate those who are not able to make application during normal business hours.

The Sheriff’s Office also plans to make applications available online to save firearm permit holders time, and make the service more convenient. It should also be noted that although state law allows for permits to take up to 45 days to be issued, on average our office regularly issues permits within a two-week period.

It is interesting that my critics do not make known the fact that the Allegheny County Sheriff’s Office has already issued 9,248 firearm permits this year, compared to 7,804 in all of 2006, and 8,743 in 2005; and rest assured the office will continue to draw on technology to enable us to streamline the process and at the same time make it more effective.

I invite and encourage your comments on this, or any other issue, of importance to your membership. Please contact me at mullenforsheriff@hotmail.com or at 412-563-2980.


BILL MULLEN, SHERIFF
County of Allegheny"

However, this rebuttal was garbage, and any gun owner can see that.

“I just want to make it more difficult to get a gun in Allegheny County," said acting Sheriff William Mullen” (source: http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pitt.../s_479391.html)

I spent some time in that office with the permit process in 2004 as a resident of Allegheny County. Under DeFazio, I was approved in 15 minutes and out the door with my permit in hand (there is functionally little to no difference between a new permit and a renewal). What has changed since 2004 that now requires 20-45 days to approve or deny a permit? Even if it is only 2 weeks (though I’d like to see proof of that considering the accounts I’ve read from other gun owners in that county), 2 weeks is at least a 134300% increase from what it was under DeFazio. Yes, you read that right, a more than one-hundred and thirty-four thousand percent increase. I’m sorry, but that’s unacceptable. The NICS check takes 15 minutes at most to permit or deny the purchase of a gun (aside from rare problematic occurrences of course). What could you possibly do in the extra 20,145 minutes that would truly mean the difference between life and death? Personally, I think the permit system is ridiculous and would rather see it die than improved (though, that’s out of the control of the Sheriff of course).

Furthermore, regarding the attempt at pulling the "terrorism-9/11 strings”, it’s a permit to carry, not a suitcase nuke. A real terrorist, who wanted to cause damage, wouldn’t worry about getting a permit. Did the 9/11 hijackers let the fact that they never obtained pilots' licenses stop them from flying planes into buildings? I find it highly dubious that a true terrorist capable of danger applied for a permit, it’s nonsensical. However, even if that did indeed happen (Mullen's solicitor didn’t say whether or not then person mentioned has been convicted of any crime or the details of his false statements), to paraphrase Benjamin Franklin, those that would give up essential liberty for safety deserve neither.

If not having a permit truly impacted violent crime, then we wouldn’t really have violent crime in the first place, now would we? How would all of those 2-time felon gangbangers carry their guns without a permit? The entire permit system is a revenue generator, nothing more. It doesn’t stop the truly violent criminals from carrying, it only serves to annoy the law-abiding while the Sheriff offices pull in the cash.

Mullen even went so far as to put this rebuttal on his website (http://www.mullenforsheriff.com/firearms.htm) in order to apparently increase his credibility, but this may backfire on him if he wasn't truly sincere and as pro-gun as he'd like us to believe (which I think he isn't), as PAFOA members have begun efforts to hold him to his word now that he has been elected (http://www.pafoa.org/forum/allegheny...-changes.html), I sincerely hope all gun owners, activists and other such entities follow suit.


The FOAC is also claiming that the Berks County Sheriff election resulted in a narrow victory for Eric Weaknecht (their endorsed candidate) and in Butler and Washington counties there were victories over the incumbent district attorney’s by Richard Goldinger and Steve Toprani (also FOAC-endorsed pro-gun candidates). I'm not aware of the political climate or situation in those counties, so I can't really say what impact the pro-gun vote had there. Can you?

[cz_40p]

A very interesting read. I did notice something in the one linked article that caught my attention. I sure hope it was an opsie by the writer

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pitt.../s_479391.html

"In April, Allegheny County implemented its own background check, and anyone with a prior arrest on certain felony and misdemeanor charges is disqualified from receiving concealed gun permits. Allegheny's system delays the issuance of permits up to 45 days."

scuse me but I think that should read "Convicted of certain felony and misdemeanor charges"

[NineseveN]

A very interesting read. I did notice something in the one linked article that caught my attention. I sure hope it was an opsie by the writer

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pitt.../s_479391.html

"In April, Allegheny County implemented its own background check, and anyone with a prior arrest on certain felony and misdemeanor charges is disqualified from receiving concealed gun permits. Allegheny's system delays the issuance of permits up to 45 days."

scuse me but I think that should read "Convicted of certain felony and misdemeanor charges"

It might have been an error or it could be that Mullen is withholding permits based on arrests with the intent to claim the right to under § 6109, e (1). That might be a stretch, so understand that I'm just thinking aloud.