Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How Assault Weapons Import Ban Cost Bush 41 Re-Election
"Unintended Consequences" ^ | 1996 | John Ross

Posted on 04/18/2003 3:25:56 PM PDT by Atlas Sneezed

What follows is an excerpt from a historical novel:

"Haven't seen a single Bush bumper sticker," Henry Bowman said calmly as he took another drink of his soda. John Parker nodded.

"No sh**. I think he's going to lose."

"Lose, hell," Henry said. "He's already thrown the election." Parker raised an eyebrow in a questioning gesture. Henry continued. "We'd've been much better off with Michael Dukakis, from a civil rights standpoint, at least."

"What do you mean?" This came from a slender man in a khaki shirt who had overheard the conversation.

"Bush banned semiauto imports by executive order in '89. Got his 'Drug Czar' buddy to say it was a wonderful idea. Could Dukakis have gotten away with that? Hell, no. He wouldn't have dared try it, because the Republicans in the House and Senate wouldn't have played ball. They'd have screamed bloody murder. Bush got away with it, though, 'cause he's a Republican, and now it's going to cost him the election."

"Come on, Henry," Parker said, forcefully but without rancor. "Bush has all kinds of problems. The economy is lousy, and people haven't forgiven him for breaking his 'no new taxes' promise."

"And let's face it," Karen Hill added, "a lot of voters, particularly women, don't like his anti-abortion stance. Those are the things that're going to end up costing him the Presidency." Henry Bowman was shaking his head. A crowd was starting to gather, but no one interrupted.

"I'll give you the taxes thing, but that's still only a small factor, and I'll prove it to you in a second. Your other issues are curtain dressing. Economy? The economy was terrible in 1982, and the public didn't turn against Ronald Reagan. Reagan was also at least as much against abortion as Bush, and more women voted for him than Carter in '80 or Mondale in '84. The reason George Bush will lose in three weeks is because he sold us out on gun rights." Henry Bowman and John Parker both saw a number of the people around them nodding in agreement. John Parker began to protest.

"That may be a part of it, but-"

"No 'buts', John. I'll prove it to you. Look around. How many guys do you see here right now who you know saw active duty and are proud of it? I don't mean everybody wearing camo--anyone can buy that at K-Mart. I mean guys wearing boonie hats and dog tags with their division numbers on' em, or guys in Gulf War uniforms, or old guys with tattoos and shrapnel wounds and arms missing. How many do you see around here right now? A lot, right?

"George Bush is a genuine war hero from the Second World War, right? And last year he got a half million men over to Iraq, ran Hussein out of Kuwait, and only lost- what? Eighty soldiers? That's less than I would expect would get killed in a half-million-man training exercise with no enemy." The people gathered around were nodding in agreement.

"So?" John Parker said.

"So Bush is a war hero--I really mean that--and look who he's running against. Should be no contest among vets proud of their military service, right?" Henry grinned wickedly at John Parker. "Just go around and ask some of these vets here if they're going to vote for the President in three weeks. Take your own poll."

"I'm not!" shouted a veteran of Korea who had been listening to Henry's argument. "Your friend's dead right."

"Me neither," spat another. "He sold us out." A half-dozen other veterans grunted in agreement. No one contradicted what Henry Bowman had said.

"Is anyone here--not just veterans, but anyone--planning to vote for Bush?" Henry asked in a loud voice. No one volunteered with an affirmative answer. John Parker's mouth opened in amazement.

"Too many Republicans have this crazy idea that since their party usually isn't quite as much in favor of throwing away the linchpin of the Bill of Rights, they can take our votes for granted," Henry said to what was now a crowd of forty or fifty people. "In a few weeks, they're going to find out that taking us for granted was the biggest mistake they ever made in their lives. Except that the news will undoubtedly focus on the abortion issue, or the bad economy, or how Bush didn't seem compassionate, or some other horse-sh**, and miss the real story."

"You really think we're the ones going to cost him the election?" a man in his fifties asked. "Not sayin' I disagree with you, but...everyone always acts like all the other issues are the real important ones. You know-the ones that get elections won or lost."

"Let me ask everyone here a question, then," Henry said. It was obvious he believed in what he was about to say.

"Pretend I'm George Bush, and it's Monday, the day after tomorrow. The first debate-which is tomorrow night-is over. I didn't say anything at all about the gun issue in the debate. It's now Monday, okay? Since I'm still the President, I tell the networks I'm going to give a State of the Union address, or a press conference, or whatever you call it on short notice. I'm going to give it that night, since the second debate isn't for a couple of days. I get up in front of the cameras, and here's the speech that goes out over every network Monday night." Henry looked over at John Parker. "Cut me some slack if I get some details wrong; I'm winging it here, okay?" He cleared his throat.

"My fellow Americans, I would like to address a serious issue which faces our country today: the gradual erosion of the individual rights of our honest citizens. Our government, including my administration, must shoulder much of the blame for this problem. It is time for me to acknowledge and repair the damage that has been done."

Henry paused for a moment to collect his thoughts before continuing.

"The Soviet Union has collapsed. People around the world are throwing off their yokes of oppression and tasting freedom for the first time. It is an embarrassing fact, how-ever, that our government has forgotten about individual rights here at home. It is time to acknowledge and correct the infringements we have inflicted upon our citizens in the name of 'crime control'.

"Decent, honest Americans are being victimized by a tiny fraction of the population, and it is our government's fault. It is our fault because we politicians have continually passed laws that stripped the law-abiding of their rights. As a result we have made the crime problem much worse.

"Our great economic power comes from the fact that Americans determine their own economic destiny. It is time we let Americans once again determine their own physical destiny." Henry Bowman saw the audience hanging on his words. He took a breath and went on.

"In 1989 I prohibited importation of firearms mechanically and functionally identical to weapons made before the Wright Brothers' invention of the airplane in 1903. I hoped that banning these guns would reduce crime. It hasn't. The only people denied the weapons that I banned are those citizens in our country who obey our laws. These are not the people our government should punish, and I now see what a terrible decision that was. "Some politicians are now calling for a national 5-day waiting period to purchase a handgun. The riots last spring showed us the tragedy of that kind of policy. One congressman has even introduced a bill to repeal the Second Amendment to our Constitution. The Bill of Rights enumerates human rights, it does not grant them. That is something that we in government have forgotten. Repealing the Second Amendment would not legitimize our actions any more than repealing the Fifth Amendment would authorize us to kill whoever we wanted."

Henry noticed several people smile at the notion of George Bush acknowledging his responsibility for government intrusions in a State of the Union address.

"All dictatorships restrict or prohibit the honest citizen's access to modern small arms. Anywhere this right is not restricted, you will find a free country.

"There is a name for a society where only the police have guns. It is called a police state. The Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights is not about duck hunting, any more than the First Amendment is about playing Scrabble. The entire Bill of Rights is about individual freedom.

"In my recent trip to St. Louis, Missouri, I found that violent criminals have a government guarantee that honest people are unarmed if they're away from their homes or businesses. It's a felony for a citizen to carry a gun for protection. Giving evil, violent people who ignore our laws a government guarantee that decent people are completely helpless is terrible public policy. It is dangerous public policy. Our Federal and State governments have betrayed the honest citizens of this country by focusing on inanimate objects instead of violent criminal behavior, and I am ashamed to have been a party to it. It is time to correct that betrayal.

"Accordingly, I am lifting the import ban on weapons with a military appearance, effective immediately. I am abandoning any and all proposals to ban honest citizens from owning guns or magazines that hold more than a certain number of cartridges. I will veto any bill that contains any provision which would make it illegal, more difficult, or more expensive for any honest citizen to obtain any firearm or firearm accessory that it is now lawful for him to own. I will also encourage the removal of laws currently in effect which punish honest adults for mere ownership or possession of weapons or for paperwork errors involving weapons. I will work to effect repeal of the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the National Firearms Act of 1934 in their entirety.

"Tomorrow I will appoint a task force to investigate abusive practices of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. I will ask for recommendations as to how that department can be made to shift its focus from technical and paperwork errors to violent criminal activity. I will demand the resignations of all agents and supervisors who have participated in any entrapment schemes or planting of evidence.

"Our government has betrayed its citizens and tomorrow morning I intend to start correcting that. Good night."

Screams of "Yeah!," "Damn right!," and "That's it!" came amidst tremendous applause from the several dozen people who had been standing around listening.

"Okay, that's the speech," Henry said in his normal voice after the applause had died down. He did not notice the look on John Parker's face. "Then, the next morning on the news, you see that Bush has indeed rescinded the import ban, he's named the people on the Task Force, and he's fired Bill Bennett. A couple of senators have offered to draft legislation repealing the National Firearms Act and GCA '68, and you hear Bush say on camera that he's all for it, and you hear him encourage other legislators to support this much-needed reform.

"Question number one: What are all of you going to do now?"

"Do everything we can to get George Bush re-elected!" one man yelled immediately. He was joined by a dozen similar responses. Henry Bowman laughed.

"Not bad. And we haven't even asked question number two, and it's the real clincher: If George Bush gave the speech I just gave and did the things I just described, how many people who were already going to vote for him do you think would change their minds? How many people do you think would say 'Boy, I was going to vote for Bush, but now I'm not going to'?"

"Nobody," John Parker said under his breath. "Anyone who didn't like your speech would already be against the President." John Parker was thinking frantically.

"Exactly. So he picks up four or five million votes, and loses none."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bang; banglist; bush41
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 301-311 next last
To: Beelzebubba
What a joke, I'm pro gun but I'm not going to throw the election to some gun grabbing leftist over assault weapons. No way that this cost Bush I the election, Ross Perot did.
101 posted on 04/18/2003 6:16:40 PM PDT by John Lenin (I was the kid next door's imaginary friend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin
What a joke, I'm pro gun but I'm not going to throw the election to some gun grabbing leftist over assault weapons. No way that this cost Bush I the election, Ross Perot did.

How the hell do you know that people did not vote for Ross because they could not vote for a gun grabber neocon.

102 posted on 04/18/2003 6:26:29 PM PDT by eskimo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
I think we have to control all three branches
before this can happen...

A basic law of economics says that you get what you pay for...so if you subsidize people with welfare, you get more people on welfare.

Same with politics...you get what you vote for. If you vote for gun grabbing politicians, you get more of them. The GOP has decided that American gun owners who believe in the reason for the Second Amendment just do not fit in with its big tent philosophy to retain power, so we are expendible. I would add the GOP appears to think that people who believe in limited government, scaling back the regulatory, tort and bureaucratic state, are also expendible if it can gain more power.

John Ashcroft now thinks it is ok for the feds to sue the tobacco companies for damages...right out of the dems playbook. So I don't know what point you have chosen to draw the line against the newly emergent statist wing of the GOP, but I know where I draw my line.
103 posted on 04/18/2003 6:36:35 PM PDT by Jesse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin
What a joke, I'm pro gun but I'm not going to throw the election to some gun grabbing leftist over assault weapons.


Let's read this again very carefully, shall we? Maybe you didn't really mean this.


104 posted on 04/18/2003 6:50:33 PM PDT by Jesse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: bybybill
My loyalty isn't to any man, or to any party, but to the Constitution, and the rights guaranteed therein. Yes, I know all about Ashcroft's statement, and it sounds good...if you ignore the weasel words at the end where he talks about our RKBA being subject to reasonable government restrictions, or something to that effect. Like he** I'll back off. If the time comes that "the man actually does something harmful", it'll be too late.

You Bushbots, if you want your man to stay in office for another four years, would be wise to quit calling us "one issue voters", and do your best to help us. I don't drink anyone's Kool-Aid, and you'd do well to quit drinking Bush's. It's your RKBA, too, whether or not you choose to exercise it.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

105 posted on 04/18/2003 7:16:28 PM PDT by wku man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: wku man
Your "my way or the highway" attitude is getting a little boring. Nobody is going to take your guns or mine as long as we use them in a reasonable, responsible way. Ashcroft, either at the direction of or with pormission, wrote a stronger defense of your right to own firearms than any governmental figure on record. None of that seems to be enough for you.
106 posted on 04/18/2003 7:32:14 PM PDT by bybybill (first the public employees, next the fish and, finally, the children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: HuntsvilleTxVeteran
We need to come up with a way to defuse these one issue Republicans.

A few months after GWB was elected I had an interesting conversation. It happened at a garage sale in Fairmont, WV. This man that I had never met struck up a conversation when he saw me buy some .45 ammo. He was a dyed in the wool democrat. He must've thought I was one too. He said that all of the WV gun owners that voted for Bush should be ashamed of themselves. They got Bush elected president over a stupid issue like guns. He actually said that those ignorant hunters had no right to elect a republican, that they had betrayed all of the good people of WV and the whole country. He said that those ignorant hunters were one issue voters, and their stupid beliefs should not jeopardize the future of the country.

WV is over 75% democrat, and has voted that way forever. We also lead the country in gun ownership. Because of guns and a few other issues, in the 2000 elections we elected Bush and a Republican congresswoman. WV was the considered the democrat stronghold. The union stronghold that would vote democrat no matter what. We ended up being the swing state that put Bush in the white house and gave the Republicans a "safe" majority in the house.

It wasn't one issue Republicans that got George Bush elected. It was one issue democrats. So please explain to me the logic in "defusing these one issue [voters]".

107 posted on 04/18/2003 7:33:29 PM PDT by FreeInWV (Its not the only issue, just the most important one!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
And let's face it -- California is pretty much a lost cause for the NRA and pro-life folks. If they've lost hope, who could blame them?

Are you willing to write off the few pro gun pro life Repub Congressmen from Calif that may be all there is between what we have and a total gun ban. Doesn't sound too smart to me.

108 posted on 04/18/2003 7:36:36 PM PDT by tubebender (?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
"The NRA bloc voted in 1994--mostly by accident."

You had me until you made this statement. I'd like you to prove any of the specualtions you made from that statement on, 'cause I don't believe them one bit. The gun vote was overwhelming in both '94 and 2000, and I'm pretty sure it was significant in '96 and '98. Gun owners do vote, because we evidently have more to lose than the rest of you.

Now, to answer your algebra, let me offer this opinion:
X = potentially 60-80 million. Y (who, the soccer moms?) = a few million, maybe?
Solution: stick to your base, Mr. President. We're the ones who brung ya, now dance with us.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

109 posted on 04/18/2003 7:37:37 PM PDT by wku man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
"From where I am (California)..."

Now, tell me how I knew that without even checking your profile page!

Seriously, tell me why on Earth I should take any advice from a freakin' Kalifornia Pubbie? We see how rousingly successful you guys have been in defeating the least popular governor in US history. Sheesh...I think American Airlines has more credibility right now that you and your state party.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

110 posted on 04/18/2003 7:47:35 PM PDT by wku man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: bybybill
Nobody is going to take your guns or mine as long as we use them in a reasonable, responsible way

C'mon. Do you really believe that? I was going to post about 25-30 quotes from govt officials that want a total ban, but I'll just say - look at Illinois right now.

111 posted on 04/18/2003 7:49:46 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan ("I have two guns. One for each of ya." - Doc Holliday)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
If he doesn't want you to have the means of defending your life, do you want him in a position to control it?

Outstanding.

112 posted on 04/18/2003 8:01:11 PM PDT by LTCJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
Nobody is going to take your guns. Now, your M1A1 Abrams, that will have to go.
113 posted on 04/18/2003 8:06:20 PM PDT by bybybill (first the public employees, next the fish and, finally, the children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: bybybill
"Nobody is going to take your guns or mine as long as we use them in a reasonable, responsible way."

And just who do you trust to determine the definition of "legal and responsible"? The government? You're a slave already.

"Your "my way or the highway" attitude is getting a little boring."

Tough. Get used to it, 'cause your boooooooredom is gonna do your president in. Again, you need me, I don't need you.

"None of that seems to be enough for you."

You're damn right it's not. I don't need a freakin' government appointee speaking platitudes about my rights...I have studied my Constitution, and know my rights. I don't need anyone monkeying with them. Period.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

114 posted on 04/18/2003 8:08:51 PM PDT by wku man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: wku man
Do the black helicopters keep you up at night?
115 posted on 04/18/2003 8:12:08 PM PDT by bybybill (first the public employees, next the fish and, finally, the children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: bybybill
Awwwww....isn't that soooo cute? An ad hominem insult. Just like the little Commielibs do when they're beaten in an argument, and they can't think of something relevant to respond with. Guess what? You're not nearly as funny and smart as you think you are. And I still don't need you, but Bush needs my vote. If I were you, I'd quit wasting time insulting folks who've just beaten you in an argument, and get busy trying to change my prez's mind.

P.S....Bush lost this "one issue" voter last year when he signed CFR. Damn, I guess it sucks being wrong again, doesn't it? Sure sorry, guy.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

116 posted on 04/18/2003 8:19:53 PM PDT by wku man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: bybybill
Well, the people of Illinois are about to lose their SHOTGUNS thanks to Chicago's sleazeballs unless something is done QUICK.
117 posted on 04/18/2003 8:20:59 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan ("I have two guns. One for each of ya." - Doc Holliday)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: wku man
I have a feeling that the President will do just fine without your vote, not that he could ever get it. More fun for you to rant.

Question, Have you ever had a weapon sized by any government?

118 posted on 04/18/2003 8:23:43 PM PDT by bybybill (first the public employees, next the fish and, finally, the children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
#16 - Yes. It is considered a mental condition that requires drug therapy.
119 posted on 04/18/2003 8:24:03 PM PDT by PatrioticAmerican (If the only purpose of assault weapons is to kill lots of people quickly, why do police have them?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: AAABEST
Count me in as well. I pay for most items with a credit card. I WANT the feds to see another purchase. We should all stand and be counted....counted for EVERY firearm, book, or ammo purchase that we make. Let THEM get nervous!
120 posted on 04/18/2003 8:26:16 PM PDT by PatrioticAmerican (If the only purpose of assault weapons is to kill lots of people quickly, why do police have them?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 301-311 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson