"We’re prepared to fight him every step of the way.”
Ooooh. I'd be scared. The skilled compromisers of the NRA are "going to fight (Obama) every step of the way." Read here: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/business-likes-obama-plan-2008-12-08.html
Gun groups don’t trust president-elect By Sam Youngman
Posted: 12/08/08 08:08 PM [ET]
Gun groups say they are “prepared to fight” the incoming administration on the issues dear to them despite President-elect Obama’s insistence that lawful gun owners “have nothing to fear” from him.
Obama, appearing on at a Sunday press conference, said he believes “in common-sense gun safety laws, and I believe in the Second Amendment.”
But Chris W. Cox, executive director of the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) political arm, said membership in his organization is growing at record levels, and a number of reports show that gun sales are up by as much as 50 percent nationally since Obama won the presidency on Nov. 4.
“He says gun owners shouldn’t be worried, but clearly gun owners are worried,” Cox told The Hill.
Cox said Obama’s record, particularly from his time in the Illinois state Senate, paints a picture of an incoming president that is an enemy to gun owners, and he said the president-elect’s early actions bring that picture into focus.
The job application for a position in Obama’s administration includes questions about gun ownership, which offended the gun lobby.
“That’s a pretty outrageous abuse of not only taxpayer dollars but also personal privacy, and it’s clearly indicative of somebody who doesn’t respect the Second Amendment,” Cox said.
Toward the end of his campaign against Republican Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), Obama fought hard to win reliably red states, and in doing so, ran television ads promising gun owners they should not worry about his administration infringing on the right to bear arms.
But Cox and other gun rights groups say they expect Obama to betray that campaign promise now that he has won.
“We have no doubt that he’s going to break his promise to the American people that he made during the campaign, and we’re prepared to fight him every step of the way,” Cox said.
Cox declined to say how much money, if any, the NRA is preparing to use in paid media to wage war against Obama and any efforts at gun control laws he might try to enact.
“We’re prepared to fight,” Cox said. “We know how to fight.”
John Velleco, the director of federal affairs for Gun Owners of America (GOA), said his organization is preparing to target Congress in an effort to stop gun control legislation from reaching the White House.
“We are going to try to keep the heat on the members of Congress who claim to be pro-gun but have not yet been tested and try to prevent them from sending President Obama anything he can sign,” Velleco said.
Obama tried to reassure gun owners on Sunday when he noted “lawful gun owners have nothing to fear.”
“I haven’t indicated anything different during the transition,” Obama said. “I think people can take me at my word.”
But Velleco said Obama’s choice of aides and officials have given gun owners several reasons to fear that the Obama administration “will be the most anti-gun in history.”
Velleco said Vice President-elect Biden, as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1993 and 1994, was instrumental in the passage of both the Brady Bill and the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, and he noted that incoming Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, as a member of the Clinton administration, advocated for the assault weapons ban on Capitol Hill.
“It’s not only Obama who’s a huge concern, but it’s the people he’s surrounding himself with,” Velleco said.
Gun control advocates scoffed at what they see as the hysteria of their opponents, arguing that Obama and Biden join them in supporting “common sense gun laws,” not trying to ban guns for lawful citizens.
“We’ve been very impressed with Obama’s record in the past on the gun issue,” said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. “He didn’t run from the issue [during the campaign].”
Helmke told The Hill that Obama has been “consistent” in his beliefs on gun control, specifically in approval of an assault weapons ban and improved background checks, including closing the so-called gun show loophole. It is that loophole that the Brady Campaign, which endorsed Obama, hopes the president-elect will try to address first, and, hopefully, in his first year in office.
“I think that’s the one that really makes the most sense to bring up first,” said Helmke, noting that the 10-year anniversary of the Columbine school shootings falls next April.
Helmke said he understands that an assault weapons ban “could be a little messier in terms of getting something worked out,” but he said the campaign will “work closely with the administration, the new attorney general and whoever the new head of the [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms] is to get some of these things done.”
Helmke criticized gun rights groups for not balancing the rights of gunowners with public safety.
The hell with EVERY last one of them.
This "system" is almost completely broken. The wheels already fell off the cart long ago.
And still the same band-aids and bull from the "leaders"
He can say whatever he wants but people that actively shoot are good at doping the wind and hunters are, for the most part, pretty good at recognizing sign and smells.
They can take my non-detachable-magazine, non-high capacity, greatest battle implement ever devised and faithful companion 150 grains of Lake City 58 at a time. Won't be a 300 yard war either, prints pretty good at 600 and does a reasonable job at 1000 with iron sights, for a relic of a different age sold to me by the Federal Government when we were a Nation of Rifleman before they milled surplus M-14s into scrap and stopped selling good ammo.
If they put their toe in these waters, their toes will be shot off, from long range, one at a time.
Buddy of mine can keep his .45-70 Sharps on 36" of paper at 1000 using aperture sights with a spotter. Do that with an M-4 and get back to me...
I'm with Chris.
NRA: Not really worth supporting anymore.
We should all move our money where it will REALLY benefit us: such as Gun Owners of America, or Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. These two are unique, and they continue to uphold their non-partisan status. And they won't throw gun owners under the bus just to run a red light and save some time.
Note to CorbinKale.
I didn't publish your comment, not because I necessarily disagree with it, but because I think you personalized it too much. Just trying to keep you out of trouble. When you read the entire volume of Absolved, I think you'll understand that some things are best left hanging. I appreciate your sentiment though.
If you still disagree with my decision, please email me at GeorgeMason1776@aol.com. Thanks
I don't disagree. I tend to say exactly what I mean, and I end up being less tactful than is prudent.
I recall, for example, a mass email from the ARCENT-QA EO Rep about an ethnic history month celebrated by the Army. I hit 'reply all' and explained that it was against Army EO discrimination policy to celebrate a group of people based on race, sex, creed, religion, etc. to the exclusion of others, and would they please stop sending me these racist emails. When I hit 'Send', it was like launching a virtual nuke.
Over the next few weeks that email was forwarded all the way up to the Pentagon, so I heard. During those weeks, I received death threats, in addition to several offers to whip my ass. I was a hero to the people who felt the same as I did, but dare not speak up. I was a villain to those who thrive on racism to achieve their ends. Oddly enough, the two camps were not drawn on racial lines. People of the celebrated race confided that they hated the celebration because its very existance was proof that equality was still just a dream. People of my own race publicly and loudly denounced me for fear of being called 'racist' themselves, if they did not. It was like a freak social experiment that exposed the hidden souls of everyone it touched.
Somewhere up the chain, someone realized that I had done nothing wrong, and the upper echelon racists calling for my head got their leashes yanked. I have always wondered just how high it went and what conversations took place. Anyway, my CDR took me aside and told me that someone very high was on my side, and while he personally agreed with my sentiment, he would appreciate it if I would not reply to the EO mailings anymore. He laughed and said, "SSG, I don't think my ass can take another one of your emails."
The racist CSM demanded that I write an open letter of apology, that my career depended on it. I, respectfully, refused on the grounds that I would rather be Court Martialed than compromise my integrity by writing a bullshit apology for some imaginary offense. When I called his bluff, he backed down. I did agreed not to pursue harrassment charges, in consideration of the LTC. He was a decent man, and I didn't want to cause him any more grief than he had already suffered on my account. Watching the racists expose themselves, then stand there impotent was justice, in my eyes. Good times.
So if you think it best to withhold any of my posts, I will understand. :)
Post a Comment