1 posted on
03/10/2004 1:44:52 PM PST by
kimber
To: kimber
Cubin and Young are each under an affirmative obligation to avoid conflicts or appearances of conflicts due to their NRA positionTheir NRA position is pro 2nd Amendment. Do we take this further & say they can't speak freely on anything because of their position on the 1st Amendment?
Are these not one in the same?
BEHOLD! The mind of the defenseless
2 posted on
03/10/2004 1:50:02 PM PST by
Puppage
(You may disagree with what I have to say, but I will defend to your death my right to say it)
To: *bang_list
Boy o boy, what will these devious Marxists think of next?
4 posted on
03/10/2004 1:52:56 PM PST by
Joe Brower
(The Constitution defines Conservatism.)
To: kimber
Everytime in those areas where gun control nuts have established anti gun laws and an unarmed woman or child is raped beaten or murdered...they should be allowed to sue the Brady Bunch....
And every govt offical or politican who helped bring such insanity on the victims
5 posted on
03/10/2004 1:54:00 PM PST by
joesnuffy
(Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
To: kimber
"The Brady Campaign's letter pointed to a conflict of interest stemming from Young's and Cubin's active support of H.R. 1036, which gives broad immunity to gun manufacturers, dealers and trade associations from civil litigation. The NRA, as a "trade association," would benefit from the measure." Firstly, the NRA is not a "trade association", it is a civil rights and safety organization. Secondly, how about the "conflict of interest" on the part of "Lousy" Lautenberg, "Turkey" Teddy Kennedy, "Upchuck" Schumer, and others who act as shills for the "Brady bunch" of knee-jerk anti-gunners.
Cheez---GIVE ME A BREAK!!!! These people had NO SHAME.
To: kimber
These people are dead serious about disarming us. We've got to stop them. It's obvious that bunch of jack*sses in Congress aren't going to do anything.
8 posted on
03/10/2004 2:07:50 PM PST by
NRA2BFree
(The Socialists are in control of our Congress. It's time to clean house!!)
To: kimber
What about Dianne Feinswine and being a board member of CEASEFIRE?
9 posted on
03/10/2004 2:11:34 PM PST by
Dan from Michigan
(""....but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America"")
To: kimber
If they want the NRA held civilly liable, when can we push to have the ACLU held civilly liable for their actions? Hmmmmm?
10 posted on
03/10/2004 2:14:16 PM PST by
Prime Choice
(Hm? No, my powers can only be used for Good.)
To: kimber
Anybody got a legally accurate definition of 'trade organization' and how the NRA (a member organization representing the political and sporting interests of its members, not representing the gun trade) would meet that definition?
12 posted on
03/10/2004 2:32:10 PM PST by
templar
To: kimber
Doesn't the Brady Campaign and Million Moms financially benefit from contributions based on the increased violence generated from pursuing their policies?
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson