Posted on 11/17/2004 1:55:47 PM PST by neverdem
www.gunowners.org
Nov 2004
November 5, 2004
The 2004 election might be remembered as "The Year of the Gun Owner."
Presidential candidate John Kerry, a liberal anti-gun Senator from Massachusetts, tried to morph himself into 'The Hunter.' Rarely a day passed during the latter part of the campaign without Kerry posing with a firearm and speaking about his strong support of the Second Amendment, in complete contradiction to his 20-year anti-gun voting record.
Kerry was not alone. All across the country, anti-gun politicians tried to hide behind gun-friendly photo ops and empty rhetoric about how much they support gun rights.
Gun Owners of America, through its candidate rating program and political action committee, was able to expose much anti-gun duplicity this year, and the results were extremely heartening.
Of course, the obstructionist anti-gun Senate Minority Leader, Tom Daschle, is finally deposed. Replacing him is former Representative John Thune, a strong pro-gun ally supported by Gun Owners of America -- Political Victory Fund (GOA-PVF).
But while ousting Daschle was certainly one of the most crucial races this year, there were six open Senate seats that anti-gunners had their sights set on. GOA-PVF played an important role in thwarting that plan and helping to elect strong pro-gun advocates to five of the six open seats.
In Louisiana, pro-gun Rep. David Vitter shocked pundits by winning this senate race outright. In that state, all candidates, regardless of party, are placed on the November ballot. If no candidate were to break the 50% mark, the top two vote getters would head into a December runoff election.
Both major candidates, Vitter and Rep. Chris John (D), claimed to be pro-gun. Rep. John, though, had voted against arming commercial airline pilots and for the unconstitutional campaign finance reform law, earning him a "C" grade by GOA as opposed to David Vitter's solid "A" rating.
GOA-PVF was the ONLY national gun rights group to jump into the race, contacting thousands of Second Amendment supporters highlighting the differences between the candidates. At the end of the night, Vitter had 51% of the vote and is now the Senator-elect. He replaces retiring anti-gun "F" rated Senator John Breaux (D).
One of the most exciting races of Election Day was the one to replace retiring Senator Don Nickles (R). Running were former Representative Dr. Tom Coburn and current Rep. Brad Carson.
Guns were a blazing issue right up to the end.
On Friday before the election, GOA got a call from Sen. Jim Inhofe, the senior senator from Okalahoma. He was in a campaign bus somewhere in the state, and he was upset. Coburn's opponent had sent out a large postcard claiming that he was the real pro-Second Amendment candidate in the race. In addition, the mailing alleged the Coburn was not really pro-gun.
GOA immediately faxed the campaign a letter labeling the hit piece a deception and reiterating our endorsement of Coburn, who was a solid "A" with us (his opponent was a "B"). Moreover, Coburn's leadership and integrity would have made him the pick even if their voting records had been identical.
GOA-PVF was the ONLY national gun rights group to make an endorsement in this race, helping Dr. Coburn to victory with 53% of the vote.
And this in the face of being outspent nearly two to one in a state with a Democrat registration advantage of two to one. The Republican establishment did not support Coburn, who is known as a "Dr. No" who opposes their pork projects.
Other races where GOA-PVF played a role were equally significant:
* The Senate seat in North Carolina was that of vice-presidential nominee John Edwards, a trial lawyer who earlier this year took a rare break from the campaign to come to Washington to help sink a bill designed to protect gun makers from frivolous lawsuits. Running to fill this seat were pro-gun U.S. House member Richard Burr and former Chief of Staff to President Bill Clinton, Erskine Bowles. GOA-PVF supported Rep. Burr, who won with 52% of the vote.
* In South Carolina, pro-gun House member Jim DeMint faced off against Inez Tenenbaum, State Superintendent of Education. Tenenbaum had the advantage of having won statewide office in 1998 and 2002, while Rep. DeMint was widely unknown outside of his congressional district. Rep. DeMint is a man of principle who clearly articulated his positions and stood by them. Tenenbaum, on the other hand, refused to make her Second Amendment positions known. Rep. DeMint, endorsed and supported by GOA-PVF, won with 54% of the vote.
* In the Sunshine State, a former cabinet member for President George W. Bush, Mel Martinez, faced a formidable foe in anti-gun former state senator and Florida Commissioner of Education, Betty Castor. Martinez, though a trial lawyer himself, is an outspoken opponent of the frivolous lawsuits brought by many cities and states against the gun industry. Martinez, who replaces retiring anti-gun Sen. Bob Graham, narrowly won this race with 50% of the vote.
This is why GOA's Executive Director put out a PERSONAL appeal for incumbent Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO), who was combating a million dollar TV campaign that attacked her incessantly. Happily, Musgrave was able to raise $3 million, and she won her race with 51% of the vote.
Musgrave has been a leader on a whole host of conservative issues, including gun rights. She was the founder of the Second Amendment Caucus in Congress and has sponsored and cosponsored numerous pro-gun bills.
People in Musgrave's district have certainly appreciated her willingness to fight the Republican establishment in the nation's capital, just as she fought it in Denver as a state legislator.
GOA-PVF was involved in other House and Senate races. To get the full report, become a GOA member at www.gunowners.org/ordergoamem.htm -- this will start your subscription to The Gun Owners newsletter, which will keep you up-to-date on what's happening with your gun rights.
There is no question that gun owners made significant gains in the 2004 elections. There is the question, however, of what will be done with these gains.
The ultimate objective is not merely to elect good people; we must also work to restore lost ground. Consider just a few examples of gun rights we have lost over the past few decades:
* The 1968 Gun Control Act instituted, among other things, the blatantly unconstitutional "sporting purposes" test, which stipulates that imported firearms must be "particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes."
* Since 1976, the District of Columbia has been under a near total gun ban. The House voted this year to repeal the ban, but it died in the Senate.
* In 1986, the Congress banned the manufacture of machine guns for non-military and law enforcement. Anti-gunners use the argument the authors of the Constitution never envisioned full autos when they wrote the Second Amendment. Well, they probably never thought about radio, television and the Internet, either. Yet, no one would argue the First Amendment does not protect these.
* In 1993, the Congress passed the Brady background registration check. Now, citizens must go to the FBI to get permission to buy a firearm. This is nothing less than turning our Second Amendment "right" into a mere "privilege." Supporters of the law try to make it more palatable by pointing out that it is "instant" and hardly an inconvenience, as if expediency makes losing liberty acceptable.
* In 1996, the Congress passed the gun free zones law (prohibiting firearms within 1,000 feet of any school property) and the misdemeanor gun ban (lifetime gun ban for certain misdemeanor convictions).
These are just some of the unconstitutional laws GOA would like to repeal. GOA will also continue push for implementation of the armed pilots program and to pass a lawsuit protection bill for the firearms industry.
It is an ambitious agenda. How far we are able to move the ball in our direction, however, depends entirely on the GOA membership. Many gun owners mistakenly believe the battle is won in the election. That is only half the battle. The harder work still lies before us.
Gun owners must stay engaged in the battle by calling, writing, and e-mailing elected officials, urging them to roll back unconstitutional gun laws. And we need you to stand with us.
Renew your GOA membership today at www.gunowners.org/ordergoamem.htm -- and work together with the organization that Rep. Ron Paul calls the "only no compromise gun lobby in Washington."
I love GOA. I have found my gun lobby home with them.
Be Ever Vigilant ~ Bump!
I think the gun issue is sufficiently dead after this election. The federal government will no longer try to have any control over any weapons (except those at the far extremes - such as nuclear).
I am one who does not personally believe free gun ownership is good for society - but also know that the Second Amendment protects that free gun ownership. As long as that Amendment is there - there should be no infringement.
I'm a Life Member of the NRA and have been making contributions to GOA for more than a year now.
God, Guns and Guts make America great!
Jack.
Would you care to back up your feeling with some facts as to WHY you feel that way?
Somehow, I think that the right to own machine guns does not rate highly in my interpretation of 2nd amendment rights. I mean, aren't blowtorches a firearm, too?
| GUN OWNER IN HOUSEHOLD? |
|
 |
KERRY |  |
NADER | |||
|
TOTAL
|
2004
|
2000
|
2004
|
2004
|
||||
 |
||||||||
|
Yes (41%)
|
63% |
+2
|
36% | 1% | ||||
|
||||||||
|
No (59%)
|
43% |
+4
|
57% | 0% | ||||
|
||||||||
OMG, now you've done it.
Me too. They were the only ones who sent me a postcard on a pro-gun local judge. Now THAT's grass roots!
In the meantime, the NRA backed incumbent anti-gun Democrats over Pubbie pro-gun challengers here in Nevada.
Before attempting to think again, go read the text of the Second Amendment ten times.
Then try a re-interpretation.
If your thinking parts are working correctly, you will come to the same conclusion as many constitutional scholars, including the notoriously liberal Lawrence Tribe, namely that the Second Amendment absolutely bans the government from limiting the right of the citizen to posses any weapon that has a military use.
A strict interpretation of the Second Amendment would protect the right to own fully-automatic weapons and grenade launchers, but not a target pistol, long barrel shotgun or lever-action carbine.
The purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure that citizens have access to, and the absolute right to own, carry and use, such weapons as would be necessary to overthrow a government gone out of control.
The gun issue will never be dead until anti-gun lunatic left and their sycophants the media are all dead!
No Guns ~ No Rights!
| These |
 |
|
|
Nevada politicians rated by the NRA
Nevada politicians rated by the GOA
Dems who vote in accordance with the Second Amendment, especially if they are incumbents, will get the NRA endorsement over pubbies with dubious records, IIRC. To which race are you referring?
Including nuclear weapons?
I didn't write it. If you don't like it, amend the Constitution.
I have seen no data that claims that gun ownership is good for society. Hunting aside, violent crimes in countries without gun ownership is much lower. And the crap about "defending against the government" - that, to me, is just paranoid delusions.
Its a moot point - we have the Second Amendment here in the US. Therefore unfetterred access to all types of firearms should be allowed - I just personally see no need for it (unless someone can accurately make the case that we need to engage in armed revolution). However, gun control laws should not be enacted under our current Constitution. We are on the same side - just I don't think that gun ownership is some unalienable right that comes from God - sorry.
I don't like it - but I do agree with you that that is the way it is.
However, I thought one of the underlying currents of the Bill of Rights is that, at least in theory, they were rights afforded all of man. Therefore, expanding out on that - everyone in the world should be able to have nukes.
In the concrete, the U.S. Constitution only directly protects the rights of its citizens and through some fairly recent activist judges, residents of this country, both legal and illegal.
It doesn't necessarily protect the rights of citizens of other countries, and certainly doesn't protect the rights of the governments of other countries, if governments can be said to have any rights at all.
But I'll bite. Let's say that the 2nd does protect the rights of every person on earth to have nukes. The Constitution also guarantees a republic form of government.
Let's start overthrowing any government which it's a republican government, ok?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
