Posted on 07/23/2005 12:50:45 PM PDT by holymoly
I like to remind my Republican friends that the roots of the Brady Campaign are Republican to the core. I do it just to get them backpedaling after some dig about Democrats hating guns. I may also remind them that the original 1993 Assault Weapon Ban amendment could not have passed without Republican votes because eight Democrats voted NO and two of the eight were Nevada Senators Reid and Bryan.
I generally think the best of everybody, so I had counted organizations like the Brady Campaign as sincere but illogical and misguided. Gun control folks are well intentioned but wrong.
Recently I had an experience with the Brady Campaign that reveled a darker side.
The Brady Campaign testified on March 15, 2006, at the House Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law, against H.R. 800. This testimony included opposition to companion Senate legislation S. 397. Part of that testimony was a letter purported to be from several national Law Enforcement organizations opposing Gun Liability reform. The letter was published on the web along with Brady’s record of testimony. The letter carried a list of 66 individually named Sheriffs and Police Chiefs of major cities. Six of the names listed were Nevada Chiefs or Sheriffs. My Sheriff was included.
I made contact with my Sheriff through a ranking officer in the Department. He remembered getting a briefing from the Brady organization at a State meeting but didn’t remember that our Sheriff had signed any letter. Later my Sheriff responded directly and personally to an email saying he was checking facts on the whole matter.
About that time the National Rifle Association’s NRA-ILA issued an alert to email subscribers in Nevada and urged those citizens to contact the Law Enforcement Officers who signed the letter and ask them to reconsider their opposition. Nevada Sheriffs are elected and Chiefs are appointed by elected officials. That’s a good thing.
Following the NRA Alert, all of the feedback I was able to track indicated that not one of the Nevada Law Enforcement Officers listed had signed the letter or authorized the use of his name. My info now is that every one of the six has demanded his name be removed and two penned letters of support for S.397.
The Brady Campaign issued a release saying they respected the decision of the Nevada Sheriffs. They claim the Sheriffs gave permission for their names to be used, but changed their position. That didn't agree with some Sheriff's statements, but Brady led all to believe that the letter in question would be removed from web posting.
Some weeks passed and I came across the original URL for the Brady letter. I clicked on the link and to my surprise the letter was back, but changed. It was edited to remove reference to S.397. The new letter limited its scope to H.R.800 but appeared otherwise unchanged, and the names of Nevada Chiefs and Sheriffs remained. That edited and republished document was still dated March 15, 2005 as entered into the record of the Brady testimony to Congress. That second letter was clearly not any sort of mistake. That was a lie.
Today another edited version of the original Brady letter, this one dated June 9, 2005, is published by Brady and posted on the web. This letter is in Brady’s “xshare” file and appears to be provided as an inside source document for affiliate gun control supporters to use when contacting the Senate and Congress. It is not linked from the Brady web page, but GOOGLE found the posting.
The Nevada Chiefs and Sheriffs are listed on the June 9, 2005 letter despite their instructions that their names be removed, and in contradiction to Brady’s statement that they have “profound respect for America’s law enforcement professionals”.
That June 9, 2005 letter may be removed by the time this editorial is published, but if it remains please check to see if your local law enforcement agency is listed. Save the letter and contact your Chief or Sheriff and ask if he/she gave his name to the Brady Campaign for that letter and if so, ask if he will get more facts and reconsider that position. If he says he never gave permission for his name to be used, suggest that he contact Brady and ask them to set the record straight on the web and with our Congress.
Let's urge our Law Enforcement Organizations and Officials to get briefed by both sides on political issues before they take a position that can affect citizen rights. And suggest they never let their good name be used by someone who lies.
The Brady Campaign is dishonest?
I'm shocked. SHOCKED I tell you!
Do I detect a typo here?
"Let's urge our Law Enforcement Organizations and Officials to get briefed by both sides on political issues before they take a position that can affect citizen rights."
I guess it's too much to ask that they not lend their official position to support or oppose a political organization? What they do when they vote as private citizens is none of my business, but we have legislatures to make the law. Or am I missing something?
The Brady Campaign testified on March 15, 2006,
Do I detect a typo here?
We need to send them back...to the future!
LOL. Agreed!
Edited version of the original Brady letter
Need a program to view PDF files? Try Foxit Reader. It's small, and much faster than Adobe Acrobat (aka "bloatware").
Need a program to view PDF files? Try Foxit Reader. It's small, and much faster than Adobe Acrobat (aka "bloatware").
I use Foxit, FWIW.
bump
I thought the article was about this lie. I noticed he didn't give a breakdown of the numbers between the dems and the Republicans. I don't have to remind Freepers the dem party leadership is all anti-gun to the core.
Having read through this article, perusing the Brady Campaign site, looking at what they have to say about my homestate of Texas Regulations, it really has moved me. I am afraid I WILL have to go buy that new pistol i was undecided about.
fwiw, their piece about Texas regs, is a farcical tale of omissions, falsehoods, and intimation that the state should make laws that are already in place at the federal level.
Ping!
"I like to remind my Republican friends that the roots of the Brady Campaign are Republican to the core. I do it just to get them backpedaling after some dig about Democrats hating guns. I may also remind them that the original 1993 Assault Weapon Ban amendment could not have passed without Republican votes because eight Democrats voted NO and two of the eight were Nevada Senators Reid and Bryan."
Anyone surprised that Democrat Liars and Republican Outliers (RINOs) are in cahoots?
duh.
Shocked...I tell ya I'm shocked to find out that Brady would lie.... </ sarcasm> LOL
A few weeks ago I bought a 3rd generation Glock 17, with three 17 round magazines and a neat little Glock light that attaches slick as can be on a rain under the slide. It is my dedicated home defense gun.
In a few weeks I plan to buy about six more of those evil high capacity mags, including one of those 33 rounders.
Sara Brady and her wheeled meal ticket can kiss my butt.
The sunsets must be beautiful on Mr. Cahill's planet!
Sarah Brady may have been the wife of a prominent Republican within the Reagan White House. Though she and her organization appeared to have quickly sold out. Lock, stock and barrel. Or were overrun by Dems and Libs.
Jack.
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.