Posted on 02/27/2007 11:33:50 PM PST by NormsRevenge
A little-noticed oddity of the 2008 presidential election field is that the three leading candidates for the Republican nomination have, at one time or another, gone to war with the NRA and its allies on the gun issue.
After six years of thumb-twiddling boredom – the issue has been off the radar in elections and in Congress – the gun lobby must have been a bit shocked when they realized what they faced: John McCain, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, all once proud champions of sensible gun laws, are the odds-on favorites to carry the GOP banner.
Consider their histories:
McCain was the lead sponsor of federal legislation to close the gun show loophole. In 2000, he appeared in television ads in Colorado urging voters to pass a ballot initiative closing the loophole there.
Romney signed a state ban on assault weapons into law as Governor of Massachusetts. And as the Boston Globe has reported, he said during a debate in 2002 that he supported his state’s tough gun laws and vowed that he would not “chip away at them” because they “protect us and provide for our safety”
Giuliani aggressively went after illegal gun traffickers when he was mayor, and he filed a lawsuit against a bunch of major gun manufactures and dealers. He’s on record supporting tougher gun laws, including the assault weapons ban.
Now, the gun lobby is not subtle in responding to perceived threats. NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre gave a speech six months after 9-11 comparing our old organization, Americans for Gun Safety, to al Qaeda and our founder to Osama bin Laden. LaPierre concluded, not without some hyperbole, that we were “a far greater threat to your freedom than any foreign force”.
So it’s no surprise that the NRA responded to this problem with overwhelming firepower.
First, they attacked John McCain, slathering his caricature on their magazine covers and calling him “one of the premier flag-carriers for the enemies of the Second Amendment.” McCain buckled like he was gut-shot – he has stopped talking about guns (despite the fact that the gun show loophole remains open in most states), and he just brought on James Jay Baker, once the NRA’s lead man in Washington, as a strategist for his “kitchen cabinet.”
Then they took on Mitt Romney. After getting peppered with criticism for his gun positions, Romney, who does not own a gun, now calls himself a “proud” NRA member. He even toured a gun show with the NRA’s chief lobbyist Chris Cox, (the guy who took over for McCain’s kitchen-mate Baker).
Most recently, they trained their sights on Rudy Giuliani. In a press release this week, an NRA ally called the National Shooting Sports Federation warned: “Giuliani No Friend to Gun Owners.”
How Giuliani will respond is not yet clear – as the NSSF notes, there are conflicting signals out of his camp about where he stands today on guns.
But if Rudy Giuliani is anything, he’s tough. We hope that he treats these thugs the way he treated them back when he was cleaning up New York one turnstile-jumper at a time.
Our advice to Rudy: tell the NRA and its minions that you will not be cowed, and stick to your guns: you are a strong supporter of the rights of law-abiding citizens to own firearms. But rights come with responsibilities. And anyone who isn’t responsible about owning, selling, or using their guns should lose those rights.
Try your brain.
Katie-O said “I have been through the NRA safety course and have had a concealed weapons permit issued by the state of Oregon for 18 years. I am familiar with handguns and know how to use them. I own a stainless steel Smith and Wesson, 38 caliber, 5 shot revolver, which I carry for protection. My husband is a lifetime member of NRA and has several larger caliber handguns as well as hunting rifles and shotguns. I still don’t like assault weapons and wouldn’t allow one is my home. My husband agrees.”
So...after all these pages of posts, and discussions, and arguments it FINALLY becomes clear. Katie-O and her husband are Fudds. It’s all clear now. I have Fudds in my family. They just don’t get it, and never will. As much as they protest, to them it IS about duck hunting. (notwithstanding the S&W J Frame)
Horse Pucky!!
Try your brain.
I was thinking more in terms of the round file receptacle, guaranteed not to leak bile on my carpets.
Horse Puckey?
Do you even know what a Fudd is? Jim Zumbo knows what it is.
So long as no one is specifically after your guns, you’re happy. It is your duty as a gun owner, and supposed supporter of the 2nd Ammendment to fight for MY gun rights, not just yours.
Rudy wants to make some of my guns illegal. That is unacceptable.
Oh, and your S&W J Frame is a Saturday Night Special in his eyes. But I’ll defend your right to carry it. Will you support my right to own an AK47, or an AR15?
Number One: I agree with Zumbo.
Number Two: I think Mr. Giuliani is smart enough to know a .38 S&W Stainless Steel revolver is NOT a cheap SNS. Nice try.
This clown thinks the NRA people are "thugs"?
That's more than enough reason for me to write them off.
“Auto thefts went down on average about 80,000 per year.”
Well - I guess one of those hidden benefits of banning all those COMBAT ASSAULT WEAPONS from the streets of Gotham.
We are advancing a 21st century progressive agenda
My take on this post is that you are a supporter of Rudy's "in your face" stance against the NRA........If so, your "progressive agenda" is all too clear and i for one am not a supporter of your agenda nor a supporter of your poster boy Rudy.
Had your "boy" Rudy and the other 30 major city mayors in this country been successful in their lawsuits against the firearms manufacturers, it is very unlikely myself and other like minded firearms enthusiasts would be able to find any handguns left on the market to buy.
If I am wrong in my interpretation of your post then forgive me. If I'm right then stick your "Rudy Friendly" gun control up your butt.........!
as CALAMITY JANE to prove how pro-gun he is.
Katie-O says “Number One: I agree with Zumbo.”
Well..there ya go. You have just proved our point. You are NOT one of us. Thanks.
Mr. Zumbo realized the error of his ways, and has backtracked. Will you?
In 1987, Purdy was caught shooting at trees in El Dorado National Forest. Resisting arrest, he assaulted a police officer and kicked out the back window of the police cruiser. When Purdy came up for parole after only 45 days, the parole report noted that he had attempted suicide in jail, smeared his jail wall with blood, and had been found in possession of white supremacist literature. The parole report called Purdy "a danger to himself and others." The parole board let him go. Covering the evidence of failure, California's criminal justice authorities have ordered Purdy's criminal and mental health records sealed. Los Angeles Police Chief Daryl Gates and California Attorney General John Van De Kamp ought to be asking why their agencies didn't do their job of controlling Patrick Purdy.
And gunowners are supposed to be responsible for the incompetence of the officials ?,how about leaving the rest of us and the Bill of Rights alone,a conservative sane society would have put purdy in a madhouse before he could do any damage
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.