Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 4/25/2003 2:19:55 PM EDT
From News max.com NRA's LaPierre Promises 1994 Gun Ban Will Be Defeated Jeff Johnson, CNSNews.com Friday, April 25, 2003 ORLANDO, Fla. – The chief of staff for the nation's largest defender of gun owners' rights said today that the 1994 ban on so-called "assault weapons" enacted by then-President Bill Clinton will not be renewed under President Bush. "We are bound and determined that that the Clinton gun ban on semi-autos and so-called 'assault rifles' will not be re-enacted," said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of National Rifle Association to a standing ovation. "I promise you that." LaPierre's comments came at a gathering of more than 300 NRA members attending a workshop on grassroots political activism before the group's annual meeting Saturday. Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, the anti-gun group formerly known as Handgun Control Inc., has attacked NRA for not supporting the Clinton ban on semi-automatic hunting and sporting rifles. "As a former U.S. Marine, I have fired 'assault weapons,' and there is no legitimate civilian use for these weapons," said Michael Barnes, president of Brady Campaign. "There is no good reason, no defensible reason to turn back the clock and allow 'assault weapons' to be on the streets." Though Brady Campaign refers to the law as an "assault weapons ban," the legislation actually bans the manufacture and importation of hundreds of types of semi-automatic firearms commonly used by hunters and sport shooters. "Assault weapon" is a technical and legal term referring to fully automatic weapons, more commonly called "machine guns." According to statistics from the U.S. Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Statistics, only about 2 percent of criminals in state or federal prisons for committing a crime with a firearm used a weapon banned by the law. Establishment Media Don't Understand NRA; Politicians Do LaPierre said the reason the establishment national news media always predict defeat for gun owners' rights is because they don't understand the devotion of those who support the Second Amendment. "What they don't see is all of you and folks like you all over the country that, one by one, believe in freedom, believe in what we stand for ... it changes everything," he said. "I don't have to tell you that without what you've done, without the NRA, President Bush wouldn't be there today. "There's absolutely no doubt it would be Al Gore," LaPierre continued. "Even Bill Clinton said it." Chris Cox, executive director of NRA's Institute for Legislative Action, said NRA members - like those who took off from work and traveled from all over the country to attend the session this morning - were the reason the group was so successful in Congress and in state legislatures. "It's not because of me; it's not because of Wayne. It's because of you," Cox said. "When we have legislative victories, it's because of you. When we have election victories, it's because of you. "When I walk into a politician's office, they're not scared of me," he added, "they're scared of you." According to Kayne Robinson, first vice president of the organization, approximately 50,000 of the NRA's 4 million members are expected to attend the group's 132nd annual meeting Saturday. The meeting will include a tribute to NRA President Charlton Heston, who was recently diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease, and additional workshops on defending the Second Amendment. Copyright CNSNews.com
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 3:18:39 PM EDT
Nice to hear they finally showed up to the party.
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 3:21:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/25/2003 3:22:43 PM EDT by thedave1164]
better late than never........ I wonder what they will sacrifice for us this time?
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 3:22:26 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 3:28:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/25/2003 3:34:18 PM EDT by NAM]
"As a former U.S. Marine, I have fired 'assault weapons,' and there is no legitimate civilian use for these weapons," said Michael Barnes, president of Brady Campaign WTF? And this "gentleman" calls himself a Marine? What part of "I do solemnly swear that i will support and defend the constitution of the United stated against all enemies, foreign and domestic;..." doesn't this gentlemand understand? Last time i checked, the 2nd amendment included all arms, not not jsut sporting rifles and shotguns... [rolleyes]
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 3:50:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/25/2003 4:02:25 PM EDT by liberty86]
I guess this means those who are on NRA's mailing lists can expect the fundraising letters to start hitting the mailbox...I wonder how much they'll rake in? I wonder how much of it they'll contribute to re-elect Ron Paul?? [:D]
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 3:52:22 PM EDT
Sounds promising. Next time they send me a letter begging for more money, maybe I'll actually send them a few bucks.
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 3:52:39 PM EDT
i wonder how awsome the compromise bill they help write will be!
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 3:58:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/25/2003 4:01:08 PM EDT by TigerStripe]
With Republicans in control of both houses of Congrefs and the Presidency, there better not be [b][red]any[/b][/red] compromise bill/law. TS Edited to add: [b]Welcome to ARFCOM, Cold![/b] Maybe I'll renew my membership.
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 3:58:21 PM EDT
Without the NRA, you guys wouldn't have pre-ban rifles and such. Without the NRA your handguns would've already been banned. The NRA has NEVER EVER supported the 1994 AWB. In fact they worked for it's repeal in 1995 and 1996. CRC
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 4:06:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CRC: Without the NRA, you guys wouldn't have pre-ban rifles and such. Without the NRA your handguns would've already been banned. The NRA has NEVER EVER supported the 1994 AWB. In fact they worked for it's repeal in 1995 and 1996. CRC
View Quote
No, without the NRA, this shit would be all settled, one way or the other, rather than "compromising" away rights a little at a time. By the time they get around to total bans, or registration, it will be seen as "reasonable" to most, 'cause they don't know what they've lost.....
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 4:07:57 PM EDT
I saw Wayne on CNBC last night. He did a halfway decent job for once. They confronted him about the Red Lion, PA school incident and he handled it well - Said the kid got a gun by breaking the law. It's about f***ing time.
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 4:19:09 PM EDT
Originally Posted By liberty86: I guess this means those who are on NRA's mailing lists can expect the fundraising letters to start hitting the mailbox...I wonder how much they'll rake in?
View Quote
???? Oh I get it. Fuck the NRA. They are only one of the most powerful lobbying groups in the US. Screw those bastards we can get by with out them.[rolleyes]
I wonder how much of it they'll contribute to re-elect Ron Paul?? [:D]
View Quote
Why would they give money to someone who voted against them? Will donate to Bush if he signs the AW ban? I mean it's only one time that he would do something you don't want, right?
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 4:22:44 PM EDT
I may actually join the NRA...
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 4:31:00 PM EDT
Its about time, keep it up NRA.
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 4:31:02 PM EDT
Good first post ColdSteel223 and Welcome to the site[beer]
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 4:35:06 PM EDT
If they get this right maybe they can get the 1986 machinegun ban knocked down. We need to wake up those Elmer Fudds and the "if it ain't a deer gun or shotgun you-uns don't NEED it" MFers and get them off the fence. You're either for freedom or against it. You're either doing something about it or you're giving it up. Have you tried to change the mind of a liberal/socialist/marxist/moderate today?
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 4:48:18 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SWIRE:
Originally Posted By liberty86: I guess this means those who are on NRA's mailing lists can expect the fundraising letters to start hitting the mailbox...I wonder how much they'll rake in?
View Quote
???? Oh I get it. Fuck the NRA. They are only one of the most powerful lobbying groups in the US. Screw those bastards we can get by with out them.[rolleyes]
I wonder how much of it they'll contribute to re-elect Ron Paul?? [:D]
View Quote
Why would they give money to someone who voted against them? Will donate to Bush if he signs the AW ban? I mean it's only one time that he would do something you don't want, right?
View Quote
Largest gun lobby group to sell us out you mean. As this develops, we'll see how serious NRA is won't we? [url]http://www.nrawol.org/[/url]
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 4:55:32 PM EDT
Something to think about. Maybe we can make the ban go away and we can get those evil features back. But the one thing I want back more then anything else is the magazines with capacities over 10 rounds. Now who is to say the companies will make them again. I doubt Ruger will bring out magazines with higher capacites. Would Glock or Smith and Wesson? Just a thought.
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 5:53:05 PM EDT
"As a former U.S. Marine, I have fired 'assault weapons,' and there is no legitimate civilian use for these weapons," said Michael Barnes, president of Brady Campaign. Doesn't he know that what he fired had three round burst or auto and the AWB deals with semi-automatic? Just more misinformation to scary the sheeple and blur the line b/w machine guns and semiautomatic rifles. Why doesn't someone make him accountable for his lies?
Link Posted: 4/25/2003 6:11:41 PM EDT
Anybody need a C Mag? This is like trying to beat the stock market. Buy or sell? That is the question.
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 2:51:29 AM EDT
Bump for the morning shift.
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 3:00:08 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 3:06:18 AM EDT
Originally Posted By NAM: "As a former U.S. Marine, I have fired 'assault weapons,' and there is no legitimate civilian use for these weapons," said Michael Barnes, president of Brady Campaign WTF? And this "gentleman" calls himself a Marine? What part of "I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the constitution of the United stated against all enemies, foreign and domestic;..." doesn't this gentleman understand? Last time I checked, the 2nd amendment included all arms, not not just sporting rifles and shotguns... [rolleyes]
View Quote
I think is his related the the retired Marine that wanted the entrance visa to Iraq and him and others were going to use themselves as the human shields. Barnes has to be relation or family some how, they have to be missing some kind of gene that is screwing up their minds causing this stupidity.[:d]
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 3:24:54 AM EDT
"As a former U.S. Marine, I have fired 'assault weapons,'
Bullshit! Every fucking Marine is a rifleman! A real Devil Dog should strangle this faggot with his own fucking intestines... Sorry, had to get that out... Anyways, the NRA better stop the AWB, or I'm gonna renounce my membership, and I may leave the country too.
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 3:42:42 AM EDT
I am awaiting the results of this BEFORE I give one cent to the NRA. If they get full defeat of the AWB nonsense I will rejoin. Otherwise, forget it. Compromise is NOT an option!
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 6:29:29 AM EDT
I second that Mickey Mouse. They IMO have always compromised for rights instead of fighting for them. Maybe they should change name to NRA Union. I am a member of IBEW so don't go there with the union bashing thing either. IMO the GOA is one that seems to fight for our rights. They are just not the big kid on the block. Seems like NRA has been called up on the carpet and forced to take a stand on issues because GOA came out and stood for it. Now the NFA act of 1986. If you could get them to fight to get that removed I would rejoin as a life member and even send a few bucks every now and then. I don't see the NRA fighting for machine guns because it is such a small group of owners. However most of those owners have a lot more money than the average Joe on this board. Rant concluded.
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 6:48:13 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/26/2003 7:05:16 AM EDT by 1_153_370_371_407]
Originally Posted By J_E_D: If they get this right maybe they can get the 1986 machinegun ban knocked down.
View Quote
[img]http://www.haveanicelife.com/users/p_cards/3/tn_pc_willbeacoldday.gif[/img] maybe if gun friendly forces get a larger majority in congress
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 6:58:04 AM EDT
The most crucial thing for the RKBA is a SCOTUS decision in our favor. As long as there is no official constitutional restriction from antigun legislation, it will continue. It can be dramatically slowed by fewer antigun forces in the legislature, but only the SCOTUS can stop it. Thus, constitutionalist SCOTUS nominees are critical.
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 7:05:40 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 1_153_370_371_407:
Originally Posted By J_E_D: If they get this right maybe they can get the 1986 machinegun ban knocked down.
View Quote
http://www.haveanicelife.com/users/p_cards/3/tn_pc_willbeacoldday.gif
View Quote
maybe if gun friendly forces get a larger majority in congress
View Quote
So-called "Conservatives", (actually "neo-cons"), control two branchs of govt., Congress, and the White House. I remember when they said "we need the House of Representatives",(1993), we gave 'em that. Then it was "we need the Senate"(1996). We gave it to 'em. Then, "We need the White House", they've got that now. Now they say "we need a larger majority". Lemee tell ya something. If these guys can't get back our rights now, it's because they DON"T WANT TO!!
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 7:06:17 AM EDT
None of us would legally own a firearm if it hadn't been for the efforts of the NRA over the past few decades. We need to realize that and support them. If membership was doubled, every beltway rat would be either gone or whipped into submission by the NRA. Past comprimise is a result of a weakened bargaining position due to only 4 million of the nations 80+ million gun owners giving a damn enough to support the cause. If you're not an NRA member quit bitching and sign up to make a difference!
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 8:00:29 AM EDT
Gunowners make up about 40% of the general (voting) population. "Real" conservative gunowners (those who favor repealing most gun laws) make up even LESS of the general population. So what makes ya'll think there ought to be a larger proportion of hard-core conservative gunowners in Congress than there are in the general population????? It's all about ORGANIZATION - voting to concentrate and focus our small minority interest on the most important seats and positions (like we have on the House Judiciary Committee right now). We will ALWAYS be outnumbered at the voting booth. But so have the Greens and the Gays and just look at what they've done with their ultra-small but highly organized and focused minority of voters. We can't survive being fractured any more than we already are. I welcome the NRA's committment (LaPierre: [i]""I promise you that."[/i]) to defeating the AWB. It WOULD be a MAJOR victory for our side.
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 8:17:49 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 1_153_370_371_407:
Originally Posted By J_E_D: If they get this right maybe they can get the 1986 machinegun ban knocked down.
View Quote
[url]http://www.haveanicelife.com/users/p_cards/3/tn_pc_willbeacoldday.gif[/url] maybe if gun friendly forces get a larger majority in congress
View Quote
You can wish in one hand and take a dump in the other see which one fills up first. We will be lucky if we just get hicap mags back, anything more is a mere wishfull thinkin. Sorry to bust the bubbles.
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 9:19:23 AM EDT
damn.......the whole ban thing is getting more confusing!
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 9:28:04 AM EDT
Originally Posted By TexasRooter:
Originally Posted By 1_153_370_371_407:
Originally Posted By J_E_D: If they get this right maybe they can get the 1986 machinegun ban knocked down.
View Quote
[url]http://www.haveanicelife.com/users/p_cards/3/tn_pc_willbeacoldday.gif[/url] maybe if gun friendly forces get a larger majority in congress
View Quote
You can wish in one hand and take a dump in the other see which one fills up first. We will be lucky if we just get hicap mags back, anything more is a mere wishfull thinkin. Sorry to bust the bubbles.
View Quote
no bubble here dude (regarding machine guns) as for the AWB, i think things are looking pretty good on the surface. got the NRA publicly commiting to getting it gone, pro-gun congresscritter running the house judiciary committee we'll see, i'm sure the media will do their part to stir up the sheeple, and if there's a high profile shooting around that time, then all bets are off. bush will sign it if it gets to him, but hopefully, that won't happen.
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 10:41:30 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 1_153_370_371_407:
Originally Posted By J_E_D: If they get this right maybe they can get the 1986 machinegun ban knocked down.
View Quote
[url]http://www.haveanicelife.com/users/p_cards/3/tn_pc_willbeacoldday.gif[/url] maybe if gun friendly forces get a larger majority in congress
View Quote
I agree but I haven't given up either. Go ahead and give up. It's a lot easier to be a pessimist and a lot less disapointing.
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 10:42:23 AM EDT
Originally Posted By TexasRooter:
Originally Posted By 1_153_370_371_407:
Originally Posted By J_E_D: If they get this right maybe they can get the 1986 machinegun ban knocked down.
View Quote
[url]http://www.haveanicelife.com/users/p_cards/3/tn_pc_willbeacoldday.gif[/url] maybe if gun friendly forces get a larger majority in congress
View Quote
You can wish in one hand and take a dump in the other see which one fills up first. We will be lucky if we just get hicap mags back, anything more is a mere wishfull thinkin. Sorry to bust the bubbles.
View Quote
You too. Give up now.
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 10:50:48 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/26/2003 10:52:00 AM EDT by 1_153_370_371_407]
Originally Posted By J_E_D:
Originally Posted By 1_153_370_371_407:
Originally Posted By J_E_D: If they get this right maybe they can get the 1986 machinegun ban knocked down.
View Quote
[url]http://www.haveanicelife.com/users/p_cards/3/tn_pc_willbeacoldday.gif[/url] maybe if gun friendly forces get a larger majority in congress
View Quote
I agree but I haven't given up either. Go ahead and give up. It's a lot easier to be a pessimist and a lot less disapointing.
View Quote
[img]http://www.workoutmusicvideo.com/images/richard.jpg[/img] golly gee JED, you're right, if i just keep a positive optimistic outlook, i'm sure all the unconstitutional gun laws will be repealed this year! YAHOO! mail order M16s here I come. pull your head out of your ass. just because I think the chances of gun laws getting repealed are slim doesn't mean i've 'given up'.
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 11:19:10 AM EDT
This statement might renew my membership next year.
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 11:25:30 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 6:07:36 PM EDT
I left the "A" out in my topic header for a reason. When the "ASSUALT" weapons ban was enacted true assualt weapons were already controled by several other laws. IE 1968, 1934 etc.... He who controls the definition of the words is more or less in complete control of the debate. Now WE have the opportunity to control some definitions. Like it or not the NRA is the group that the "many blood sucking creatures" listens to. We can write all the letters and make all the phone calls that we want (and they will help) but in the end the NRA is the one group that will be heard the loudest. "We are bound and determined that that the Clinton gun ban on semi-autos and so-called 'assault rifles' will not be re-enacted," said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of National Rifle Association to a standing ovation. "I promise you that." That sounds like a very firm definition to me.
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 6:54:09 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/26/2003 6:56:32 PM EDT by mace]
Originally Posted By splicer: Now the NFA act of 1986. If you could get them to fight to get that removed I would rejoin as a life member and even send a few bucks every now and then. I don't see the NRA fighting for machine guns because it is such a small group of owners. However most of those owners have a lot more money than the average Joe on this board. Rant concluded.
View Quote
You might want to take a look at exactly what was passed in 1986 and what it said before you start calling for it's repeal. (edited because for some reason the computer decided to submit before I was done typing. !@#$%^& windows...)
Link Posted: 4/26/2003 7:48:11 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 1_153_370_371_407:
Originally Posted By J_E_D:
Originally Posted By 1_153_370_371_407:
Originally Posted By J_E_D: If they get this right maybe they can get the 1986 machinegun ban knocked down.
View Quote
[url]http://www.haveanicelife.com/users/p_cards/3/tn_pc_willbeacoldday.gif[/url] maybe if gun friendly forces get a larger majority in congress
View Quote
I agree but I haven't given up either. Go ahead and give up. It's a lot easier to be a pessimist and a lot less disapointing.
View Quote
[url]http://www.workoutmusicvideo.com/images/richard.jpg[/url] golly gee JED, you're right, if i just keep a positive optimistic outlook, i'm sure all the unconstitutional gun laws will be repealed this year! YAHOO! mail order M16s here I come. pull your head out of your ass. just because I think the chances of gun laws getting repealed are slim doesn't mean i've 'given up'.
View Quote
Great.
Link Posted: 4/27/2003 10:12:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/29/2003 3:35:36 PM EDT by cyrax777]
Originally Posted By mace:
Originally Posted By splicer: Now the NFA act of 1986. If you could get them to fight to get that removed I would rejoin as a life member and even send a few bucks every now and then. I don't see the NRA fighting for machine guns because it is such a small group of owners. However most of those owners have a lot more money than the average Joe on this board. Rant concluded.
View Quote
You might want to take a look at exactly what was passed in 1986 and what it said before you start calling for it's repeal. (edited because for some reason the computer decided to submit before I was done typing. !@#$%^& windows...)
View Quote
all we would need to do is repeal the amendment in the fopa something like "part xxx in xx is hereby null and void.
Link Posted: 4/27/2003 10:48:59 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Sixgun357: I doubt Ruger will bring out magazines with higher capacites.
View Quote
A company who's most famous products are in .22LR sticking with 10rds... I'd hope not... If you're gonna make a .22, at least give it a big enough mag to save your customers fingers (from constantly re-loading mags)...
Link Posted: 4/28/2003 4:42:46 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/28/2003 5:06:21 AM EDT
So I see you guys can't read or comprehend...the NRA is not your friend--they are for reasonable gun laws and have proved this on numerous occasion. They do not want the 2nd amendment to be as written. And Ron Paul who voted against something becuse it was unconstitutional is your new enemy.....where did we get so many bush supporters from? That's right--the guy that said it ain't constitutional but I will sign it anyway.
Link Posted: 4/28/2003 5:27:12 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/28/2003 5:36:34 AM EDT
And beekeeper weighs in with the latest apology for the republican party----the next one is "we can't do anything until George is King!!!" why wait join the green party now.......
Link Posted: 4/28/2003 6:34:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/28/2003 6:35:40 AM EDT by stator]
For you guys who want to look for the truth, you must come to the realization that the NRA is about GUN-CONTROL. Yes, they want registration but control by industry association and not by the government. They only want the government to authorize the power to the NRA to do so. They have been very effective in this for CCWs. VPC, Brady Center, Finestein, and others are all about GUN-PROHIBITION. So here it is. This is most people's uninformed definition: gun-rights: GOA, NRA, SAF, Republican Party,... gun-control: Democrats, VPC, Brady Center, Finestein... gun-prohibitionist: Hollywood This is the correct correlation to groups and categories: gun-rights: GOA, SAF... gun-control: NRA, Republican Party, 1/2 democrats gun-prohibitionist: VPC, Brady, Finestein and the other 1/2 democrats. flat-out-flaky, defines logic: Hollywood.
Link Posted: 4/28/2003 6:45:14 AM EDT
Originally Posted By thebeekeeper1: Please educate yourself about the word "filibuster" in the Senate. In short, it means it takes 60 votes to pass anything controversial. There are not 60 Republicans, [i]neo-conservative[/i] or otherwise, present, and several that are quite liberal, despite party affiliation. NOTHING pertaining to guns will get passed without 60 votes. Period.
View Quote
And the rarity with which true conservatives use the filibuster to block stuff like the Brady Bill also proves that "true" conservatives are a very small minority in Congress - [b]because they reflect the small minority of true conservatives in the general population[/b]. Hardcore Conservatives probably could never sustain any filibuster to block the BS like Campaign Finance Reform, Brady Bill, 1994 AWB... We don't have a majority-conservative population , so we'll never have a majority-conservative Congress. The key (again) is to concentrate and focus our small minority interest on the most important seats and positions (like we have on the House Judiciary Committee right now).
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top