Sarah Brady Demands the Law-Abiding Be Punished for Maryland Shootings

The Brady Bunch ^ | 10/10/02 | Sarah Bunch

[SevenDaysInMay]

This red herring costs time and money, $50+/weapon, is actually ineffective as markings="finger print" changes with normal use especially if any parts are repaired, swapped, are altered. So annual "finger printing" at $50+/year? Will it be a crime if one possesses a registered arm with an out-of-spec "finger print"? Guilty until proven innocent? I expect so.

We have learned nothing if we don't recognize that these obstructions are simply infringments. Adding costs and layers of officious crap (critical reports and paperwork), under penealty of law, is the fascists' M.O. Registration by any means is their only hope of confiscation.

No one will be safer, but the powerful will become more powerful.

[harpseal]

There are actually a large number of rifles and even some handguns that would leave ballistic imprints indistinguishable from a so called assault weapon among these are the Thompson contender single shot pistol the Remington XP 100 and some single shot kits that mount on a 1911A1 frame. In short once more Sarah Brady lies to get attention. Have another cigarette Sarah and get out of our lives.

Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown

[Freedom2specul8]

I think you've gotten a lot of great responses to your question about tracking firearms. NOTE: The brady bunch WILL NOT tell you the weaknesses of her ideas..EVER.

To quote myself:

There is a difference between Gun Control, and Firearm legislation. Gun control regulates the manufacturing of firearms, (rifles, sem-automatics handguns etc) and ammunition. Firearm legislation/Laws limit your rights..or expands them. They create restrictions on what you can and cannot do with guns. This type legislation is designed to control your behaviour. The problem with limiting the rights of or controlling the behaviour of law abiding citizens is addressed in the following links. Crimes committed with guns, are done so by criminals. More often than not, crimes are committed with illegally obtained guns.

I then like to pass along this link to articles about the jewish perspective of gun control.

Jewish Perspective

[PaulJ]

Very good point, the best I've heard.

[freedomcrusader]

Yeah, would you be forbidden from changing barrels, for instance? Or, would every sale of replacement-part barrel now be required to be "fingerprinted" and "registered" as well? Would they outlaw you from making your own barrel?

[Freedom2specul8]

I should have edited my quote a bit..but I hope you get the idea. (it's from my webpage)

[TC Rider]

This is so full of lies it deserves a thrashing.

Lie: "On behalf of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence united with the Million Mom March, I want to express our deepest sympathies to the families of the victims of these senseless shootings.

Truth: We could care less about victims, we want to advance our own agenda.

Lie: " "As police try to track down and stop this killer, we do know this: sensible gun laws can help law enforcement solve crimes as well as prevent gun violence."

Truth: Criminals ignore "sensible gun laws" .

Lie: "The unique markings, called the 'ballistic fingerprint,' that every gun leaves on a fired bullet or shell casing have always been helpful in investigating shootings."

Truth: There has not been one conviction from a casing match in Maryland. And, of course bullets and casings are two different things. Additionally, the 'fingerprint' on a casing is easily modified. Rifling of a barrel can not be easily changed enough to matter on bullet markings.

Lie: "These limitations speak to a need for a national ballistics fingerprinting law for all firearms. Doesn't it make sense for us to give law enforcement the tools they need in order to solve such crimes?"

Truth: This is defacto registration of all guns and their owners, the first step to confiscation, see United Kingdom and Australia. There is no need, these records would only ID lawful owners of guns or owners of guns that had been stolen.

Lie: "Furthermore, according to police, the shooter could be using one of four possible firearms to carry out this shooting spree.

Truth: There are hundreds of different weapons that fire this round.

Lie: Three of the four are assault rifles.

Truth: None are assault rifles, some may have plastic stocks instead of wood.

Lie:We do not want to put more military-style weapons capable of such devastation and worse back on our streets."

Truth: What makes fully automatic military weapons devastating is their automatic fire capability. For all we know the sniper is using a single-shot Thompson Contender.

Lie:"The National Rifle Association, which claims to be on the side of law enforcement, fought the assault weapons ban and it fights ballistic fingerprinting laws. Instead of supporting measures that would help police solve crimes and prevent gun violence, it promotes the dangerous notion that 'an armed society is a polite society."

Truth: Yet violent crime continues to drop in those states with CCW laws.

I'm certain I missed a few lies, fibs and fudges, but when these things are total fabrications, where does one start and where does it end?

[Sgt_Schultze]

More deaths from the sniper have occured in Maryland than in Virginia. If the heavy-handed gun laws in Maryland made its citizens safe, there would be fewer deaths than in Virginia, which I believe is a right to carry state.

[Lost Highway]

You know, the shooter could be her grandson. She did buy him a gun.

[PaulJ]

Thanks, it's very helpful.

[RollingThunder]

This piece of human defecation called Sarah Brady has for years tried to disarm the lawful Amerian People from being able to defend themselves.

Whenever we see her surface, we must realize that she is a person who feels that only she knows what is good for us. We should not be able to defend ourselves because then people like her think we should be victims.

Besides, if her allies in Congress (liberal democRATs) ever lost there ability to use these incidents to futher erode our Constitutional Rights, then they would lose one of there largest voting groups: THE CRIMINALS!

[TC Rider]

I am a srong proponent of the 2nd ammendment. But I must confess, I don't understand why this law is an infrigment on one's rights and why people are against it. Now, I am well aware that criminals would not care about such a law, as gun laws in no way deter them, but as a gun owner, how would this law violate my rights? Am I missing something?

This is not about solving crimes. It is about constructing a data base of every gun and it's owner. Illinois, through Mayor Daley, is already using such info to collect weapons.

This is the way it went down in the UK. First registration, then confiscation.

[Phantom Lord]

Very good point, the best I've heard.

Now thats something I dont hear often!

[oldironsides]

It was reported that Mrs. Sarah Brady went to the state of Delaware and purchased a gun for a relative. She broke the gun laws in the state of Delaware. I believe she purchased a rifle for her son.

[TC Rider]

Here's another 'what if' for you.

What if you go to the range and practice with your Glock. You leave your spent casings on the ground as I do, since the Jr. NRA members collect them and resell them to reloaders.

A reloader, remanufactures your casings and sells them to Joe Blow who becomes a killer. The casings are recovered.

How sophisticated is their equipment? Enough to detect your original markings? enough to distinguish between two? Enough to send you to jail?

[TC Rider]

You know, the shooter could be her grandson. She did buy him a gun.

I went back and checked last night, it was a 30.06. In my mind a better weapon for a sniper.

[gatex]

..."The National Rifle Association, which claims to be on the side of law enforcement,...."

Sarah Brady said on public tv that she was going to make it her life's work to put the NRA out of business.---Of course she instead has helped increase NRA membership.

[thepitts]

tO:brady bunch,etc.

Seems to me that the 2nd may be more important now than at any other time in history.

Author Unknown:

It is time to speak plainly for the good citizens and patriots of this nation who believe unendingly in the Constitution of the United States of America.

Though foreign governments may disarm their subjects, we will not go down that road.

We will not disarm and see our freedoms stripped away. The lessons of history are numerous, clear, and bloody. A disarmed population inevitably becomes an enslaved population. A disarmed population is without power, reduced to childlike obedience to - and dependence upon - the organs of a parental state. A disarmed population will lose - either piecemeal or in one sweeping act - those basic rights for which the citizens of America risked their lives and fortunes over 200 years ago.

We Will Not Disarm. The right to self-protection - the internal directive of every living creature, be it mouse or man - is the most fundamental right of all. It is a right that must be exercised against the predators of the streets, against the predators hidden within agencies of law enforcement, and against the most dangerous predators of all - those to be found in government, whose insidious grasping for power is relentless and never-ending.

We Will Not Disarm. Not in the face of robbers, rapists and murderers who prey upon our families and friends. Nor in the face of police and bureau agents who would turn a blind eye to the Constitution, who would betray the birthright of their countrymen; nor in the face of politicians of the lowest order - those who pander to the ignorant, the weak, the fearful, the naive; those indebted to a virulent strain of the rich who insulate themselves from the dangers imposed upon other Americans and then preach disarmament.

We will not surrender our handguns. We will not surrender our hunting arms. And we will not surrender our firearms of military pattern or military utility, nor their proper furnishings, nor the right to buy, to sell, or to manufacture such items. Firearms of military utility, which serve well and nobly in times of social disturbance as tools of defense for the law-abiding, serve also in the quiet role of prevention, against both the criminal and the tyrannical. An armed citizenry - the well-regulated militia of the Second Amendment, properly armed with military firearms - is a powerful deterrent, on both conscious and subconscious levels, to those inclined toward governmental usurpations.

An armed citizenry stands as a constant reminder to those in power that, though they may violate our rights temporarily, they will not do so endlessly and without consequence. And should Americans again be confronted with the necessity of - may God forbid it - throwing off the chains of a tyrannical and suffocating regime, firearms designed to answer the particular demands of warfare will provide the swiftest and most decisive means to this end.

Any law which prohibits or limits a citizen's possession of firearms of military utility or their proper furnishings provides an open window through which a corrupt government will crawl to steal away the remainder of our firearms and our liberties.

Any law which prohibits or limits a citizen's possession of firearms of military utility or their proper furnishings, being directly contrary to the letter and spirit of the Second Amendment, is inimical to the Constitution, to the United States of America, and to its citizens.

Now - today - we are witnessing the perilous times foreseen by the architects of the Constitution. These are times when our government is demanding - in the guise of measures for the common good - the relinquishment of several rights guaranteed to Americans in the Constitution, foremost among which is the right to keep and bear arms for our own defense. These are times when our government has abdicated its primary responsibility - to provide for the security of its citizens. Swift and sure punishment of outlaws is absent, and in its place is offered the false remedy of disarming the law-abiding. Where this unconstitutional action has been given the force of law, it has failed to provide relief and has produced greater social discord. This discord in turn now serves as the false basis for the demand that we give up other rights, and for the demand for more police, more agents of bureaucratic control to enforce the revocation of these rights.

Legislators, justices and law officers must bear in mind that the foundation of their duties is to uphold the fundamental law of the land - the Constitution. They must bear in mind that the unconstitutional act of disarming one's fellow citizens will also disarm one's parents, spouse, brothers, sisters, children and children's children. They must bear in mind that there are good citizens who - taking heed of George Washington's belief that arms are the liberty teeth of the people - will not passively allow these teeth to be torn out. There are good citizens who - taking heed of Benjamin Franklin's admonition that those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety - will surrender not one of their rights.

Those who eat away at our right to own and use firearms are feeding on the roots of a plant over two centuries old, a plant whose blossom is the most free, most powerful nation ever to exist on the face of this planet.

The right to keep and bear arms is the tap root of this plant. All other rights were won at the point of a gun and will endure only at the point of a gun. Could they speak, millions upon millions of this world's dead souls would testify to this truth. Millions upon millions of the living can so testify today. Now - today - is a critical moment in our history.

Will we Americans passively lie down before a government grown disdainful of its best citizens? Or will we again declare:

WE are the government, government functions at our behest, and it may not rescind our sacred rights? Will we place our faith in public servants who behave like our masters? Or will we place our faith in the words and deeds of the daring, far-seeing men and women whose blood, sweat and tears brought forth this great nation?

Will we believe those who assure us that the police officer will shield us from the criminal? Or will we believe our eyes and ears, presented every day with news of our unarmed neighbors falling prey in their homes, on our streets, in our places of work and play?

Will we bow our heads to cowards and fools who will not learn and do not understand the lessons of human history? Or will we stand straight and assume the daily tasks and risks that liberty entails? Will we ignore even the lessons of this present era - which has seen the cruel oppression of millions on the continents of Europe, Asia, Africa and South America - and believe that the continent of North America is immune to such political disease? Or will we wisely accept the realities of this world, wisely listen to and make use of the precautions provided by our ancestors?

Will we be deceived by shameless liars who say that disarmament equals safety, helplessness equals strength, patriotism equals criminality? Or will we mark the words of our forefathers, who wrote in plain language: The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?

Let us make known: We will choose the latter option in every case.

Legislators: Do your duty to your country. Uphold the Constitution as you swore to do. Do not shame yourselves by knocking loose the mighty keystone of this great republic - the right to bear arms.

Justices: Do your duty to your country. Examine the origins of our right to weaponry and uphold the letter and spirit of the Constitution.

Lawmen: Do your duty to your country. Do not be misguided and misused. Your task is to serve and to protect - not to oppress, to disarm and to make helpless your countrymen. To the blind, the ignorant, the apathetic, the safe and sheltered, these may seem to be concerns of another age. They are not. They are as vital as they ever have been through history.

For times may change but human nature does not.

And it is to protect forever against the evil in human nature that the Founding Fathers set aside certain rights as inviolable.

For these reasons we must now make known:

We will not passively take the path that leads to tyranny.

We will not go down that road. We Will Not Disarm.

[justshe]

A Strong Kick To The Finish! (Leave The Left Behind)
	Finish Strong. Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

[RogueIsland]

There are very few things as dangerous to a society as people with political power who insist on working out personal psychological issues via public policy.