Gun bills may trigger split

THE WASHINGTON TIMES ^ | Feb 23, 2004 | Brian DeBose

[neverdem]

The Senate will begin another debate on federal gun laws this week, and at least one issue may put it at odds with Republicans in the other chamber.

A Republican-led bill to immunize gun makers from wrongful-death claims is expected to hit the floor tomorrow, but Democrats and liberal Republicans will propose an amendment to extend the federal assault-weapons ban, possibly setting up a showdown with the House.

[Euro-American Scum]

Why should anybody believe that you'd oppose the Rat agenda (including the AWB), when you are so willing to put the Rats in power in the first place?

I'l say it again. WHAT THE HELL IS THE DIFFERENCE? Let's take a laundry list of accomplishments from this champion of "conservative" issues.

Campaign Finance Reform -- signed into law by a Republican president. Oh yeah, we all heard about how this was all part of the grand Bush strategy of gathering political capital under the lofty assumption that SCOTUS would strike down the law as unconstitutional. Only they didn't. Now there is a law on the books that says you can't talk about political issues under certain circumstances. That you will be thrown into jail if you exercise your God-given right of free speech. Tell me something? Where's that written in the Constitution? How can CFR be anything but the foundation upon which any further suppression of free speech will be built? But, hey, it's O.K., because George Bush is a Republican.

Then there's this ridiculous amnesty for illegals. Gosh, let's open the borders. Let's throw open the gates to every deadbeat who wants to live on the government dole. And those that don't can work for sub-minimum wages until they get too old, or too sick, or whatever and get thrown them away like yesterday's leftover garbage. And if some terrorists get in and blow up Long Beach harbor with a dirty nuke, well, that's just the cost of doing business. But hey, it's all right, because you see, George Bush is a Republican.

And while we're at it, let's ship off every job worth having to India, China, Russia and whatever third-world sh*thole that works cheap. Who needs to have any manufacturing base? Who needs any engineering and/or high tech skill? Because third world communist countries will be more than happy to provide us with all the infrastructure support we'll need. Besides which, you know, we're going to have so many people working as greeters at Wal-Mart or slinging hash in some greasy spoon diner that people will be busier than ever. And so what if our cheap Chinese-made DVD players are pumped out by some 10-year-old girl working in some Chinese labor gulag with a gun to her head. Communism is great so long as corporate profits are up and we all get our cheap foreign goods. But, you know, it's just peachy, because George Bush is a Republican.

Tell you what, when the Chinese drop a nuke on your city with pinpoint precision -- because they just happened to manufacture a few JDAM guidance systems for themselves while they were making them on the cheap for us -- and they show up to throw you in some labor camp, you can tell them you've got a get out of jail free card, because you supported George Bush, and everything's just fine, because he's a Republican.

Tell me something, is there anything about this country that matters to you? Is there anything about the uniqueness of this grand experiment that is important beyond cheap foreign goods and fat corporate profits? Like the right to speak about anything you damn well please, at any time, and under any circumstances. What about your right to keep and bear arms? To maintain ANY defense against tyranny, which is what the Second Amendment is all about. Or does it just matter to you that the occupant of the White House has an R after his name. Sleep tight. I'm sure you'll have nothing to worry about on Dubya's watch. Rest easy. Bush will take care of you, because after all, he's a Republican.

Drink some kool-aid and polish your autographed photo of George W. Bush. And don't talk to me about John Kerry. The only difference between the two is Kerry doesn't pretend to be something he's not.

[ampat]

Yeah. Let's see if GW has any cowboy sense in him or is he just another Kennebunkport crony.

[Dave Olson]

If he signs the AWB extension, what's the difference between him and dems?

Oh, I can see some differences:
- A possible end to the estate tax
- An effective war on terrorism
- Privatizing Social Security
- School choice
- Ban on partial-birth abortions

[sheltonmac]

I *will* vote for Kerry if this is signed.

Before you vote for someone like Kerry, you might consider voting for a party that actually supports the right to keep and bear arms.

[neverdem]

Let's see. My Senators are Patty "Osama-Mama" Murray and Maria Cantwell. Should I waste my time calling them to urge them to oppose this crap?

I can't feel sorry for you, but I understand your dilemma. I got the one who couldn't stay home and bake and chuckie. I feel sorry for our country.

[Monty22]

Didn't clinton have a dem congress too though? Without that it never would've passed.

[HumbleButExceedinglyAccurate]

Bill Clinton got this bill passed in the Democrat-controlled house by a margin of, IIRC, one vote. Largely because of that vote, the house is solidly Republican.

The fact is that it's a lot harder for house Republicans to oppose the agenda of a president from their own party.

[ExSoldier]

"Sign this, GW, and you are a one-term president, just like your dad."

Well said; AMEN and DAMN RIGHT!

EVERYBODY seems to forget that gunowners put GWB in the White House in the first place, including those good folks in Tennessee who voted their guns instead of their "favorite son" for the first time in a Presidential election since the mid 1870's. West-By-God Virginia went Republican for the first time in almost half a century for the same reason. Forget Florida, had either of those gone for Gore, he'd be "Mr President" right now. Gun owners put Bush in the White House and our votes can take him out of the White House!

[Dave Olson]

[Long rant of grievances against Bush]
Drink some kool-aid and polish your autographed photo of George W. Bush.

First of all, I'm a Libertarian. I did not vote for Bush in 2000 and I do not see him as an idol. I do not approve of the CFR or the enormous waste of good money or the AWB. I just do not understand the belief that voting for a Democrat sends the message of opposition to those very things. In fact, it does quite the contrary -- it sends a message of support for them.

...Kerry doesn't pretend to be something he's not.

You cannot be serious!

[Big Mack]

Yoy sir are wrong! If GWB signs an AWB we must make sure the rats win.(Probably Hitlery) If the 2nd revolution is to be fought, it must be while my generation can still squeeze a trigger, and remember why we are doing so. The majority of the next generation don't care aboout, or are brainwashed against firearms. The gun grabbers for some reason want to fight this war now rather than wait till we are dead then there will be very little opposition to their programs.

[Djarum]

Yep. An idiot. I actually believed he was merely pandering to the left to get votes.

They would have told you the same thing back in 2000. Now they pretend it is principle.

[SQUID]

Okay? Then inform me

[SQUID]

Explain

[Atlas Sneezed]

If the Republicans are looking for me / my vote in November and Bush signs the AWB in any form, tell them my address is "Gone".

---

Me too.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Pay the dues and give an extra $30 to $100 to help them lobby for your right.

---

A donation doesn't mean squat compared to faxing your representatives.

All these groups use the money for (if they are effective) is motivating people to contact their reps.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Thing is, it sounds like the NRA's on the verge of selling us out to help the company's avoid lawsuits.

---

They do get a lot of ad revenue from the companies.

[SQUID]

The solution to the problem of crime lies in improving the chances of young men. Easier said than done, to be sure. No one has yet proposed a convincing program for checking all the dislocating forces that government assistance can set in motion. One relatively straightforward change would be reform of the educational system. Nothing guarantees prudent behavior like a sense of the future, and with average skills in reading, writing, and math, young people can realistically look forward to constructive employment and the straight life that steady work makes possible.

But firearms are nowhere near the root of the problem of violence. As long as people come in unlike sizes, shapes, ages, and temperaments, as long as they diverge in their taste for risk and their willingness and capacity to prey on other people or to defend themselves from predation, and above all as long as some people have little or nothing to lose by spending their lives in crime, dispositions to violence will persist.

This is what makes the case for the right to bear arms, not the Second Amendment. It is foolish to let anything ride on hopes for effective gun control. As long as crime pays as well as it does, we will have plenty of it, and honest folk must choose between being victims and defending themselves.

[SQUID]

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/AWBan/

[Dan from Michigan]

Vote for or sign a gun ban, and I'll do what I have to do.

[NYTexan]

Delay said this is never gonna make it out of committie.

Do you know who is on this committie?