Bush Backs Renewing Assault Weapons Ban

Washington Post ^ | April 12, 2003 | Unknown

[Teacher317]

Quagmire? Seems to me it's been a rather protracted victory march for the enemy.

[TLBSHOW]

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., will introduce a bill in the coming weeks to reauthorize the assault-weapons ban.

[backhoe]

What I recall is that the President said he would sign the renewal if it reached his desk.

I interpert that to mean our job is to keep it from getting there in the first place, and am doing what I can from here to effect that.

[JudgemAll]

It is deeply annoying. The man cannot be perfect of course, but this sounds like the "no new taxes scheme". The economy is not good, so Bush better emphasis principles and substance over humanism, because on the humanism and economy cause, he has nothing to gain.

Of course as a voter I cannot scrape Bush off stupidly and let it play in the hands of the hard left enemy, wishing them to win instead of him.

Now is not the time to split the nation's general momentum, which is much more important than the actual hits and misses of a president.

[newgeezer]

Noone here to defend him yet?

If you're that interested, perhaps we should ping Noone to get his or her views.

[JudgemAll]

As Christians, moral clarity exists by expecting the best and coping with the worst, and in this instance I am not writting off Bush yet on this legislation until it becomes an issue.

[TLBSHOW]

"The president supports the current law, and he supports reauthorization of the current law," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.

[PuNcH]

It is an incredibly stupid ban and there are probably a ton of people running around with technically illegal weapons because of this law that dont even know it. This pile of crap is about to come to an end. I wont be supporting those who cant recognize our 2nd amendment rights and wish to continue such an ignorant, illogical ban.

[Teacher317]

What I recall is that the President said he would sign the renewal if it reached his desk.
I interpert that to mean our job is to keep it from getting there in the first place, and am doing what I can from here to effect that.

He used that gutless line with CFR, didn't he? Is there any awful domestic legislation that he will grow a spine to veto?

[chainsaw]

Bush cannot afford to Pi$$ off 5 million voting NRA members.

He is either with US or against US, he can't be both.

[JudgemAll]

You bet. I will not vote for Bush if he truly supports this. He's showing his true colors.

Well, he has liberal tendencies after all, this is not a secret. But what people forget all too easily is that Bush supports the due process to come up to a decision on this. As long as he is not in the cover ups and courrageous enough to stand there in transparence, then he has my vote. Power should be at the service of truth, and not the reverse, and this is the 2nd amendment's logic.

[chnsmok]

Incoming....

[Timesink]

Here come the Fair Weather Republicans.

[Mark Felton]

Will Iraqi citizens have to abide by this law as well? < /sarcasm>

[KriegerGeist]

"FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS"

IF OR WHEN THEY OUTLAW THESE WEAPONS, THEN ONLY OUTLAWS WILL HAVE THEM!

If this is true, then Bush needs to take a lesson from England and Australia where crime is up because the criminals know the public is now disarmed!...Canada too is not far behind.

WE ARE OUR OWN AND ONLY TRUE, RELIABLE HOMELAND SECURITY IN TIMES LIKE THESE!

[Teacher317]

And exactly what does this law do to promote public safety or principles of justice?

[JudgemAll]

Bush cannot afford to Pi$$ off 5 million voting NRA members.

He is either with US or against US, he can't be both.

THat is a strong possibility. As much as Bush's imperfection need to be forgiven, so are the voters'. Bush is held hostage by this legislation with Dems threatening him and NRAers threatening him on the other side. The point is that an intelligent argument must be lead instead of falling into party lines, and we have to make sure Bush will not cover up things in his explanations for his stance. We have to demand him an explanation. If he provides none or rationalizes things, then I will start to worry, not until then.

That said, if people are POed after the economy that cannot be proped up, Bush better not PO the rest of his support on his principles as opposed to his performance which will suffer in support. He has to indeed emphasis on his principles when his economic performance are criticised. If he clings to performance as his father did and abandons principles, he is toast.

[rwfromkansas]

While I am not thrilled with this, Bush supported it in the campaign an Bush is a man of his word.

I don't worry much about the assault weapons ban; it is when they get into other things that I get concerned.

[Teacher317]

Heck, not renewing the ban would also encourage the economy, since quite a few pieces would be available for sale (and many of us would be stocking up in anticipation of the next Democrat President and ban).

[Shooter 2.5]

Exactly.

NRA members worked in the offices of the candidates so we could have a majority in the House and the Senate. If Bush signs this, it will be his "No new Taxes" statement. All of the military victories won't help him if he signs this.

We can't sit back and take this. It's up to us to see that the renewal never reaches his desk.