Kerry Holds Gun-He-Wants-To-Ban High

[seretogis]

LINKY

National Shooting Sports Foundation: Kerry Accepts Shotgun He Would Ban as 'Assault Weapon'
Tuesday September 7, 5:00 pm ET

RACINE, W.Va., Sept. 7 /PRNewswire/ -- The following is a press release regarding the Remington model 11-87 shotgun that Sen. John Kerry recently accepted:

At a Labor Day campaign rally yesterday, Sen. John Kerry accepted an ironic gift from a labor union representative. The gift, a Remington model 11-87 shotgun commonly used in hunting and recreational shooting enjoyed by millions of Americans, would be banned as an "assault weapon" under a bill that Kerry is co-sponsoring.

"The semi-automatic shotgun that Kerry accepted is one that he'd like to ban under his bill known as 'The Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003 (S. 1431).' Kerry tells union workers that he's a hunter, but the truth is he would ban their shotguns," said Lawrence G. Keane, senior vice president and general counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF).

Keane said several sportsmen's groups have pointed out that Kerry's effort to cast himself as an avid hunter do not square with his anti-gun votes as a U.S. senator. In various photos Kerry appears unaware of proper firearms handling. The Hunting and Shooting Sports Heritage Fund is advertising in national sportsmen magazines and on the Web site, http://www.voteyoursport.com, to illustrate these points.

Kerry was given the shotgun by Cecil Roberts of the United Mine Workers of America. The union represents workers at a Remington factory in Ilion, New York. Last year the union urged Kerry to support a bill to end frivolous lawsuits against firearms makers (S. 659). The suits threaten manufacturing jobs. However, Kerry voted against the bill.

Remington President Tommy Milner said, "Rest assured, Remington was neither aware of this presentation in advance nor in any way supportive of its intent to support Senator Kerry's candidacy. In fact, the company remains amused by ongoing photos of Senator Kerry shooting without either ear or eye protection while discharging a firearm."

The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the companies and businesses that make and sell firearms, ammunition and other products for the 40 million Americans who responsibly hunt and enjoy recreational shooting. Learn more at http://www.nssf.org.

An article on the Drudge Report Web site, http://www.drudgereport.com/dncg.htm, points out the irony of Kerry accepting the shotgun gift given the legislation that he supported.

Flip. This is both funny and sad to me. Flop. Another example of how Kerry will constantly reinvent himself like Gore in an attempt to attract voters. Flip. Does anyone even know who Kerry is anymore? Flop.

I'd also like to know how many Remington shotguns are used in crime, and why it would even be considered for an assault weapon ban other than in an attempt to disarm the American public incrementally.

[xepherys]

Bah... I REALLY wish there was a strong third party these days! *grumble*

[Journeyman]

Linky

Originally Posted by Nanofever

Holy shit, stop the presses. Kerry was the 9th co-sponsor on a bill that died in committee; a bill which would have passed 100% in its current form without any changes in committee to make it enforceable or changes to appease Republicans. I swear Drudge is taking down Kerry's bid for the presidency one story at a time. I thought Drudge finally sunk Kerry's battleship with the intern scandal, but now, I think this story is the one that will destroy Kerry's chances.

Perform searches, they help.

[smooth]

Originally Posted by seretogis

LINKY



Flip. This is both funny and sad to me. Flop. Another example of how Kerry will constantly reinvent himself like Gore in an attempt to attract voters. Flip. Does anyone even know who Kerry is anymore? Flop.

I'd also like to know how many Remington shotguns are used in crime, and why it would even be considered for an assault weapon ban other than in an attempt to disarm the American public incrementally.

Are you seriously asking how many shotguns are used in street crime?

fucking hilarious.

[scout]

Mr. Kerry has never voted anything pro-gun or pro-2nd Amendment in his life. Suddenly, in dire straights and in need of votes, he's the gun owners best friend.
Pathetic to say the least. I wonder, if he is elected, how long it will be before the assault on the 2nd Amendment begins again? The assault weapons ban is about to expire, ABC News last night ran an ad about tonight's show, their [ABC News} going to air a piece about how the expiration of the ban has some police officers scared to death. So here we go again, the assault has already begun and Kerry hasn't even been elected yet {yea I know, it's paranoia at it's peak haha } Most police officers I know think the ban was a load of crap, most support our 2nd Amendment rights, but ABC News, the liberal bastards that they are, have dug up a few that are in agreement with the liberal media and are going to try to pass it off as all police personnel are scared outa their pants. This whole media/Kerry thing is sickening.

[zenmaster10665]

Originally Posted by xepherys

Bah... I REALLY wish there was a strong third party these days! *grumble*

Agreed....how the hell can the US ever have a viable 3rd party though....will it ever happen??

[Ustwo]

Originally Posted by zenmaster10665

Agreed....how the hell can the US ever have a viable 3rd party though....will it ever happen??

Bull Moose party was pretty strong!

A new party (new as in new to power) will require a charismatic leader and very hard times in the country. Be careful what you ask for, this doesn't always work out for the best.

[rukkyg]

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Bull Moose party was pretty strong!

A new party (new as in new to power) will require a charismatic leader and very hard times in the country. Be careful what you ask for, this doesn't always work out for the best.

Yeah, in 2000 the country was experiencing GOOD times, and look what happened!

[filtherton]

I think i'm gonna hafta go constitution party this time, fellas. We'll show those islamic fundamentalists how it's done!

File this under: OMGOMGOMGOMG A POLITICIAN IS TRYING TO MOLD HIS IMAGE TO GET ELECTED!!! STOP THE FUCKING PRESSES!!!

[Lebell]

Yes,

Very ironic.

Another reason I am not voting for Kerry.

[MSD]

Originally Posted by smooth

Are you seriously asking how many shotguns are used in street crime?

fucking hilarious.

What's so hilarious about that? Kerry wants to ban this gun as an "assault weapon," which is supposed to cut down on crime. It makes no sense.

[Ustwo]

Kerry doesn't have the most liberal record in the senate by voting for second amendment rights. I think the ironic thing is he doesn't even know what he voted to ban.

[Seaver]

One more reason I'm not voting for Kerry..

[OpieCunningham]

Whoa!

If only the other guy hadn't started an unecessary war, attempted (and continues to attempt) to write discrimination into the Constitution, uselessly cut taxes for the wealthy, created zero jobs, dismantled decades of environmental policy, etc ... I'd definitely have to rethink my vote for Kerry!

[SecretMethod70]

Originally Posted by xepherys

Bah... I REALLY wish there was a strong third party these days! *grumble*

There is. The Libertarian party is the largest third party in the nation but you'd never know based on the media attention they're given. They hold more public offices than any third party in the nation - including high-ranking positions in state government - but you'd never know based on the media attention they get. In my opinion this is because they are also the party with the most appealing platform (of the third parties) and therefore they pose a REAL danger if their message gets out. We can debate all day about whther the media is controlled by liberals or conservatives, but one thing is certain - it's controlled by one of the two (or both) and neither of them wants a REAL third party to start getting any attention.

[seretogis]

Originally Posted by OpieCunningham

Whoa!

If only the other guy hadn't started an unecessary war, attempted (and continues to attempt) to write discrimination into the Constitution, uselessly cut taxes for the wealthy, created zero jobs, dismantled decades of environmental policy, etc ... I'd definitely have to rethink my vote for Kerry!

I thought this thread was about Kerry, not Bush? If the only reason you would vote for Kerry is to vote against Bush, your candidate and your party have serious problems.

[OpieCunningham]

Originally Posted by seretogis

If the only reason you would vote for Kerry is to vote against Bush, your candidate and your party have serious problems.

Or the political reality of modern day America has some serious problems.

But really, if I disagree with one option far more so than I disagree with the other, why is that a problem that I vote for the latter?

I know you'd like to imply that the Democrats are weak ... but if you actually look at the Conservative platform, you'd see that there are essentially 2 types of people - the religious and the financialists. That the financialists have decided it's ok to sacrifice their social freedom to team up with the religious folks who have little to no interest in any non-social issues is a testament to the depths that Conservatives must go to have any power in this country.

[seretogis]

Originally Posted by OpieCunningham

Or the political reality of modern day America has some serious problems.

But really, if I disagree with one option far more so than I disagree with the other, why is that a problem that I vote for the latter?

Because there are more than just two options. The "lesser evil" mentality is what is shackling the American people to a two-party system. If everyone who wanted Bush out of office but didn't want to vote for Kerry would vote for Nader, we would have a three-party system and candidates would be forced to live up to their own hype and deliver what they promise to get elected. The two-party system benefits only Democrat and Republican politicians.

PM if you want me to elaborate, let's not derail this thread too much. ^^

[OpieCunningham]

Nothing much more to say other than - In essence, I agree. This is the first time I will vote for a Democrat or a Republican. That's just a testament to how significantly evil Bush really is. If only the Libertarians pretending to be Republicans followed your advice.

[Strange Famous]

I doubt Kerry would be able to disarm the American people, gun rights are very firmly entrenched in culture and the common opinion... it would take a revolutionary government freed from the fetters of "checks and balances" to achieve this... I do agree that the widespread distrbution of arms is becoming more unpopular, but I think the majority of Americans are still not prepared to give up their weapons...

[Boo]

I wish Kerry would make it easier for me to vote for him.

[docbungle]

Unbelievable how this election has turned into a bunch of trite little arguments over little things such as this. The public pounces on every little thing instead of concentrating on the big picture. As if banning this gun will really have an effect on the country as a whole. As if it is what the election should be about.

The issues that the media assaults us with are things I'd expect to see in an episode of "The Real World" on MTV or some such garbage. I can't remember an election year where so much absolute bullshit was spouted by either side.

[seretogis]

Originally Posted by docbungle

Unbelievable how this election has turned into a bunch of trite little arguments over little things such as this. The public pounces on every little thing instead of concentrating on the big picture. As if banning this gun will really have an effect on the country as a whole. As if it is what the election should be about.

The issues that the media assaults us with are things I'd expect to see in an episode of "The Real World" on MTV or some such garbage. I can't remember an election year where so much absolute bullshit was spouted by either side.

Yeah, I can't believe that people are worried about such petty things as the security of their second amendment rights. Can't we just vote for who has the better hair?

[whocarz]

This is one of the biggest reasons why I hope Kerry doesn't win. I could really give a damn about anything else, but gun control disgusts me.

[Kadath]

If anyone actually believes that Kerry would be able to do anything to affect their right to own a gun, I am amazed. Look at the Republican Congress. Look how massively unpopular anti-gun laws are. I think people should be more concerned about the reproductive rights of women, the danger to the environment, the threat to their sons and daughters who go off to war, the ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor, and on and on and on. To vote based primarily on an archaic and Neaderthal desire to possess a weapon is pretty short-sighted.

[Lebell]

Originally Posted by Kadath

If anyone actually believes that Kerry would be able to do anything to affect their right to own a gun, I am amazed. Look at the Republican Congress. Look how massively unpopular anti-gun laws are. I think people should be more concerned about the reproductive rights of women, the danger to the environment, the threat to their sons and daughters who go off to war, the ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor, and on and on and on. To vote based primarily on an archaic and Neaderthal desire to possess a weapon is pretty short-sighted.

We've had some good discussions as of late, so I'll respond to this.

This "neaderthal(ic) desire" as you put it, is simply the desire to be responsible for one's own life, starting at the basic levels and moving up to one's government. Yes, I am upset with Bush on many levels, but some of the things he is erroding can be fixed, whereas erroding the right to own guns errodes our very means to ultimately overthrow a corrupt government.

I know you don't agree, but I did want you to understand why many gun owners think that your view point is the short-sighted one.

[Ustwo]

Originally Posted by seretogis

Yeah, I can't believe that people are worried about such petty things as the security of their second amendment rights. Can't we just vote for who has the better hair?

I've vote on who has the hotter wife

I think a problem a lot of liberals have is they assume that wars, and revolutions are a thing of the past for white nations, and yes I think some of that really is a racial bias, but thats another topic. They forget that we already had the war to end all wars, and that most of them live in the most contested piece of land in all of human history (Europe), Isreal may be a close second.

They think it can't happen here, not in my country, not in our society, but its happened in less then a human life time ago and can happen at any time in the future.

[roachboy]

do you imagine a situation in which you would actually mobilize to overthrow the government with your gun?
on what basis?

i am not in the least opposed in principle to such an action, but the crux would be on what basis any such movement worked. but that is hypothetical at the moment--i am just interested in how th link between gun ownership as such and the possibility of radical political action moves from the level of fantasy in this case, if it does.

[xepherys]

Originally Posted by seretogis

I thought this thread was about Kerry, not Bush? If the only reason you would vote for Kerry is to vote against Bush, your candidate and your party have serious problems.

If you'll recall, his only platform for months was that we wasn't George W. Bush. *shrug* If it works for the candidate...

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70

There is. The Libertarian party is the largest third party in the nation but you'd never know based on the media attention they're given.

I'm very aware of the Libertarian party, and have voted for them in local offices MANY times. That may just be the route I take for Pres...

Originally Posted by seretogis

Yeah, I can't believe that people are worried about such petty things as the security of their second amendment rights. Can't we just vote for who has the better hair?

Bush would win that... but they're both so damned goofy looking.

Originally Posted by Ustwo

I've vote on who has the hotter wife :P

I usually check out their daughters... that was my only point AGAINST Clinton! )

[Kurtz]

Kerry's and idiot about guns, Bush is and idiot about everything. And if you check out bush's positions on guns, they're about the same as Kerry's. For me, Kerry is just the lesser of two evils.

[Superbelt]

I don't like Kerry's general stance on guns either.

But there is no way he will ever be the cause of anti-gun legislation being passed. If any would get passed you can blame it on both parties, not just the democrats because the Republicans are pretty much assured to hold onto at least one half of the federal legislature this year.

[Kadath]

Originally Posted by Lebell

We've had some good discussions as of late, so I'll respond to this.

This "neaderthal(ic) desire" as you put it, is simply the desire to be responsible for one's own life, starting at the basic levels and moving up to one's government. Yes, I am upset with Bush on many levels, but some of the things he is erroding can be fixed, whereas erroding the right to own guns errodes our very means to ultimately overthrow a corrupt government.

I know you don't agree, but I did want you to understand why many gun owners think that your view point is the short-sighted one.

I reject your inapt correction of Neanderthal; though I understand the desire to turn the word into an adjective, "neanderthalic" is not a word. I find it surreal that you consider things like permanent damage to the environment, the destruction of a woman's right to choose, and the deaths of thousands in a misguided war reversible, but not so for an assault weapons ban that has a built-in end date. We have had some good discussions of late, so I apologize for the inflammatory nature of my initial post, but I believe gun enthusiasts allow themselves to become blinded by a single issue.

[Strange Famous]

Originally Posted by Ustwo

I've vote on who has the hotter wife

I think a problem a lot of liberals have is they assume that wars, and revolutions are a thing of the past for white nations, and yes I think some of that really is a racial bias, but thats another topic. They forget that we already had the war to end all wars, and that most of them live in the most contested piece of land in all of human history (Europe), Isreal may be a close second.

They think it can't happen here, not in my country, not in our society, but its happened in less then a human life time ago and can happen at any time in the future.

I am not a liberal... but I do not just believe that the revolution will happen. I know that it will happen. There is no such thing as the end of history... or if there is, only that it would mean the end of time. Whether you are a communist or not, everyone must understand that no system of government, no empire, no economic system, is eternal... every existing society and empire has been overthrown... and every one that exists today will be too. Another saying of Churchill was that "those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it"... armed citizenary or not, the social order of today will be overthrown.

On the issue of hand, I in favour of complete gun control, to the extent that normal police do not carry guns (only SWAT teams), and possessing any weapon other than a modified target shooting air pistol is illegal... I would support any president that would do this... but Kerry is not the man for it, he does not strike me as a man of any moral convictions, he will do whatever the opinion polls tell him too. Gun ownership is become more unpopular in America - but it is still too entrenched to be taken away by a LIBERAL democratic government, a truly revolutionary government able to free itself from special interest and individual self interest - and act in the cause of true human interest and the decent opinion of mankin could achieve it... but that is a whole different thread.

[whocarz]

Originally Posted by Strange Famous

On the issue of hand, I in favour of complete gun control, to the extent that normal police do not carry guns (only SWAT teams), and possessing any weapon other than a modified target shooting air pistol is illegal... I would support any president that would do this... but Kerry is not the man for it, he does not strike me as a man of any moral convictions, he will do whatever the opinion polls tell him too. Gun ownership is become more unpopular in America - but it is still too entrenched to be taken away by a LIBERAL democratic government, a truly revolutionary government able to free itself from special interest and individual self interest - and act in the cause of true human interest and the decent opinion of mankin could achieve it... but that is a whole different thread.

Well, you and I are both content then. You in the fact that you already live in the society you describe (England), and I in the fact that you cannot vote in America.

[Strange Famous]

guns are becoming far more widespread in London. 10 years ago everyone had a knife, more and more now it's a .22

Even withlegal gun ownership fairly heavily restricted, anyone who wants a gun can get one if you know the right people. There are calls here for the police to be armed too. And if America had Columbine, we had Dunblane. Our gun problem might not seem bad compared to some nations, but it is growing every year..

[OpieCunningham]

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Bullets should cost $5000 each.

I don't support gun control for the same reason I don't support drug laws for the same reason I don't support abortion regulations, etc.

But for anyone that makes this issue their primary or close to primary reason for voting: you've got to be kidding me.

This concept of being protected from the government by maintaining the ability to revolt is absurd. Let's fantasize about that for a moment. Let's assume that the entire country, all 150 million-odd adults decide that democracy has become totally ineffective and/or subverted completely. 60% of those people don't even vote right now. And 85-90% of those people vote for the lessor of two evils instead of their ideal candidate. That leaves about 7.5 million people. Let's assume that a generous 10% of those are willing to take up arms to fight the established government. 750 thousand people with shotguns, assault rifles and handguns is going to be completely destroyed by the U.S. Military. It's not even a contest. It's shooting ducks in a barrel.

Back in 1776, sure - a passionate underdog could fend off a comparably armed yet still outnumbering foe. Unless you start saving up for a few hundred tanks, fighter jets, cluster bombs, bunker bombs, etc (and lobby to create laws which allow you to own them) - an armed revolt against the U.S. government is completely futile.

And to top it off, there are very few people claiming all guns should be banned.

So tell me again how this could possibly be the most important or near most important political issue in this election?

[Lebell]

FYI,

It was 1/3 revolutionary, 1/3 torrie and 1/3 didn't care.

We would need at least those percentages.

Whether or not you agree, doesn't matter to me in the least.


{edit: seems I kan't spel todaie}

[zandor45w]

Go Libertarian party, make the government smaller and get the heck out of my personal life; plus I can own a gernade launcher.