As I Predicted, George W. Bush Is Backing Bill Clinton's Gun Ban

In this column dated December 17, 2002, I predicted that President G.W. Bush would support the so-called assault weapons ban first promoted by former President Bill Clinton and Sen. Diane Feinstein back in 1994. Interestingly enough, the gun ban became law on the strength of a tie-breaking vote by then Vice President Al Gore. The ban is scheduled to sunset next year, but Bush is joining Clinton and Gore in supporting an extension.

Presidential spokesman Scott McClellan said, "The president supports the current law (the Clinton gun ban), and he supports reauthorization of the current law."

This must come as quite a blow to people such as the leaders of the National Rifle Association who campaigned heavily for Bush touting him as a "pro-gun" candidate. Since his election, the NRA and others have repeatedly reaffirmed their support for Bush, because he is "pro-gun." Well, now the mask is off!

I have tried to warn my readers that Bush is not a true conservative. He is not pro-life; he is not pro-family; he is not pro-Constitution. And now we know he is not pro-gun.

Instead of reversing the miserable policies of Clinton/Gore, Bush is helping to harden the cement around those policies. The gun issue is no exception.

The so-called assault weapons ban was the benchmark piece of legislation reflecting the anti-gun policies of people such as Clinton, Gore, Feinstein, and New York Senator Charles Schumer. It was also the number one target of the NRA. In fact, the NRA all but promised their supporters that a Bush presidency would help reverse this Draconian gun ban. Instead, Bush is pushing Congress to extend the ban.

A bill to reauthorize the gun ban will be introduced by Senator Feinstein in the coming weeks. It must pass both chambers of Congress to reach the President's desk. The best chance of stopping it will be in the House of Representatives. However, in order to defeat this bill, it must resist the power and influence of the White House. This will be no small task.

Not only is Bush betraying the pro-gun voters who helped elect him, he is breathing new life into a nearly dead anti-gun movement. Most political analysts credit Bush's pro-gun image as the chief reason he defeated Al Gore in the 2000 election. They also credit the pro-gun image of the Republican Party for helping them to achieve impressive wins in the 2002 congressional elections.

Now, Bush is giving new credibility to anti-gun zealots such as Schumer and Feinstein and is helping to reinvigorate the anti-gun momentum that had all but been put on ice.

However, the real question will be, "Will pro-gun conservatives continue to support Bush?" Bush is every bit the "Teflon President" that Clinton was. Conservatives seem willing to overlook anything he does, no matter how liberal or unconstitutional it may be. Will they overlook this, also?

If you truly believe in the Second Amendment and are willing to do something about it, I suggest you go to the Gun Owners of America website. They have a quick link set up which allows people an opportunity to conveniently send email to the White House about this issue. Go to the gun ban "alert" button. From there you can voice your disapproval with the President's decision to betray his constituents by supporting this new round of gun control.

Once again, the ball of freedom and constitutional government is in the court of the American people. Will they keep the ball and do something with it, or will they hand it off to the neo-conservatives at the White House? We'll see.

"That’s why I’m for instant background checks at gun shows. I’m for trigger locks."
George W. Bush - Source: St. Louis debate Oct 17,2000.

MORE INJUSTICE ON THE WAY - Bush GUN CONTROL
"Gene Healy, a Cato Institute scholar, recently provided a thorough exploration of the unintended consequences of one law, the new Bush-Ashcroft plan to federalize gun crimes, known as the Project Safe Neighborhoods program. The unintended consequences of this law are frightening."
NOTE: Same Article in Washington Times.

"W. Wimps Out on Guns"
The Bush package includes several pet causes of the gun-control lobby, including $75 million for gun locks; $15.3 million for 113 new federal attorneys to serve as full-time gun prosecutors; and $19.1 million to expand a program by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms aimed at preventing youths from obtaining guns. Although Bush stressed that he simply wants to "enforce existing laws," the fine print of Project Safe echoes the gun-grabbing Left's call to ban the importation of high-capacity ammunition clips."

LAURA BUSH:
"During her San Diego speech, for instance, she said nothing about the school shooting that occurred 20 miles away in El Cajon the day before, although in a television interview she condemned it, adding that she thinks more gun control laws are needed.

"I think that's very important," she said when asked by CNN whether stronger gun laws are needed."
Source.

Ok - here's a shocking wakeup call for you. You look at AW's and say - "ha! Who needs them! We can live without them! They'll never come after my X". Where X is your favoriate PC gun.

Well guess what - in Illinois, right this VERY minute, there's a bill, SB.1195 which is ostensibly an anti assault-weapon bill. Ok, fine. Wanna know what else is tacked onto it? ALL SHOTGUNS WILL BE BANNED. ALL. PUMP, SEMI-AUTO, SIDE-BY-SIDE, OVER-UNDER. All of them. I am not kidding nor exaggerating. This bill was looking to be turned down. But guess what, the highly corrupt Mayor of Chicago has forced it to remain in committee until Dec 31. Know what that means? It'll pass. Mark my words, by the end of the year, anyone owning a shotgun in Illinois will be a FELON.

Next up - you bet - handguns. All of them gone. No explicit bills on the table yet, but with a bill as audacious as a total shotgun ban, there's no limit on what they'll try,

The assault-weapon ploy is merely that - a plot. Make no mistake, by giving into it, you're giving in to eventual loss of ALL your guns.

OUCH: "White House Favors Renewing Gun Ban"

V.P.C. Welcomes President Bush's Reaffirmation Of Campaign Pledge To Support Reauthorization Of Federal Assault Weapons Ban

PR Newswire via AP
Violence Policy Center
April 14, 2003
Source

VPC Welcomes President Bush's Reaffirmation of Campaign Pledge To Support Reauthorization of Federal Assault Weapons Ban

WASHINGTON, On the eve of the National Rifle Association's annual meeting, President Bush has kept his 2000 campaign promise and reaffirmed his support for the federal ban on assault weapons, Knight Ridder news service reported this past weekend. According to White House spokesperson Scott McClellan, "The President supports the current law, and he supports reauthorization of the current law." The federal assault weapons ban is scheduled to expire on September 13, 2004. The NRA, one of Bush's strongest supporters during the 2000 election, claimed credit for his electoral victory. The NRA is vehemently opposed to the ban and has called for the law to not be renewed. The NRA's annual meeting is April 25-27, 2003. Florida Governor Jeb Bush is scheduled to be the keynote speaker at the event.

Bush's support for the ban has been longstanding. In October 2000, Bush spokesperson Ray Sullivan told Salon magazine that he would expect then- candidate Bush to reauthorize the ban.

That position was reiterated by John Ashcroft during his confirmation hearings on January 17, 2001, when he said, "It is my understanding that the president-elect of the United States has indicated his clear support for extending the assault weapon ban, and I would be pleased to move forward that position, and to support that as a policy of this president, and as a policy of the Justice Department."

Like Bush, Ashcroft has been a strong ally of the NRA, which spent over $500,000 on his behalf during his failed 2000 Senate bid. Just as importantly, in his confirmation hearing testimony Ashcroft stated that the law was not precluded by the Second Amendment. That determination by Ashcroft, a strong adherent of the NRA's view of the Second Amendment, should remove any discussion from the debate about the law's constitutionality. In fact, no court challenge to the law has ever succeeded.

During the 2002 campaign cycle, the NRA made ending the assault weapons ban a top priority. Just this month, the Associated Press reported, "Federal NRA representatives say the ban simply has not worked," and quoted NRA spokesperson Andrew Arulanandan as stating, "The question is why should we keep ineffective laws on the books....Undoubtedly, there will be a healthy debate on this."

VPC Public Policy Director Joe Sudbay states, "Undoubtedly, the NRA's leadership did not envision that the debate over the federal assault weapons ban would be between the NRA and the White House -- which they vowed to be working out of if Bush won. We have long been concerned that Bush would choose the NRA over public safety.

This reaffirmation of the President's campaign promise is a positive step in protecting the American public. We are equally encouraged by Attorney General Ashcroft's view that the ban is constitutional.

Given the President's enormous prestige in his party, having the White House on our side should help insure that the Republican House and Senate will pass meaningful legislation to keep these weapons of war off our streets.

Unlike NRA head Wayne LaPierre, who apparently believes the President is 'somewhat irrelevant' to this debate, we look forward to working with President Bush to reauthorize an effective law banning assault weapons."

For more information, visit the VPC's web site: www.vpc.org.

The Violence Policy Center is a national non-profit educational organization working to stop gun death and injury in America.

The right to bear arms

Gun control = government control

No right to bear arms? - Solicitor general: 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to individuals

Trust the Government?

"I George Walker Bush, do solemnly swear, that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States. And will to the best of my abilities, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. So help me God."

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.