I present for yourconsideration Sportsmen for Clinton? and Sportsmen for Obama?The next presidential election will be especially important in case the Democratsretain control of the House and Senate.
(Washington, DC, September 27, 2007) Oklahoma Republican Senator Dr. Tom Coburn put a halt to an attempt to push through H.R.2640, the so called "NICS Improvement Bill", by objecting to an attempt by Chuck Schumer (D, NY) to move the bill directly to a vote without debate or an opportunity to amend the problematic piece of legislation. The bill was rushed through the House in June and passed on a voice vote with only one know dissenter, presidential candidate, Representative Ron Paul (R, TX) who expressed concerns that the bill was simply an expansion of an already unconstitutional program requiring citizens to seek and receive government permission before exercising their Constitutional Right to bear arms.
Senator Coburn's action does not put a stop to the controversial NICS bill, but it does keep it from barreling through without any opportunity to fix some of its serious flaws. The bill has caused a deepening of the rift between the "hard-line" and "moderate" branches of the gun rights movement. NRA cooperated in the crafting of the bill which blew through the House with their support in mid-June, but strong opposition from GOA and many grassroots organizations seems to be slowing the bill's momentum and damaging NRA's credibility.
The Senate Judiciary Committee dramatically increased funding for the proposal just before the August recess and rolled several other "school safety" bills in with the NICS bill. The Firearms Coalition strongly supports the objectives of the NRA improvements in the NICS bill, but the gains are not worth the costs to taxpayers or the damage that the argument over the bill is causing within the gun rights movement. We are encouraging Senator Coburn and others to take the next step and place a "Hold" on the bill which we believe would result in a quiet death to this controversial issue - at least for now.
**************** Chris has been doing a lot of work on The Firearms Coalition website at www.FirearmsCoalition.org and we'd like to have your opinion on it. We've added the ability to comment on articles and blog entries, we've added a forum area, and we've given members the ability to create their own blogs on the site.
We've also started collecting member ZIP codes to help us alert them to local issues as they come up. If you're already registered for the site, please stop by and add your ZIP code to your profile so we can more effectively keep you informed. If you haven't yet registered on the site, what are you waiting for? Stop by and see what we've got going on.
**************** I'll be doing a presentation on expanding concealed carry at the Gun Rights Policy Conference outside Cincinnati next weekend. This is a free event and a great opportunity to brainstorm and network with fellow gun rights activists. For information about the conference, click on the GRPC link on www.FirearmsCoalition.org.
**************** The new Hard Corps Report should be in the mail next week. Subscribe now!
Does anyone else find it amazing that the Dems have a chance to pass a bill, the gun grabbers want to take credit, the NRA is for it and the Dems start bickering?
Of course, if Leahy and Kennedy want to start pimp slapping each other, just give me a front row seat. And if Paul Helmke gets heart burn in the process, we'll just call that gravy.
By your words and actions you are known. How is this for a start? To purchase a gun in the State of New York you have to give your full name, your date of birth, your residence, your occupation. You have to prove that you're a United States citizen, you have to show you are of good character, competency and integrity. And you have to demonstrate a real need for the weapon. And thanks in part to our stricter gun control laws, crime is down dramatically in New York City. Shootings are down over 50 percent. Murder is down over 50 percent. But the fact is that 90 percent of the guns we take out of the hands of criminals in New York City come from out of the State of New York. We need a federal law that bans all assault weapons, and if in fact you do need a handgun you should be subjected to at least the same restrictions -- and really stronger ones -- that exist for driving an automobile.From Archives of Rudolph W. Giuliani, Sunday, March 2, 1997
How about from your own mouth:
Or how about this from just six months ago:
SACRAMENTO -- Rudy Giuliani addressed a potentially troublesome issue with conservative voters, saying his policies as mayor to get handguns off the street helped reduce crime in New York. "I used gun control as mayor," he said at a news conference Saturday during a swing through California. But "I understand the Second Amendment. I understand the right to bear arms." He said what he did as mayor would have no effect on hunting.From Giuliani: Gun Control Helped Lower Crime The Associated Press, Sunday, February 11, 2007; 4:28 PM
Sorry Rudi. You just don't get it. Let me know when:
You are willing to acknowledge that the Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting.
Repudiate your actions bringing a NYC lawsuit against gun manufacturers.
Recognize that gun ownership is a Constitutional right whereas driving is a privilege.
In politics, it is all about perception. And this is politics.
When speaking as an individual, you are free to speak as you wish. But, when you start an interview flaunting your status as a member of the NRA Board of Directors, you have a responsibility to choose your words carefully and represent your constituents.
There are 79 members on the Board of Directors. That means that each one has very little power, if any. It also means that the NRA has a difficult job controlling what they say. But, they have a responsibility to not stab the organization in the back.
The board is elected by the membership. BoD members can not be fired. But, the membership should be able to hold a recall vote.
Joaquin Jackson is a former Texas Ranger and has published a biography. His resume and style all give him substantial credibility in the media.
Jackson advocated magazine limits for assault weapons. He did not define 'assault weapons'. His advocacy of magazine limits for assault weapons is in direct opposition to the NRA's stated position and the belief of gun owners across the country. It also plays right into the hands of gun control groups.
The bottom line is that Joaquin Jackson either meant what was on tape, did not communicate clearly or was a victim of editing.
If Jackson meant what was on tape, he does not support the NRA's position and should not be reelected to the NRA Board of Directors.
If Jackson communicated poorly, he has no business putting himself front and center as a spokesman for the NRA.
If Jackson is just a victim of editing, his rebuttal is two years late in coming. He and the NRA should have addressed this issue as soon as it appeared.
Do I buy Jackson's explanation? It does not matter. Joaquin's actions have weakened the power of the NRA. His membership on the BoD should come to an end.
Should the gun owning public shun the NRA for the ill advised words of one member of the BoD? Absolutely not. The NRA is the most effective gun rights advocacy group in Washington.
Finally, any gun rights organization that attacks the entire NRA for the actions of one member of the board should be looked at very skeptically. This fight should not be within the movement. It should be with those that would infringe on our rights.
Hillary's makeover into a person who can understand those less successful than herself has begun. There is even mention of Hillary as a gun shooter, but not owner, mind you.
About Us | Copyright 2004-2008, Gun Law News Do not construe anything you read here to be legal advice. Consult your attorney for any advice you may require.
