I fear that Dennis Henigan has somehow mixed up his blogs. This blog — Cato Unbound — is an exchange between Henigan, Kopel, Chemerinsky, and Levy. The blog on which Henigan has most recently posted is an exchange between Henigan and the NRA — somewhat complicated by the fact that the NRA is not a participant. Fully one-half of Henigan’s latest post is a critique of the NRA, its positions, and its tactics — everything from its advocacy of slippery slope arguments to its fight against corporations that want to keep guns off their private property. In a proper forum, I’m sure the NRA would counter Henigan’s critique. But this is not that forum; and I am not the NRA’s representative. Indeed, as Henigan well knows, I join him in opposing NRA claims that corporations are bound by the Second Amendment to allow guns in their parking lots.
That said, I can’t resist a brief comment on “the NRA’s core strategy,” according to Henigan, “of keeping gun owners in a perpetual state of fear and anxiety about gun confiscation.” If true, that would surely be a bizarre and ineffective strategy. After all, 44 states secure an individual right to keep and bear arms under their own statutes or constitutional provisions. Forty-eight states allow concealed carry with varying degrees of administrative discretion. Confiscation isn’t even on the radar screen, except perhaps in a small handful of municipalities and counties legislating under delegated state power. Whatever plans Pete Shields may have had for confiscation in his early days at the Brady Center, those plans lost all momentum with the enactment of permissive state laws, long before the Heller decision. Gun control is a losing issue for would-be confiscators. That’s why even liberals, like Obama, find it necessary to embrace — or perhaps pretend to embrace — an individualist view of the Second Amendment.