Columbine Father Challenges Cheney at NRA Convention

Status
Not open for further replies.

BenW

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
1,116
Location
CA
Alright, that's it. I'm not reading any more news sites today. There are too many stories raising my blood pressure.


-------
Columbine Father Challenges Cheney on Guns
16 minutes ago

Add U.S. National - AP to My Yahoo!

By JOE MANDAK, Associated Press Writer

PITTSBURGH - A man whose son was killed in the Columbine High School shootings literally walked in his child's shoes to the National Rifle Association convention, where he hoped Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites) would address the federal assault weapons ban set to expire in September.


AP Photo



Tom Mauser, whose son Daniel was killed with an assault weapon in the Littleton, Colo., killings five years ago Tuesday, said continuing the ban is common sense.

Assault weapons "are the weapons of gangs, drug lords and sick people," Mauser said before his three-block march to the convention, which runs through Sunday. "It is a weapon of war and we don't want this war on our streets."

Mauser challenged Cheney to speak about extending the ban when the vice president delivered the convention's keynote address Saturday night.

However, there was no indication Saturday afternoon that Cheney would address the matter. He was expected to reaffirm President Bush (news - web sites)'s position that the Second Amendment protects individual gun ownership and tout statistics that federal prosecutions of gun-related crimes have risen significantly under Bush's presidency.

NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam called the assault weapon ban "nothing but an incremental effort to ban more firearms."

Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry (news - web sites) issued a statement before Cheney's address, saying "most voters don't know that (Bush and Cheney) are standing against major police organizations and breaking their promise to renew the assault weapons ban — which helps keep military-style assault weapons out of the hands of criminals and terrorists."

Mauser entered the convention hall where the NRA was meeting, but was turned away by a security guard as several conventioneers applauded. A couple of conventioneers yelled "Get a life" and "Vote for Bush."

Mauser said the NRA "is an organization with a Field and Stream magazine membership, but a Soldier of Fortune magazine leadership."

The NRA expected up to 60,000 people at the weekend-long convention, dubbed "Freedom's Steel," featuring seminars on whether to hunt in Africa, legislative agendas, methods of carrying a concealed weapon and a game-call challenge.
 
Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry (news - web sites) issued a statement before Cheney's address, saying "most voters don't know that (Bush and Cheney) are standing against major police organizations and breaking their promise to renew the assault weapons ban — which helps keep military-style assault weapons out of the hands of criminals and terrorists."

No -- WRONG! It keeps military-style weapons out of the hands of CITIZENS who have done nothing wrong!

Why do people just NOT UNDERSTAND that laws only affect those willing to obey them? WHY?!?

Wes
 
May'be he should have urged laws that prohibit felons from having guns and from people a) taking guns on school grounds, and b) shooting students.

Oh wait, all that stuff is illegal already. But wait, you mean the criminals BROKE the laws??? No way. Once something is law, it's over. Right?

As the anniversary approaches, I've read a great deal about Columbine from a variety of places, including a piece in GQ. This was undeniably and PROFOUNDLY tragic event, a horrible horrible thing for which words cannot possibly be adequate in describing the gravity of the situation. But as most of us know, banning guns would have no effect. In fact, MORE guns on the "street" in the hands of teachers would likely have SERIOUSLY mitigated the tragedy in terms of number of lives lost. Don't get me wrong, I sympathize to some degree with the father in as much as I feel for him, but he is wrong in his call for more restriction.
 
Bless his heart...

Nothing can bring back his son, and I hope he finds peace, but urging to disarm honest law abiding citizens won't prevent any criminal attacks on our children and loved ones.
 
Tom Mauser is a tragic,pathetic, individual.After Columbine he left his job to work for the Sarah Brady people, at the same salary he was making. He's a tool of the antis. I think he's probably better off just left alone. I understand that he's trying to do something, anything, in his son's memory, but doesn't realise, or maybe doesn't care, that he's being manipulated. It won't bring Danny Mauser back. I don't think that any parents on this board, myself included, want to know what Tom Mauser knows.
 
Tom Mauser, whose son Daniel was killed with an assault weapon in the Littleton, Colo., killings five years ago Tuesday, said continuing the ban is common sense.

Is this really true? What was the assault weapon?
 
Tom Mauser is a total AH. Try e-mailing him and try to engage him in a honest respectful conversation. He will attack you with cheap shots and personal attacks that have nothing to do with what you're talking about. But if you do contact him it is mandatory that you acknowledge that he is the father of a Columbine victim, if not he will take it as a persnal insult and attack you for that.
I hope he finds peace
I hope he gets a social disease
 
I really do feel for the man, but does he realize how dumb he sounds talking about a crime that happened five years ago with a weapon banned ten years ago, and how continuance of said ban is going to help? Someone pull Sarah Brady away from that poor man's ear.
 
Mauser said the NRA "is an organization with a Field and Stream magazine membership, but a Soldier of Fortune magazine leadership."

Rock-solid wrong. The NRA is just one more grass roots civil rights organization—and far more effective than the vast majority of the rest, too.
 
Perhaps that gentleman could find peace and closure if he changed his surname to Brady. With Mauser for a name, his family tree could prove to be quite interesting.
 
Why do people just NOT UNDERSTAND that laws only affect those willing to obey them? WHY?!?

Sigh....okay, I know that I'm probably going to catch a lot of flak for this but, hell, - it's the darned truth. The reason is that there are a lot of people in this country who lack either the desire or the compacity to think independently. They're dependent upon news outlets and the print media to interpret events and/or summarize consequences for them. They accept whatever Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings, Dan Rather, or Katie Couric says as absolute gospel. The same with Hollywood. If it's in a movie, they believe it unquestioningly.
 
What can you say about someone who assigns no responsibility to the killers of his son but chooses to attack those who have nothing to do with his tradgedy?
 
Why doesn't this guy realize that if all the teachers, administrators, etc had been armed, the shootings would've been stopped before they even really got going?
 
He needs to burry his son....



He ain't coming back. Trying to make sure that we only have one evil item on our rifles also isn't going to bring him back.



TCD
 
Hey look -- now he says we're all "sick people" (and okay, I guess I couldn't stay away from the news sites after all):


--------------
Cheney Says Kerry a Threat to Gun Owners
15 minutes ago

Add U.S. National - AP to My Yahoo!

By DAN NEPHIN, Associated Press Writer

PITTSBURGH - Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites) portrayed President Bush (news - web sites) and himself as champions of the Second Amendment — and Democratic candidate John Kerry (news - web sites) as a potential threat to gun owners — in a speech at the National Rifle Association's 133rd annual convention Saturday.


AP Photo



"John Kerry's approach to the Second Amendment has been to regulate, regulate and then regulate some more," Cheney said, citing votes against legislation that would protect gun makers from lawsuits and in favor of allowing federal authorities to randomly inspect gun dealers without notice.

Cheney lauded the NRA for its safety programs and said the best way to prevent gun crimes was to enforce existing laws. Federal prosecutions of crimes committed with guns increased 68 percent under President Bush, he told the crowd.

Bush "has shown you respect, earned your vote and appreciates your support," Cheney said.

Cheney spoke for about 25 minutes after he was greeted by a standing ovation punctuated by chants of "Four more years."

Cheney did not address the federal assault weapons ban, which expires in September, and which the NRA maintains has been ineffective.

Kerry, in a statement issued before Cheney's address, said "most voters don't know that (Bush and Cheney) are standing against major police organizations and breaking their promise to renew the assault weapons ban — which helps keep military-style assault weapons out of the hands of criminals and terrorists."

Earlier in the day, Tom Mauser, whose son, Daniel, was killed with an assault weapon in the Columbine High School killings five years ago, tried to enter the convention hall where the NRA was meeting, seeking to urge Cheney to support extending the assault weapons ban.

Mauser was turned away by a security guard as several conventioneers applauded. A couple of conventioneers yelled "Get a life" and "Vote for Bush."

Mauser, who marched three blocks to the convention hall literally in his son's shoes, said before the march that continuing the ban would be common sense.

"What is the useful purpose to these weapons? ... They are the weapons of gangs, drug lords and sick people." Mauser said. "It is a weapon of war and we don't want this war on our streets."

Mauser called the NRA "an organization with a Field-and-Stream-magazine membership but a Soldier-of-Fortune-magazine leadership."

The NRA expected up to 60,000 people at its weekend convention, dubbed "Freedom's Steel." The association, which endorsed Bush and Cheney in the 2000 election, will not endorse a candidate until the fall, spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said.
 
While I believe he is completely and totally wrong, I do not think personal attacks on him are appropriate. There is no doubt in my mind that he is not in a position to make a calculated rational argument for one position or another. He may be misguided, but I think he would benefit from some empathy rather than derision. Attacking him personally will only martyr him and his son.
 
Mauser said the NRA "is an organization with a Field and Stream magazine membership, but a Soldier of Fortune magazine leadership."

This might not be true, but it is bloody brilliant writing, and will be repeated, remembered and believed.

It's short, pithy, accessible sound bites like this that carry the day. We as a movement need to learn to communicate like this if we are to beat those who oppose us.

Homework: Distill this fragment to a memorable, believable sound bite.
...talking about a crime that happened five years ago with a weapon banned ten years ago, and how continuance of said ban is going to help?
 
.....Well lets ban rocks to.....you can add the word "Assault" to the word rock to make it an "Assault rock", since the word "Assault" seems to be their big thing, they could just add the word to anything they wanted to ban.....imagine.....Assault cheesecake, assault SUV's and much, much more.....:scrutiny: poor guy...he's just a tool.
 
I'm glad most of us here have taken what I think is the only decent approach: contend with Tom Mauser's ideas, not with Mauser himself. I don't know what I might do if someone shot my son to death, so I don't find it hard to understand that grieving parents are not entirely rational. That doesn't mean I'll roll over, but no personal attacks, either.


wQuay, a Tec-9 or whatever variant was among the guns used at Columbine. Whether it was the gun used to kill Daniel Mauser, I don't know, but I think it's reasonable to stipulate to that one.
 
To those who would say that, because of his past experiences, we should not be critical of Mr. Mauser, all I can do is ask the question: does the reason WHY someone tries to strip you of a human right really matter? The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and Mr. Mauser has laid more than his fair share of cobblestones on that road.
 
But were the people who provided the weapons used at Columbine prosecuted? For anything? Even the straw-purchases? Let alone conspiracy, felony murder, accomplice to murder, or any other crimes they committed?

You'd think he'd be upset about that, wouldn't you?
 
Of course, when the next school shooting happens, the cops who respond will be armed with...


... wait for it...

AR-15s

But I doubt Mr. Mauser has given serious thought to that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top