Lies in Brady Campaign's 2003-10-22 NYT ad... any recourse?


PDA






tyme
December 21, 2003, 12:53 AM
Was it Brady Campaign or Brady Center (nonprofit) that funded this ad?
http://www.stopthenra.com/site/DocServer/AssaultWeaponsAd.pdf

Text of ad (lies and suspected lies are in bold):
12 SLUGS IN A COP’S BODY. AS FAST AS YOU CAN SAY “NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION.”
POLICE OFFICERS ON YOUR STREETS WILL SOON BE OUTGUNNED BY FAST, EFFICIENT COP-KILLING MACHINES THAT HAVE BEEN BANNED FOR A DECADE, IF THE NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION GETS ITS WAY.

Can you believe this? The NRA wants military-style rapid-fire assault rifles—weapons of choice of violent gangs and drug traffickers—made legal again. And the Republican Congress is going along.

They’ve taken dead aim on the 1994 federal assault weapons ban. They want to wipe it from the books.

The deadly weapons used in the Stockton schoolyard massacre, the Columbine killings and the D.C. sniper murders— UZIs, AK-47s and dozens more, loaded with vicious features like 50-round ammunition clips, pistol grips for rapid hip-firing, silencers and even grenade launchers—will all be legal if the NRA gets its way.

Haven’t our police officers sacrificed enough?
Every major law enforcement agency in America—from chiefs of police to sheriffs to rank-and-file cops on the beat—fought hard to get the 1994 assault weapons ban passed.

And polls show nearly 7 out of 10 Americans want to keep the ban in place. But the NRA doesn’t care what the public or police think—only about achieving its extremist goals.

A special interest out of control
From the day George W. Bush took power, the NRA has bragged about having its own office in the White House. No wonder so many of us fear our country has veered off course!

The President treats the NRA like a fourth branch of government. Spending more than $50 million on political campaigns during the last two elections, the NRA bullies Congress to do its bidding again and again. But this time it’s gone too far.

We can rein in the zealots at the NRA.
The NRA has flat-out lost touch with the American people. You know and every law enforcement officer in America knows: the 1994 assault weapons ban saved lives. It must be renewed and strengthened.

Go to our website:
STOPtheNRA.com Go to our website now or clip this coupon. Sign our petition and give what you can to help us reach or exceed our goal: 10,000 signatures and $1 million to keep the heat on Congress and beat back this latest attack by the NRA.
Isn't there some way to get them in trouble for an ad like that?

If you enjoyed reading about "Lies in Brady Campaign's 2003-10-22 NYT ad... any recourse?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
jimpeel
December 21, 2003, 12:59 AM
stopthenra.com is funded and operated by the Brady bunch.The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence (Brady Campaign) and the Brady Center to Prevent Handgun Violence (Brady Center) have created this privacy statement to inform site visitors of the Brady Campaign and the Brady Center's data collection and storage practices, and guidelines for use of visitor data. This privacy statement covers practices related to www.bradycampaign.org, www.bradycenter.org, www.stategunlaws.org, www.gunlawsuits.org, www.millionmommarch.org, www.stopthenra.com , www.nrablacklist.org, www.nramadness.org and any other Web pages associated with these primary domains.

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence United with Million Mom March has retained Public Interest Communications, a paid professional fundraiser located at 7700 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22043, to conduct this program on our behalf. The telephone number of Public Interest Communications is (703) 847-8300.

RKCheung
December 21, 2003, 01:05 AM
Disgusting :cuss: :fire: :barf:

voilsb
December 21, 2003, 01:23 AM
Wow, talk about sensationalism! The only thing their ad is lacking is the news article where Batboy robs a Ma & Pa store with an "Assault Weapon" so he can afford his dowry for Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, who are in reality the same person!

Geech
December 21, 2003, 01:30 AM
Nothing there looks like defamation, so I don't really think there's anything to do about it except for trying to educate people when you get the chance.

Harry Tuttle
December 21, 2003, 01:38 AM
considering that the times and the post failed to cover the press conference on this issue that Diaz held 2 weeks ago,
i find it quite amusing that they are forced to pay full tariff for their full page

tyme
December 21, 2003, 01:39 AM
Jimpeel, yes, but they're split just like the NRA and the ACLU into a legislative/lobbying organization and non-profit organization. I'm curious which one funded this ad, since I'm not sure whether it counts as lobbying (in which case it would, of course, be the lobbying side doing the funding).

Okay, looking it over some more, it looks like there might be three organizations:
"Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence United with Million Mom March" (lobbying)
"Brady Campaign" (lobbying)
"Brady Center" (501c)

If that's correct, the first one funded the ad. Aren't such lobbying entities prohibited from making known-false statements?

Cool Hand Luke 22:36
December 21, 2003, 03:50 AM
What crap. :fire:

The KGB would have had nothing on Sarah Brady for to ability to cook up raw propaganda and half-truths.

Where is the countering Ad from the NRA? :confused:

Nightfall
December 21, 2003, 07:42 AM
...silencers and even grenade launchers...

The rest of the lies are bad enough, but now they're telling people in public ad campaigns that the AWB covers 'silencers' and grenade launchers!! Think of how many people are being misled into imagining suppressors and 40mm ‘nade launchers by this propaganda.

Jeez-o-flip, it's 7:30 in the morning and I'm already mad as hell. I swear I'm going to die of a heart attack at 19 years old if I keep reading this crap... :fire: :cuss: :banghead:

TheOtherOne
December 21, 2003, 08:16 AM
Where is the countering Ad from the NRA?What I want to know is if the New York Times would even run an ad from the NRA?

BTR
December 21, 2003, 08:25 AM
Well, it's my understanding the ATF counts a "silencer" as an evil feature, 'cause it does reduce muzzle flash... and rifle-grenade launcher attachements on the end of rifles are an evil feature (like those on a yugo sks).

Mark Tyson
December 21, 2003, 08:44 AM
Since making outrageous, unsupportable lies is not against the law, there's nothing we can do except to tell the truth.

CaesarI
December 22, 2003, 02:39 AM
lessee...

They haven't been "banned for a decade" just the manufacture of new ones.

Stockton was pre-ban
Columbine stuff was all post ban, and only one of their guns was "evil" looking. And it wasn't the most effective gun they used either.
DC Sniper's weapon was a post-ban weapon it was legal under the law.

AK-47s and Uzis are strictly regulated by the 1934 NFA

There is no such thing as a 50 round ammunition "clip"

I know cops who oppose the 1994 AW ban

I received one of their polls via fax. No real surveyer would EVER consider this a question that is likely to result in a honest answer. It was more leading than a man on a dance floor.

There is NO evidence that the 1994 AW ban saved a single life.

-Morgan

GigaBuist
December 22, 2003, 04:22 AM
pistol grips for rapid hip-firing

Does anybody know where they get thos notion? I'd love to find the person responsible (or anybody in the Brandy Bunch that beleives it) -- toss a paper plate up at 10 yards and let them try their hip-shot tricks to show the world just how deadly it really is.

... then proceed to make better marks with a bolt action rifle in the same amount of time it takes DiFi or whoever to unload 30 rounds from an AR or AK.

Nightfall,

Actually the AWB does concern grenade launchers. They're one of the evil features. There's nothing wrong with owning a flare launcher -- it all depends on the type of ammunition you put into it. Smoke bombs and signaling flares are prefectly legal things to toy with out of your 37mm launcher. I'm no expert on the matter but IIRC a 37mm launcher is a 37mm launcher -- it doesn't care what the projectile is. That flare gun somebody's got on a sail boat will happily launch a grenade if that's what you stuff into it.


Silencers, in a round about way, are addressed.... the threaded barrel restriction. A threaded barrel will let you screw on a flash supressor, sound supressor, or muzzle brake. Currently you can affix a muzzle brake permanently to your barrel (I don't know if the set-screws are legal) but you can't thread the barrel and use a brake like most militaries do.

Oh, and how come they aren't ranting on and on about the evil BAYONET LUGs that will return to fill the streets with blood?

glocksman
December 22, 2003, 06:38 AM
12 SLUGS IN A COP’S BODY. AS FAST AS YOU CAN SAY “NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION.”

Would that cop be any less dead with 10 slugs (postban magazine) in his body as fast as you can say 'Sarah Brady'? :rolleyes:

Nightfall
December 22, 2003, 09:40 AM
I was under the impression that the AWB covered the mounting of a GL as a dreaded assault feature as you said, but took the ad as to state that ‘nade launchers were a completely banned item. Reading back, it doesn't really say that. The silencer part though... if they had said a threaded barrel to accept a ‘silencer', I would have made a different wise crack about the article. If they had said flash suppressor, okay. Instead they said silencers, which only refers to sound suppressors, and then said ‘will become legal if the NRA gets it's way'. That's beyond misleading, it's an outright lie.

P.S. When I say legal referring to sound suppressors, I mean ‘pick up off a gunshop shelf' legal. :p

Langenator
December 22, 2003, 10:27 AM
pistol grips for rapid hip-firing Does anybody know where they get this notion?

Up until this moment, I never realized how hard it is to find a good sized picture or Rambo (s)pray-firing his M60 one-handed...

Cool Hand Luke 22:36
December 22, 2003, 10:47 AM
GigaBuist wrote:

Does anybody know where they get thos notion? I'd love to find the person responsible (or anybody in the Brandy Bunch that beleives it) -- toss a paper plate up at 10 yards and let them try their hip-shot tricks to show the world just how deadly it really is.


Like the alien's in the movie "Galaxy Quest" they apparently researched the issue by carefully studying "Historical Documents" such as old telecasts of "The Rifleman," movies like "Rambo," "Predator," "The Terminator," etc...


Or maybe it's just more of Sarah Brady "Spray lying from the lip."

Mark Tyson
December 22, 2003, 11:01 AM
Why don't we purchase some ad space of our own debunking their lies? If we all chip in we could do it.

Russ
December 22, 2003, 11:05 AM
Nothing you can really do about these clowns. I was on my way to work this morining and there was some "comedian" on this radio show as a guest. He caught a case of diahrrea of the mouth and said the NRA wants everyone to be able to buy rocket launchers and other assorted heavy weaponry the local convenience market "without an ID". How can you fight the opinions of ignorant people other than to tell them the truth to which they don't listen. I guess in the end, it may come down to who has the most and biggest guns.

Harry Tuttle
December 22, 2003, 02:11 PM
we attempted twice to raise funds on TFL for a FOUP
Firearm Owners Unification Project
http://www.thefiringline.com/unite/

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=27757&highlight=foup

HBK
December 22, 2003, 06:57 PM
They lie, they cheat, they steal. When the facts prove them wrong, they change the facts. There is nothing that is beneath them. They represent the worst of humanity.

Geech
December 23, 2003, 02:41 AM
While the AWB may concern itself with silencers and grenade launchers, these items were already restricted by law, so that element is essentially redundant.

If you enjoyed reading about "Lies in Brady Campaign's 2003-10-22 NYT ad... any recourse?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!