Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Brady Campaign on a rampage

Discussion in 'Legal' started by LickitySplit, Jan 7, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. LickitySplit

    LickitySplit Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Messages:
    83
    Realistically... I can see maybe 5-6 (which is 5-6 too many), of these proposals gaining any ground in the next 2-4 years, but it's obvious what the Bradys game plan is... think big... settle for small and appear as being the reasonable and fair ones.

    Complete text here...

    http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/pdf/politics/obama-transition-memo.pdf
     
  2. ArmedBear

    ArmedBear Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    23,171
    Yeah. The Obama machine owes a lot to a lot of unsavory entities. But the Brady Bunch ain't one of 'em.

    Doesn't mean I won't pay attention, just that the Obama campaign doesn't take its marching orders from the Brady Bunch.

    (It seems it may get them from corrupt labor unions, first and foremost, BTW.)
     
  3. DoubleTapDrew

    DoubleTapDrew Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2006
    Messages:
    5,356
    Location:
    Oregon
    It's just a reminder that we can't stop pushing back, not for a minute because they will keep pushing their agenda. You can't appease the anti-gun movement so don't give an inch! They'll take every concession we give them and keep clamoring for more until the second amendment is gone. Even if it's something you have no interest in owning or shooting, keep up the fight. We outnumber them if we can just stand together. Stand up for me and I'll stand up for you, even if our tastes in firearms differ.
     
  4. tpaw

    tpaw Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    787
    Excellent post DoubleTapDrew! I could not agree more. We can't sit back and let up for one moment. As the saying goes, " You snooze, you loose".
     
  5. subknave

    subknave Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Messages:
    135
    So is the "terror gap" going to be the next "gun show loophole"? If they can't even get the "Terror list" right and prevent people from flying how will they do it to stop terrorists from buying guns. Not to mention that theywould probably get them illegally anyway and I cannot recall a terrorist attack in the US using guns.
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2009
  6. subknave

    subknave Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Messages:
    135
    If you actually read this it decries that firearm homicide is the leading cause of death for black men 15-34 and 2nd for hispanics 15-24. This demographic ring any bells? Can you say G-A-N-G-S. I would think working to get rid of gangs would be more productive than gun bans. How about a age restriction that you have to be over 25 to buy a handgun. Would that stop anything ?probably not. Stopping Gang violence would stop more than anything else.

    Thay need to take a big dose of reality and stop pursuing the myth of massive gun traffickers buying huge amounts of weapons from legal dealers then selling them on the street. Sometimes you just want to say WAKE UP.

    I personnally am very worried if Holder is confirmed as AG. That would have more of an impact than any future legislation. When the ATF comes knocking at your door it doesn't matter if you are innocent or not you will have to PROVE you are innocent.
     
  7. benEzra

    benEzra Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    8,584
    Location:
    Down East in NC
    The Bradyites are asking the Obama administration to perpetuate the Bush administration's secret "watchlists" (which have included environmental activists, peace protesters, toddlers, Congressmen, Medal of Honor recipients, and people added to the list to meet quotas, all based on secret evidence that you can't challenge in court) and use them as a basis to arbitrarily revoke gun rights. This was originally an Alberto "No Habeas Corpus" Gonzales proposal, who was no friend of gun owners.

    Thing is, the Dems (and probably Obama himself) vigorously criticized Gonzales and the Bush Administration for the secret watchlists, so it would be rather awkward for them to turn around and say "we changed our mind, we love them now." Not that they might not be tempted to do just that, but there would be a political cost.
     
  8. ServiceSoon

    ServiceSoon Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,404
    Location:
    Michiana
    You know that quote about power corrupts...? Well, at one time Obama said he thought it made sense for local government to regulate certain firearms. Ok. Now he wants to ban assault rifles at the federal level. It appears he didn't have a problem changing his mind that time.
     
  9. Dave in PA

    Dave in PA Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2006
    Messages:
    120
    He was probably OK with state level restrictions when he was a state level pol. Now he's going to be a federal level pol......
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page