Kerry shotgun remains in state — and in news


PDA






Harry Tuttle
September 23, 2004, 05:49 PM
http://www.dailymail.com/news/News/2004092329/

Kerry shotgun remains in state — and in news
NRA official contends
presidential candidate
trying to confuse sportsmen

Brad McElhinny
Daily Mail staff

Thursday September 23, 2004



Presidential candidate John Kerry never took home a semi-automatic shotgun that stirred controversy when he accepted it at a Boone County rally, causing critics to claim the Democrat even flip-flops on photo ops.

Kerry's opponents and political Internet sites made hay from pictures of him accepting the gun at a Labor Day rally, saying the Remington 11-87 was one he had voted to ban in the Senate.

But Kerry hasn't been able to keep the gun because he couldn't transport it over state lines to his home in Massachusetts until he has filled out the proper paperwork.

"It's par for the course, John Kerry flip-flopping on the issues," said Ashley Varner, a spokeswoman for the National Rifle Association.

"We knew this was a photo op to confuse hunters and law-abiding gun owners because he has been so anti-gun in his 20 years in the Senate. Now his campaign strategy is to don blaze orange as camouflage of his true voting record against gun owners."

The United Mine Workers, which presented Kerry with the shotgun that was made by union members who work for Remington, said the candidate knew beforehand he would not be able to take it home immediately.

For Kerry to keep the shotgun, he would have to fill out the proper paperwork through a federally licensed dealer. He also would have to pass a background check.

"We still have it in our possession," United Mine Workers spokesman Doug Gibson said. "We're waiting for him to fill out the proper paperwork. Senator Kerry has given us every indication he wants to keep the gun. He just has to finish out the campaign."

Gibson said the issue has been exaggerated.

"We think it's been way overblown," he said. "Our members of Remington Arms are proud of the product they make, and we were proud to give to Senator Kerry."

Kerry currently is taking the necessary measures to legally transfer the gun into his possession in Massachusetts, said Kathy Roeder, a campaign spokeswoman. He looks forward to legally owning and using the Remington, she said.

"He wants to keep it," Roeder said.

Earlier this month, the online Drudge Report and the National Rifle Association said the shotgun would have been banned under a bill that Kerry co-sponsored.

The bill sought to renew the ban on the manufacture of assault-style weapons and legally broaden the characteristics that would define such weapons.

Kerry's campaign has said the gun is a "sportsman's shotgun" and "he would never ban it."

The issue was the focus of a recent article in "Gun Week," a publication of the Second Amendment Foundation. Senior Editor Dave Workman wrote that Kerry did not have possession of the gun he accepted in West Virginia.

"It's probably in somebody's closet gathering dust," Workman said in an interview this week. "You wonder if he really will. If he actually does go ahead and get the shotgun, that's news."

Workman said most of his readers believe the gun gift was staged for the image that Kerry is for gun rights.

"My impression was it was a photo op and that's it," Workman said. "That impression is shared by a lot of people in gun community."

Gun Week has paid earlier attention to some of Kerry's campaign events involving guns -- a pheasant hunt in Iowa and a skeet shoot in Wisconsin.

"It's obvious that he is really trying to present himself as a pro-gun, pro-sport shooting candidate," Workman said. "Unfortunately, his voting record in Washington, D.C., says otherwise."

If you enjoyed reading about "Kerry shotgun remains in state — and in news" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
redhead
September 23, 2004, 06:06 PM
Um, isn't there still the issue of a senator receiving a gift that is worth more than $50?

I really really really liked the comment about it being a "sportsman's" shotgun, so that Kerry would never vote to ban it. We all know that the 2nd amendment is about duck hunting, after all.

tyme
September 23, 2004, 06:16 PM
"We think it's been way overblown," he said. "Our members of Remington Arms are proud of the product they make, and we were proud to give to Senator Kerry."
It hasn't been given to Senator Kerry yet, you idiot. Until he fills out the paperwork and it gets transferred properly from an FFL, NO DICE.

Workman said most of his readers believe the gun gift was staged for the image that Kerry is for gun rights.
Of course. Even if the gun had been transferred, it would still be a photo op. Based on his voting record, he has no credibility.

I wonder if Kerry carries a handgun.

sharpie613
September 23, 2004, 07:57 PM
I've often wondered if the union guy who gave Kerry that shotgun was secretly on our side and hoping this would force the issue one way or the other, as it's been pretty much a boondoggle for him since the beginning.

RavenVT100
September 23, 2004, 10:32 PM
Kerry's campaign is not telling the truth. That shotgun would have been banned by the bill which Kerry co-sponsored. AFAIK that's not a fact that's up for debate.

Of course, we all know about how the law doesn't seem to apply to Kerry's personal firearms in the same manner that it does with ours.

sendec
September 23, 2004, 10:37 PM
We also know how to make a mountain out of a molehill. If this is our idea of a real issue, we are screwed.

Y'all are just jealous cause nobody's giving you guns as presents

:rolleyes:

When do we start Shotgun Owners for the Truth?

Hkmp5sd
September 24, 2004, 12:00 AM
It does show that Kerry will ensure guns that he likes and/or approves of will remain legal, whether or not they meet the criteria of a banned weapon. Only the guns he has no interest in owning will be banned.

We also know how to make a mountain out of a molehill.
Actually, it is more that those of us that have spent years jumping through hoops to get the firearms we want are greatly aggravated when a public figure is able to bypass those hoops. If we are going to have rules, then everyone gets to play by them.

Wildalaska
September 24, 2004, 12:24 AM
Remington let one of their shotguns go to an anitgunner like Kerry...they are worse than Colt...boycott em! Hope they go under! Who needs traitorous gun comapnies!

Pass me that Raven!

WildthatwillteachemAlaska

444
September 24, 2004, 12:36 AM
You are not getting my Raven.

Leatherneck
September 24, 2004, 09:14 AM
If this is our idea of a real issue, we are screwed. You're missing the (obvious) point. Kerry actually favored proposed legislation that would have banned the very gun while his campaign spinners say "he would never ban it." . They're lying again. He DID try to ban it. Either they're continuing their desperate attempts to gain traction by spinning an incident instead of their wheels, or they're so truth-impaired and stupid they don't actually realize that he tried to ban it and weapons like it.

Dave Workman has it exactly right:Workman said most of his readers believe the gun gift was staged for the image that Kerry is for gun rights.

TC
TFL Survivor

Joe Demko
September 24, 2004, 10:21 AM
Yeah! Boycot Remington! Remington must die! And boycot Heinz too! Heinz must die! No true patriot would own an 11-87 or eat ketchup!
Jumping jeebus, it stinks of desperation in here. Find a real issue or move on.

halvey
September 24, 2004, 10:30 AM
The United Mine Workers, which presented Kerry with the shotgun that was made by union members who work for Remington, Just proves how out of touch their union is.

But I do like the theory of "forcing the issue".

Foreign Devil
September 24, 2004, 11:58 AM
Kerry's opponents and political Internet sites made hay from pictures of him accepting the gun at a Labor Day rally, saying the Remington 11-87 was one he had voted to ban in the Senate.

Much as I don't like Kerry, did he actually vote to ban this thing?

It doesn't have a pistol grip or other evil feature, though it is a semi-auto.

hecks68
September 24, 2004, 12:03 PM
The way I understand it... Remington had nothing to do with this. If you purchase a shotgun and give it to someone who is the giver... You or the company who made the shotgun? Besides, what would boycotting a company who contributes to our rights and interests do other than dry up yet another gun manufacturer. We can't afford to have less support on todays age.

RKCheung
September 24, 2004, 12:23 PM
Under S.1431 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:S.1431:) that was co-sponsored by Kerry, the Remington 11-87 Kerry held that day would have been banned under these two provisisions:
______________________________________________________

`(H) A semiautomatic shotgun that has--

`(ii) a pistol grip;

`(42) PISTOL GRIP- The term `pistol grip' means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.
______________________________________________________

`(L) A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.'.

RavenVT100
September 24, 2004, 12:35 PM
Almost all firearms were originally designed for military or law enforcement use. Even if a firearm is marketed as being for hunting, the core design most likely derives from something that was used in a military context at one time.

Black Snowman
September 24, 2004, 12:43 PM
S.1431 is (was hopefully?) a scary bill. Basicly, the Attorney General determines what we can and cannot have and could simplely rule that no guns are legal because he doesn't consider any firearm to have a sporting purpose and that ANYTHING the goverment buys, has bought, or thinks about buying is automaticly verboten.

Bye bye shotguns, bolt rifles, semi-auto pistols, semi-auto rifles, lever guns, revlovers, (can't forget the Forestry Servcie), 22s . . . is there ANY weapon the US Government hasn't employed at some point?

LiquidTension
September 24, 2004, 06:19 PM
I dunno...kinda turns me off to Remington if they like Kerry enough to give him free guns. He actively tries to pass legislation and that would hurt their business and our rights and they praise him for it??? A bit screwy :scrutiny:

EOD Guy
September 25, 2004, 09:02 AM
I dunno...kinda turns me off to Remington if they like Kerry enough to give him free guns. He actively tries to pass legislation and that would hurt their business and our rights and they praise him for it??? A bit screwy

As stated above, Remington DID NOT give Kerry the shotgun. It was given by the union representing some Remington workers. The company has stated that it had nothing to do with the gift itself.

Hkmp5sd
September 25, 2004, 11:44 AM
If all it takes is a couple of employees giving a gun to an anti-politician to turn people against the manufacturer, I'm sure the antis will be getting a bunch of gifts in the near future.:rolleyes:

GSB
September 25, 2004, 12:06 PM
Under S.1431 that was co-sponsored by Kerry, the Remington 11-87 Kerry held that day would have been banned under these two provisisions:
______________________________________________________

`(H) A semiautomatic shotgun that has--

`(ii) a pistol grip;

`(42) PISTOL GRIP- The term `pistol grip' means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.

Thanks. I've tried unsuccessfully on another forum to get people to understand that under some interpretations of the law, that shotgun could have been considered to have a pistol grip, and that in fact I've seen gun writers refer to that style of stock as having a pistol grip. They can't seem to get AR15-style grips out of their heads and understand that just about any grip feature protruding "consipicuously" beneath the line of the stock can, conceivably, be ruled a "pistol grip" by the Powers that Be (and if anyone thinks the VPC and Brady would not be pushing that particular interpretation under a Kerry administration, I have some prime land in the Everglades for sale).

carpettbaggerr
September 25, 2004, 01:54 PM
So every gun has a pistol grip, huh?

You can have my Raven if you pry it from my cold, dead fingers, WildAlaska. Get yourself a Hi-Point.

DigMe
September 25, 2004, 04:24 PM
I just sent an email to Remington. I know that this man was speaking for the union and not them but in this article he specifically said:

"We think it's been way overblown," he said. "Our members of Remington Arms are proud of the product they make, and we were proud to give to Senator Kerry."

He doesn't say "our members of the union" but "of Remington Arms." That pisses me off that he's pretending to speak for the company so I sent them the following email in the hope that they will take this guy to task for appearing to speak for the company:



To Whom it May Concern,

I'm only 28 years old but I've been a proud Remington owner and shooter for the past 7 years. Lately I've had my eye on a new Remington 700 deer rifle. However, I recently saw in an article here:
http://www.dailymail.com/news/News/2004092329/

A quote from a man who is apparently speaking for Remington Arms regarding the gift of an 11-87 to John Kerry. He said:

"We think it's been way overblown," he said. "Our members of Remington Arms are proud of the product they make, and we were proud to give to Senator Kerry."

Is this true?! Is Remington Arms supporting documented gun-grabber John Kerry? If so I swear to you I will sell off my Remington products and never look back. How could you support a man who wants so badly to tell you what you may and may not produce and sell?! Please tell me this man Gibson is in error when he speaks for members of Remington Arms. If he does not speak for you then I'd encourage you to take appropriate action to prevent him from speaking for your company in the future.

I have attached the entire article for you to read.

brad cook



Again, I'm not jumping to boycott Remington and I know they issued a statement disassociating themselves from the event but I just want them to hold that guy responsible in some way.

EDIT: Actually I didn't send an email so-to-speak. I filled out the customer help section on their website.

brad cook

EOD Guy
September 25, 2004, 09:56 PM
Again, I'm not jumping to boycott Remington and I know they issued a statement disassociating themselves from the event but I just want them to hold that guy responsible in some way.

EDIT: Actually I didn't send an email so-to-speak. I filled out the customer help section on their website.

brad cook

Brad,

Read the article again! It was NOT Remington that gave Kerry the Shotgun, it was the United Mine Workers Union. The person that presented the shotgun was a union representative, not a Remington representatrive.

Even if he is a Remington employee, the company cannot do anything about his union activities during his own time.

goon
September 25, 2004, 10:37 PM
For those of you who call this a non-issue, you are wrong.
It clearly says to the "borderline" gunowners "Look, he is after your guns too!"

It really doesn't matter to me because hunting is about the least of my reasons for owning a gun.
The first ammendment doesn't apply only to journalists, so why should the second apply only to hunters?

In other words, keep your blankety-blanking hands off my AK, off my FAL, and off my Bill of rights.

But it is an issue.
Also, Kerry supposedly owns a war trophy from Vietnam. I wouldn't be suprised if it was a gift from Ho Chi Minh though. But at any rate, he owns one of the guns that he doesn't want me to be able to own.
IMO, that is also an issue worthy of drawing attention to.

sendec
September 26, 2004, 09:23 AM
The death toll in Iraq

Outsourcing

Medicine plans and prices

One shotgun given as a gift.

:rolleyes:

goon
September 26, 2004, 03:36 PM
So my guns don't count?
We should just not worry about that?
Think what you want, but that is something that I am not willing to do.

DigMe
September 28, 2004, 07:05 PM
Brad,

Read the article again! It was NOT Remington that gave Kerry the Shotgun, it was the United Mine Workers Union. The person that presented the shotgun was a union representative, not a Remington representatrive.

Even if he is a Remington employee, the company cannot do anything about his union activities during his own time.


EOD Guy,

Read my post again! I made it clear that I understand that the guy wasn't a Remington rep. I know that he can do what he wants in his free time but he is NOT allowed to pretend to represent the Remington Company and in my mind his words are deceptive and do make it sound that way. I wrote the letter hoping to help cause a stir between Remington and that guy.

brad cook

DigMe
September 28, 2004, 07:08 PM
I received a reply from Remington today. It's about what I expected. Again I wasn't really writing the letter to get clarification...just to try to stir things up and have them hold that guy accountable for talking as if he represents them:


Dear Mr. Cook,

We can understand you[sic] confusion and[sic] comments regarding the firearm
that was presented to Kerry. Remington Arms Company has made no
endorsement of any presidential candidate. This endorsement and
presentation by the UMWA was made independently of the Remington Arms
Company and the Company did not coordinate with or endorse the
actions of the union.


brad cook

EOD Guy
September 28, 2004, 10:51 PM
DigMe,

In reading the article, it was apparent to me that the individual presenting the shotgun was a union representative and may not have even been a Remington Employee.

DigMe
September 29, 2004, 12:13 AM
DigMe,

In reading the article, it was apparent to me that the individual presenting the shotgun was a union representative and may not have even been a Remington Employee.


Are you even reading my posts? It's apparent to me too.

The problem I have is with his words, where he makes it sound like he's speaking for Remington (NOT that he works for Remington). UH, uh uh...I didn't say it's not apparent that he's a union rep.

My problem is that he says "Our members of Remington Arms.." not "Our members of the union..." The union in question is NOT called "Remington Arms." He makes it sound like Remington Arms is in agreement with the union in presenting the gun to Kerry, which they weren't.

Even if someone is a Union Rep for the union that works for, say, UPS, they cannot go up to someone without company permission and say "On behalf of the members of UPS I hereby punch you in the face." It would not be on behalf of the members of UPS, it would be on behalf of that one guy, or the union.

brad cook

dustind
September 29, 2004, 12:21 AM
Sendec: You are missing the point. We are talking about Kerry being a hypocrite and an elitist. Two pretty big charges, IMHO. Also pointing out to the world that Kerry wants to ban a normal hunting shotgun could influence a lot of votes, if the idea gets out.

If you want to talk about wasting time, there are hundreds of better examples of threads on this site that are a waste of time.

If you enjoyed reading about "Kerry shotgun remains in state — and in news" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!