Face it--Kerry knows exactly where to hit us

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cosmoline

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2002
Messages
23,646
Location
Los Anchorage
I don't know if JFK II will make it to the White House. But there's no doubt he's darn close to pulling it off. I have to admire the political cunning of whoever was responsible for putting shotguns in Kerry's hands. They realized that the chink in the RKBA armor is the whole "I'm a hunter" argument. They seek to isolate us by dividing off part of that group and making us appear to be extremists.
 
True, but there are plenty of blind men out there. In this case they're trying to sell pure bravo sierra as sweet apple pie. It's a hard sell, given Kerry's voting record. But what worries me is if they have someone with a less clear record on RKBA issues. Dressing him up in gortex and handing him a shotgun might work. It's certainly a far cry from Gore's call for a ban on all semiautomatic handguns in 2000. They have learned from their mistakes. Like the Borg they are adapting :D
 
Sadly there are too many gun owning idiots who think the Second Amendment IS about Ruger Red Labels and collecting roomfuls of old Colts and can't, or won't, see the real danger. "He's not after MY guns, just them thar A-salt rifles. Whatcha need one of them dang things fer anyway?"

Even the flipping NRA has been cought in that trap, trying to justify gun ownership for "sporting" purposes when sporting use has little at all to do with the reasons for the 2nd Amendment! :banghead:
 
The 2nd amendment rights groups espically the NRA I hope have the right tactic but I worry deeply. JUst look at every rights movement in this country. It took looking like kooks at first. Yes they mostly had MSM behind them at times. For example-----the gay rights movement. Look at the progress they have made in 20 years. Now they already have the Courts starting to go their way. This is a very small minority of people. Not near the serious 2nd amendment people in number. Look at the ant-gun people-----also a relatively small number.( Look at the kooky things they do) However these groups have the whole left wing , money and international support. Have you ever seen a "Save our 2nd amendment march". The "Save the flea groups" are making more progress than us.:cuss:
 
I agree.. Many hunters don't really consider the political side of firearms ownership. Some will not see through the camo.
 
other forces are shifting too:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=106800

"We know the basic premise of gun control is flawed," spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said in an interview from NRA headquarters in Fairfax, Va.

Arulanandam said his opposition shifts attention from effective gun violence prevention measures because it focuses instead on one goal: banning guns. It isn't even honest about its intent, he said, noting that The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence was called Handgun Control Inc. until 2001.

"The reason these folks feel like they have to camouflage their agenda is because they know the vast majority of the voting American public stands with the NRA," Arulanandam said.

Ramsey, the Brady spokesman, said the name change was a tribute to the family of James Brady, a former presidential aide wounded in the 1981 attempt to assassinate President Ronald Reagan.

"Our goal is to stop gun violence, not to control guns," Ramsey said. "It's gun violence prevention. It's not handgun control."

>>>>>>>>>

"The NRA wields incredible power with the Republican leadership," said Kristen Rand, legislative director for the Violence Policy Center, which she called the largest national gun control advocacy group seeking a ban on handgun production.

>>>>>>>>

Meanwhile, reasonable, attainable solutions are ignored, said John Lacey, a spokesman for Americans for Gun Safety, a relatively new, nonpartisan group that claims to support both the Second Amendment's protection of the right to bear arms and also what it calls sensible gun control legislation.

"We are sick and tired of people playing politics with the gun issue," he said, laying equal blame on both sides of the debate. "We have a number of very good gun laws, and we need to enforce them."

Lacey's group is in the interesting position of being disliked by both sides in the debate.

Since its creation in 2000 by Andrew McKelvey, a former Handgun Control Inc. board member whose company runs the employment Web site Monster.com, Americans for Gun Safety is listed by the NRA as an "anti-gun" organization and criticized by gun control groups as too willing to compromise with the gun lobby.


>>>>>>


Brady / VPC go hard left and the NRA goes hard right,
leaving McKelvey to claim the middle with his "Common Sense"

Any compromises will be towards the middle ground.
 
Standing Wolf, I sure hope you're right. But looking at the not so distant past, I'd have bet money that "Slick Willie" wouldn't have gotten re-elected.
I wished I had your optimism.
 
Standing Wolf,what are you going to say if/when America DOES elect that Kerry creature?
Click to expand...

It's not going to happen. That Kerry creature might—just might—have stood a chance prior to September 11, 2001. History has left him behind. I expect he'll be the last to figure it out.

Standing Wolf, I sure hope you're right. But looking at the not so distant past, I'd have bet money that "Slick Willie" wouldn't have gotten re-elected.
Click to expand...

Snopes Clinton wasn't called "Slick Willie" for nothing.
 
Malone LaVeigh:

I don't know what you mean by this. I haven't seen the NRA take positions on topics other than firearms and the use of firearms. I don't think that they get involved much in the religious right, or other non-firearms sub-groups of the Republican party. They do chime in with regards to crime and criminals. They have a very strong sense of punishing the criminal. This again is in contrast with those that would blame the gun and punish the law abiding citizens.
 
Malone LaVeigh:

I don't know what you mean by this. I haven't seen the NRA take positions on topics other than firearms and the use of firearms. I don't think that they get involved much in the religious right, or other non-firearms sub-groups of the Republican party. They do chime in with regards to crime and criminals. They have a very strong sense of punishing the criminal. This again is in contrast with those that would blame the gun and punish the law abiding citizens.
 
Which would be a lot harder to do if the NRA and other gun rights groups didn't play into their hands by being so allied to the far right whacko wing of the Republican Party.
Click to expand...

Could you explain what policies/programs you consider to be "far right whacko" ?
 
Malone LaVeigh,

Maybe you think that they should get in bed with the likes of Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Diane Finestein then?


45CAL NRA Life member.
 
The NRA has been a visible presence at the last several Republican conventions. They boasted after the 2000 race of having someone in the oval office that would be an ally, even though he had at that time pledged to sign an AWB extension. The partisanship of gun rights organizations is not just a matter of perception. they could be reaching out and trying to recruit members and political allies across the aisle. When I was young, the NRA had a pretty good conservation program. Now they endorse canditates with the worst environmental records.

The enviro clubs have done the same thing with the Democrats. That's why I quit the Sierra Club in 96. I probably won't be renewing my NRA membership, either. I can get a lot of 7.62x39 for what I give them.
 
Good luck finding a gun to shoot it in if the Dem's are in control.
And, what new gun regulations have the Republican's passed in this term?

45CAL NRA Life member.
 
Malone LaVeigh:

I'm sure that the NRA supports candidates that I disagree with on many issues. One such person is Bush.

Regarding environmentalism.. it is a shame that the lawyers have taken over the movement, whereas many well meaning people are left with slogans and the rest of us are left with law suits, burned out forests, coal burning power plants and a loss of an individual's right to own property free of government control. Two hundred nuclear power plants in the U.S. would do more for environmental causes than all other efforts put together. We could free ourselves of dependence on the Middle East oil and produce hydrogen in abundance without the tons of radioactive waste that coal plants produce.
 
Gary H:

At one time, there were people in the enviro movement that favored nukes. I don't agree with that position, but it does have its legitimate arguments that have been drowned out by the current ruling mindset.

Another example of this among enviros is immigration. Until they're willing to tackle that issue, there is no hope for environmental protection in this country.

Just goes to show you that every group eventually develops a PC catechism.

The gun rights movement is not immune from this.
 
It is the environmentalists that blocked cleaning out the overly dense undergrowth in our forests, which turned them into tinderboxes. Witness the many forest fires in the last few years, and the resulting loss of life and property.

They have nothing to brag about.
 
Nit pick:

Actually, moa, I believe it was the Smokey the Bear campaign of the US Forest Service, stretching back many decades.

Lots of good posts here.
 
Actually, there's a bit of truth in both. Being on a Forest Service planning team, I know whereof I speak. The enviros certainly did not get us into this mess, that was Smokey's doing. But they've pretty much tied our hands about the VERY little that we could do about it now with the current political and financial constraints.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top