Off Topic But Are We Going To Get Screwed?
Posted 05 November 2004 - 12:20 AM
Posted 05 November 2004 - 01:45 AM
Even with a Republican-controlled House and Senate it's worrisome enough, since most politicians - Repubs as well as Dems - fear an armed populace and tend to support strict if not confiscatory regulation. At least this inclination is dampened by the example set in this election demonstrating yet again that strict gun control is literally the third rail of American politics - Bush's slim margin is probably more than equalled by pro-Second Amendment folks who despise Bush but voted for him only because of what Kerry represented.
However, the AG has the power to "interpret" existing law in ways that could make things a whole lot worse without any further anti-gun legislation whatsoever. And let's not forget that George Bush himself promised to sign another AWB (or worse) if it came to his desk. That it didn't may be more reflective of pre-election political pragmatism than a true commitment to gun rights.
In short, a strong NRA is more important than ever, despite the election.
Posted 05 November 2004 - 07:29 AM
Posted 05 November 2004 - 07:32 AM
Question No 1: How many people believe civilian ownership of handguns would still be legal in America if the NRA did not exist?
Question No 2: If you are not a NRA member, why?
Posted 05 November 2004 - 02:29 PM
|I sometimes hear gun owners put down the NRA because of this or that and say they would never join or renew their membership.|
I hear those excuses all of the time. And that's all they are, excuses from forking over $35.00.
|Question No 1: How many people believe civilian ownership of handguns would still be legal in America if the NRA did not exist?|
If the NRA Didn't exist, we wouldn't have any guns, no less Handguns...
|Question No 2: If you are not a NRA member, why?|
Those who aren't, rely on those who are...Too many folks who want their battles to be fought for them, but yet, they make no effort themselves. There ought to be a new rule here. IF a member of this forum isn't an NRA Memeber, they should be banned!
Posted 05 November 2004 - 03:25 PM
|QUOTE (LIONHART @ Nov 5 2004, 03:29 PM)|
|There ought to be a new rule here. IF a member of this forum isn't an NRA Memeber, they should be banned! [/color][/font][/b]|
I could'nt agree more. $35 is only 3-4 boxes of ammo. Small price to pay for everything the NRA does, even includes American Rifleman. EVERYONE here should be a member.
Posted 05 November 2004 - 05:24 PM
Posted 05 November 2004 - 05:37 PM
|That likens back to the day of gotta be a member of the Communist party or Nazi party for privileges. JMHO.|
I don't see how one can compare being a member of the NRA to the likes of the NAZI's or a member of a Communist Party..I do feel EVERY Gun Owner should be a Card Carrying Member, and not a freeloader. There are too many of those in life as it is..
Posted 05 November 2004 - 05:41 PM
Posted 05 November 2004 - 07:06 PM
Posted 05 November 2004 - 08:49 PM
Waffen has it right! Unfortunately, the NRA has backed every major piece of anti-gun legislation that we are currently living with including; 1934 National Firearms Act, 1968 Gun Control Act and the 1986 Firearms Owners Protection Act.
I'm a life member and hate what they have helped do to the NFA dealer/collector but we have had to take the bad with the good. In each of these cases the NRA "duck hunters" were happy to sell us out to protect what they see as "main stream" gun owners. They're probably right. There are a lot more "duck hunters" than NFA collectors. Plus, making a fuss about NFA weapons seems to bring on unwanted and unnecessary attention from the liberals everytime we try it. We were a lot better off when these idiots didn't know civilians can and do own MGs.
Even with the Republicans in firm control you won't find the NRA or anyone else willing to stand up and
and fight for the NFA stuff. Most of them know it would be political suicide to suggest repealing the 1986 NFA ban.
I'll stay a member and I'll support others like GOA but sadly, the MG issue is a "dead duck" politically speaking.
Posted 05 November 2004 - 09:19 PM
2004 Election Report
-- Guns a major factor in races all across the nation
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
November 5, 2004
The 2004 election might be remembered as "The Year of the Gun
Presidential candidate John Kerry, a liberal anti-gun Senator from
Massachusetts, tried to morph himself into 'The Hunter.' Rarely a
day passed during the latter part of the campaign without Kerry
posing with a firearm and speaking about his strong support of the
Second Amendment, in complete contradiction to his 20-year anti-gun
Kerry was not alone. All across the country, anti-gun politicians
tried to hide behind gun-friendly photo ops and empty rhetoric about
how much they support gun rights.
Gun Owners of America, through its candidate rating program and
political action committee, was able to expose much anti-gun
duplicity this year, and the results were extremely heartening.
Of course, the obstructionist anti-gun Senate Minority Leader, Tom
Daschle, is finally deposed. Replacing him is former Representative
John Thune, a strong pro-gun ally supported by Gun Owners of America
-- Political Victory Fund (GOA-PVF).
But while ousting Daschle was certainly one of the most crucial races
this year, there were six open Senate seats that anti-gunners had
their sights set on. GOA-PVF played an important role in thwarting
that plan and helping to elect strong pro-gun advocates to five of
the six open seats.
Louisiana: Anti-gun to Pro-gun
In Louisiana, pro-gun Rep. David Vitter shocked pundits by winning
this senate race outright. In that state, all candidates, regardless
of party, are placed on the November ballot. If no candidate were to
break the 50% mark, the top two vote getters would head into a
December runoff election.
Both major candidates, Vitter and Rep. Chris John (D), claimed to be
pro-gun. Rep. John, though, had voted against arming commercial
airline pilots and for the unconstitutional campaign finance reform
law, earning him a "C" grade by GOA as opposed to David Vitter's
solid "A" rating.
GOA-PVF was the ONLY national gun rights group to jump into the race,
contacting thousands of Second Amendment supporters highlighting the
differences between the candidates. At the end of the night, Vitter
had 51% of the vote and is now the Senator-elect. He replaces
retiring anti-gun "F" rated Senator John Breaux (D).
Oklahoma: Moderately Pro-gun to Very Pro-gun
One of the most exciting races of Election Day was the one to replace
retiring Senator Don Nickles ®. Running were former Representative
Dr. Tom Coburn and current Rep. Brad Carson.
Guns were a blazing issue right up to the end.
On Friday before the election, GOA got a call from Sen. Jim Inhofe,
the senior senator from Okalahoma. He was in a campaign bus
somewhere in the state, and he was upset. Coburn's opponent had sent
out a large postcard claiming that he was the real pro-Second
Amendment candidate in the race. In addition, the mailing alleged
the Coburn was not really pro-gun.
GOA immediately faxed the campaign a letter labeling the hit piece a
deception and reiterating our endorsement of Coburn, who was a solid
"A" with us (his opponent was a "B"). Moreover,
and integrity would have made him the pick even if their voting
records had been identical.
GOA-PVF was the ONLY national gun rights group to make an endorsement
in this race, helping Dr. Coburn to victory with 53% of the vote.
And this in the face of being outspent nearly two to one in a state
with a Democrat registration advantage of two to one. The Republican
establishment did not support Coburn, who is known as a "Dr.
opposes their pork projects.
Pro-gun Candidates Win Open Senate Seats in the Southeast
Other races where GOA-PVF played a role were equally significant:
* The Senate seat in North Carolina was that of vice-presidential
nominee John Edwards, a trial lawyer who earlier this year took a
rare break from the campaign to come to Washington to help sink a
bill designed to protect gun makers from frivolous lawsuits. Running
to fill this seat were pro-gun U.S. House member Richard Burr and
former Chief of Staff to President Bill Clinton, Erskine Bowles.
GOA-PVF supported Rep. Burr, who won with 52% of the vote.
* In South Carolina, pro-gun House member Jim DeMint faced off
against Inez Tenenbaum, State Superintendent of Education. Tenenbaum
had the advantage of having won statewide office in 1998 and 2002,
while Rep. DeMint was widely unknown outside of his congressional
district. Rep. DeMint is a man of principle who clearly articulated
his positions and stood by them. Tenenbaum, on the other hand,
refused to make her Second Amendment positions known. Rep. DeMint,
endorsed and supported by GOA-PVF, won with 54% of the vote.
* In the Sunshine State, a former cabinet member for President George
W. Bush, Mel Martinez, faced a formidable foe in anti-gun former
state senator and Florida Commissioner of Education, Betty Castor.
Martinez, though a trial lawyer himself, is an outspoken opponent of
the frivolous lawsuits brought by many cities and states against the
gun industry. Martinez, who replaces retiring anti-gun Sen. Bob
Graham, narrowly won this race with 50% of the vote.
Huge Victory in Colorado
All together, GOA-PVF helped 14 pro-gun challengers get elected in
the House and Senate. GOA's general policy is to restrict our
support to challengers, since incumbents have obvious advantages in
raising money and name ID.
This is why GOA's Executive Director put out a PERSONAL appeal for
incumbent Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO), who was combating a million
dollar TV campaign that attacked her incessantly. Happily, Musgrave
was able to raise $3 million, and she won her race with 51% of the
Musgrave has been a leader on a whole host of conservative issues,
including gun rights. She was the founder of the Second Amendment
Caucus in Congress and has sponsored and cosponsored numerous pro-gun
People in Musgrave's district have certainly appreciated her
willingness to fight the Republican establishment in the nation's
capital, just as she fought it in Denver as a state legislator.
GOA-PVF was involved in other House and Senate races. To get the
full report, become a GOA member at www.gunowners.org/ordergoamem.htm
-- this will start your subscription to The Gun Owners newsletter,
which will keep you up-to-date on what's happening with your gun
The Road Ahead
There is no question that gun owners made significant gains in the
2004 elections. There is the question, however, of what will be done
with these gains.
The ultimate objective is not merely to elect good people; we must
also work to restore lost ground. Consider just a few examples of
gun rights we have lost over the past few decades:
* The 1968 Gun Control Act instituted, among other things, the
blatantly unconstitutional "sporting purposes" test, which
that imported firearms must be "particularly suitable for or readily
adaptable to sporting purposes."
* Since 1976, the District of Columbia has been under a near total
gun ban. The House voted this year to repeal the ban, but it died in
* In 1986, the Congress banned the manufacture of machine guns for
non-military and law enforcement. Anti-gunners use the argument the
authors of the Constitution never envisioned full autos when they
wrote the Second Amendment. Well, they probably never thought about
radio, television and the Internet, either. Yet, no one would argue
the First Amendment does not protect these.
* In 1993, the Congress passed the Brady background registration
check. Now, citizens must go to the FBI to get permission to buy a
firearm. This is nothing less than turning our Second Amendment
"right" into a mere "privilege." Supporters of the
law try to make
it more palatable by pointing out that it is "instant" and
inconvenience, as if expediency makes losing liberty acceptable.
* In 1996, the Congress passed the gun free zones law (prohibiting
firearms within 1,000 feet of any school property) and the
misdemeanor gun ban (lifetime gun ban for certain misdemeanor
These are just some of the unconstitutional laws GOA would like to
repeal. GOA will also continue push for implementation of the armed
pilots program and to pass a lawsuit protection bill for the firearms
It is an ambitious agenda. How far we are able to move the ball in
our direction, however, depends entirely on the GOA membership. Many
gun owners mistakenly believe the battle is won in the election.
That is only half the battle. The harder work still lies before us.
Gun owners must stay engaged in the battle by calling, writing, and
e-mailing elected officials, urging them to roll back
unconstitutional gun laws. And we need you to stand with us.
Renew your GOA membership today at www.gunowners.org/ordergoamem.htm
-- and work together with the organization that Rep. Ron Paul calls
the "only no compromise gun lobby in Washington."
Posted 05 November 2004 - 10:11 PM
No freeloader here. In the past, I have driven to Tallahassee (and brought a friend) and stood on the lawn of the Capitol waiving signs protesting the ban of "assault weapons." I've spoken up at AWB public hearings held by anti gun legislators from South Florida saying that I nor any officer I knew would enforce such laws. That endeared me to them for sure.
I speak at local schools supporting firearms ownership and educating students that MG's are legal (even displaying and demoing MG's on occasion). We're hoping to start a shooting team at a new high school when it opens (more students to introduce to MG's).
I have written and called my (and other) representatives telling them who I am, what I do and have asked for their support for gun rights including those of machine gun owners. I have spoken with them face to face at political meetings (and I never pass up the chance to speak with them when I meet with them while doing security for them or addressing them for other crime issues) and let it be known that the major police associations' leadership is out of touch with the real issues pertaining to gun control. They don't represent real police officers and that in my experience, the average street officer supports law abiding citizens' right to possess and use firearms.
I've signed off on a bunch of Form 4's and have helped to get fellow pro gun officials elected (through campaigning, voting, and public endorsements).
I have gone on record with the Florida Police Chief's Association saying that they should not support the ban renewal. I was overruled (and I'm sure gained more brownie points).
I do more than my part. I just chose not to belong to the NRA. If they get the machine gun ban overturned, I'll reconsider.
Posted 05 November 2004 - 11:53 PM
Waffen, I applaud all your efforts. I too am very vocal about how all gun owners must stick together. And I think progress is being made. We all know gun owners had a big say in the outcome of the last two Presidential elections. It nearly kills the liberal media to even mention guns and gun owners in a broadcast To that end I will offer you something to think about. I will join Gun Owners of America if you will rejoin the NRA. I know a year of reading what another pro-gun organization has to say will be beneficial to me. If it is as good as the e-mail alert Devlin posted, I will stay a member for many years to come. I also know the more members every pro-gun organization has is beneficial to all gun owners. What about it? Twelve issues of the American Rifleman should be enjoyable reading this next year. Seriously, thank you and everyone for your thoughts on this subject.
Posted 06 November 2004 - 12:20 AM
Reguardless of who is in the oval office, the senate, and/or the house of reps....
WE ALWAYS GET SCREWED!!
The only differenece is that some of them hit harder than others. We just have to choose the lesser of the two evils!
Posted 06 November 2004 - 06:50 AM
Posted 06 November 2004 - 12:33 PM