White House Pokes Gun Owners in the Eye -- admits receiving "tremendous amount of e-mail"

email | May 9, 2003 | GOA

[lainie]

Friday, May 9, 2003

Well, you've probably seen the news by now.

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) introduced legislation yesterday to reauthorize the ban on scores of semi-automatic firearms.

As a result, reporters asked White House spokesman Ari Fleischer for the President's position. Fleischer said, "Often, the president will agree... with the National Rifle Association. On this issue, he does not."

The bottom line? The President supports the ban on many semi-automatic firearms and on magazines holding 10 rounds or more.

The White House seems to think that the bill will never reach the President's desk. At least that is what top officials are counting on. In pursuing this strategy, they are trying to please both sides and are playing a very dangerous game, to be sure.

No one should assume for a second that there are a majority of pro-gun legislators in the Congress that will join to kill this bill. It may be that Democrats in Congress will call the President's bluff and attach the Feinstein reauthorization bill as an amendment to some "must pass" bill.

With all the "horse trading" that goes on behind closed doors, don't be surprised if some fence-sitters in the Senate trade their votes in favor of the ban to gain the support of certain Democrats for tax cuts.

Meanwhile, the White House has been inundated with e-mail in opposition to the ban. Senior White House official Carl Rove told a director of Gun Owners of New Hampshire that they have received a "tremendous amount of e-mail" on this issue.

That's a testimony to all of you. Good work, guys!

But there is still much more that needs to be done. The White House is trying to straddle the fence on this issue. It's up to us to yank the President over to our side.

We have included a new pre-written letter for you to e-mail which answers the main objection that the White House is putting forth. But if you have the time, we encourage you to call the White House to deliver your message. Better yet, do both!

It is important that they feel the growing displeasure that is brewing in the grassroots. Making phone calls -- as opposed to just e-mailing -- is one way to do that.

As one legislative official said, "If you do phones, you can ruin the staff's day and they will get nothing done -- because they are spending all their time on the phone. That definitely gets their attention."

Let's get their attention.

ACTION: Please use the pre-written text below to guide your response to the White House. It is preferred that you call. But if you can only e-mail, please be sure to do that.

You can visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send a pre-written e-mail message to President Bush. To call or snail mail the President regarding the semi-auto ban, you can use the following contact info:

President George Bush
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500
Fax: 202-456-2461 or 202-456-1907
Phone: 202-456-1414

------ Pre-written message ------

Dear President Bush:

I am sorely disappointed to hear that you support reauthorizing the Clinton-Feinstein ban on commonly owned semi-autos and on certain magazines.

Your spokesmen have said that you are being "consistent" because you have always supported the enforcement of existing gun laws.

First, the Second Amendment says the right to keep and bear arms "shall not be infringed." That does not allow for you to play political games with the Bill of Rights!

Second, your support for "existing gun laws" means that you should support the EXISTING SUNSET in the semi-auto ban which forces the semi-auto gun ban to expire in September, 2004.

You are in the White House because gun owners in West Virginia, Tennessee and Arkansas believed they could count on you. We would urge you to keep faith with them and with us.

Sincerely,

****************************

[lainie]

Posted as an FYI & for discussion. The president is betting the farm that the bill won't cross his desk. For if it does, he will have no choice but to sign it. He either knows it has no chance, or is an idiot. Since none of us thinks he's an idiot, and these political things never happen by accident...

your support for "existing gun laws" means that you should support the EXISTING SUNSET

amen.

[tet68]

Carl Rove told a director of Gun Owners of New Hampshire that they have received a "tremendous amount of e-mail" on this issue.

Seems to me I saw this on another thread, hmmmmmm.

[Cicero]

Rove is a political genius. Except on certain issues, where he seems to be a blithering idiot. I guess nobody's perfect.

[Almondjoy]

There is no reason for anyone to own a semi auto weapon.. not for sport.. not for fun.. and certainly don't need one in self defense(unless that is you have a feeling that a russian 10 man kgb team is coming to your house to kill you in the next couple of days). Good for Bush.. to hell with idiocy that the NRA can stoop itself to.

[freedomlover]

What do you consider to be a semi-auto weapon?

[upchuck]

Pardon me while I...uuugh...snap...zip...zip...snap... there... put on this flame-proof suit. OK, all done.

With all the "horse trading" that goes on behind closed doors, don't be surprised if some fence-sitters in the Senate trade their votes in favor of the ban to gain the support of certain Democrats for tax cuts.

This weapon ban already exists. So, given a choice between extending something that already exists and getting some tax cuts, I'm for tax cuts 100%. YOU MAY NOW FLAME AWAY!!!!

I prefer napalm. Great flavor :)

[lainie]

hm. I missed that. interesting.

[philetus]

I can shoot certain lever action and pump action rifles as fast as a semi.
Do you want to ban those also?

[LTCJ]

There is no reason for anyone to own a semi auto weapon.. not for sport.. not for fun.. and certainly don't need one in self defense

Son, getting your education on Saturday morning cartoons is no way to go through life.

Do you know anything about firearms?

[templar]

There is no reason for anyone to own a semi auto weapon.. not for sport.. not for fun..

I own numerous weapons of this type. They are both for sport and for fun, but that isn't the reason I own them. I own them because I want to, and that's all the reason I need. It's what is generally referred to as freedom and liberty. You and your kind can just live with it or end up in extremely prejudicial opposition with me and my kind at some time in the future.

[templar]

So, given a choice between extending something that already exists and getting some tax cuts, I'm for tax cuts 100%.

No reason to flame here. I believe everyone should make his choices according to what's truly important to him. Take me, for instance. Given a choice between voting for a president that has signed a gun control law and voting for a third party candidate, I'll take the third party candidate 100% of the time.

[Dan from Michigan]

There is no reason for anyone to own a semi auto weapon.. not for sport.. not for fun.. and certainly don't need one in self defense(unless that is you have a feeling that a russian 10 man kgb team is coming to your house to kill you in the next couple of days). Good for Bush.. to hell with idiocy that the NRA can stoop itself to.

1. 2/3 of all handguns are semi-auto. Did you know that, son.

2. It's not called the bill of needs, son. It's called the bill of rights. I'll repeat myself since it's obvious from your post. Bill of RIGHTS.

3. What part of shall not be infringed do you not understand?

4. Did you know that most semi-autos are not covered by this ban?

[af_vet_rr]

Yes, but it's not like gun owners are going to vote against President Bush if he signs it. Who are we kidding? He'll sign the bill and we'll vote for him, win-win situation for him.

[Stopislamnow]

No government agent, other than the standing military, should be better armed than the average citizen. Period. The whole reason behind the 2nd was to give the people the power to keep the govt in check.

Swat teams, FBI, ATF all have access to assault weapons, semi and FULL auto.

[Crusader21stCentury]

I got one thing to say to you.

Come and get them then.

What part of shall not be infringed can't you get through your skull?

[lainie]

It can happen here.

[Crusader21stCentury]

If he signs this Nancy Johnson of Connectict will not get my vote, and neither will he. She barely made it in the last election.

[niteowl77]

As someone pointed out on an earlier thread, this whole AWB crock of excrement really isn't about features or capabilities, it is about the statists removing guns from a (reasonably) free people.

One kind at a time.

What's your opinion about that?

[PuNcH]

This weapon ban already exists. So, given a choice between extending something that already exists and getting some tax cuts, I'm for tax cuts 100%. YOU MAY NOW FLAME AWAY!!!!

*THIS* weapon ban does NOT already exist. It could and will most likely be at least somewhat more restrictive and permanent.

[lawdog]

You've got be kidding ! Here's a a little secret, the "Assault Weapons ban" isn't about banning, it's about the State having the gun monopoly. Eventually, the government will seek to ban all guns. Slaves don't own guns.