Posted on 03/22/2002 11:41:39 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
Move over, Rosie O'Donnell: The newest "celebrity" anti-gun hypocrite is Sarah Brady.
Mrs. Brady "bought her son a powerful rifle for Christmas in 2000 - and may have skirted Delaware state background-check requirements," the New York Daily News reported Thursday.
Some people will do anything to tell a book. No doubt to increase interest in what otherwise would be a boring memoir, the gun rights opponent writes that she bought James Brady Jr. a Remington .30-06, "complete with scope and safety lock," at a gun shop in Lewes, Del.
"I can't describe how I felt when I picked up that rifle, loaded it into my little car and drove home," she writes. "It seemed so incredibly strange: Sarah Brady, of all people, packing heat."
According to her book, the store ran federal Brady Law and state background checks with much ado. But the book suggests she did not have her son checked, as required by Delaware law.
Delaware Justice Department spokeswoman Lori Sitler said the purchase could be illegal if Mrs. Brady did not say who she was buying the gun for and submit his "name, rank and serial number" for an inquiry.
"You can't purchase a gun for someone else," Sitler told the Daily News. "That would be a 'straw purchase.' You've got a problem right there."
Gun rights advocates were surprised to hear of Mrs. Brady's antics.
"We hope that it's innocuous and there's been no laws violated," said James Jay Baker, chief lobbyist for National Rifle Association. "It's obviously interesting that Sarah would be purchasing firearms of any kind for anybody, given her championing of restrictive guns laws for everyone."
Seniors United Supporting the Second Amendment told NewsMax.com it was asking Delaware and the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate "what appears to be a criminal act" by Mrs. Brady.
"Sarah Brady is infamous for her radical anti-Second Amendment positions and her work to strip the citizens if the United States of their civil rights. She is the head of an extremist group that is working to gut the Bill of Rights," the group said in a statement.
"Sarah Brady is typical of the anti-civil rights radicals," noted John Bender, executive director of SUSSA. "She wants to ban private transfers of guns for everyone but her and her elitist friends. If a black mother in a Delaware public housing apartment did this she would already be charged with a crime. I’m wondering if Delaware has different enforcement standards for rich white women.”
The group concluded: "Sarah Brady is one of the leaders in the anti-civil rights movement’s attempt to make all private transfers of firearms illegal. Along with other extremists she pushed Congress to make this type of straw purchase illegal. Law enforcement should show her what her work has accomplished."
Mrs. Brady became a media-adored opponent of the Second Amendment after her husband, James, White House press secretary to President Ronald Reagan, was shot in a 1981 assassination attempt on Reagan.
Regardless, if the Rats were to get their way, who's to say that one day someone won't say they want that extra inch. Just like DWIs..., it's not the first round that hurts, it's the third or fourth where we realize we never hould have conceded to anything. With regard to Sara Brady et al., this is too limited a group speaking against a Constitutional mandate, and personally I don't give a shit what anyone thinks about hunting. Gunless we are what Clinton always dreamed, a democracy.
If you want to live in a Society where you can attain power and force your belief system on others than emmigrate and sleep your way into power in a Fascist State. Then you can ban hunting and emasculate all the little children.
If you are going to stay here in the land of the free I suggest you pick up a rifle and spend some time in the woods - only then will you truly have frame of reference from which to speak.
If you plan on staying on this forum then you should re-think this arrogant, elitist attitude you have whereby you feel that somehow you have the right to tell us how to live and how to raise our children. If you intend to stay and pass judgements on people you've never met, merely because they hunt, you might as well get ready to either be ignored totally or flamed when post this assinine drivel you call your opinion.
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.
My cats are truely evil creatures. They don't hunt mice and gophers to eat, they hunt them for sport, swatting them around until they're too crippled to move. Then they ignore them, only occasionaly eating them. Many times I find them in the yard, abandoned when the game is no longer fun.
But according to PETA, all the little animals live together in peace and harmony. Only man hunts for sport, according to them..
I'm not trying to take anything from your argument but your statement isn't true. They had just as many different categories as we do. Target, Military, sporting, hunting, collecting and if I wanted to be technical, they had one more that we don't have, dueling.
Do tennants get paid for doing chores?
You do. If you know of someone who is illegally hunting endangered species, you should turn them in. It's called poaching, and it's against the law. For example - if you know of someone who is hunting pumas or cougars and they've told you that they're doing it illegally, you have an obligation to turn it over to the authorities.
I think you call that Buck Fevor. All hunters get that feeling at first.
What you are blind to is that hunters are the ones who are most annoyed by the sorts of stories that you have brought forward. Head over to iowawhitetail.com and read some posts on how those guys feel about poachers. We all realize that, because of people like you, bad eggs are a threat to our way of life.
How many times in this country has bad publicity of an isolated incident or two ended up with sweeping laws that have nothing to do with real crime? Just look at the open container laws - an activity two steps removed from causing harm or injury is illegal because of 'what might happen.' The legally blind can get a driver's licence simply by taking a test, but I can't have window tint on my car because of 'what might happen.' Every time CCW comes up for a vote, in spite of evidence to the contrary in 34 states that have passed it already, we hear about why people should be prevented from excersizing their rights because of 'what might happen.'
Expressing your opinion would have sounded like this:
I don't think hunting is beneficial or ethical.
Contrast that with: Don't teach your kids to hunt, it's wrong. Can you see the difference? I certainly can. My opinion is that the people here have been quite cordial in attempting to sway your opinion, and it is you who has repeatedly gone on the attack by lumping us in with the criminal and the criminally insane, then hurling accusations at us.
As I said before, your 'opinions,' and advice, have been assimilated. Reasonable arguments have been put forth as to why they are wrong. You have turned a blind eye to those arguments and continued on the warpath.
Many of the disabled mentally retarded kids/adults do get paid for working...
Very nice.
TERRIER:
We never said that. We said we PREFER to harvest our own, overall. YOU are the one who is demanding a purist mindset. Therefore if you are demanding that of us, we will point out where you don't have it yourself. We don't mind that you eat meat, but we mind that you look down on us for something which is morally equivalent to what you do.
DUH.
The only case that you're proving is that you're ignorant to the point you can't see your own inability to think straight.
TERRIER:
Yes we relate eating meat to the points you make because we believe it is much better to pursue and HUNT one's meat than go to the supermarket and buy it prepackaged. Of course, you missed that point also. What YOU do to obtain meat, we think is lazy and shallow and allows you to remain in blissful ignorance of the facts of life.
345 posted on 3/23/02 8:36 PM Pacific by Terriergal
SUNGIRL:
I think you better re-read what you said there. You do not say you 'PREFER' to hunt than go to the market. You said it's shallow and lazy to buy meat at the supermarket. Where do you see the word 'prefer"?? You say that buying prepackaged meat makes you lazy and ignorant of the facts....you did not note any exceptions...or say that only when it's convenient or anything like that. HAhahah
You're lying with every answer you post to me trying to weasel out and twist what you said to try to save yourself.
It's also interesting how you have to drag others in there with you "WE" instead of speaking for yourself...no one in a post that I saw ever mentioned that people who buy meat at a supermarket were lazy and ignorant. Haha
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.