shooterx10
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2003
- Messages
- 159
Would you gnaw off your own leg to get out of a trap only to die later on? Or are you going to fight and avoid getting into that trap in the first place?
PASS THIS ONTO OTHER FIREARMS FORUMS!
John Kerry and Democrats Want More Gun Control
By Ralph Weller
GunNewsDaily.com
Monday, July 25, 2004
Presidential candidate John Kerry says he's all for the Second Amendment. Shooting a few clays at a trap and skeet club is kind of like Clinton going duck hunting... it didn't make him a defender of the Second Amendment. Neither does it make Senator Kerry a defender of gun rights.
All one needs to do is analyze Kerry's history. First and foremost, Kerry has voted yes on every anti-gun bill since he's been in office. That's not political nonsense, that's a hard fact. And, if you think Kerry is gun-shy about voting for gun control bills now that he's campaigning, guess again. He made a point in April to return to the Senate floor off the campaign trail for his very first Senate vote of the year. He voted to not only extend the current ban on certain semi-automatic rifles, but to ban hundreds of other semi-automatic civilian rifles and shotguns greatly expanding the current law. A lot of those so-called "assault rifles" are sporting, hunting, and target guns.
That last part is what you don't hear about in the media, nor will you hear it from John Kerry. Feinstein's bill called for banning the sale of all centerfire semi-automatic rifles and shotguns with detachable magazines. Included in that are piles of sporting rifles and shotguns used by target shooters and hunters. Now I ask you, does Kerry sound like a champion of gun rights when he's willing to ban more guns during a presidential campaign? Do you actually think he would veto an anti-gun bill as president?
Out here in California we're a good ten years ahead of the rest of the country. This is leading-edge socialism out here and we rule the roost nationally when it comes to gun control. We heard all the nonsense in 1989 that our first assault weapon ban was just ban on a few "evil" weapons. That was only the beginning. It expanded in 1999 to hundreds more. In fact, any gun can be added to the list of evil weapons and California legislators don't even have to vote on it. But, it doesn't end with rifles. Handguns are "certified" annually by the state as "safe" using arbitrary test methods, and if not deemed safe for use by Californians, the state simply bans their sale. Or if they so choose, the California Department of Justice can simply change the test criteria. Nice, neat and politically clean. Non-elected bureaucrats or elected officials in non-legislative roles now determine what what rifles and handguns can be owned without a single vote in the legislature. How's that for Democrats protecting Second Amendment rights? The Bill of Rights has been reduced to regulatory control.
This is the kind of nonsense that will happen federally if the Dems get control of Congress and the White House. John Kerry proved it by voting to ban hundreds of firearms in April, going well beyond simply renewing existing law. He then has the arrogance to show up at a trap and skeet club a couple of months later proclaiming how he's a big gun rights supporter.
But that's only the half of it. Just look at what some in the so-called pro-gun community are doing to our rights. There are plenty of clays shooters and hunters now talking to the media about how these evil assault weapons should be banned, including members of the very same trap and skeet club Kerry showed up at. My goodness, with support like that, who needs anti-gun groups?
For the skeet and trap shooters and the hunters who don't understand, let me once again explain the logic of all this nonsense about why you should care about everyone's gun rights, not just your own. I'll put it to you in anti-gun jargon so hits you where it hurts. If you ask any cop on the beat what he would fear most in a face-to-face shootout on the street with a criminal, a handgun, a rifle or a shotgun, most would pick the shotgun they fear the most. After all, it'll blow your head clean off your body at close range. And don't even ask what a slug gun can do to someone. If that's not enough, those hunting rifles you hunter types use out there in the woods look a lot like sniper weapons capable of picking off a young child on a school ground at a half a mile or more away.
You see, it's real easy to start making an argument that your shotguns and hunting rifles are dangerous and have no place in a modern society. After all, no one needs to hunt to survive in this country anymore anyway.... and on and on the argument will go in the not too distant future. And, the public will respond demanding the ban of these evil weapons. Make no mistake about it. If the anti-gun rhetoric can get gun club members to demand banning firearms and making foolish statements to the press, then non-gun owner John Q. Public will have no problem in the future demanding high-powered rifles and deadly shotguns be banned. It happened in England and it has already happened in parts of the U.S.
The sad part about all this is it shouldn't be about whether your firearm is better than my semi-automatic rifle, now called an assualt weapon, thanks to anti-gun rhetoric. Or, that hunting or shooting trap has some kind of legitimate acceptance by most Americans. I could care less about how legitimate you think your sport is. The guy on the prairie who takes his kid out hunting prarie dogs with a Colt Sporter firing .223 ammo is as legitimate as you skeet folks and deer hunters. The guy who shoots nationally in competitive shooting with a Colt Heavy Barrel Sporter is just as legitimate as any shotgunner or Model 700 shooter. Why in the world would you as a hunter or clays shooter suggest that a Colt Sporter be banned? Why I ask? Is it like the wolf in a trap that gnaws off one of its own legs to free itself? I have news for you bubba! The wolf dies a slow death anyway after it's out of the trap. That's what you so-called gun owners of a different caliber are attempting to do. You trumpet your brand of sports as legitimate and leave the rest of us gun owners to fend for ourselves hoping you'll be left alone by the politicians.
The politicians will never leave you alone. When the guns rights of target shooters, collectors and varmint hunters are gone and they come after your shotgun, 'the most feared weapon of police officers on the beat' and those 'sniper weapons' capable of shooting a five-year-old at 300 yards, don't look to us former gun owners for help. We're done. We don't own guns anymore thanks to the anti-gun rhetoric of politicians and some of you folks. You hunters and clay pigeon shooters are on your own. Hope there's enough of you left to stop the legislative carnage, but unfortunately, there won't be. It will be just like California in Washington D.C. "All gun control, all the time." They'll continue to nibble around the edges of the gun-owing community like small fish feeding on the carcas of a dead whale. And though they take only small bites, it doesn't take long and the only thing left is carcass sinking to the bottom.
The next time you hear a so-called gun owner spout off about "evil assault weapons," take him or her behind the proverbial woodshed for a verbal lashing to tell them that a gun is a gun is a gun. If we let the politicians have some of the guns, they'll eventually get around to take ours away next.
Look what happened in California. Every year it's a new crop of gun control bills by Democrats. They even banned Olympic style pistols in California for crying out loud calling them "assault weapons." And when some of us screamed, the Democrat who wrote the law told us if we didn't like it, "move to Texas." And, if you don't believe it, ask anyone who's visited a California gun show recently. You would be shocked at what you can't buy. You can't allow that to happen nationally, because if the Dems get back into office, they will be relentless.
Everything you thought John Kerry stood for, will go right out the door. You'll soon find he could care less about your gun rights, your right to shoot skeet or trap, or your right to hunt. Because the bottom line is, you have no right to do any of those sports. The only right you have is to own firearms and he's proven within the last few months that he'll gladly take them away. Where was the press to inform the public on exactly what he voted for? They were non-existant. They gladly defended him by shutting up and not informing the public. They'll never talk and neither will Kerry. If you don't believe me, just watch the democratic convention this week. The only thing you'll hear is more gun control. And what will Kerry say about protecting Second Amendment rights? Not a single word. The man hasn't got the nerve to stand up to his own party and say what he spouts to the press and to a few gullible gun owners. He won't have the nerve in office either, because he hasn't in over twenty years of politics. And, if he does muster the nerve to say he defends the Second Amendment, listen closely, because his idea of supporting Second Amendment rights is to ban guns, far more than have been banned to date. He proved that in April.
The man is fraud and no friend to gunowners. He will do anything to become president including acting like he's some big white pro-gun hunter from the Midwest. He's not pro-gun and he's not a hunter. And, despite where he says he grew up, he's a died-in-the-wool Massachusetts liberal. Just look at his record and forget about the photo-ops during the campaign. His record doesn't lie, but his words on the campaign trail do just that.
Here is the link.
PASS THIS ONTO OTHER FIREARMS FORUMS!
John Kerry and Democrats Want More Gun Control
By Ralph Weller
GunNewsDaily.com
Monday, July 25, 2004
Presidential candidate John Kerry says he's all for the Second Amendment. Shooting a few clays at a trap and skeet club is kind of like Clinton going duck hunting... it didn't make him a defender of the Second Amendment. Neither does it make Senator Kerry a defender of gun rights.
All one needs to do is analyze Kerry's history. First and foremost, Kerry has voted yes on every anti-gun bill since he's been in office. That's not political nonsense, that's a hard fact. And, if you think Kerry is gun-shy about voting for gun control bills now that he's campaigning, guess again. He made a point in April to return to the Senate floor off the campaign trail for his very first Senate vote of the year. He voted to not only extend the current ban on certain semi-automatic rifles, but to ban hundreds of other semi-automatic civilian rifles and shotguns greatly expanding the current law. A lot of those so-called "assault rifles" are sporting, hunting, and target guns.
That last part is what you don't hear about in the media, nor will you hear it from John Kerry. Feinstein's bill called for banning the sale of all centerfire semi-automatic rifles and shotguns with detachable magazines. Included in that are piles of sporting rifles and shotguns used by target shooters and hunters. Now I ask you, does Kerry sound like a champion of gun rights when he's willing to ban more guns during a presidential campaign? Do you actually think he would veto an anti-gun bill as president?
Out here in California we're a good ten years ahead of the rest of the country. This is leading-edge socialism out here and we rule the roost nationally when it comes to gun control. We heard all the nonsense in 1989 that our first assault weapon ban was just ban on a few "evil" weapons. That was only the beginning. It expanded in 1999 to hundreds more. In fact, any gun can be added to the list of evil weapons and California legislators don't even have to vote on it. But, it doesn't end with rifles. Handguns are "certified" annually by the state as "safe" using arbitrary test methods, and if not deemed safe for use by Californians, the state simply bans their sale. Or if they so choose, the California Department of Justice can simply change the test criteria. Nice, neat and politically clean. Non-elected bureaucrats or elected officials in non-legislative roles now determine what what rifles and handguns can be owned without a single vote in the legislature. How's that for Democrats protecting Second Amendment rights? The Bill of Rights has been reduced to regulatory control.
This is the kind of nonsense that will happen federally if the Dems get control of Congress and the White House. John Kerry proved it by voting to ban hundreds of firearms in April, going well beyond simply renewing existing law. He then has the arrogance to show up at a trap and skeet club a couple of months later proclaiming how he's a big gun rights supporter.
But that's only the half of it. Just look at what some in the so-called pro-gun community are doing to our rights. There are plenty of clays shooters and hunters now talking to the media about how these evil assault weapons should be banned, including members of the very same trap and skeet club Kerry showed up at. My goodness, with support like that, who needs anti-gun groups?
For the skeet and trap shooters and the hunters who don't understand, let me once again explain the logic of all this nonsense about why you should care about everyone's gun rights, not just your own. I'll put it to you in anti-gun jargon so hits you where it hurts. If you ask any cop on the beat what he would fear most in a face-to-face shootout on the street with a criminal, a handgun, a rifle or a shotgun, most would pick the shotgun they fear the most. After all, it'll blow your head clean off your body at close range. And don't even ask what a slug gun can do to someone. If that's not enough, those hunting rifles you hunter types use out there in the woods look a lot like sniper weapons capable of picking off a young child on a school ground at a half a mile or more away.
You see, it's real easy to start making an argument that your shotguns and hunting rifles are dangerous and have no place in a modern society. After all, no one needs to hunt to survive in this country anymore anyway.... and on and on the argument will go in the not too distant future. And, the public will respond demanding the ban of these evil weapons. Make no mistake about it. If the anti-gun rhetoric can get gun club members to demand banning firearms and making foolish statements to the press, then non-gun owner John Q. Public will have no problem in the future demanding high-powered rifles and deadly shotguns be banned. It happened in England and it has already happened in parts of the U.S.
The sad part about all this is it shouldn't be about whether your firearm is better than my semi-automatic rifle, now called an assualt weapon, thanks to anti-gun rhetoric. Or, that hunting or shooting trap has some kind of legitimate acceptance by most Americans. I could care less about how legitimate you think your sport is. The guy on the prairie who takes his kid out hunting prarie dogs with a Colt Sporter firing .223 ammo is as legitimate as you skeet folks and deer hunters. The guy who shoots nationally in competitive shooting with a Colt Heavy Barrel Sporter is just as legitimate as any shotgunner or Model 700 shooter. Why in the world would you as a hunter or clays shooter suggest that a Colt Sporter be banned? Why I ask? Is it like the wolf in a trap that gnaws off one of its own legs to free itself? I have news for you bubba! The wolf dies a slow death anyway after it's out of the trap. That's what you so-called gun owners of a different caliber are attempting to do. You trumpet your brand of sports as legitimate and leave the rest of us gun owners to fend for ourselves hoping you'll be left alone by the politicians.
The politicians will never leave you alone. When the guns rights of target shooters, collectors and varmint hunters are gone and they come after your shotgun, 'the most feared weapon of police officers on the beat' and those 'sniper weapons' capable of shooting a five-year-old at 300 yards, don't look to us former gun owners for help. We're done. We don't own guns anymore thanks to the anti-gun rhetoric of politicians and some of you folks. You hunters and clay pigeon shooters are on your own. Hope there's enough of you left to stop the legislative carnage, but unfortunately, there won't be. It will be just like California in Washington D.C. "All gun control, all the time." They'll continue to nibble around the edges of the gun-owing community like small fish feeding on the carcas of a dead whale. And though they take only small bites, it doesn't take long and the only thing left is carcass sinking to the bottom.
The next time you hear a so-called gun owner spout off about "evil assault weapons," take him or her behind the proverbial woodshed for a verbal lashing to tell them that a gun is a gun is a gun. If we let the politicians have some of the guns, they'll eventually get around to take ours away next.
Look what happened in California. Every year it's a new crop of gun control bills by Democrats. They even banned Olympic style pistols in California for crying out loud calling them "assault weapons." And when some of us screamed, the Democrat who wrote the law told us if we didn't like it, "move to Texas." And, if you don't believe it, ask anyone who's visited a California gun show recently. You would be shocked at what you can't buy. You can't allow that to happen nationally, because if the Dems get back into office, they will be relentless.
Everything you thought John Kerry stood for, will go right out the door. You'll soon find he could care less about your gun rights, your right to shoot skeet or trap, or your right to hunt. Because the bottom line is, you have no right to do any of those sports. The only right you have is to own firearms and he's proven within the last few months that he'll gladly take them away. Where was the press to inform the public on exactly what he voted for? They were non-existant. They gladly defended him by shutting up and not informing the public. They'll never talk and neither will Kerry. If you don't believe me, just watch the democratic convention this week. The only thing you'll hear is more gun control. And what will Kerry say about protecting Second Amendment rights? Not a single word. The man hasn't got the nerve to stand up to his own party and say what he spouts to the press and to a few gullible gun owners. He won't have the nerve in office either, because he hasn't in over twenty years of politics. And, if he does muster the nerve to say he defends the Second Amendment, listen closely, because his idea of supporting Second Amendment rights is to ban guns, far more than have been banned to date. He proved that in April.
The man is fraud and no friend to gunowners. He will do anything to become president including acting like he's some big white pro-gun hunter from the Midwest. He's not pro-gun and he's not a hunter. And, despite where he says he grew up, he's a died-in-the-wool Massachusetts liberal. Just look at his record and forget about the photo-ops during the campaign. His record doesn't lie, but his words on the campaign trail do just that.
Here is the link.
Last edited:
