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

NSSF Spokesman Opens Mouth..Inserts Foot..the Inevitable Result

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Jeff White, Nov 29, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jeff White

    Jeff White Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    19,205
    Location:
    Alma Illinois
    "We have met the enemy and it is us".....Pogo

    The New York TImes printed this:
    Note the comments by Lawrence Keane. So we have the National Shooting Sports Foundation making inane statements about the SKS and the suitability of the 7.62x39 round for deer hunting. And the inevitable result is the rest of the media picks up on this and we get the statement as justification for a new ban.

    So my question is; Does the NSSF intend to further divide the gun owning public? Are they that stupid that they don't believe that this will feed into the entire sporting purposes justification for a ban? Or, are they seeking to replay what I've heard happened in 1968 and use this as a way to cut imports and foreign competition?

    Jeff
     
  2. Harry Tuttle

    Harry Tuttle Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Messages:
    3,093
    i thought the serial number showed that the rifle was a saiga "hunter" kalashnikov.
     
  3. Boats

    Boats member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    3,705
    Location:
    Oregon
    Almost everything sold in this country that fires the 7.62 commie rounds (which, last I heard were .30-30 equivalents) is either a Yugo mil-surp or some flavor of an AK. Why would the industry trade group like those guns?

    Every SKS sale is one lost to "hunting" rifle manufacturers and the NSSF is a trade group front who probably doesn't count IZMASH or Arsenal of Bulgaria among their members.

    So the comments by NSSF are not so much political as economically motivated IMO, but inexcusable nonetheless for how RKBA tone deaf they are.
     
  4. Sistema1927

    Sistema1927 Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    4,396
    Location:
    "Land of (dis)Enchantment"
    Hmmm, 7.62x39 won't kill deer cleanly?

    Amazing that a weapon with ballistics darn close to the venerable 30-30 isn't suitable for deer hunting.

    This just shows that some folks, like this joker from the NSSF, don't care one hoot for the RKBA, they just want to make money. A pox upon them.
     
  5. Fletchette

    Fletchette Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,398
    Location:
    WY
    Five word e-mail hits a nerve

    Either the NYT grossly misquoted him to the point of commiting liable (a definite possibility considering the NYT) or Mr. Keane doesn't like being called to task for his comments.


    Feel free to fire him an e-mail - his e-mail address is publicly posted.



     
  6. iamkris

    iamkris Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,839
    Location:
    My own little slice of Purgatory
    Just sent a venom filled email to NSSF for letting their people speak so carelessly to the biggest anti-gun rag of all. No excuse for being so carless with the BIGGEST ANTI_GUN RAG in the country.
     
  7. RavenVT100

    RavenVT100 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,107
    What did Mr. Keane think would happen, allowing himself to be interviewed by an individual with the aforementioned track record of being a shill for the Brady Campaign? Did he think that his quotes would not have been taken out of context? It seems as if he went into the interview fully aware of this reporter's reputation.

    I'm sorry, but the fact that he did not sell us out in his own words does not absolve him of all the responsibility for this. Taking quotes out of context and playing fast and loose with the truth is what these people are known for. Giving them your own words to play with and manipulate in the press is just asking for trouble.

    He could have just said "The SKS is not an assault weapon and it is used frequently by many hunters" and left it at that. It seems from the e-mail that he knows he made a mistake and will cover for himself if this happens again. I hope he will be more careful in the future.
     
  8. Harry Tuttle

    Harry Tuttle Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Messages:
    3,093
  9. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Sad to say, even that's no guarantee with the presstitutes of the New York Times. Frankly, I think it would have made much more sense for the N.S.S.F. to speak with more reputable papers' reporters.
     
  10. Waitone

    Waitone Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,406
    Location:
    The Land of Broccoli and Fingernails
    When I read Butterfield's article the first thing that went through my mind was "Were are the distortions and lies." Shore 'nuff there they were.

    I was under the impression that you (editorial) simply did not conduct an interview without a tape recorder. Guess I was wrong. :scrutiny:

    Now I hope Mr Keane take the time to email Mr. Butterfield a nasty-gram and thank him for so carefully representing his statements. It will not help with the NYT but it sure will clean up his skirt with the pro-second amendment world.
     
  11. AZRickD

    AZRickD Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    1,684
    Keane should demand a retraction or some op-ed space.

    He owes it to us to fix this mess.

    BTW: info@nssf.org

    Also, Fox Butterfield is not only whack on the gun issue, he's whack on other things. timeswatch.org has a few stories...

    http://www.timeswatch.org/topicindex/C/crime/welcome.asp

    Apparently Mr. Butterfield is puzzled as to why so many criminals are in prison yet crime is down. Or is it, crime is down yet so many criminals are in prison. I get confused.

    Rick
     
  12. El Rojo

    El Rojo Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    2,541
    Location:
    The People's Republik of **********
    My letter to Larry Keane:

    Just add me to one more person not happy with that interview with Fox Butterfield. Please do you best to rectify the situation. I won't be one of the "lets hang em for selling us out" crowd, but some damage was done and I hope you can do something to fix this. Good luck and I hope you learned something valuable here. If you need any help let me know.

    El Rojo
    2nd Amendment Enthusiast
     
  13. AZRickD

    AZRickD Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    1,684
    Way to suck up, El Rojo. ;)
     
  14. Jeff White

    Jeff White Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    19,205
    Location:
    Alma Illinois
    Lawrence Keane responds to the Post Dispatch Editorial

    The Post did see fit to print Mr. Keane's response to their editorial.
    http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/editorialcommentary/story/C11C6E68F9DCE6F086256F600038113D?OpenDocument&Headline=LETTERS%3A+Crimes+vs.+weapons%3B+foggy+liberals%3B+ethanol's+cost
    12/06/2004

    Focus on crimes,
    not the weapons


    A Nov. 29 editorial shamelessly exploits the criminal attack on a group of Wisconsin hunters in order to promote an agenda against lawfully made and owned military-style semiautomatic rifles.

    Semiautomatics have long been legal for hunting under the laws of most states. The 7.62 x 39 mm rifle reportedly involved in the Wisconsin killings fires a .30-caliber bullet that many hunters routinely use to humanely take down deer at moderate distances within 150 yards.

    The quotes referenced from a New York Times article were not accurate in context and consequently not reflective of the National Shooting Sports Foundation's position on military-style semiautomatic firearms.

    Our organization, which helps 40 million Americans safely enjoy hunting and recreational shooting, supported the expiration of the misnamed "assault weapons ban" for a number of good reasons. Chief among them was that the ban had no effect on crime. "Banned" guns and those functioning identically to them were legal to own and available for sale throughout the decade following the ban in 1994. During that time, crime rates, especially those for murder, dropped by about half.

    What the ban was intended to do was make the argument that some guns are bad, in order to serve the ultimate purpose of arguing that all guns are bad.

    Inanimate objects are neither good nor bad. Guns without criminals are not a problem, but criminals - even those without guns - always are.

    Let's focus on prosecuting the individual who committed the crime in Wisconsin, not disparaging millions of responsible gun owners for the rifles they own.

    Lawrence G. Keane
    Senior Vice President
    and General Counsel,
    National Shooting Sports Foundation
    Newtown, Conn.

    Of course they couldn't let the opposing side have the last word:

    Dangerous guns

    President George W. Bush campaigned on the notion he was keeping America safe from terrorism. If this is the case, why did he let the federal assault weapons ban expire in September?

    In Wisconsin, there are now six dead and two wounded at the hands of a killer with an assault rifle. How is our country safer by letting people carry very dangerous, terrorist-like weapons such as these previously banned firearms?

    Many of these weapons are purchased with hardly a background check on the sellers or buyers. If Bush truly were concerned about safety in this country, he would urge his party's leaders in Congress to renew the federal ban on assault weapons.

    Ryan D. Kulik
    Executive Director,
    Missourians Against Handgun
    Violence
    Defiance
     
  15. Cool Hand Luke 22:36

    Cool Hand Luke 22:36 member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,291
    Location:
    Arlington, VA

    I frequently "circumvent" the traffic laws by; driving at the speed limit, wearing my seatbelt, and properly insuring and registering my vehicle.
     
  16. DRZinn

    DRZinn Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Messages:
    3,991
    Location:
    In a pot of water, 200 degrees and rising slowly..
    That's one of the easiest ways to get a :fire: type reaction from me; the whole "loophole" argument. They always mention that people are doing something to "get around" the law. I'd say people are doing something to "comply with" the law.
     
  17. alan

    alan Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,594
    Location:
    sowest pa.
    One would think, alas such thinking is seemingly unwarranted, that the spokesman for a NATIONAL SHOOTING ORGANIZATION would be careful about what they say, especially when they are being interviewed by the dean of the ANTI GUN PRESS, The New York Times.

    In case it had escaped your attention, there is unfortunately a large difference between things "as they are", and things "as they should be".
     
  18. c_yeager

    c_yeager Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2003
    Messages:
    5,479
    Location:
    Seattle
    FYI The NSSF is the organization that is behind a massive campaign distributing gun-locks for "safety" (your tax dollars bought them too). In the literature regarding those gunlocks they remain "neutral" (their words) on the idea of self-defense using a firearm but, mantain that there is no reason that a defensive weapon couldnt be locked when not in use. (see "operation child safe", hey its for the Children!)

    I do NOT consider the NSSF to be out friends. They seen to personify the "they will never take away my birdgun/what do you need a ak47 fer, you can't hunt with it" croud.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page