Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 5/31/2003 7:37:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2003 7:43:10 AM EDT by CRC]
"Whoever is advising them on gun control should be shot." [url]http://washingtontimes.com/national/20030531-122824-1062r.htm [/url] CRC
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 7:57:30 AM EDT
Democrats appear to have abandoned gun control as a political wedge, declining to push the issue in Congress despite being given the opportunity by congressional Republicans. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, upbraided President Bush earlier this month for not pushing fellow Republicans to bring the assault-weapons ban up for reauthorization before it expires in September 2004. "The president has announced that he supports the assault ban, and it would be helpful if he used his good offices to do that," Mrs. Pelosi said at her last weekly press briefing before the Memorial Day recess. "I don't know whether he intends to or not." House Republicans consider it a pretty safe bet that he won't, and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas has stated that the chances of a renewal of the ban coming to the House floor are slim. Yet Democrats still have options — both rhetorically, by trying to make gun control a hot-button issue again, and legislatively, by filing for a discharge petition to get a vote on the floor. Mrs. Pelosi, however, has declined to commit to either strategy and acknowledged that if the vote comes to the floor, many Democrats would not vote to renew the ban. "We would probably lose some votes," Mrs. Pelosi said early this month. "It won't be something that we would be whipping." Asked whether she would push for a discharge petition, which requires support from a majority of House members, to force an up-or-down vote on the assault-weapons ban, Mrs. Pelosi balked, saying that "our discharge focus is now on unemployment compensation." After the press briefing, however, Mrs. Pelosi said the Democrats might revisit guns "when the issue is ripe." Republicans see that as a dodge. "There seems to be a disconnect between Leader Pelosi's desire for the administration to utilize its 'good offices,' while at the same time maintaining that they don't intend to whip the issue," a high-level House Republican staffer said. "If you want something done in this town, you have to be willing to lift a finger at the very least. But on this issue and so many others, it's apparent that the Democrats aren't interested in results, just rhetoric," the staffer said. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat, has introduced a bill to reauthorize the ban on 19 types of "assault weapons," which first passed in 1994. It has garnered eight co-sponsors after several weeks of courting. Meanwhile, a bill protecting firearms manufacturers and gun-store owners from liability if their guns are used to commit crimes passed in the House on April 9 by a vote of 285-140, with the support of 63 Democrats. The Senate version of the bill has 52 co-sponsors and is expected to pass during the summer. Andrew Arulanandam, director of public affairs for the National Rifle Association, sees these as signs that the political tide turned long ago against those who support further regulating firearms. He pointed to the defeat in the 2000 presidential election of Al Gore in such Democratic-leaning yet pro-gun states as West Virginia, Arkansas and his home state of Tennessee. And in the 2002 midterm elections, 230 of 246 House candidates endorsed by the NRA emerged victorious. "If you look at the results of the last two elections, you see a trend that candidates who are supporters of gun rights for law-abiding citizens tend to prevail," Mr. Arulanandam said. Gun-control groups, however, suggest that the issue may be dormant now, but is apt to become an electoral factor by 2004. "No one is particularly focused on this," said Matt Bennett, spokesman for Americans for Gun Safety. "There is no hook for this issue quite yet. But when the public realizes that unless Congress acts [by September 2004], that 'street sweepers' and Tec-9s will hit the streets again, it will become hot again." Democrats abandon the gun issue at their peril, said Blaine Rummel, spokesman for the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. He disputed the NRA's political success stories, noting that Mr. Gore won Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin — states where advocates on both sides of the gun issue spent heavily on political advertising. "There isn't a shred of evidence that says gun control is a political loser," Mr. Rummel said. "It hasn't cost a candidate a political race anywhere." Mr. Rummel also pointed to the failed campaign of Senate candidate Jean Carnahan, Missouri Democrat, who tried to woo gun owners by wearing hunting camouflage in her political advertising. "The Democrats ran away from gun safety in the 2002 elections, and look where it got them," Mr. Rummel said. "Whoever is advising them on gun control should be shot." Democrats "foolishly believe the NRA is going to go easy on them" if they register a vote for the liability protection or keep quiet about the assault-weapons ban, Mr. Rummel said. "This issue is never going to go away," he said.
View Quote
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 8:07:37 AM EDT
After the press briefing, however, Mrs. Pelosi said the Democrats might revisit guns "when the issue is ripe."
View Quote
Like after another high profile shooting.
"No one is particularly focused on this," said Matt Bennett, spokesman for Americans for Gun Safety. "There is no hook for this issue quite yet. But when the public realizes that unless Congress acts [by September 2004], that 'street sweepers' and Tec-9s will hit the streets again, it will become hot again."
View Quote
I thought the street sweepers were class 3 guns now? If the AWB dies will they stay that way?
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 9:41:34 AM EDT
After the press briefing, however, Mrs. Pelosi said the Democrats might revisit guns "[red]when the issue is ripe[/red]." "No one is particularly focused on this," said Matt Bennett, spokesman for Americans for Gun Safety. "[red]There is no hook for this issue quite yet[/red]. But when the public realizes that unless Congress acts [by September 2004], that [red]'street sweepers' and Tec-9s will hit the streets again, it will become hot again.[/red]"
View Quote
The antis aren't going to push for it this year. There will be no battle this year. Next year will be a blood bath.
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 9:44:32 AM EDT
Originally Posted By The_Macallan: Next year will be a blood bath.
View Quote
Good, so I'll have (at least) a year to buy up all the AR goodies I can get at decent prices.
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 9:47:02 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2003 9:47:39 AM EDT by NYPatriot]
The_Macallan...
The antis aren't going to push for it this year.
View Quote
Which is why we need to take the initiative [i]this[/i] year!!!
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 9:52:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2003 10:01:03 AM EDT by warlord]
There originally was not that much interest in the original '94AWB, but Bill Clinton pushed the issue real hard, and twisted a lot of arms real hard. He got democrats that would not have normally voted for the gun ban to support it. And it only barely passed. Of course those Dems took a beating, to my mind Speaker of the House Tom Foley of Wash. state lost his seat outright, and he was quit bitter about it. The Dems lost control of the House and Senate, that year, and never gained it back. Currently, the only Dems who are calling for an extension of the ban are the lib. news media and Dems in safe districts such as Calif, New Jersy, New York. Remember the some of the battle is already won, the HOuse already passes a repeal of the ban a few years back.
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 10:34:00 AM EDT
Originally Posted By CRC: "Whoever is advising them on gun control should be shot." CRC
View Quote
That is funny. I didn't catch the significance of the quote until I read the article. Even if the guy was trying to be sarcastic, he comes across as totally ignorant of his own statements, as well as the rest of the hypocrite politicians. Nothing new there.
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 10:51:38 AM EDT
Andrew Arulanandam, director of public affairs for the National Rifle Association, sees these as signs that the political tide turned long ago against those who support further regulating firearms. He pointed to the defeat in the 2000 presidential election of Al Gore in such Democratic-leaning yet pro-gun states as West Virginia, Arkansas and his home state of Tennessee. And in the 2002 midterm elections, 230 of 246 House candidates endorsed by the NRA emerged victorious.
View Quote
If someone was concerned enough to vote against Democrats due to their anti-gun stance in the last elections, he's not going to switch sides in the next election simply because the Demos have stopped discussing gun control. The Demos have shown their true colors, and even if they deny it from now on, it's not going to sway many of the original "swing voters". For some voters, gun control put a lifetime pox on the Democratic party.
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 10:52:06 AM EDT
There isn't a shred of evidence that says gun control is a political loser," Mr. Rummel said. "It hasn't cost a candidate a political race anywhere."
View Quote
Somebody apparently missed what a whole LOAD of Dems said after the '94 ban passed.
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 11:03:53 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/31/2003 11:10:24 AM EDT by warlord]
Originally Posted By Spade:
There isn't a shred of evidence that says gun control is a political loser," Mr. Rummel said. "It hasn't cost a candidate a political race anywhere."
View Quote
Somebody apparently missed what a whole LOAD of Dems said after the '94 ban passed.
View Quote
Some of the more radical dems don't care what the consquences are in their effort to ban guns. And they really don't care whose bodies they step on or over, witness the call for more gun control after the Columbine HS shootings. If some of those dems don't recognized the perils of voting for more gun bans, they deserved to get kicked out. Remember the battle cry to oust Tom Foley, was something like "Defoiate?"
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 11:10:11 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 11:24:42 AM EDT
All the wisdom & accurate information that emanates from gun show gurus could fit in a thimble, with room to spare for your thumb. [rolleyes]
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 11:27:23 AM EDT
It is gonna die. The Pres spoke his mind, which was a veiled message not to have it come to his desk and the House will not hear the thing. It will get some more press as Sept. 04 approaches but it will die. More folks are interested in tax breaks and the economy than the AWB. The Dems are in a complete disarray. They have no strong Pres candidate and they cannot get their party platform together because whatever they propose blows up in their face. Example. They tried to make Bush look bad over the carrier landing, they tried to shoot down a tax break, the whole Iraqi slaughter and huge american casualties was non-existant, Clinton continues to further alienate the party with his egotistic opinions, it goes on and on. They are fucked. Come Sept. 04 we will all be able to dump those loud fucking Mini-Y brakes for true FS'.
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 11:35:43 AM EDT
Originally Posted By shotar: ...Gunshow dealers are always in the know on these things because it affects their business ya know.
View Quote
[img]http://www.click-smilie.de/sammlung/sprachlos/speechless-smiley-034.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 5/31/2003 11:49:59 AM EDT
My goodness, it certainly sees some liberal reporters are panicing over this. But I wonder what is really upsetting them, the guns coming back or their loss of power and influence over public opinion?
Top Top