Schoenke is at it again!!!

[Mr White]

As I sat and read the Pittsburgh Post Gazette online this morning, I was greeted with this piece of yellow journalism.

Link to article

I like how they call the column The Sunday Forum. Isn't a forum supposed to be an open discussion of ideas and issues from both sides? Hardly a forum when only one side gets to do all the discussing.

I think his line about the NRA resorting to bullying, intimidation, distortion and lies may be one of the most ironic (and perhaps moronic?) things I have ever read.

I'll write a rebuttal to this very misleading opinion and send it in later this week. I suggest that everyone in Western and Central PA, Southeastern Ohio and Northwestern WV do the same. Let the PG know where the real lies and distortions are coming from.

The NRA doesn't get it
by Ray Schoenke
The National Rifle Association wants to relive the past and plans to spend $40 million to campaign against Sen. Barack Obama. For the NRA, it is a desperate attempt to remain relevant in light of the recent Supreme Court decision in the Washington, D.C., gun law case, District of Columbia v. Heller.

The gun lobby wanted Justice Antonin Scalia to author the long-awaited decision in Heller, but when he did, he confirmed what I and most gun owners have long believed: Citizens have an individual right to keep and bear arms, not only as members of organized militias, but that right is not unlimited.

According to Justice Scalia, "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited." He went on to say, "Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

Those aren't the words of a gun-control advocate; they were written by one of the most conservative justices on the bench. They undermine the NRA's all-or-nothing approach which has been so damaging to the gun debate for so long.

My organization, the American Hunters and Shooters Association, filed an amicus brief in support of Heller and against the District of Columbia's outright ban on the possession of handguns. We applauded the Supreme Court ruling.

The Heller decision signals that the gun debate in this country no longer includes the NRA's extreme right-wing position of allowing unlimited access to any gun by anyone. The court also made it clear that most guns are now safe from government confiscation. Policy makers can craft responsible and appropriate measures to ensure guns do not fall into the wrong hands or get carried into the wrong places.

This thoughtful approach by Justice Scalia is shared by the vast majority of the nation's 80 million gun owners and by Mr. Obama, who supports an individual right to own a gun but says, "The notion that somehow local jurisdictions can't initiate gun safety laws to deal with gang bangers and random shootings on the street isn't born out by our Constitution."

So, this is a time to move forward. The leaders of the NRA can't hold America's gun owners hostage anymore. Sure, they will refight the old battles with the old tactics of bullying, intimidation, distortion and lies. But the rest of us finally are ready to address the critical issues affecting gun owners.

For instance, where is the NRA on protecting our environment and public lands, on making sure there is a healthy, sustainable population of wild game in the Rockies and elsewhere? They won't fight these issues. The American Hunters and Shooters Association will.

The NRA has plenty of excuses for not protecting the needs of hunters and shooters. One is that the leaders of the NRA were busy fighting John McCain on campaign finance reform, which could threaten their ability to intimidate lawmakers. Another is that they were busy fighting John McCain on gun-show background checks.

Wait. This is the guy for whom they now plan to spend more than $40 million of their members' money to get him elected president. This sort of hypocrisy and political opportunism is what's wrong with the leadership of the NRA. They've lost touch with what really matters.

Earlier this year, 670 hunting and fishing organizations, including the hunters and shooters association, became actively engaged in the fight against global warming. We see the effects firsthand. Hunters like me can tell you that the ducks are coming later and later every year.

The NRA was absent. In fact, NRA leaders actively undermine the efforts of hunting and fishing groups. NRA board member Grover Norquist, through his group, Americans for Taxpayer Reform, co-sponsored a conference for self-proclaimed global warming "skeptics."

At the hunters and shooters association, we aren't going to spend $40 million on tired partisan politics. What we spend goes to actually protecting your right to have a gun, to be safe in your home and to have a place that isn't polluted to hunt and fish. The voices of ordinary hunters and shooters are finally being heard.

Mr. Obama isn't perfect, but he believes the Second Amendment confers an individual right to own a gun, although he doesn't think it protects "gang bangers." This position, plus his commitment to protecting our natural resources and our hunting and shooting heritage, makes sense to me and millions of other responsible gun owners.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

This ain't rocket surgery...

If the D party doesn't want NRA to spend millions against their candidate, then they shouldn't have put up an avowed gun-banner as their candidate, who has actively supported every gun ban and anti-gun measure that ever came down the pike, and supported DC's complete ban on guns.

Which part of that basic premise don't the D party leaders get?

I hate the neocons, little Bush, his policies and illegal activities just as much as the next average libertarian type guy, and if the D's had put up a pro-gun candidate, I would vote for him/her. But how can they expect anything different when they choose an avowed gun-banner as their candidate? They made their bed, and now they shall lie in it.

 

[Drgong]

Funny thing is, NRA supports not having felons having guns...

 

[Cesiumsponge]

The NRA is the National Rifle Association, not the National Wildlife Game Land and Global Warming Association.

Maybe I should write an article about how the NRA isn't doing anything against dependency on foreign oil and they haven't lifted a finger in helping the crashing real estate market, and that they're terrible because of it.

Judging from the tone of the article, I'm willing to bet this guy has the "you don't need no assault rifle" mentality where the only firearms he wants available are blued and wood-stocked. He seems to brag that the association he particularly subscribes to is superior because they branch off and focus on environmental issues. If I wanted to focus on environmental issues, I would join an environmental group.

 

[El Tejon]

"The notion that somehow local jurisdictions can't initiate gun safety laws to deal with gang bangers and random shootings on the street isn't born out by our Constitution."

Barry, have you read on down the the Fourteenth Amendment?

No, Barry, local jurisdictions cannot violate fundamental individual rights. Remember, we fought a big war about this and the good guys won. Local government cannot violate the rights of its citizens no matter how much you mutter about safety or crime.

 

[basicblur]

This article is so wrong on so many levels...

...it’s almost not worth one’s time, but here goes!

Let's see...he's griping 'bout the NRA's "all or nothing" attitude, yet we've had many in here griping 'bout the NRA not forcing the issue in DC v Heller (until they realized the suit was going forward). You’d think if the NRA really had an all or nothing attitude they would have pushed DC v Heller before Gura et al (NRA was weighing the Supreme Court odds when it started). I’ve also often heard NRA reps state they supported keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill etc.
Unfortunately, the writer sounds like some guys I used to work with. They were avid hunters, but couldn’t understand why someone would want an “assault” weapon or some of the pistols being sold. I tried explaining to them the true purpose of the 2nd Amendment, and that if those opposed to us having a means to protect ourselves (up to and including from our government) are successful in disarming us, hunters will be next on their list.
BTW…I get so damn tired of hearing about the VA Tech shootings being due to a failure of gun laws-it was NOT a failure of gun laws. If there was a law “at fault”, it was on the medical end (privacy laws).

The NRA has plenty of excuses for not protecting the needs of hunters and shooters.

What? I’m not a hunter, but I’ve seen numerous times the NRA was behind/supported conservation issues etc.

One is that the leaders of the NRA were busy fighting John McCain on campaign finance reform, which could threaten their ability to intimidate lawmakers.

Or…they were fighting for Mr. Schoenke’s 1st Amendment rights (and his right to make a complete ass of himself by exercising said right by writing such drivel as his column).
McCain-Feingold is a direct assault on freedom of speech, and if I’m not mistaken, McCain has admitted it was a bit of a screw-up.
So with McCain-Feingold, instead of “NRA intimidation”, we now have (more) government intimidation by restricting your 1st Amendment rights (somebody please explain it to him)!

Earlier this year, 670 hunting and fishing organizations, including the hunters and shooters association, became actively engaged in the fight against global warming. We see the effects firsthand. Hunters like me can tell you that the ducks are coming later and later every year.

Yeah…global warming is real because his ducks are coming later every year!
Personally, I don’t know if global warming is real or not, but if it is, how much can man do about it (I understand over 80% of carbon emissions come from nature)? I'm sure the planet has gone through many heat/cooling cycles over the eons and find it a bit arrogant that some are so sure there's something man can do about it.
I’m not saying it is not real, but Gore et al whine about the Arctic ice cap melting (I understand the Antarctic ice cap is growing), and there are a number of scientists that debate whether it is real (some are FINALLY getting a little press). I saw the founder of The Weather Channel stating he had over 3,500 scientists who agree with him that global warming alarmism is false, but when they challenge Gore and company to debate it, they’re told “the debate is over”.
BTW...how "convenient" is it that Al Gore can sell you some carbon offsets?

The NRA was absent. In fact, NRA leaders actively undermine the efforts of hunting and fishing groups. NRA board member Grover Norquist, through his group, Americans for Taxpayer Reform, co-sponsored a conference for self-proclaimed global warming "skeptics."

The NRA was absent, eh? Good for them! I don’t want my NRA dues spent on “global warming” issues-I want ‘em spent defending my “right to keep and bear arms”.
Kudos to Grover Norquist for his co-sponsorship of a conference of global warming skeptics, of which I am one (sounds like no NRA money was used).
Apparently Mr. Schoenke is one of those who think “the debate is over”!

Another is that they were busy fighting John McCain on gun-show background checks.

As we all know, there ARE background checks by licensed gun dealers at gun shows.
Does the writer really want to give the government the power to regulate sales (of any item) between private individuals?

Mr. Obama isn't perfect, but he believes the Second Amendment confers an individual right to own a gun…

Really? Based on his past history (some wish you’d just forget that) it certainly doesn’t sound like it to me! The really scary part is Obama once taught Constitutional Law, and believed the DC gun ban was constitutional!

We won’t even go into the pointlessness of passing more laws to keep weapons out of the hands of “gang bangers” (how’s that working out so far?).

In closing, it sounds like Mr. Schoenke has triple-dipped from the Obama, global warming, and Brady Campaign Kool Aid!

 

[SCKimberFan]

Hey all, His group: ASHA is a shill funded a ton by the Brady Campaign. This guy needs to be exposed for the charlatan that he is. He no more thinks the 2nd Amendemnt is an individual right than Barack Obama does.

Assualt the Post-Gazette with letters. It is nothing but a left-wing rag.

 

[Prince Yamato]

Since when does the NRA hold anybody hostage?

 

[bogie]

What is a Schoenke?

 

[AlaskaErik]

For the NRA, it is a desperate attempt to remain relevant in light of the recent Supreme Court decision in the Washington, D.C., gun law case, District of Columbia v. Heller.

What an idiot. Heller was one battle in an ongoing war against those who would deprive us of our Second Amensdment rights. Those who fight the gun grabbers and gun haters will always be relevant in one way or another, including the NRA. As for their ad campaign against Obama, he represents the greatest threat to gun owners in decades, so he should be the target of those who cherish their inalienable rights.

 

[mnrivrat]

WOW ! What a pitty .

Anybody here a member of this guys association, and if so pm me and tell me why you would support this organization ?

I was just to their web site and contacted them to let them know they sure don't have my support .

 

[Kim]

He is also lying about the NRA not doing anything for hunting. If I remember right they did something BIG at the beginning of the Bush Presidency in getting the money that was supposed to go toward saving hunting land spent on that and NOT on Bubbas other pet theme at the time.(Seems there was alot of discussion about it here) I will have to google it. Also they backed laws that were passed that if hunting land was taken out an equal amount had to be put in hunting. Also they protect shooting ranges and such. The guy is a LIAR. They also worked hard so Clinton did not just gut the .gov supplying Garands to the public. Clinton gutted it but it became a private/public sort of thing. The best they could do.

 

[Libertarian52]

I keep telling my hunter friends who keep saying "Assault weapons are only designed to kill people.":banghead:

A) The 2nd Amendment ain't about duck hunting.

B) That our "...right to keep and bear arms..." was codified by the 2nd amendment because it was, "...necessary to the security of a free State,".

C) And that right "...shall not be infringed."

D) And finally, if that right is ever infringed, how long would it be before they start coming after their precious deer rifles and over/under shotguns since they aren't "protected" by the constitution.

But sometimes you can't through their thick skulls.

 

[basicblur]

ASHA is a shill funded a ton by the Brady Campaign.

Yeah, I kinda figured that after reading his column.
I knew from my NRA First Freedom magazine there was a "hunting" organization basically started by the Brady Bunch in an effort to divide gun owners and conquer the 2nd Amendment. After reading his propaganda, I figured his “organization” had to be the one the Brady Bunch started.

It’s pretty pathetic that he couldn’t be more deceitful writing his amateurish column-you’d think he would at least be skilled enough (or would have gotten enough help/talking points from the Brady Bunch) to be clever instead of just outright lying?

 

[ServiceSoon]

Do these people sit around on weekends trying to figure out how to take guns from peaceful law-abiding citizens? I have to admit this tactic will take some second amendment supporters closer to the anti side.

 

[Hk91-762mm]

cezium=wrote
Judging from the tone of the article, I'm willing to bet this guy has the "you don't need no assault rifle" mentality where the only firearms he wants available are blued and wood-stocked. He seems to brag that the association he particularly subscribes to is superior because they branch off and focus on environmental issues. If I wanted to focus on environmental issues, I would join an environmental group.
OHHhh YEEAaaaa You got that right --This bunch is a wing of the BRADY Campain - They support all the resionable Gun laws and they are an extreamest Enviromental Groupe -[enviro nuts are way against gun rights -we might hurt a little animal]

FROM there web site ===>>>>>AHSA Policy Statement: Modern Fifty Caliber Semiautomatic Rifles
Issue: Modern semiautomatic .50 caliber BMG sniper rifles are weapons designed for military use that combine long range, accuracy, and massive power. Intended for use in combat situations, these weapons can penetrate structures and destroy or disable light armored vehicles, radar dishes, helicopters, stationary airplanes, and other “high-value” military targets. The Branch Davidian cult in Waco, Texas, Al Qaeda, the Irish Republican Army, street and motorcycle gangs in California, Missouri and Indiana, and various militia groups and criminals across the United States are all documented as having possessed or used modern .50 caliber BMG sniper rifles.

AHSA supports legislative efforts to regulate .50 caliber BMG sniper rifles in the same manner as machine guns are regulated under the provisions of the National Firearms Act of 1934.

The modern .50 caliber BMG rifle is one of the most powerful and destructive weapons legally available to civilians in the United States. A modern .50 caliber BMG rifle can hit a target accurately from distances of 1,000 to 2,000 yards, depending on the skill of the shooter, and

FROM a letter they sent to me [Im on there mailing list]

Those of you who know me, know that I am a straight shooter, I mean what I say and say what I mean.

As a hunter who is proud of the American hunting tradition there is no doubt in my mind that the senior leadership of the National Rifle Association has sold us out and become a front group for the Republican Party. The GOP's interests come first -- and that leaves hunters behind. There's a reason Grover Norquist and CPAC's David Keene sit on the NRA's Board -- and I think we all know it has nothing to do with hunting or gun rights.

But it's not enough to say this in the blind to my buddies while waiting for the ducks to come. That's why I'm writing to you today and that's why I started the American Hunters and Shooters Association (AHSA) so that we can stand up for gun owners and reject the extremism of the NRA leadership.

Forward this email to five friends today and ask them to join us and stand up for hunter's rights.

We all know the NRA has no qualms about attacking gun owners who don't agree with their "soldier of fortune" philosophy. Remember Jim Zumbo, the dean of outdoor writers whose 30 year career was destroyed by NRA because he had the audacity to write that AK-47s were not a good choice for prarie dog hunting. Or Smith & Wesson, when they agreed with the Clinton administration that a free gun lock with a new gun is a good idea. Now the NRA wants to label AHSA as the "enemy in camouflage". The problem is most rational thinking sportsmen are beginning to understand that it's really the NRA who is trying to pull the wool over the eyes of America's 40 million hunters.

We're doing our best to expose the NRA's hypocrisy and truly represent American Hunters and Shooters. Here's an example of what we've been doing: In the summer and fall of 2006 there was an emerging a hot button issue about public lands. The Bush Administration was proposing the sale of millions of acres of federal forest land, land

 

[Blackbeard]

What is a Schoenke?

I'm not sure but I think they should be banned.

 

[CrawdaddyJim]

Man, what a load o' hooooey!

And for a "straight shooter" he isn't bothered with facts much.

 

[Wes Janson]

Once again I think it's worth pointing out that Heller isn't as much of a victory as many claim it is. Even here we can see the beginnings of "Gun control is perfectly acceptable because the Supreme Court said so!".

 

[hoosier8]

Quote: Mr. Obama isn't perfect, but he believes the Second Amendment confers an individual right to own a gun

I have never heard Obama say we have the right to keep and bear arms. Listen closely, he leaves out the word keep.

 

[basicblur]

Just the facts, ma'm!

For a pdf of Obama's record on the second amendment, click here.

Download it...e-mail it and pass it around to your friends.
Heck...pass it around to your enemies!

 

[basicblur]

I have never heard Obama say we have the right to keep and bear arms. Listen closely, he leaves out the word keep.

After the Heller decision, and Obama’s convoluted explanation of his flip-flop, I believe one commentator probably said it best:
“So basically what he’s saying is he supports the 2nd Amendment in theory-just not its implementation!”

Ahhhh politicians! Ya gotta......luv 'em!

 

[K-Romulus]

Wouldn't "global warming" mean that the ducks will come EARLIER in the (spring) season?!

ETA: My bad . .what do I know, I'm a deer archery season guy

 

[Telumehtar]

According to Justice Scalia, "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited." He went on to say, "Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

This is the part of the opinion that the anti-gunners seem to be latching onto. It's this one sentence that gives them hope and allows them to keep on picking an argument about other gun laws.

This sentence explicitly states that this ruling, in trying to be as narrow as possible (which is what the SCOTUS is supposed to do), was not to be used as a blanket ruling to strike down all other gun laws. But to me it also seems to be saying implicitly, that this ruling is not affirming those laws either.

If there was one thing I have to wonder about this opinion which could have been written more clearly is whether that sentence should've read:

"Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt or affirm on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

 

[myrockfight]

The NRA is the National Rifle Association, not the National Wildlife Game Land and Global Warming Association.

Maybe I should write an article about how the NRA isn't doing anything against dependency on foreign oil and they haven't lifted a finger in helping the crashing real estate market, and that they're terrible because of it.

Judging from the tone of the article, I'm willing to bet this guy has the "you don't need no assault rifle" mentality where the only firearms he wants available are blued and wood-stocked. He seems to brag that the association he particularly subscribes to is superior because they branch off and focus on environmental issues. If I wanted to focus on environmental issues, I would join an environmental group

Cesium, I was thinking the exact same thing. It is amazing how these guys try to bridge completely unrelated issues in an effort to bring fring 2nd Amendment supporters over to their side.

So we just need to reinforce the obvious for those who may be standing over there by the fence and might be tempted to sit on it, or God help them, go over and hang out. If that happens they'll just swarm over them and we may never see 'em again. lol Or at least until they get sick of stepping in all the BS.