Do you know of any GUN OWNERS who are AHSA members?


PDA






No Fear
November 10, 2008, 05:02 PM
I don't think AHSA has more than a dozen members who are actually gun owners so I'm curious if you ANYBODY who is an AHSA member, gun owner or not. If you know someone who is an AHSA member AND a gun owner then tell us about this person. I just don't think that animal even exists. I think effectively all of AHSA's members (do they publish member data?) are just bored environmentalists.

If you enjoyed reading about "Do you know of any GUN OWNERS who are AHSA members?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
RPCVYemen
November 10, 2008, 05:04 PM
You know at least one - or have read his posts (or are reading his post as we speak). :)

Mike

No Fear
November 10, 2008, 06:15 PM
You know at least one - or have read his posts (or are reading his post as we speak).

MikeYou know they support gun control on our .50 caliber rifles don't you? :barf:

You know AHSA is merely a front for several gun banners don't you?
The anti-gun credentials of AHSA’s leadership is well documented. For instance, AHSA president Ray Schoenke has a long history of giving political donations to some of the most anti-gun politicians, including Al Gore, John Kerry, Barbara Boxer, Bill Clinton, Dianne Feinstein and Ted Kennedy. In 2000, Schoenke donated $5,000 to Handgun Control, Inc. (now the Brady Campaign) and the Ray and Holly Schoenke Foundation also made donations to the Brady Campaign. AHSA Board member John Rosenthal remains the leader of Stop Handgun Violence, the Massachusetts anti-gun group. And one of the leading organizers of AHSA is Bob Ricker, who has been a paid expert witness against gun manufacturers in a number of reckless lawsuits.

Since you are a member, maybe you can shed some light on how many members AHSA has.

If you would be so kind, I would love to hear how AHSA is supposedly a good organization for gun owners.

TexasRifleman
November 10, 2008, 06:17 PM
You know at least one - or have read his posts (or are reading his post as we speak)

Wow, I'm surprised someone would admit that in public, especially on a pro gun forum.

May I ask why in the world you would join a group like that?

Did you happen to know that:

Robert Ricker, executive director (AHSA) and Joe Vince, board member (AHSA), have been paid witnesses against the
firearms industry in municipal suits in California, Washington, D.C. and New York City (including the “City of New York v.
Beretta U.S.A. Corp. et al” case which is still pending).

And a little more on their board:

Founders / Executives
While AHSA purports to be a pro-hunting, pro-conservation and pro-gun organization, its leadership and board would qualify
as a blue ribbon committee of activists who are anything but friends to the hunting, shooting sports and firearms community.
Let’s take a look at who runs this “hunters and shooters” organization:

Robert Ricker (Executive Director, AHSA)
• Paid witness against the firearms industry for cases where plaintiffs attempted to hold gun manufacturers liable for
the criminal misuse of their products by third parties.
• Monthly salary of $3000; AHSA claims no more than 150 members who pay $25 dues. The rest of the money
comes from “individual contributions” with the largest contributors on the AHSA board of directors.iv
• Paid an hourly fee of $225 to $250 dollars for testimony, depositions, and meetings with the Brady Campaign.v
• Consults for the Educational Fund to End Handgun Violence (the “educational” arm of the Coalition to Stop Gun
Violence).vi (http://www.csgv.org/)
• Consults with Virginians for Public Safety (http://www.vapublicsafety.com/) (lobbying for additional restrictions on
law abiding gun owners).vii

Ray Schoenke (President, AHSA)
• Mr. Schoenke, his wife, his daughter and son have been generous donors of anti-gun candidates including: Al Gore,
Barbara Boxer, Bill Clinton, Dianne Feinstein, Ted Kennedy, Carolyn McCarthy and John Kerry.viii
• Mr. Schoenke and his wife donated $10,000 to Handgun Control, Inc. (HCI) in 2000.ix
• Mr. Schoenke’s daughter and son each contributed $5000 to HCI in 2000.x

John Rosenthal (President, AHSA Foundation)
• Rosenthal is the leader of Stop Handgun Violence, the principal anti-gun group in the state of Massachusetts
(credited with being the “political force behind the strict gun control laws of Massachusetts”xi)
• Rosenthal is a former member of the HCI board of directors, now known as the Brady Campaign.
• Rosenthal has most recently focused his energy on voicing opposition to firearms’ advertisements during sporting
events < http://news.bostonherald.com/localRegional/view.bg?articleid=154057 >

Jody Powell (Co-Chairman, AHSA Advisory Board)
• Press Secretary for one of the most anti-gun U.S. administrations, President Jimmy Carter.

Joe Vince (Board Member, AHSA)
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) architect of the Clinton-Gore regulatory assault on the
Second Amendment.
• His company Crime Gun Solutions (CGS) employs a number of other ex-ATF officials including Gerard Nunziato,
who told the Houston Chronicle that “If it wasn’t for criminals, there wouldn’t be a gun industry in this country.”
• Crime Gun Solutions provides consulting services for the lawyers at the Brady Campaign, frequently appearing as
paid expert witnesses in lawsuits against the firearms industry.


National Shooting Sports Foundation has a PDF document detailing this anti gun operation here:

http://www.nssf.org/share/pdf/AHSA_Fact_Sheet.pdf

Justin
November 10, 2008, 06:55 PM
AHSA is demonstrably a false-flag operation dedicated to dictating which firearms in what calibers I can own, and under what circumstances I should be allowed to use them in.

They absolutely do not represent me as a shooter, gun-owner, or liberty-minded person. The fact that they endorsed Obama doesn't mean they have his ear, nor does it mean they actually represent the interests of even the average gun owner.

No Fear
November 10, 2008, 06:59 PM
The fact that they endorsed Obama doesn't mean they have his ear, nor does it mean they actually represent the interests of even the average gun owner.I wonder (I hope) if we can use that endorsement to make it harder for Obama to ban anything. I'm sure that AHSA quietly supports the Clinton gun ban, but are they open about it? If the AW ban gets revived in congress, watching AHSA's actions will get VERY interesting.

JImbothefiveth
November 10, 2008, 07:02 PM
I think they are of the belief that guns cause crime. As far as I know, they want a renewal of the '94 ban, and probably would support a handgun ban too.(Apparently they don't care about handgun hunters)

RPCVYemen
November 10, 2008, 07:19 PM
You know they support gun control on our .50 caliber rifles don't you?

Yes, and I think that's silly.

I maintain my membership in NRA - I am not happy with everything AHSA says. But I am concerned that the NRA is so tightly tied to the Republican party that it may have peaked.

Maybe it's because I am from North Carolina, and the shift was truly seismic here. The Obama win combined with the total shellacking of Elizabeth Dole. I think that the Dems may have figured out how to break the Republican stranglehold on the South.

Every success in American politics seeds its own failure.

When I was growing up, the NRA was not a fund raising arm of the Republican party. The Democratic president whom my parents heroized - JFK - was a member of the NRA (a life member I think, but I am not sure).

In the following decades, the NRA became more and more tightly tied to the Republican party. That gave them a lot of influence, and may have helped us win Heller.

But that also meant that when the Republicans fall out of power, they take the NRA with them. I think that the Reagan revolution is fundamentally over, and I expect that it will take them some time to recover.

The NRA bet on the wrong horse in this election, and doubled up their bet with a vitriolic campaign - implying that Obama was insincere, or a liar.

The AHSA bet on the right horse, and I expect them to have more influence on the administration (and maybe Congress) than the NRA until the Republicans are again ascendant. Which they will - everything comes in cycles in American politics.

I want to be a member of a gun org that has some influence in the next administration (and I suspect for the next decade or two). My $25 bet is that organization will be the AHSA, not the NRA.

Mike

TexasRifleman
November 10, 2008, 07:20 PM
I want to be a member of a gun org that has some influence in the next administration

LOL well I'll say you sure picked the right one. You should probably send some cash to HCI while you are at it, they will likely have a good relationship with this administration.

I mean, the board of directors of AHSA send HCI money, you should too.

No Fear
November 10, 2008, 07:24 PM
But that also meant that when the Republicans fall out of power, they take the NRA with them.+1 That is 100% dead smack ON.

RPCVYemen I applaud your openness and honesty. I think your entire comment was correct.
The NRA bet on the wrong horse in this electionYes and nra could have seen it coming MONTHS in advance. Their support for McCain, especially when it was obvious he was going to lose, REALLY did gun owners a disservice. Do you think NRA will detach from the republican party a little bit now?

I think that the Reagan revolution is fundamentally over, and I expect that it will take them some time to recover.
That is the saddest part and it is 80% Bush's fault and 20% the fault of the rest of the republican "leadership" (and I use that term veeeery loosely).

hags
November 10, 2008, 07:36 PM
But that also meant that when the Republicans fall out of power, they take the NRA with them. I think that the Reagan revolution is fundamentally over, and I expect that it will take them some time to recover.

The NRA bet on the wrong horse in this election, and doubled up their bet with a vitriolic campaign - implying that Obama was insincere, or a liar.


That is not dead smack on. The NRA has massive influence in the courts via lawsuits, attroneys, etc..as well as Republicans still in office.

Obama was/is a liar!!! He's as phony as a $3 bill.

Larry Ashcraft
November 10, 2008, 07:36 PM
I want to be a member of a gun org that has some influence in the next administration (and I suspect for the next decade or two). My $25 bet is that organization will be the AHSA, not the NRA.
Jumping on the bandwagon of the organization which is "winning" doesn't set right with me, especially if it goes against every freedom this country stands for.

mgregg85
November 10, 2008, 07:37 PM
I want to be a member of a gun org that has some influence in the next administration (and I suspect for the next decade or two). My $25 bet is that organization will be the AHSA, not the NRA.
:barf:

Just how far down does one have to keep his head in the sand to believe that the AHSA is in any way, shape or form a pro 'gun org'?

I've got a shovel but I'm thinking you'd need some kind of oil well drilling rig to get deep enough to believe their crap.

No Fear
November 10, 2008, 07:45 PM
Just how far down does one have to keep his head in the sand to believe that the AHSA is in any way, shape or form a pro 'gun org'?I've read this entire thread and didn't see ANYONE saying that AHSA is "pro gun." I can't stand AHSA but I can see RPCVYemen's point about influence, especially after NRA just blew millions on a horse that never had a chance in my view.

AHSA just MIGHT be forced to oppose some gun bans in this next administration, in order to maintain their false appearance of supporting the 2nd amendment. That may turn out to be helpful since there won't be a solitary SOUL in the Obama admin who will listen to the NRA at this point (unless NRA can get influence over congress-critters).

RPCVYemen
November 10, 2008, 07:46 PM
I don't think the policies of the AHSA go against every freedom this country stands for. Their stance on .50 BMG is silly.

The NRA has given boatloads of money to people intent on shredding every amendment other than the 2nd - I was no happier with that than I am with the AHSA stance on the .50 BMG. The NRA donations struck directly against more American freedoms than any .50 BMG ban - however stupid.

I would be interested in any link to AHSA policy about the AWB, if you have one.

Mike

Justin
November 10, 2008, 07:49 PM
AHSA just MIGHT be forced to oppose some gun bans in this next administration, in order to maintain their false appearance of supporting the 2nd amendment.

I wouldn't bet on it, nor would I donate money based on such a flimsy notion.

RPCVYemen
November 10, 2008, 07:49 PM
Where have these fine centrist Democratic leaders gone to?

They have come back - that's how the Dems regained control of Congress and won in safe Republican states like Virginia and North Carolina.

The Dems - at least the ones who win - have moved back to the center (at least on this issue).

Mike

TexasRifleman
November 10, 2008, 07:52 PM
I would be interested in any link to AHSA policy about the AWB, if you have one.

AHSA supports closing down gun shows

AHSA supports bans of .50 caliber weapons

AHSA's board members are all high dollar contributors to HCI

AHSA's board members testified IN FAVOR OF NYC in the NYC vs Beretta case.

AHSA has NO lobbying arm, required by law if they plan to try to influence any voting by Congresscritters.

At least one AHSA board member was also a board member of HCI, now Brady Campaign

Joe Vince, AHSA board member, worked for ATF and

HELPED WRITE THE CLINTON ASSAULT WEAPON BAN.

Please disprove anything I've posted. (Here's a hint, it's all been VERY well documented by The National Shooting Sports Associaton)

What planet are you from where those things don't matter?

bdickens
November 10, 2008, 07:54 PM
Obama was/is a liar!!! He's as phony as a $3 bill. ...with a 75-cent peice taped to it!

Ever stop to think that maybe if the Demopublicans had some pro-gun candidates, that the NRA might support them too.

Yeah, I know that there is the odd Democrat or two who is semi-solid on the Second Amendment, but the fact of the matter is that between the Republocrats and the Demopublicans, the former tend to do a whole lot better than the latter on the 2d.

No Fear
November 10, 2008, 07:54 PM
I wouldn't bet on it, nor would I donate money based on such a flimsy notion.Oh believe me, I don't plan to give AHSA any money, but it's not a flimsy notion at all. AHSA needs to keep it's false appearance of being pro 2nd amendment and they will be cornered into opposing some of the coming congressional gun bans whether they like it or not. Granted, they probably won't be very loud in their opposition, but the people who run AHSA are crafty/scheming little devils who know the political game.


Joe Vince, AHSA board member, worked for ATF and

HELPED WRITE THE CLINTON ASSAULT WEAPON BAN.Yea that supports my suspicion but it remains to be seen what AHSA will do PUBLICLY when gun bans start showing up in congress.

langenc
November 10, 2008, 08:03 PM
Remember-"By their fruits ye shall know them"--and I add-individuals, organizations or whatever.

They may try to change spots but like the leopard, it is not possible.

The only problem with the NRA-then, now or in the future is that to many weasels have all kinds of excuses for NOT joining.

Larry E
November 10, 2008, 08:07 PM
A gun owner who is a member of AHSA and thinks they may do some good is sort of like a Jew in 1930's Germany donating money to the Nazis because they've built nice autobahnen and the VW is kind of cute too.

The NRA didn't support Republicans because they were Republicans, but because for the most part Democrats have voted to ban guns, institute ever stricter gun control laws, and/or spoken out for banning of various and sundry ill defined types of firearms. The NRA rated the governor of Montana and our senior Senator as "A", and selected the Democrat incumbent for governor over the Republican.

Juna
November 10, 2008, 08:16 PM
The Dems - at least the ones who win - have moved back to the center (at least on this issue).

You apparently haven't see Obama and Biden's records on gun control (or any of the majority of the Dems in power in Congress, for that matter). Obama makes Bill Clinton look like Charlton Heston.

I'm not a Republican or a Democrat, but I cannot bring myself to vote for a Democrat who supports gun control (which is the vast majority of them). The NRA does endorse some Democrats (pro-gun Democrats). The reason they side with Republicans usually is b/c 90+% of Democrats are anti-gun, and most Republicans are pro-gun. In my state congressional district, however, BOTH the Dem and the Rep running are anti-gun, so the NRA didn't endorse either of them.

Any time a politician uses the phrase "common sense legislation," it's a HUGE red flag for something that will violate your rights and has no evidence to support it. Obama uses that phrase a LOT.

When we start electing Libertarians, we'll be much better off in terms of maximal freedom and minimal government. The NRA needs to endorse more Libertarians. If we had more Libertarians in debates and in office, we'd be better off for it. Instead of choosing between pro-gun or anti-gun, there'd be multiple pro-gun options. This would also weaken the anti-gunners b/c it would pull from some of their voting pool.

mothergoose
November 10, 2008, 08:44 PM
The NRA has actually supported Democratic candidates before. I know for a fact they supported Gov. Barnes here in GA when he was running in 02. He was a democrat. How many republicans has AHSA supported? The same argument you are using about the NRA being tied to the republicans can be used for the AHSA and the dems.

I am not saying that the NRA is not closley tied to the republicans, but so am I. And really the reason is guns. The republicans are more likley to vote in favor of my 2nd amemdment rights. You are just giving money to the enemy and hoping that people with a long history of supporting gun bans change their minds to keep up the illusion. I got a big surprise for you, the illusion is only there so they can get enough support to ban your guns. They have no need to keep it up beyond getting massive restrictions passed.

Do you go to meetings with child molesters? I guess you figure since you can't stop them you might as well try to keep them away from your kids right? Maybe you can convince them to only attack 3 kids instead of 4 this month. No, of course you don't. Because the action is wrong and you will not give even an inch in that belief.

I feel the same way about guns. No way would I donate money to a group who doesn't share my opinions.

prickett
November 10, 2008, 10:10 PM
Oh believe me, I don't plan to give AHSA any money, but it's not a flimsy notion at all. AHSA needs to keep it's false appearance of being pro 2nd amendment and they will be cornered into opposing some of the coming congressional gun bans whether they like it or not.

You are assuming this organization won't disappear now that their goal has been achieved.

No Fear
November 10, 2008, 10:14 PM
You are assuming this organization won't disappear now that their goal has been achieved.That would be good too.

Kim
November 11, 2008, 12:16 AM
The flow of history always confuses people. JFK was the last pro 2nd amendment democratic president. The party went lefty on guns. That is just a fact. The NRA did not become republician the democrats became anti strong anti's. They do support Democrats alot of them espically at the State level. It is hard to find many on the National Level. Do not blame the NRA for seeming a arm of the Republician party blame the Democrats for turning their back on the NRA , THE PEOPLE and the 2nd amendment.

MT GUNNY
November 11, 2008, 02:28 AM
The NRA has endorsed Brian Schweitzer(D) Gov of MT twice now.

stevelyn
November 11, 2008, 04:30 AM
Well since AHSA is the Brady/VPC pukes propaganda/psyops/disinformation section that would make anyone a member of it our enemy wouldn't it? :scrutiny:

JWarren
November 11, 2008, 08:45 AM
The NRA has long-endorsed Rep. Gene Taylor (D) (NRA A-Rated) in Mississippi.


Let's see the AHSA wants to ban calibers? The AHSA HELPED WRITE the Clinton AWB?

And they are RKBA? Give me a break.


I don't think I like their twisted notion of what it means.


If I guy raped a woman, he doesn't get to call himself a feminist. Words mean jack. Actions on the other hand....



-- John

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 10:25 AM
AHSA is to gunowners what the "Judenrat" (Jewish police) were to the Jews forced into ghettos by the Nazis. They exist solely as a surrogate for those who wish to oppress and destroy those whom they allegedly "protect". Some anti-gunners think it's easier for "gun owners" to get other gun owners to give up their 2nd Amendment rights, just as anti-Semites thought it was easier for Jews to get other Jews to get on the trains to Auschwitz, Sobibor and Treblinka.

Never again.

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 10:59 AM
Do not blame the NRA for seeming a arm of the Republican party blame the Democrats for turning their back on the NRA ...

Notice that I did not talk of "blame" - the simple matter of fact is that at the national level, the NRA is tied to the Republican party with lots of apron strings. My sense is that the NRA is so tightly tied to the Republican party that as that party's influence wanes, the influence of the NRA will wane. That's not an attempt to "blame" anyone - it's life in a two party system.

They have in fact supported local pro-gun Democrats, but I am not convinced they can do that at the national level. Their support of pro-gun local Dems is a healthy sign.

But the vitriol and dishonesty of their attacks on Obama is not a healthy sign. It would have been fine to have said that John McCain was a better friend of gun owners than the Obama, and endorse Obama. I think that there is little doubt of that. I don't think that would have earned anyone's ire. But the NRA stole a page from Karl Rove's playbook, and reviled Obama as a "gun grabber",etc, - which he clearly is not. McCain stole a page (actually a bunch of pages) from Karl Rove's playbook and claim that Obama is a socialist because he wants a 37.5% tax on those making $250,000 a year while hard core capitalist McCain only wants to impose a 35% tax on people making $250,000 a year.

Karl Rove's playbook didn't work any better for the NRA that it did for John McCain. It didn't work for Elizabeth Dole, either. The problem for the NRA is that Karl Rove's methodology is that it transforms opponents into enemies. Once you have transformed an opponent into an enemy, you had better win. And the NRA lost.

They may in fact be able to morph into a bi-partisan entity. But I think there's a better than 50% chance that the pro gun movement will bifurcate into two camps - the NRA will become the Republican gun lobby, and the AHSA will become the Democratic gun lobby.

If that's the case, I want to me a member of both organizations. That's my $25 bet.

Mike

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 11:11 AM
But the vitriol and dishonesty of their attacks on Obama is not a healthy sign. It would have been fine to have said that John McCain was a better friend of gun owners than the Obama, and endorse Obama.
Obama and Biden were and continue to be implacable enemies of gun owners, certainly gun owners who want to own handguns or AR15s and who want to carry concealed firearms.

The difference between McCain's and Obama's attitudes toward gun owners is the difference between Anita Bryant's and a mob of bat wielding skinheads' attitudes toward gays. There's a certain difference in degree...

I can't make AHSA stop lying about itself and Obama, but AHSA can't make me believe those lies. And EVERY time I see the Judenrat of the "gun rights" movement crawl out from under their rock, I'll be there to pull the sheet off of them. And there's NOTHING in the world they can do about it. Oh, you can go the "criminal libel" route. See how that works for you. I D A R E you.

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 11:19 AM
I don't think that would have earned anyone's ire. But the NRA stole a page from Karl Rove's playbook, and reviled Obama as a "gun grabber",etc, - which he clearly is not.

You gotta be kidding me. From his own website:

support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.

No offense intended, high road and all that, but you are clearly an anti gun member here by continuing to try to push AHSA off as a pro gun entity and denying things about Obama that he himself has said.

Your agenda is clearly anti gun and anti freedom and now you are adding dishonesty by denying things about Obama that he's made no secret of himself.

TX1911fan
November 11, 2008, 11:39 AM
Thank you TexasRifleman. I see so many gun owners who are Obama fans trying to convince us that Obama is not a gun grabber. That is an absolute falsehood. One of the few things Obama has been consistent on his entire political career is his hatred for an armed populace. He has never met a gun ban or gun control law he didn't like. He has supported every single one of them. RPCVY, please find me any evidence Obama ever voted against any gun control legislation and if you can, maybe I'll believe you that he isn't a gun grabber.

The NRA is not tied to Republicans, it is tied to the 2nd Amendment. When Democrats start to respect that Amendment, the NRA will support them, as it has in the past, and continues to today on a case by case basis.

It's fine if you like Obama (or more likely just hate Bush) but don't try to get us to drink the kool-aid you did. That's not going to happen on this board.

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 11:44 AM
Thank you TexasRifleman. I see so many gun owners who are Obama fans trying to convince us that Obama is not a gun grabber.

Yeah, the election is over so this is no longer "politics", it's a fact that our next President has a known voting record on guns and published statements on them.

We are down to reality now, so there should be no more dancing around to avoid the "no politics" rules on THR.

This is gun owner's reality for 4, possibly 8 years. The important thing now is to watch for the slightest beginnings and attempt as best we can to head off any attempt to restrict our rights further.

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 11:50 AM
I see so many gun owners who are Obama fans trying to convince us that Obama is not a gun grabber.

Do we have any evidence that Obama is going to introduce legislation to confiscateanyone weapons - that's what a "gun grabber" does, right? Show me any evidence that he is going to introduce legislation to confiscate ("grab") anyone's weapons, and I will accept that he is a "gun grabber".

Mike

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 11:53 AM
Do we have any evidence that Obama is going to introduce legislation to confiscateanyone weapons - that's what a "gun grabber" does, right? Show me any evidence that he is going to introduce legislation to confiscate ("grab") anyone's weapons, and I will accept that he is a "gun grabber".

We have his own statements. You don't want to believe his own words fine, just mark this thread and we'll get back to you when it happens.

If you believe that this President and this Congress will attempt no firearm legislation over the next 4 years then I guess that's just what you believe, but their own words have made it clear they intend to make such changes part of their agenda.

Obama has specifically said, and put it on his President-Elect website, that he wants 2 things immediately gun wise;

1) Ending the "gunshow loophole" whatever the hell that is

2) Reinstating and making permanent an assault weapon ban.

It's on his own website, that you continue to argue that he didnt' say it is more proof of your anti gun agenda here. I'm really not sure what to make of you at this point, Obama's put it all in writing.

If you want to play word games over confiscation vs banning go right ahead. Again, that is the anti gun angle on everything. "Oh it will be OK, it's just a ban, we're not taking anyone's guns away".

If you take away my right to purchase a firearm you have "grabbed" my gun, you have "grabbed" the gun of my children for sure because they will not be able to purchase them. That my child might not be able to purchase certain types of firearms is most certainly a long term gun grab and you can't spin your word play around to make it anything other than that.

This is serious. If all you can bring to the table are word games then you should just move on to another website.

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 11:55 AM
Yeah, the election is over so this is no longer "politics", it's a fact that our next President has a known voting record on guns and published statements on them.
It is absolutely CRITICAL that the Judenrat of AHSA be confronted directly EVERYWHERE they show up. Do not give them one second's uncontested screen time to tell their lies.

A lot of people don't remember that this happened before with the similarly duplicitous "National Firearms Association". They had the same sort of overlap with fanatical anti-gun groups. They were crushed so thoroughly that almost nobody remembers them. The same will happen to AHSA, and faster because we're even more organized and technologically well equipped. Any public figure who gives them the time of day needs to be made an example of, just like Zumbo. This is for real and for keeps.

Dain Bramage
November 11, 2008, 11:58 AM
AHSA just MIGHT be forced to oppose some gun bans in this next administration, in order to maintain their false appearance of supporting the 2nd amendment.

I sincerely doubt that. AHSA has no problem supporting every current gun-grabbing proposal with a straight face. I don't see anywhere on their website what pro-gun stance they actually support, or if they even have a "line in the sand". I believe that if they achieve the current goals, AHSA will have no problem going to the next step of the gun control agenda.

The very idea of the AHSA (Brady/HCI) staff, and their twelve members, bending Obama's ear about any positive 2nd Amendment issues is laughable. "No, no Obama, you've gone too far!"

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 11:59 AM
If you want to play word games over confiscation vs banning go right ahead. Again, that is the anti gun angle on everything. "Oh it will be OK, it's just a ban, we're not taking anyone's guns away".
It's the anti-gunners' version of "resettlement to the east" and "arbeit macht frei". It's all from the same playbook. It needs to be pitilessly exposed and crushed.

TX1911fan
November 11, 2008, 12:00 PM
Gun grabber doesn't necessarily mean only grabbing guns from those who already have them. I have no doubt that Obama would support confiscation, but he definitely supports, has expressed support in the past, and will support in the future GRABBING guns from those who currently do not own them. Don't get so caught up in your technicalities that you can't look at the issue from all sides. He will definitely grab future guns. All those people who couldn't buy high capacity magazines during the Clinton gun ban didn't really care that technically Clinton didn't confiscate existing ones. They just cared that they couldn't get any.

6_gunner
November 11, 2008, 12:00 PM
Fair enough. Obama is not a "gun grabber." He is an advocate of legislation which would deny us our right to carry and outlaw nearly all modern firearms.

I don't see how that is much better.

I also don't agree with your argument of the AHSA "betting on the right horse." It is ridiculous to suggest that we should have supported a fanatically anti-gun politician simply because he was winning.

The NRA is not a Republican organization. The NRA endorses Democrats who respect the 2nd Amendment. They support Republicans more frequently, because there are vastly more pro-2nd Amendment Republicans than there are pro-2nd Amendment Democrats.

jfh
November 11, 2008, 12:04 PM
Finally, a well-articulated set of comments about the policy goals of the incoming Administration.

I thought this kind of discussion had been moderated out of THR--and it's good to see it can be left intact, with no drift.

Jim H.

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 12:05 PM
The very idea of the AHSA (Brady/HCI) staff, and their twelve members, bending Obama's ear about any positive 2nd Amendment issues is laughable. "No, no Obama, you've gone too far!"
They should be treated in exactly the same way that a Klan sponsored "civil rights" organization would be.

The preponderance of the evidence indicates that they're really just a Gleiwicz-like disinformation operation.

AHSA is a LIE. Treat it like a lie. Treat its supporters as the liars they are.

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 12:30 PM
The posted policies of the AHSA on gun legislation are as follows:


Overturn the DC Gun Ban

ASHA strongly agrees with the recent Supreme Court decision (DC v Heller) which requires that the DC gun law be amended to allow law-abiding citizens the right to acquire and keep handguns in their homes and places of business.

I fully support this.

Protect Gun Makers from spurious lawsuits

AHSA believes manufacturers of lawful products should not be held responsible for the criminal acts of third parties unless it can be proven by a preponderance of the evidence that the manufacturer, authorized distributor or dealer aided or participated in the unlawful act, or through negligence or other willful conduct, contributed to the unlawful act.

I fully support this.

Give the FBI Access to NICs

AHSA believes the FBI should be given reasonable access to National Instant Check System (NICS) purchase records to insure terrorists and other prohibited individuals do not have access to firearms.

I have no objection to this.

Support Legal Gun Use (from what I can tell, this means they want the same NICs checks at guns shows as local FFLs have to run)

AHSA supports requiring all transfers of firearms at gun shows to be subject to all federal, state and local laws and regulations currently applicable to federally licensed firearm dealers including the conducting of the instant background check on purchasers.

I have no objection to this.

50 BMG riles should be regulated as NFA weapons are.
AHSA supports legislative efforts to regulate .50 caliber BMG sniper rifles in the same manner as machine guns are regulated under the provisions of the National Firearms Act of 1934.

This is silly, and I will lobby as a member to rescind this policy.


http://www.huntersandshooters.org/issues/gunrights

So I fully support two of their stated policy positions, two are OK, and I object to one.

I have bones to pick with the NRA as well - they can't figure out how to shovel money fast enough to people shredding every other right in the Bill of Rights (separation of church and state, due process, etc).

No organization is perfect.

Mike

SDDL-UP
November 11, 2008, 12:37 PM
RPCVYemen,

That's like saying you want to join the S.S. so you have some say as to what happens to the Jews - it makes no sense.

AHSA will use your membership to promote "their" ideas about gun control, and they will use your money to elect Diane Fienstien, Chuck Schumer, and all the rest of the gun control left. The NRA supports pro gun democrats (D) Max Baucus of Montana, does the AHSA support any republicans? According to my inquiry the answer is NO!

Who are the partisans again?

mljdeckard
November 11, 2008, 12:50 PM
So, RCVPYemen, you think he's not a gun grabber, just because he doesn't START with full confiscation. You think INCREMENTAL loss of rights is ok.

Not a liar? How about promising he would finish his senate term before he ran for president?

The Democratic platform is anti-gun. What you have done here is rationalize and convince yourself that it's ok to give up some of your gun rights, because you want so badly for the democrats to win.

If every gun owner was a member of the NRA, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Your willingness to require background checks for EVERY firearms transfer at a gun show shows your willingness to give your rights away. As Americans, we have the right to assemble peacefully. We have the right to keep and bear arms. One person is allowed to sell a legal item to another person. This is all a gun show is. Which one of these rights do you want to let them have?

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 12:53 PM
That's like saying you want to join the S.S. so you have some say as to what happens to the Jews - it makes no sense.

Please supply one scintilla of evidence that the AHSA intends or exterminate gun owners.

Else we can both agree that your claim is silly, offensive, and refuted.

Mike

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 12:55 PM
The posted policies of the AHSA on gun legislation are as follows
What, nothing to say about AR15s and Kalashnikovs?

How about standard capacity magazines?

How about registration? By the way, if you don't have a problem with registration, tell me how to move to Chicago with my handguns... LAWFULLY.

How about concealed carry?

You're not fooling anybody. Nobody believes you. You don't even believe yourself.

PS - How much overlap on BoDs does AHSA have with organizations like HCI, VPC, Brady, etc.? I remember that the NFA had a real honesty problem in that regard too...

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 12:56 PM
So I fully support two of their stated policy positions, two are OK, and I object to one.

Except where you have failed to address the fact that several board members have testified in court AGAINST firearm manufacturers (and were well paid for it) .

Therefore their claim that :

AHSA believes manufacturers of lawful products should not be held responsible for the criminal acts of third parties unless it can be proven by a preponderance of the evidence that the manufacturer, authorized distributor or dealer aided or participated in the unlawful act, or through negligence or other willful conduct, contributed to the unlawful act.

is demostrably false since the board is made of members that have acted on more than one occasion in the other direction entirely.


What exactly is your explanation for that? Simply that what they say is more important than what they do? Or is that one more thing that you want to play "word games" with since it was the board members individually, not in the name of AHSA, that did these things.

You think that really passes the smell test? You need to be honest in this conversation or there is no point in going forward. I've posted all very well documented facts on AHSA, it's board, and Obama, do you have any FACTS at all here?

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 12:56 PM
Please supply one scintilla of evidence that the AHSA intends or exterminate gun owners.
It doesn't want there to be any. The method is still unspecified.

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 01:04 PM
So, RCVPYemen, you think he's not a gun grabber, ...

Actually, I think that we have all agreed that there is no evidence to support the assertion that Obama intends to confiscate anyone's weapon.

Your willingness to require background checks for EVERY firearms transfer at a gun show shows your willingness to give your rights away

Actually, my willingness to requite background checks at gun show is evidence that I am willing to require background checks at gun shows. :)

As Americans, we have the right to assemble peacefully.

Some of us fine Americans have committed felonies, and while those who have committed such felonies have the right to assemble peacefully, they do not have the right to possess firearms.

Mike

X-Rap
November 11, 2008, 01:08 PM
You can look at the NRA endorsements and see they are not biased, in Colorado they gave the nod to a number of Democrats including a US Representative John Salazar.
They may support other organizations that work for the rest of the bill of rights but I doubt they endorse the demise of those freedoms.

Justin
November 11, 2008, 01:13 PM
Do we have any evidence that Obama is going to introduce legislation to confiscateanyone weapons - that's what a "gun grabber" does, right? Show me any evidence that he is going to introduce legislation to confiscate ("grab") anyone's weapons, and I will accept that he is a "gun grabber".

Show me evidence that he won't prohibit the further purchase of firearms. If someone is, say, 15 years old now, and our Shiny New Postmodern Messiah (SNPM) prohibits further purchases of, say, AR15's, thereby denying that 15 year old the ability to purchase such a rifle when he is 18, how is that any better than being an outright prohibitionist?

Frankly, I have yet to see even one of the supporters of our SNPM point out where he has ever done anything to aid gun owners and shooters.

For that matter, show me one example where AHSA has pushed forward an agenda that is in any way, shape, or form geared toward advancing the rights of gun owners. Just because they state support for about four very obvious boilerplate and "common sense" views on gun ownership says absolutely zero about how many yards they've carried the RKBA football on the field. In fact, their support of bans on so-called "assault weapons" and rifles chambered in .50 BMG shows that they're carrying it in the wrong direction.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
November 11, 2008, 01:16 PM
When I was growing up, the NRA was not a fund raising arm of the Republican party.

And they are NOT NOW. Why would you imply such a ludicrous thing?

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 01:22 PM
AHSA believes manufacturers of lawful products should not be held responsible for the criminal acts of third parties unless it can be proven by a preponderance of the evidence that the manufacturer, authorized distributor or dealer aided or participated in the unlawful act, or through negligence or other willful conduct, contributed to the unlawful act.

What exactly is your explanation for that?

You either support this policy, or you don't. I do support that policy. I don't buy into many conspiracy arguments. If I find that the AHSA is violating their stated policies, then I will drop my membership. Until that time, I will accept that their stated policies are their real policies.

Mike

Justin
November 11, 2008, 01:23 PM
Why would you imply such a ludicrous thing?

Partisan hackery.

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 01:32 PM
If I find that the AHSA is violating their stated policies, then I will drop my membership. Until that time, I will accept that their stated policies are their real policies.

What do you mean if you find out? The entire board of AHSA has been and continues to testify in court AGAINST that stated AHSA policy.

Seriously, you're starting to sound a little confused here.

Are you telling us that just because the board of directors does something individually you are OK with it as long as the AHSA name isn't directly attached?

Wow. That must be some SERIOUSLY good kool aid.

SuperNaut
November 11, 2008, 01:32 PM
I've been railing against Joyce Foundation astro-turf orgs like AHSA for years. I am gratified to see that the message is getting traction.

RPCVYemen, I understand some of your points but I think that it is clear that financial support for the AHSA is like financial support for the ACLU. You do not have control over what issue your money will fund. Therefore you run the very real risk of funding an anti-2a initiative by supporting these orgs.

Given this risk, the logical action would be to discontinue donations.

X-Rap
November 11, 2008, 01:35 PM
How many progun Republicans did AHSA endorse? Did they endorse Dear Leader?

Golden Hound
November 11, 2008, 01:36 PM
For that matter, show me one example where AHSA has pushed forward an agenda that is in any way, shape, or form geared toward advancing the rights of gun owners. Just because they state support for about four very obvious boilerplate and "common sense" views on gun ownership says absolutely zero about how many yards they've carried the RKBA football on the field. In fact, their support of bans on so-called "assault weapons" and rifles chambered in .50 BMG shows that they're carrying it in the wrong direction

If you're going to use the sports analogy, the AHSA is like the 1919 White Sox - paid off by gangsters to lose the game. The AHSA is paid off by (political) gangsters to try to undermine the RKBA. To throw the ball to the other team.

SuperNaut
November 11, 2008, 01:41 PM
I have to add that real grassroots organizations like the NRA do not dry up and blow away unless their members dry up and blow away (regardless of which way the political winds blow). Astro-turf orgs on the other hand have no real membership and will vanish as soon as their parent organization feels they are no longer of use.

IOW on a completely practical level, since your donations mean nothing to them, donations to a mask organization like the AHSA are a complete waste of money.

SDDL-UP
November 11, 2008, 02:53 PM
RPCVYemen - please review post #4 by TexasRifleman if you think that the AHSA doesn't want to at least exterminate gun ownership.

Sorry you were offended, but I take gun ownership and our Second Amendment very seriously. I actually don't think it's a silly comparison at all, sorry if anyone is offended but I couldn't think of a better analogy that more people would understand.

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 03:09 PM
Sorry you were offended, but I take gun ownership and our Second Amendment very seriously.
Exactly. Ultimately, people's property, freedom and lives are at stake here.

In terms of gun rights, AHSA wants the entire United States to be Chicago. The answer is "no, I refuse, absolutely". That could cost me my freedom or my life. I'm not going to put up with dishonest word games about "banning" vs. "confiscation". It's simply despicable.

In terms of honesty, AHSA is of a kind with the Institute for Historical Review. This is the gun control version of "no showers at Auschwitz". Nobody's buying it. It's insulting that anyone would think that anyone would. That is the measure of just how MUCH contempt AHSA has for gun owners at large.

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 03:19 PM
RPCVYemen, I understand some of your points but I think that it is clear that financial support for the AHSA is like financial support for the ACLU.

Odd you should bring that up - I am also a card carrying member of the ACLU. And I am very happy that more and more ACLU state chapters are fighting for gun rights.

I took an oath on a clear sunny day more than two decades ago in the dusty city of Sana'a, Yemen:

I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge my duties in the Peace Corps.

In my opinion, that oath did not end when I completed my term of service two years later. It is still binding.


The most serious enemies of the Constitution in my lifetime are domestic.

[I don't intend to enter into political discussion about the following paragraph - that's off topic on THR. I enclose it solely to elucidate my thinking about the AHSA and the NRA.]

Kim Il Jung does not believe in the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment - but he had no power to suspend due process. The domestic enemies of the Constitution did that. Saddam Hussein does not believe in the 4th Amendment, but he had no power to suspend the 4th Amendment. The domestic enemies of the Constitution did that. Osama bin Laden does not believe in the separation of Church and State - but he had no power to breach the wall between Church and State. The domestic enemies of the Constitution did that. And the list goes on and on and on.

So for the last 20 years or so, if I wanted to support RKBA rights, my only choice was to give money to an organization (the NRA) that funneled that money to the most serious enemies our Constitution has faced in my lifetime - the domestic enemies. Those are the very enemies I swore to uphold the Constitution against!

As a purely hypothetical :) , suppose a candidate believes in the RKBA and also believes that American citizens should be denied liberty without due process when due process is inconvenient for the government - despite the Fifth Amendment. It's not possible to designate that your money should only support his RKBA stand. If you give him money for his RKBA stand, you are also supporting his desecration of the Fifth Amendment.

I am happy to have the choice to donate money to an organization that has a public policy of support for the Second Amendment and will no longer fund those domestic enemies of the Bill of Rights. I am not 100% happy with their policies - particularly the 50 BMG nonsense - so I did not join. The NRA tactics against Obama, and the clout that I expect the AHSA to have with the incoming administration tipped the balance in their favor.

That's fundamentally why I am a gun owner and a member of the AHSA.

Mike

Justin
November 11, 2008, 03:24 PM
The Democrats have been in power for two years, and so far as I know, haven't even made a half-hearted attempt to undo all of the stupid, unconstitutional stuff that the Republicans have instituted.

Your beliefs are plainly flawed.

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 03:30 PM
The Democrats have been in power for two years, and so far as I know, haven't even made a half-hearted attempt to undo all of the stupid, unconstitutional stuff that the Republicans have instituted.


Obama's team is trying to figure out how to clean up one of them - a little south of the mainland. But that's off topic in THR.

Mike

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 03:30 PM
And I am very happy that more and more ACLU state chapters are fighting for gun rights.
I recall exactly ONE. What are the others?

Grayrider
November 11, 2008, 03:32 PM
Dawn those waskly Wepublicans!

Sorry Mr. Fudd, I could not resist...

John

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 03:40 PM
RPCVYemen, maybe you should go read the first post of this thread:

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=400129

But I guess you will just say that ISRA is a puppet of the Republicans right?
This is getting old, you're clearly uneducated on how all this works and you've had the AHSA Kool Aid so you believe what you will.

Off to more productive things.

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 03:47 PM
Off to more productive things.
Exposing lies is always productive.

SuperNaut
November 11, 2008, 03:53 PM
Odd you should bring that up - I am also a card carrying member of the ACLU.

Not odd at all, I already knew that you are a card-carrying member. I used to be as well.

And I am very happy that more and more ACLU state chapters are fighting for gun rights.

1 ≠ more and more.

I'll state it again, you cannot control what your donations to the AHSA (or the ACLU) will be used for. There is a real risk that those donations will be used to fund anti-2a initiatives.

It is becoming clear that you view the AHSA as an alternative to the NRA, this view is simply false. The AHSA is a front for the virulently anti-gun Joyce Foundation. It is staffed by anti-gun advocates and ex-Handgun Control Inc. operatives. Its goal is to spread FUD and offer a faux-middle ground and therefore divide gun advocates. To fund such an organization isn't funding an alternative to the NRA it is funding an organization whose ultimate goal is the abolition of the Second Amendment.

Posting the bullet-points from their website proves nothing other than the quality of the mask they wear.

hso
November 11, 2008, 03:54 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/11/11/obama.gun.sales/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 04:11 PM
Exposing lies is always productive.

Not when the person being lied to isn't listening :)

But yes, I agree with you 100%

Eyesac
November 11, 2008, 04:39 PM
RPCVYemen, your lack of skepticism of the AHSA is amazing. So much so that I donít think youíre being truthful. Youíve either swallowed their coolaid completely, or youíre attempting to deceive people on their behalf on a pro-gun forum. Both are equally embarrassing. It's not worth arguing with you because you are either one or the other. I'll say one thing and that is at the very least this is another thread that brings more AHSA awarness...

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 05:07 PM
The AHSA is a front for the virulently anti-gun Joyce Foundation.

It must be interesting to live in a world of "fronts" and "hidden policies" and "secret agenda" - sort of like a pulp spy novel.

Either the AHSA will take actions commensurate with its stated policies, or it will not. Since its members likely chose to join based on those policies, if the AHSA does not take actions commensurate with its stated policies, either the members will leave or there will be a purge (another neat Cold War term like "front") as per the ACLU in 1940.

Mike

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 05:08 PM
I'll say one thing and that is at the very least this is another thread that brings more AHSA awarness...
The good thing about AHSA is that it's advocates display arrogance and contempt for other gun owners to such an extreme degree that it naturally offends real gun owners and supporters of the 2nd Amendment. People dislike being lied to. They REALLY dislike being lied to as though they were mentally handicapped children. And that's exactly what the AHSA types do when they deny AHSA and Obama's PUBLICLY stated positions, and especially when they try to parse words like Holocaust deniers. They're their own worst enemeis and I sincerely encourage them to keep at it.

AHSA and the NFA before it are like the cavalcade of neo-Nazi organizations. The names and initials change, but the lies never do.

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 05:19 PM
It must be interesting to live in a world of "fronts" and "hidden policies" and "secret agenda" - sort of like a pulp spy novel.
It must be interesting to live in a world where up is down, black is white, and lies are truth. It must in fact be like being a Holocaust denier. Deny the undeniable, parse words, lie by omission; but despite your best efforts, the truth remains the same. It must be as frustrating for you as it is for guys like Ernst Zundel and William Pierce.

Strangely, just as you futilely attempt to gull gun owners into supporting their own oppression and destruction, neo-Nazis regularly try to recruit in gun related usnenet newsgroups and discussion boards. Oddly, they're no more successful than AHSA is... yet you both keep trying... and failing miserably.

The National Alliance was followed by the National Vanguard, which will doubtless be followed by some other Holocaust "truth" con game. The NFA was followed by AHSA. What name will you be using when AHSA dries up and blows away like the National Alliance, the National Vanguard and the National Firearms Association?

SuperNaut
November 11, 2008, 05:35 PM
It must be interesting to live in a world of "fronts" and "hidden policies" and "secret agenda" - sort of like a pulp spy novel.

If it were at all hidden you might have a point. But the Joyce Foundation thinks so little of the intelligence of AHSA donors, that they don't even bother hiding this info. I find it interesting that you would feel the need to attempt to marginalize the connection between anti-gun groups and the AHSA as tinfoil.

Why is that?

HIcarry
November 11, 2008, 05:38 PM
You know at least one - or have read his posts (or are reading his post as we speak).

Mike

Is this the same Mike who posted on Democratic Underground (DU) that he had spoken to Ray Schoenke before the election?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x188822

Just curious...

SuperNaut
November 11, 2008, 05:54 PM
Anyone who even remotely believes RPCVYemen's claims please google:

John Rosenthal, Stop Handgun Violence

Ray Schoenke, Handgun Control Inc.

Bob Ricker

Joseph J. Vince, Jr., Crime Gun Solutions

Washington State Bill SB-5197

"I see our issues as complementary to theirs (AHSA)"

Also check out these "hidden" data points (http://www.gunlawnews.org/asha.html) about the AHSA.

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 05:56 PM
Anyone who even remotely believes RPCVYemen's claims please google:

Oh I think by now he's all alone in this one. Even he knows the truth about this group he just isn't admitting it for whatever reason.

They didn't even try very hard to hide it with a board made of people like that. It's a who's who of HCI.

bdickens
November 11, 2008, 05:56 PM
Well, all you chickens who voted for Colonel Sanders: I hope he breads you up real good before he drops you in that hot grease. Maybe it won't burn so bad.

mgregg85
November 11, 2008, 05:56 PM
A gun owner who is a member of AHSA and thinks they may do some good is sort of like a Jew in 1930's Germany donating money to the Nazis because they've built nice autobahnen and the VW is kind of cute too.

Larrye, I love it, I think I just found my new sig line.

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 06:03 PM
They didn't even try very hard to hide it with a board made of people like that.
The old National Firearms Association was exactly the same, probably even with some of the same people.

It's like a "civil rights" organization with David Duke, William Pierce, the Rev. Richard Butler and Matt Hale on the board of directors.

AHSA ought to get together with VPC, Stop Handgun Violence, the Brady Organization, and the Million Mom March to put on a "gun rights" conference. Maybe President Ahmadinejad of Iran would be willing to host it in Teheran...

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 06:06 PM
Is this the same Mike who posted on Democratic Underground (DU) that he had spoken to Ray Schoenke before the election?

Now that's funny. I guess Mike must be a less common first name than I thought. I guess I am responsible for all posts on the Internet by anyone named Mike?

Just for the record, I don't know that the Democratic Underground is, and have never posted there. I assume that it's some kind of Democratic Party site?

Mike

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 06:07 PM
Oh I think by now he's all alone in this one. Even he knows the truth about this group he just isn't admitting it for whatever reason.

Never been much influences by group think. I guess thinking for myself is now a weakness. :)

Mike

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 06:09 PM
Never been much influences by group think. I guess thinking for myself is now a weakness.

Oh you are clearly not thinking for yourself. You have so far refused to talk about the issues I've brought up about the entire board of directors of AHSA working consistently against firearm owners for a very long time. You simply repeat the party line as you've been led to believe it.

Instead you play word game with "ban" and "confiscate".

That you refuse to discuss it or defend their actions tells plenty.

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 06:10 PM
Never been much influences by group think. I guess thinking for myself is now a weakness.
Thinking that 2+2=5, that there was no Holocaust, or that Obama and AHSA aren't hysterically anti-gun... and cravenly dishonest about it, is nothing to be proud of, whether you do it alone or in a group.

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 06:10 PM
I think that when all that is left is personal attacks, the thread has run its course.

Mike

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 06:11 PM
I think that when all that is left is personal attacks, the thread has run its course.

And you see one of those where?

That's what I thought.

When you can no longer defend your position the only move left is to claim personal attacks and walk away.

mljdeckard
November 11, 2008, 06:12 PM
You have clearly demonstrated that you are willing to talk yourself into believing anything a pro-Obama organization tells you.

Deanimator
November 11, 2008, 06:13 PM
I think that when all that is left is personal attacks, the thread has run its course.
So, what's Obama's position on handgun and CCW bans?

What's AHSA's?

How many board members does AHSA share with various anti-gun groups?

The thread won't ACTUALLY have run its course until the maximum number of gun owners realize how AHSA is attempting to deceive them.

TX1911fan
November 11, 2008, 06:22 PM
Looks to me like RPCVYemen hates the Republican party more than he loves the Second Amendment. And he sure talks a good game about Constitutional rights being "destroyed" to then make fun of people speaking of "fronts" and "conspiracies." To hear him talk about the Republican party, we should all be locked up without a trial. They love to trot out the Patriot Act and other supposed mis-deeds of the Republicans but cannot point to one AMERICAN who has had those rights violated without due process. Instead, they deflect and point to Guantanamo, where ENEMY COMBATANTS are detained and scream about lost Constitutional Rights.

SuperNaut
November 11, 2008, 06:26 PM
I think that when all that is left is personal attacks, the thread has run its course.

LOL, I suppose that is one way to avoid backing up assertions! I hope you don't leave the thread RPCVYemen, I'm expecting some data from you that refutes mine.

Justin
November 11, 2008, 06:28 PM
I think that when all that is left is personal attacks, the thread has run its course.

You've plainly failed to address many valid points brought up by those in this thread, including myself.

Larry Ashcraft
November 11, 2008, 06:29 PM
I think that when all that is left is personal attacks, the thread has run its course.
You'll have to point it out, I guess I missed it. I do see some piling-on, but it looks deserved to me.

SuperNaut
November 11, 2008, 06:32 PM
RPCVYemen's attempt to mischaracterize my (now supported) claims as tinfoil is the first ad-hom AFAICT. So I must conclude he was referring to his own behavior.

Dain Bramage
November 11, 2008, 06:55 PM
I've checked the AHSA website in vain for any of the policy issues that RPCVYemen supports. They must only be available to the multitude of members. I guess I have to get the official can and string to join that network.

It is interesting that their blog entries have comment buttons on the bottom, but they are all turned off. The only feedback they allow is to join or send money. Nice.

Slotback
November 11, 2008, 07:01 PM
What Justin said.

Dain Bramage
November 11, 2008, 07:02 PM
Also, from the content of this string, I'm finally figuring out what "RPCVYemen" means. "PCV" = Peace Corps Volunteer. Yemen is the country he/she volunteered in. I don't know about the "R". P'rolly means "Republican". :D

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 07:40 PM
You've plainly failed to address many valid points brought up by those in this thread, including myself.

I have answered the objections to the stated policies of the AHSA - the only one being an objection to the 50 BMG ban. I happen to think that's a bad policy.

What valid points did you bring up about the publicly stated polices of the AHSA that I did not answer?

I may have missed them in the deluge of post - if I did so, I apologize, and ask you to either re-post them, or refer to those posts.

I am not in any way obligated to try and defend any hypothetical policies, secret agendas assertion or conspiracy theories.

Mike

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 07:42 PM
Also, from the content of this string, I'm finally figuring out what "RPCVYemen" means. "PCV" = Peace Corps Volunteer. Yemen is the country he/she volunteered in. I don't know about the "R". P'rolly means "Republican".

Close - "Returned Peace Corps Volunteer". It's the term for those of us who completed service and returned to the US - which I did after 18 months in Mogadishu.

Mike

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 07:45 PM
I do see some piling-on, but it looks deserved to me.

.., and cravenly dishonest about it, is nothing to be proud of, whether you do it alone or in a group.

You don't consider an accusation of craven dishonesty a personal attack?

Mike

Eyesac
November 11, 2008, 08:07 PM
I am not in any way obligated to try and defend any hypothetical policies, secret agendas assertion or conspiracy theories What!? Did you google anything anyone told you to google? Just Wikipedia it if that's too hard. Look at the founders. Look at their previous jobs. Look at where the moneys coming from. This doesn't even require one min of research to figure out whats going on. As far as secret agendas... You should know by now that not everything is what it seems when anti gun political lobbiests are involved...

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 08:48 PM
I have answered the objections to the stated policies of the AHSA - the only one being an objection to the 50 BMG ban. I happen to think that's a bad policy.

OK, plain and simple questions, no secrets or tinfoil.

Do you or do you not dispute the documented fact that the majority of the members of AHSA board of directors are and have been contributors of large sums of money to HCI/Brady Campaign.

Do you or do you not dispute the documented fact that several board members of AHSA have testified AGAINST gun manufacturers in several state lawsuits, in direct conflict with the stated objectives of AHSA.


If you cannot dispute these things (which you can't since it's all well known public record) then how can you say that AHSA will attempt to fulfill its stated objectives when the very board that leads it does not do so? What is your justification for believing that these people will act on behalf of AHSA in 100% conflict with their personal actions?

Very simple questions. 2 of them yes or no and one asking for a short statement. No tinfoil, no conspiracy, no BS.

Just honesty. You got it in you?

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 08:50 PM
What!? Did you google anything anyone told you to google? Just Wikipedia it if that's too hard. Look at the founders.

Post #80 answered all the secret agenda, conspiracy and front theories. What part of it did you not understand or object to?

I'll quote myself so you won't even have to page back:

Either the AHSA will take actions commensurate with its stated policies, or it will not. Since its members likely chose to join based on those policies, if the AHSA does not take actions commensurate with its stated policies, either the members will leave or there will be a purge (another neat Cold War term like "front") as per the ACLU in 1940.

Mike

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 08:54 PM
How can you say that AHSA will attempt to fulfill its stated objectives when the very board that leads it does not do so?

See post #80 or post #112.

Do you really think that gun owners who join AHSA because of its publicly stated policy will somehow not notice if AHSA implements a secret anti-gun agenda?

Mike

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 08:58 PM
Since its members likely chose to join based on those policies, if the AHSA does not take actions commensurate with its stated policies, either the members will leave or there will be a purge (another neat Cold War term like "front") as per the ACLU in 1940.

Let's do some simple math shall we?

AHSA has published that it's yearly operating budget is $500,000.

If we assume they spend 100% of it, that means that they need $500,000 a year income. At a membership dues level of $25 that would mean that, at a minimum, AHSA would have at least 20,000 dues paying members each year.

Robert Ricker,Executive Director, has publicly stated a membership number of between 100 and 150 members. (that's $3750 at most)

Ricker went on to state that the majority of AHSA operating funds come from contributions from the board of directors itself.

So, that leaves 2 things:

1) They don't need members therefore there will be no "purge" since members don't matter and

2) The Board of Directors actions and incomes are 100% opposed to AHSA's published objectives yet they spend their own money to fund the organization.

Those are facts, most of them hard to dispute since they came from the Director of AHSA himself.

That leaves the question, why would these people spend nearly half a million dollars a year on an organization that is 100% opposed to their personal beliefs?

I'll leave that one for discussion.

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 08:59 PM
Do you really think that gun owners who join AHSA because of its publicly stated policy will somehow not notice if AHSA implements a secret anti-gun agenda?

That is clearly answered in my post #114, members do not matter since less than $4000 of AHSA's $500,000 operating budget comes from members.

You have still not answered my question,

how can you say that AHSA will attempt to fulfill its stated objectives when the very board that leads it does not do so? What is your justification for believing that these people will act on behalf of AHSA in 100% conflict with their personal actions?

By the way, all of Rickers answers concerning AHSA were given in court under oath so let's not have any of this "it's all lies" stuff shall we?

Larry Ashcraft
November 11, 2008, 09:05 PM
secret anti-gun agenda
Nothing secret about it. The AHSA is AN ANTI-GUN ORGANIZATION!

They pulled the wool over your eyes. You can believe what you want, that the NRA should have backed Obama because he was winning, that "some guns" and "some rights" should be given up for "the common good".

Believe it all you want. It's your right.

But don't try to sell that crap here.

hksw
November 11, 2008, 09:07 PM
The NRA bet on the wrong horse in this election,...

Hahaha. I remember back in '92 on my drive in to work, the subject of who folks were going to vote for came up on a local radio show. One guy called in and said (paraphrasing), 'I wait until the last minutes when the polls are open so I can watch and see who is in the lead. That way, I can go into the polling place and vote for the who is going to win.' I laughed my butt off. Talk about a man with conviction.

Hahahaha.

rbernie
November 11, 2008, 09:10 PM
RPCVYemen - you clearly believe that you've earned yourself a spot at the table via your association (donation) to AHSA. So if/when the AHSA does not prove satisfying to you as a RKBA rights group, how will you exert your influence? Will you participate in AHSA BoD nominations, and vote in BoD members more in line with the face you want for AHSA?

In short - how exactly do you intend to exert and measure your level of influence, and what will you do if AHSA proves to be less that satisfying in their RKBA lobbying?

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 09:52 PM
RPCVYemen - you clearly believe that you've earned yourself a spot at the table via your association (donation) to AHSA. So if/when the AHSA does not prove satisfying to you as a RKBA rights group, how will you exert your influence? Will you participate in AHSA BoD nominations, and vote in BoD members more in line with the face you want for AHSA?


Exactly what I was thinking of - thought I'd state it more like "vote in BoD members more in line with the stated policy of the AHSA."

Mike

Owen
November 11, 2008, 09:54 PM
So let me get this straight RCPVYemen. The NRA is compromised because the Republicans lost the presidential election.

In response, you join a front for the Brady campaign. Of the dozens and dozens of pro-gun orgs you could have thrown money at, you picked an anti-gun group. Smooth.

bannockburn
November 11, 2008, 09:55 PM
Nothing secret about it. The AHSA is AN ANTI-GUN ORGANIZATION!

Believe it all you want. It's your right.

But don't try to sell that crap here.

Thank you Larry; my feelings exactly.

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 10:02 PM
that the NRA should have backed Obama because he was winning

I have stated multiple times in this thread that I did not expect the NRA or endorse Obama over John McCain. Their political miss-step was in the vitriol and deception the used. The could have pointed to his personal preference for an extension of the AWB, and endorsed McCain. But hey didn't do that - see factcheck.org.

Mike

Justin
November 11, 2008, 10:07 PM
McCain opposed the renewal of the ban on so-called "assault weapons."

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 10:08 PM
The NRA is compromised because the Republicans lost the presidential election.

No the NRA is compromised because of its continual enthusiastic support of politicians who want to undermine the Constitution of the United States.

When I found a pro-gun organization (defined as an organization who's publicly stated verifiable policy is pro-gun) that did not support politicians who want to undermine the Constitution of the United States, I started looking at them.

The lies about Obama and the subsequent likely loss of influence were the tipping factors that led me to plunk down my $25.

Mike

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 10:15 PM
McCain opposed the renewal of the ban on so-called "assault weapons."

One of the many reasons I supported John McCain until he picked a running mate so obvious unqualified to be President and so obviously a Christian theocrat that she's probably not real sure of the difference between the Ten Commandments and the Bill of Rights.

I gave enough money to McCain to get an autographed picture of he and Cindy mailed to me.

I never gave any money to Obama - I am not a big fan. But he's a better choice than a Christian demagogue who couldn't name a single Supreme Court case other than Rove v Wade - not even Heller?

Mike

Owen
November 11, 2008, 10:30 PM
what lies did the NRA tell about Obama?

The Deer Hunter
November 11, 2008, 10:33 PM
I just don't think that animals even exists

I can assure you sir, they do.

Larry Ashcraft
November 11, 2008, 10:41 PM
No the NRA is compromised because of its continual enthusiastic support of politicians who want to undermine the Constitution of the United States.
WHAT???

138 years and counting.

As I said before, don't try to sell your crap here. We're not buying.

jahwarrior
November 11, 2008, 10:53 PM
No the NRA is compromised because of its continual enthusiastic support of politicians who want to undermine the Constitution of the United States.

When I found a pro-gun organization (defined as an organization who's publicly stated verifiable policy is pro-gun) that did not support politicians who want to undermine the Constitution of the United States, I started looking at them.

The lies about Obama and the subsequent likely loss of influence were the tipping factors that led me to plunk down my $25.

wow. it seems you've suffered a quantum shift, because your reality is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay different from the reality the rest of us are experiencing.

what lies about Obama did you find that the rest of us missed?

what exactly did the AHSA do to support the 2A that the NRA and GOA did not?

and exactly how far does your head go in there?

Explorer1
November 11, 2008, 11:10 PM
These clowns claim to support conservation. Please name me 3 things they have accomplised above claiming they support conservation.

Just like his Self-appointed Highness ObamaOne, the accomplishment list is MUCH MUCH shorter than the promises! Actually more accurately described as ZILCH!

As for "implying that Obama was insincere, or a liar." The man is a smooth talking politican, the ONLY thing he is sincere about is his gaining as much power as he can gather. If this is not true, why are all his records sealed? Along with the majority of this wife's?

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 11:16 PM
Just like his Self-appointed Highness ObamaOne, ...

Now that's off the wall wacky. Did you sleep through last Tuesday? It seems like the American pretty definitively appointed Barack Obama to be President of the United States in open and fair elections. Whatever he is, he's not self-appointed.

Mike

RPCVYemen
November 11, 2008, 11:39 PM
As I said before, don't try to sell your crap here. We're not buying.

Repeatedly calling an statement fecal matter is not exactly a powerful rebuttal. I am not trying to sell anything here. This thread questions (implicitly I grant) whether one can be gun owner and a member of the AHSA. I am both, and explained why I was both.

To sum up where I think we are - and I don't sense that there's much else to say:


I joined the AHSA because I supported or did not object to 4 out of 5 of their publicly stated verifiable policy positions, and I am sick of the NRA support pf politicians who seek to undermine the Constitution I revere and swore to uphold.
A number of you believe that the AHSA had some secret agenda, and you object to that secret agenda.
I object to the secret agenda you specify, but I don't think the AHSA has a secret agenda - or that the AHSA will be able maintain a secret agenda against the wishes of its members.


I do in fact find the notion of a secret agenda to publicly lobby for in opposition to a stated pubic policy nothing short of wacky. I would not (and have not) called it tinfoil thinking, but it's a little strange. Don't you think that the folks who joined the AHSA because of its stated policy will notice if the AHSA fulminates against those very same policies? Or are all of us in on the conspiracy as well?

Will the members somehow not notice if the AHSA suddenly starts to lobby against S. 397, for example?

Mike

rbernie
November 11, 2008, 11:49 PM
I'd state it more like "vote in BoD members more in line with the stated policy of the AHSAAnd have you determined that the BoD is elected by the members at large? Or are you assuming that to be true?

I think that you will be very disappointed to find that your seat at the table is meaningless, because the BoD of AHSA is not established by the 150 members it claims and are not in any way accountable to the 'members' of AHSA.

You, and the other one hundred and forty nine members they claim, exist solely as a pawn to further their charade.

Enjoy the fruits of that.

TexasRifleman
November 11, 2008, 11:55 PM
Will the members somehow not notice if the AHSA suddenly starts to lobby against S. 397, for example?

First of all, S397 is already law. Second, members of the board of directors of AHSA have acted in direct opposition to S397 by testifying AGAINST gun manufacturers.

I'm still waiting for you to answer my ONE question about the finances of AHSA from earlier.

It's getting just plain funny now by the way when you propose that the members of AHSA could influence who sits on the board, that's seriously funny right there.....

RPCVYemen
November 12, 2008, 12:23 AM
And have you determined that the BoD is elected by the members at large? Or are you assuming that to be true?


I am in fact assuming that the board of directors are repsponsible to the membership - that there will be some mechanism for electing the BoD.

Do you have a citation of some kind that disproves that assumption?

Mike

RPCVYemen
November 12, 2008, 12:28 AM
I'm still waiting for you to answer my ONE question about the finances of AHSA from earlier.

Actually, you posted 2 questions in post #110, and I answered both fully in #112 (though #112 has a typo - it should refer to #111, not itself).

Did you pose another question that I have not answered?

Mike

Jeff White
November 12, 2008, 12:29 AM
This has gone on long enough. Neither side is going to change the other sides mind.....

If you enjoyed reading about "Do you know of any GUN OWNERS who are AHSA members?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!