AHSA Makes Their Stance Known
- Thread starter Phil DeGraves
- Start date
- Status
I'll try again, BTW. Big, so you don't miss it.
I'll repeat my previous question: cite me where the AHSA differs from the Brady Campaign on areas that are not moot, like the DC gun ban.
I'm curious to hear your response. Official positions, please, since you cannot have to both ways.
I'm sure there are differences, btw. I'm just not convinced they're substantive.
Mike
I'll repeat my previous question: cite me where the AHSA differs from the Brady Campaign on areas that are not moot, like the DC gun ban.
I'm curious to hear your response. Official positions, please, since you cannot have to both ways.
I'm sure there are differences, btw. I'm just not convinced they're substantive.
Mike
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
Oh wow! So AHSA supported Obama because he believes that in the event of a crisis, you should be able to defend yourself!
I mean, wow, it doesn't get much more pro-gun than claiming you have a right to defend yourself with a gun against people who might be trying to victimize you!
In all seriousness, that's not a pro-gun stance. It's common sense. And Obama's support for one pro-gunnish bill that would only apply in occasional and extreme dire circumstances does nothing to alleviate his voiced support for renewing the AWB, for outlawing concealed carry nationwide, for refusing to cut a break to people who defend themselves with a gun in their own home, and any number of other obviously anti-gun stances he's taken in the past.
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
Dodge.
Anti-gun organizations are not going to waste resources attacking things that are settled law.
Coronach's question still stands.
Supporting one pro-gun bill doesn't suddenly transform you into a fearless defender of the Second Amendment, no matter what AHSA and Obama claim.
Especially when you're on the record supporting things like a nationwide ban on concealed carry, reinstating the ban on so-called "assault weapons," support for requiring ammunition be microstamped, universal registration of guns, refusing to support a state law that would have created an affirmative defense for those who use a gun to defend themselves in their own home, and on and on and on and on.
So, what you honestly expect me to believe is that Obama is pro-gun because he cast one vote, and that his one vote somehow outweighs the rest of his record which is entirely and obviously anti-gun?
Really?!
Moot: adj a. Law Without legal significance, through having been previously decided or settled.
b. Of no practical importance; irrelevant.
Meaning, in this instance, SCOTUS has ruled the DC gun ban to be unconstitutional, so coming out in opposition to the DC gun ban is irrelevant. It's decided law. It's like waiting for the game to be over to place your bet. Obama, incidentally, has done the same thing. He was opposed all along to the DC gun ban, depite never saying much about it beforehand and abiding Chicago's nearly-identical ban for years and years without saying a word about it (but endorsing every other anti-gun proposition he could find).
So, I'll repeat the question again:
Cite me where the AHSA differs from the Brady Campaign on areas other than the DC gun ban.
Mike
The amendment in and of itself is. However, it is entirely unclear whether support by any given politician on the floor for the bill was because of the meat of the bill itself, the amendment itself, in spite of the meat of the bill itself, or in spite of the amendment itself, or some combination thereof.
Amending bills to put in sweeteners or poison pills is one of the things I despise about Washington, as it gives poitical cover to politicians of both sides and all stripes, and really makes it hard to discern who really supports what.
Mike
PS So, where does the AHSA differ from the Brady Campaign, on areas other than the DC gun ban?
Last edited:
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
Let me ask you this:
What has either AHSA or the Postmodern Messiah done to move gun rights forward? Where is the advocation for repealing the asinine restrictions on imported firearms that could inadvertently make you a felon if the US parts count in your gun is below some arbitrary number?
Where is the support for instituting nationwide recognition of concealed carry permits so they work the same way as drivers' licenses?
Where is the support for teaching basic gun safety in high school the same as driver's ed or sex ed?
Where is the support for actually forcing the city of Washington DC to abide by the Supreme Court's decision in Heller?
Where is the support to prohibit nuisance lawsuits against gun manufacturers?
Where is the support for the ODCMP?
Where is the support for Camp Perry? (Who here thinks the Postmodern Messiah will sign the certificates for the President's 100?)
Where is the support for protecting shooting ranges from being shut down by encroaching urban development?
Where is the support for repealing or rectifying the blatantly unjust ex post facto loss of gun rights forced on many under the Lautenberg amendment?
Where is the support for moving sound suppressors from NFA-regulated items to being no more heavily regulated than, say, handguns?
No one who is actually pro-gun would have a problem with many or even all of the above policies. So, if AHSA is so pro-gun, if the Postmodern Messiah is the second coming of Charlton Heston, where is the support for such things? Where is the repudiation of obviously and blatantly anti-gun voting records?
In short, much like the little old lady in the Wendy's commercial from years ago, where, I ask, is the beef?
What has either AHSA or the Postmodern Messiah done to move gun rights forward? Where is the advocation for repealing the asinine restrictions on imported firearms that could inadvertently make you a felon if the US parts count in your gun is below some arbitrary number?
Where is the support for instituting nationwide recognition of concealed carry permits so they work the same way as drivers' licenses?
Where is the support for teaching basic gun safety in high school the same as driver's ed or sex ed?
Where is the support for actually forcing the city of Washington DC to abide by the Supreme Court's decision in Heller?
Where is the support to prohibit nuisance lawsuits against gun manufacturers?
Where is the support for the ODCMP?
Where is the support for Camp Perry? (Who here thinks the Postmodern Messiah will sign the certificates for the President's 100?)
Where is the support for protecting shooting ranges from being shut down by encroaching urban development?
Where is the support for repealing or rectifying the blatantly unjust ex post facto loss of gun rights forced on many under the Lautenberg amendment?
Where is the support for moving sound suppressors from NFA-regulated items to being no more heavily regulated than, say, handguns?
No one who is actually pro-gun would have a problem with many or even all of the above policies. So, if AHSA is so pro-gun, if the Postmodern Messiah is the second coming of Charlton Heston, where is the support for such things? Where is the repudiation of obviously and blatantly anti-gun voting records?
In short, much like the little old lady in the Wendy's commercial from years ago, where, I ask, is the beef?
Too silly to answer - no matter how big the font. I don't really know that - maybe if it's re-posted with a bigger font, I will suddenly be struck with the wisdom of that question.But I doubt it.
A stated position of support for the 2nd Amendment combined the policies specified (with the exception of the .50 BMG nonsense) is fine with me.
The quote from the Columbus Dispatch had me nervous - until I found that Schoenke doesn't support an AWB ban.
If in the future, there is a move to reinstate the AWB, I will expect AHSA to speak up. I don't expect Obama to introduce an AWB, or to permit an AWB to make it out of committee. I don't care whether or not the AHSA speaks about legislation that will not be introduced for the next 8 years.
Mike
yeti
Member
I guess we all now have a good idea of what they haven't done, voiced a position against the AWB. Now exactly what HAVE they done to help support our gun rights?(I ask because I really do not know)
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
And on what basis do you take such a position?
Me too. I won't hold my breath, but I'd be delighted to find them on my side. I'm 100% serious.
I hope you're right. You may well be, but it won't be because of anything the AHSA has done.
You should, because by speaking out it would make it clear that even moderate gun groups (stipulating that AHSA qualifies) do not support an AWB, and thereby it makes any future AWB less likely.
Your positioning seems to be predicated upon two ideas:
1. AHSA is a pro gun group, and yet you cannot cite relevant positions that it holds which are at variance with the major anti-gun group in the USA.
2. Obama will not push for more gun control, despite his extremely extensive anti-gun history.
#1 is inexplicable, and #2 is just pure optimism. I'm also curious why you think he will not push for more gun control. Is it because it is always a losing issue for the dems, or something about Obama's beliefs?
LOL. Are you serious? You honestly think that an inability to articulate how a supposedly pro-rkba group substantively differs from the major anti-gun group is a silly question? This should be a very simple exercise. The fact that you cannot do it speaks volumes. To be fair, I'm not insulting you. I think you cannot do it because it cannot be done. Their positions are substantively identical.
What policies specified? Which ones? AHSA has already made one that you admit is anti and that you do not support. So, where are the pro positions? As to "a stated position of support for the 2nd Amendment", whatever. If that's your measure of a pro-gun group, this discussion is simply pointless.
Mike
The AHSA policies are posted on their web site - you can read them yourself.
You're determined that AHSA is anti because what you think they should say, but don't say on their web site - after declaring what they do say "moot". So you think they should have a stated policy about what's not going to happen for the next 8 years
That seems like a wacky way to reason to me. Since I don't accept the premise that AHSA needs to say anything about what's not going to happen for the next 8 years, I couldn't care less that they don't have a stated policy on what's not going to happen.
I think we're done here.
Mike
ServiceSoon
Member
The NRA supported the assault weapon ban? HOw will sportsmen have a seat at the talbe when the Obama admin deals with guns? Deals with guns ...
ServiceSoon
Member
Like any active RKBA spirited person I signed up for AHSA's news letter to see who they were and if they would be a group I would be interested in joining. Here are some facts:
Email titled, Where are the ducks? Synopsis: The AHSA was created because the NRA allowed Bush to build a highway through a national forest. The NRA didn’t preserve the outdoors.
Email title, Hunters and Shooters on the move. Synopsis: Gun owners are voting for Obama. Also various links to press releases telling people that McCain will vote the same as Obama on key gun right issues.
Email title, AHSA is making with Real Hunters Real Conservation! Synopsis: AHSA supports Obama over McCain for this election. (You know Obama's stance on the RKBA. Let me remind you; 1 gun per month, national anti-carry, assault weapon ban, regulate gun shows, ban semi-auto firearms for citizens). What was the reason the AHSA gave for supporting Obama over McCain? The only reason mentioned in this email was that Obama has a better conservation record than McCain. They told people that the NRA doesn't have the best interest of hunters and shooters in mind.
Email title, NRA brings out the scare tatics for Haloween. Synopsis: Dan Cooper was the founder of a firearm company in Montana that lost his job. The AHSA blamed the NRA for this. According to them a small business owner should have never been harmed to promote a political agenda. This letter demonizes the NRA and ask people to join the AHSA.
My opinion: Let’s say that 40% of Americans own firearms. The only effective organization to join to protect those rights is the NRA. What if another organization was able to take 10% of those members and convince their members that these “reasonable” regulations are beneficial for society and won’t infringe upon their RKBA? I would bet large amounts of money on the fact that the largest group of NRA supporters is hunters. That is why the AHSA is catered to this group. If I was a losing anti, this is the strategy I would use. It makes sense and can work if ignorance is allowed to exist.
The AHSA is the second version of gunguys dot com. Expect more organizations to spring up as they improve their strategy. The battle is on. The anti’s need more public support to pass their policies. I honestly think the AHSA is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
Email titled, Where are the ducks? Synopsis: The AHSA was created because the NRA allowed Bush to build a highway through a national forest. The NRA didn’t preserve the outdoors.
Email title, Hunters and Shooters on the move. Synopsis: Gun owners are voting for Obama. Also various links to press releases telling people that McCain will vote the same as Obama on key gun right issues.
Email title, AHSA is making with Real Hunters Real Conservation! Synopsis: AHSA supports Obama over McCain for this election. (You know Obama's stance on the RKBA. Let me remind you; 1 gun per month, national anti-carry, assault weapon ban, regulate gun shows, ban semi-auto firearms for citizens). What was the reason the AHSA gave for supporting Obama over McCain? The only reason mentioned in this email was that Obama has a better conservation record than McCain. They told people that the NRA doesn't have the best interest of hunters and shooters in mind.
Email title, NRA brings out the scare tatics for Haloween. Synopsis: Dan Cooper was the founder of a firearm company in Montana that lost his job. The AHSA blamed the NRA for this. According to them a small business owner should have never been harmed to promote a political agenda. This letter demonizes the NRA and ask people to join the AHSA.
My opinion: Let’s say that 40% of Americans own firearms. The only effective organization to join to protect those rights is the NRA. What if another organization was able to take 10% of those members and convince their members that these “reasonable” regulations are beneficial for society and won’t infringe upon their RKBA? I would bet large amounts of money on the fact that the largest group of NRA supporters is hunters. That is why the AHSA is catered to this group. If I was a losing anti, this is the strategy I would use. It makes sense and can work if ignorance is allowed to exist.
The AHSA is the second version of gunguys dot com. Expect more organizations to spring up as they improve their strategy. The battle is on. The anti’s need more public support to pass their policies. I honestly think the AHSA is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
I suspect this is correct - the AHSA was created to give folks an alternative to the right wing cash funnel that the NRA has become.
In flavor, the AHSA reminds me of the pre-"Cincinnati Revolt" NRA, which is the one I grew up with.
I did most of the shooting in my youth at an Izaak Walton League chapter outside of Rockville, Maryland. I think it was called the "Rockville Chapter", even though it was in Germantown. At any rate, it was a conservation organization. At any rate, they were very concerned about conservation and the environment as well as shooting. Fundamentally pro-gun, but also concerned about hunting and conservation - sort of like the AHSA.
Mike
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
Yes, because the NRA, who regularly gives money to both Republican and the Democratic candidates is soooo much more partisan than the Brady Campaign and AHSA who give 100% of their contributions to Democrats.
Wait, where's the proof that AHSA is fundamentally pro-gun again? Where have they come out in favor of liberalizing concealed carry laws, spoken out against or donated to candidates who oppose the renewal of the ban on so-called "assault weapons," spoken out against Ted Kennedy's proposed ban on "armor piercing" rifle ammunition, (including .30-30, the most ubiquitous centerfire rifle round used by hunters), conducted youth safety and marksmanship programs, or actually held a sanctioned shooting match?
Why is it that I've never run into any AHSA supporters at any High Power, Bullseye, Team Challenge, Multigun or Tactical Rifle matches? Why is it I never hear of them supporting or listing contact information for pistol, shotgun, carbine, or hunter safety classes?
If they're such huge supporters of the right to keep and bear arms, please explain to me why they spend more time attacking the NRA than they do actually trying to stand up and make a difference for gun owners in Washington, DC?
auschip
Member
He just provides monetary support to politicians who support the AWB?
So what did Ray mean we he said "No one needs an assault weapon."?
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
If he's changed his mind, please explain again why his organization publicly supported the anti-gun presidential and vice-presidential candidates again?
I mean, after all, Joe Biden was instrumental in the authorship of the previous AWB. You'd think that if ol' Ray Schoenke was against renewing the AWB he would have at least abstained from supporting candidates with such abysmal voting records on guns.
Even above and beyond that, how does Ray justify his support of sportsmen while giving money and support to Obama, who supported Ted Kennedy's ban on .30-30, the most ubiquitous hunting and sporting cartridge in the United States?
Dude, seriously, have you not even read this thread? You have absolutely failed to show in any way, shape, or form that AHSA is pro-gun, except in the most half-hearted fashion. You've absolutely failed to demonstrate where they have supported even one simple stance that would move gun rights forward. Your attempts to rationalize away the anti-gun activities of the AHSA board of directors absolutely strains the credulity of anyone who's even halfway cognizant of the issues at hand.
Coronach's challenge still stands- cite where the AHSA differs from the Brady Campaign in areas that are not already settled law. This is something that, if the AHSA were actually pro-gun in any demonstrably useful fashion would have been addressed satisfactorily several pages ago. Yet, in over 170 posts, seven pages, and with more than 3,000 thread views, you have absolutely been unable to do this at all.
Frankly, I'm well and truly embarrassed for you. Despite being utterly schooled from all quarters, despite refusing to acknowledge the evidence that stares you right in the face, despite all reason, logic, or common sense, despite documented proof of AHSA's support of some of the most virulently anti-gun politicians in the modern era, despite their financial and public support for instituting new gun control laws, you continue to cling to the utterly laughable notion that the AHSA has anything substantive to offer gun owners, especially those whose primary interests in firearms are defensive, or oriented to the practical shooting sports.
I mean, after all, Joe Biden was instrumental in the authorship of the previous AWB. You'd think that if ol' Ray Schoenke was against renewing the AWB he would have at least abstained from supporting candidates with such abysmal voting records on guns.
Even above and beyond that, how does Ray justify his support of sportsmen while giving money and support to Obama, who supported Ted Kennedy's ban on .30-30, the most ubiquitous hunting and sporting cartridge in the United States?
Dude, seriously, have you not even read this thread? You have absolutely failed to show in any way, shape, or form that AHSA is pro-gun, except in the most half-hearted fashion. You've absolutely failed to demonstrate where they have supported even one simple stance that would move gun rights forward. Your attempts to rationalize away the anti-gun activities of the AHSA board of directors absolutely strains the credulity of anyone who's even halfway cognizant of the issues at hand.
Coronach's challenge still stands- cite where the AHSA differs from the Brady Campaign in areas that are not already settled law. This is something that, if the AHSA were actually pro-gun in any demonstrably useful fashion would have been addressed satisfactorily several pages ago. Yet, in over 170 posts, seven pages, and with more than 3,000 thread views, you have absolutely been unable to do this at all.
Frankly, I'm well and truly embarrassed for you. Despite being utterly schooled from all quarters, despite refusing to acknowledge the evidence that stares you right in the face, despite all reason, logic, or common sense, despite documented proof of AHSA's support of some of the most virulently anti-gun politicians in the modern era, despite their financial and public support for instituting new gun control laws, you continue to cling to the utterly laughable notion that the AHSA has anything substantive to offer gun owners, especially those whose primary interests in firearms are defensive, or oriented to the practical shooting sports.
- Status
Similar threads
