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

Toogood Reports ^ | April 15, 2003 | By Chuck Baldwin

[Atlas Sneezed]

"come on folks...everyone knows that 'semi' automatic weapons can easily be converted into fully automatic weapons..."

Aside from the technological falsity of your statement, why wasn't there a rash of machine gun violence in the pre-1934 (and pre-1986) days when machine guns were unregulated (and available at market prices)?

They were available by MAIL ORDER for goodness sake!

[rwfromkansas]

Ah. Nevermind then.

[KingKongCobra]

It's an election year bill. It's going to happen so that ir can be removed as a campaign issue. The best we can hope for is a 1 year extention which moves the issue into a non-election timeframe where it can be quietly killed.

Make no mistake, this is a popular bill with the general population and it needs to be dealt with pragmatically. To kill it outright during an election year would be a dangerous political move.

[Fletcher J]

An "assault weapon" IS a measly rifle. You're letting the media control your logic by using faulty terminology. What the Democrats and the media call "assault weapons" work no differently than the .22 rifle you may have used as a kid.

Real machine guns have been strictly regulated since the 1930s. This legislation outlaws *semi-automatic* rifles based on appearance. I can legally purchase a semi-auto AR-15 right now, but if it had a bayonet lug or flash suppressor, that looks "militaristic" and would be a felony. In other cases, rifles with evil-looking black stocks are illegal and identical models with wood are OK.

Want to add a pistol grip, flash suppressor or folding stock to a straight stock repeating rifle made after 1994? Do so under the current law, and you've committed a felony. This makes no sense.

[wireman]

Anybody who wants an "assault" weapon and does not have a criminal record should be allowed to own whatever he pleases.

It's not your business. It's not the government's business.

Now, if that person uses ANY weapon to commit a crime, he should be imprisoned and kept in jail until he no longer poses a threat to society.

Criminals, by definition do not obey the law. What is the sense of having a law that constrains only the folks who weren't going to break it in the first place?

[fifteendogs]

When the election rolls around, and they begin to fully comprehend the consequences of a Rat infesting the WH again, most of 'em will come to their senses.

Let's see, if I vote for a demoncrat, we'll see bigger government, higher government spending, bigger deficits, attacks on our first amendment rights, attacks on our second amendment rights, attacks on our fourth and fifth amendment rights, and no conservative judges. You're right, if I want these things all I have to do is vote republican.

[Nucluside]

Even though there are millions of "assault" weapons in the country statistically they don't show up on crime reports. Many not so smart police are against all gun ownership because of an unrealistic perceptions of threat to themselves.
Fact is, on the three occasions I called police -from 8 blocks away- it took them 45 minutes to get there.
Police are primarily guys who show up with a note book and ask "What happened?" I saved my own life with a gun two times and caught a prowler one time.

BTW, ALL weapons are military weapons!

[TLBSHOW]

Don't worry about it.

600 posts later and don't worry about it?

You are just lucky yesterday we had the first nice day and I was outside for most of it or I would have had more to say then. Our job is to stop this is before he would have a chance to sign it.

We know he signed CFR and then joked about it. We know the Patriot act was done under him and we know that Clinton has been given free reign to do more treason against America. So I would not put it pass him to sign this too and say he didn't want to sign it.


Our job is to keep his feet to the fire as best we can.

What will be interesting is if he does anything about the communist threat of Russia and North Korea and Cuba. That will be one of my bottom lines with him. Because to do nothing but talk when we could liberate at least Cuba in less than 2 weeks and North Korea in less than a month. We should and must do it. If all he does is appease the commies that would be BS.......

As for gun control here in America it must be stopped by W and reversed or he will be showed to be a socialist gun taker like Blair.

I sure don't like what Laura has had to say on the gun matter. Has he done any recess appointments yet for Estrada or anyone it is day 2 on this matter right now.

[Nucluside]

After having gone through the whole thread, I agree that the Second Amendment is threatened only by the 19th Amendment. Conversely, rintense appears to be the only one out there with any developed political acumen. She's right, the Pres. will mouth a few patronizing platitudes and this idiocy will die.
I might remind y'all that President Reagan said if we agree 75% of the time, it's great. Now, the 2nd Amendment is the most important right we have, because it guarantees the others, but if we become one issue people we end up with some a-----e as Pres. who has MANY issues against us...like a Clinton?
Given the magnitude of the issue, did you notice what Wayne La Pierre had to say about it? As mild as his statement was, I can't help but feel that a deal has been worked out.

Let's watch this one very carefully and unload our full political fury when it will count!
Respectfully, AK Nucluside

[B Knotts]

The ones who can't wait to say they won't vote for him, never voted for him in the first place.

Hey...I did vote for him. I also volunteered my time to work campaign events. So, don't give me that crap.

I'm certainly willing to give him a chance. If he can prevent this from reaching his desk, while claiming to be in favor of it...fine. He can do that, and I'll still support him.

But if that approach fails, and it reaches his desk, and he signs it into law, well...I'm afraid I will have to rethink my support.

[Redcloak]

I've read that he's giving lip service to this while knowing that Tom Delay will nuke it. That's the political calculation.

Counting on House and Senate Republicans to show some backbone and do the right thing is like counting on the Iraqi Republican Guard to fight to the death. If it happens, it will have been by accident!

[af_vet_rr]

What will be interesting is if he does anything about the communist threat of Russia and North Korea and Cuba. That will be one of my bottom lines with him. Because to do nothing but talk when we could liberate at least Cuba in less than 2 weeks and North Korea in less than a month. We should and must do it. If all he does is appease the commies that would be BS.......

I agree with a lot of what you say about President Bush, he has done many things that have left me...uneasy.

But I disagree here for several reasons. First, we should not get in the habit of being nation builders. Clinton tried and failed miserably, and it's not our job to be propping up and rebuilding other nations when our nation could use a lot of work.

Second, Fidel will be dead soon, I'm sure the Cubans will handle things.

North Korea will not take a month. Not you specifically, but many people are under the impression that air power can fix anything. Air power can't do a lot if 100s of thousands of North Koreans are running around Seoul and in and around the South Korea population(look at a map and you'll see how close South Korea's capital is to the border). The North Korean military is much much better than Iraq's (they didn't get most of their good stuff destroyed a decade ago) and North Koreans, I believe, would stand and fight.

We don't need to be nation builders, we can exert a lot of pressure on countries without military force. We can starve North Korea if we choose to, we feed many of them.

[MEGoody]

I'm no gun expert. What do they classify as 'assault weapons' and what would the average guy need these for?

[TLBSHOW]

We can starve North Korea if we choose to, we feed many of them.


That is part of the problem, we feed and help commies since the 1930's and what has it done for us? Nothing at all.

[Taxman]

How did Speaker Hastert vote on the original legislation?

If Speaker Hastert is on our side, he and Rep. Delay can keep the legislation bottled up indefinitely, unless a discharge petition is signed by 219 Representatives.

We have a lot of work to do!

[MEGoody]

"Anybody who wants an "assault" weapon and does not have a criminal record should be allowed to own whatever he pleases."

I tend to agree with you. I have a friend whose husband would own anti-aircraft weapons if he could, just because he is in love with firepower. (I think it gives him a testosterone rush. LOL) Anyway, he's the sweetest guy in the world (well, except for my husband), and has only occasionally used a pistol for target practice. He used to do some hunting but has stopped that as he has gotten older.

[Osage Orange]

You wrote:

"The only thing that could possibly cause me to sway on that is repealing of the income tax. "

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

So...help me out here. Are you saying you will throw away the gun issue.....for repealing of the income tax?

Ummmmmm...this brings to my mind many thoughts. But I'll wait for your answer.

FRegards,

[Sender]

We should do everything possible to keep them off the streets

I agree 100 percent. My AR-15 cost me an arm and a leg because of the stupid AW ban, and it used to get all scratched up and dirty when I kept it in the street. Now I keep it inside with all my other guns. That's very sage advice IMHO.

[Leatherneck_MT]

Gun Control under Dems, Gun Control under Republicans.

I don't think there is much of a difference when it comes to that.

I don't have a clue? I didn't live under that ass they had as a leader.

I've served my time, I was in Gulf War one and I fully support this effort. But I will not compromise my principles and hold my nose to vote for a jackass that is going to further erode my constitutional rights.

You can baa baa along if you want, but I refuse to.

Semper Fi

[Ford Fairlane]

Personally, I think it is about time we send a message

maybe something like this

Dear Mr. Bush, Mr Frist, Mr Delay:

Just to let you know our feelings on the matter of the second amendment:

If any incumbent Republican either

a)supports anti gun legislation, or

b)fails to support pro gun legislation,

we will vote for their opponent in the next election,

no matter who that opponent is.

No compromise.

Have a nice day