Bush supports gun rights..........Debate Thread

[Ironbarr]

buzz...

Not to hi-jack this thread, (we'll get this post moved if necessary), but I wonder just what kind of case would be "right".

My fear is that - one day - (if there were a spate of in-USA attacks by the supposed 25 Chechens (sp) supposedly crossing into AZ with backpacks) - there will be a need for FIRST first-responders as an on-site deterrent and/or LEO/Mil back-up.

Seems to me we should - must - be armed. I just don't understand the head-in-the-sand attitude of antis - at whatever level.

-Andy

 

[Tag]

I will not vote for Bush because of the Patriot Act and the Domestic Security Enhancement Act.

This man does not care about our rights, and I will not help him destroy our constitution.

 

[Ironbarr]

...and I will not help him destroy our constitution.

And... Kerry won't?

 

[Gordon Fink]

Bush is saying what he has to in order keep the barbs out of his back until the election is over; after November 2nd and if he wins we will see his true colors which are more conservative than a lot of people realize.

Not necessarily. He still has to look “moderate,†so another Republican can be elected in 2008.

Republican apologists praise G. W. Bush’s “shrewd†handling of the “assault-weapons†ban and his “principled†support of concealed carry in Texas, but do they ever wonder if that support for CCW wasn’t just more “shrewd†politicking?

~G. Fink

 

[BamBam-31]

Why do Bush supporters keep pushing this flawed reasoning? Only a vote for Kerry, helps put him into the White House.

How is this reasoning flawed? It's the reality of how the system works. Dems blame Nader for Gore's loss to Bush the first time around. Being from the left, had those voters voted for Gore instead, he probably would have won.

 

[fds5116]

The Debate last night

Here is the transcript of the question; my comments are inserted between the square brackets [...].

SCHIEFFER: Mr. President, new question, two minutes.

You said that if Congress would vote to extend the ban on assault weapons, that you'd sign the legislation, but you did nothing to encourage the Congress to extend it. Why not?

BUSH: Actually, I made my intentions -- made my views clear. I did think we ought to extend the assault weapons ban, [either you believe that Bush is lying for the sake of political expediency, so as not to alienate the gun-fearing-soccer-moms, or he really believes that ‘assault weapons’ do not belong in your hands or mine] and was told the fact that the bill was never going to move, because Republicans and Democrats were against the assault weapon ban, people of both parties. [So he expects us to believe that the congress-critters were against the ban? Come on, you, George, and I all know that the real reason none of them wanted to vote on the AWB is that most of those who voted to extend the AWB would be looking for a job on 3 November 2004]

I believe law-abiding citizens ought to be able to own a gun. I believe in background checks at gun shows [let’s make sure none of _those_ people have guns] or anywhere [so in a private party transaction, we must beg the governments’ permission?] to make sure that guns don't get in the hands of [_those_] people that shouldn't have them. [I don’t need to point out to you guys that government autocrats are defining just who those folks are – and it could be you or me]

But the best way to protect our citizens from guns is to prosecute those who commit crimes with guns. [Gosh, and I thought that John Lott showed that criminal activity was reduced when a small fraction of the population was carrying heat, and the crooks knew it] And that's why early in my administration I called the attorney general and the U.S. attorneys and said: Put together a task force all around the country to prosecute those who commit crimes with guns. And the prosecutions are up by about 68 percent -- I believe -- is the number.

Neighborhoods are safer when we crack down on people who commit crimes with guns. [Yup, that crook will be so dumb that he’ll mug you right in front of that nice police officer; come on, the reason that there’s never a police officer around when you need one is that crooks are not that dumb – you have to protect yourself].

To me, that's the best way to secure America.

SCHIEFFER: Senator?

KERRY: I believe it was a failure of presidential leadership not to reauthorize the assault weapons ban. [It was a failure to obey the Constitution to pass it in the first place]

I am a hunter. I'm a gun owner. I've been a hunter since I was a kid, 12, 13 years old. [Crawling on his belly with his trusty Purdey, no doubt] And I respect the Second Amendment and I will not tamper with the Second Amendment. [And he proved it by voting for all those gun control laws]

But I'll tell you this. I'm also a former law enforcement officer. I ran one of the largest district attorney's offices in America, one of the ten largest. I put people behind bars for the rest of their life. I've broken up organized crime. I know something about prosecuting. [Non sequitur]

And most of the law enforcement agencies in America wanted that assault weapons ban. They don't want to go into a drug bust and be facing an AK-47. [I believe that ‘most’ is an exaggeration – most seem to be neutral on the subject, likely because they knew the AWB was only a cosmetic measure]

I was hunting in Iowa last year with a sheriff from one of the counties there, and he pointed to a house in back of us, and said, "See the house over? We just did a drug bust a week earlier, and the guy we arrested had an AK-47 lying on the bed right beside him."

Because of the president's decision today, law enforcement officers will walk into a place that will be more dangerous. [Not true, no more dangerous than last year, or 12 years ago] Terrorists can now come into America and go to a gun show and, without even a background check, buy an assault weapon today. [Not true]

And that's what Osama bin Laden's handbook said, because we captured it in Afghanistan. It encouraged them to do it. [Argh]

So I believe America's less safe. [because of those of your ilk]
================
In my opinion, neither guy passes. Sure, one is the lesser evil, but hey, it's still evil...
Sauer

 

[GOV]

Divide and conquer

As gun owners we need to stick together till a better solution is available! Kerry is not the answer and neither is the LP. Divide us now and conquer over the next four years...The last thing we need is to fight amoungst ourselves! So, throw it all to the wind and vote for what is not in the combined interest of all. You think your pissed now!!!!!!!Keep the HARDHEAD and see what happends over the next four!!! Bush gets my vote hands down!!!!!

Steve

 

[buzz_knox]

The funny thing is that should Kerry get elected, people that helped get him in office by voting against Bush will be among those whining loudest about loss of rights, etc.

As for the claim that the incremental argument is shallow, this is the tactic that has achieved success. The everything now or nothing at all crowd has achieved a universal and resounding failure time and time again. We are in the position we are now because we failed to adapt to the enemy's tactics and use them ourselves. The death of the AWB is both a resounding victory but Ashcroft's pronouncement was the camel's nose under the tent that will have longer effects.

The guns rights battle is a war, ladies and gentlemen, and the doctrine of the one decisive battle is as outmoded here as it was in World War II.

 

[fds5116]

buzz_knox
"The guns rights battle is a war, ladies and gentlemen, and the doctrine of the one decisive battle is as outmoded here as it was in World War II"

Agree with you here, but (always there's a but), but it could work quite well in the case of a Demo President with a Repub Congress. Gridlock is good thing, especially when it comes to (taking away) gun rights.

Remember, it wasn't a Dem Pres who signed the 1989 import ban. It wasn't a Dem Pres who called guns "an abomination" (hint, think Tricky Dick). It _was_ a Repub Senator who ramrodded the Brady bill thru Congress (Bob "Brady Bill" Dole). It _was_ the former Republican National Chairman Lee Atwater who gloated that Republicans can afford to ignore gun people, who will vote Republican no matter what, because who else will they vote for?

I recognize the urge to vote against the greater evil, I'm just pointing out that the lesser evil is still, in fact, evil.

 

[fds5116]

A list of our 'friends' in the Republican Party:

Jim & Sarah Brady call themselves 'conservative' Republicans - She's a principal at HCI, now VPC;
Republican commentator George Will called for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment;
On 'Face the Nation' a few years back, Republican Jack Kemp called for a universal ban on all semi-automatic weapons (except for the police, feds, and military, of course);
William F. Buckley endorsed the passage of the "Brady Bill";
my own senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson, republican, helped pass the Brady Bill;
Republican senator John Chaffee of RI who introduced a bill in 1993 proposing a nationwide ban on handguns;
George H.W. Bush (the 41st) proposed the legislation and implemented the 1989 import ban on semi-automatic weapons, which action arguably cost him the election in 1992, giving us you-know-who;
William Bennett, republican theorist and self proclaimed morality czar, is a constant advocate for victim disarmament laws;
George W. Bush (the 43rd) has said in public (as late as last night) that he is in favor of renewing the 'assault' weapons ban;
Republican Governor of California Pete Wilson who let the state level Roberti-Roos AWB pass without vetoing it;
The present Republican Governator of California who is squishy soft on individual right to self defense, or even sporting purposes since I don't think anyone carries their Barret 50 BMG concealed...;
Republican Mayor of NYC and all-around-post 11-September-superhero Rudy Giuliani who did nothing to get rid of the Sullivan Act that disarms everyone in NYC (unless they are a celebrity or a big contributor to the party coffers);
Richard Nixon, who stated shortly before his death that the Brady Bill doesn't go far enough because, "Guns are an abomination"?
Republican National Chairman Lee Atwater who gloated that Republicans can afford to ignore gun people, who'll vote Republican no matter what, because who else will they vote for?

I know the list is far longer than this on the Republican side, and much, much, MUCH longer on the Democratic Party side. That isn't the point. The point is that "The enemey of my enemy may still be my enemy". These folks are not on our side; they are slightly less against us.

 

[OF]

I guess I'm not seeing the problem here. Is the argument that somehow Kerry is either better or equal to Bush on gun rights?

Maybe people aren't paying attention, but Kerry has the absolute worst record on 2nd Amendment issues of anyone, ever to run for president. Ever. He's never voted against an anti-gun bill in 20 years.

Maybe Bush isn't Aaron Zellman, but he sure as hell isn't John Kerry. Nancy Pelosi wishes she was as anti-gun as Kerry. Kerry is Chuck Schumer's anti-gun hero for crying out loud. 20 years voting to dismantle the 2nd Amendment and he claims to be a 'hunter and 2nd Amendment supporter' with a straight face. Schumer would kill for that kind of camoulflage.

If you want to make a point, vote L in local races where there isn't a clear difference between the R and D. Put L's on your school board and your local committees but for crying out loud, if W loses we are screwed in a major way. How'd you like Kerry to put the next SC judge up there? Think we'd have a shot at a decent 2nd Amend. case after that? Maybe in another 50 years.

- Gabe

 

[OF]

PS: Hows about this: Kerry wins, senate goes 50/50 and Edwards gets the deciding vote. Hello AWBII. Hello UN arms control signatory. Hello Rebecca Peters head of the Kerry administrations 'Assault Weapons Task Force". Hello ammo tax. Get the picture?

WAKE UP!

- Gabe :banghead:

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Agree with you here, but (always there's a but), but it could work quite well in the case of a Demo President with a Repub Congress. Gridlock is good thing, especially when it comes to (taking away) gun rights.

Gridlock is great if you plan on playing defense for the rest of eternity and like where the gunlaws are at right now. Not so good if you want to actually roll back some of the more heinous gun laws that have been hoisted upon us.

Here are just a few examples of how GWB has gone beyond playing defense to help us out:

Attorney General declares Second Amendment is individual right - reverses 35 years of previous Justice Department doctrine on the matter.

Attorney General refuses to allow legitimate purchase of NICS data to be used for fishing expedition - Ashcroft stops grabbers from sifting through NICS data of legitimate purchasers to look for "terrorists".

Ashcroft changes NICS data holding from 90 days to 1 day - NICS data on legitimate purchases will now be purged from the system in a single day as the law intended rather than being held onto for 90 days per Clinton policy

Signed the appropriations bill containing the Tiahrt Amendment that protects gunowner privacy by making item #4 the law of the land.

Partially repeals Clinton ban on import of some semi-auto firearm parts instituted in Summer of 2000 to allow import of parts for repair purposes.

Notice that the executive branch did a LOT more than the legislative branch did - mostly because we have lacked the votes we needed to push much through Congress.

Coming into this election, we know two things - we will gain pro-gun seats in both the House and the Senate. Here are two good bills that got killed in the Senate because the current Senate lacks the votes:

1) Repeal of the DC Gun Ban
2) Protection from Frivolous Lawsuits

Now neither one of those is a tremendous victory; but they both represent progress in the right direction. However, that progress isn't going to help much if we elect a Senate that will pass it and then elect a President who will unquestionably veto the same.

Your list of Republicans ignores a long list of Republicans who have gone out of their way to stand by us and help fight for RKBA. I hope you aren't suggesting that because 10-20% of the Republican party supports additional gun control, we should turn our backs on the 80-90% who want to help us out.

Your point might also be more valid if we were talking Republicans in general; but we're not - we are talking about a specific Republican who has a four-year track record as President of the U.S. and two terms as Governor of Texas before that to judge his actions - and those actions consistently support the Second Amendment.

Perhaps they aren't as strong as some in this thread would like; but there is no question that they are moving in the direction of rolling back restrictions on our RKBA.

 

[Ironbarr]

Looking to the future:

A Bush win (hopefully with a few more senate seats - SD for one) can give us four years of growth of our 2A/gun issues... growth we urgently need before the '08 onslought of the Hildebeast vs Guiliani/Petake [sp]/whomever - (I see no savior in the '08 world at this time).

The stronger we can become the harder for "those people" to change it back - short of creating major debacles across the land to say "See - we need to eighty-six the guns".

Remind yourself that, with arms, we are at the mercy of those who rule. The Second Amendment must not only survive, it MUST be known and believed as the saving grace to what we know as the United States of America.

Else we may soon be known as the Contiguous Area of Greater Europe (CAGE)... or worse.

-Andy

 

[one45auto]

ProGlock,

Look on the bright side, should Kerry win you'll have the pleasure of changing your screen name to "RegisteredGlock", then "BannedGlock", and finally "ConfiscatedGlock" in keeping with Kerry's policies and judicial appointments. Just don't expect any sympathy when you're complaining about the situation on these forums.

 

[Ironbarr]

one45auto...

What forums?

It's already out that the Kerryitis Kids intend to shut down the conservative radio talkers (Rush, et al) to get even for all the noise they're generating re Kerry. The bloggers who have also been a pain will feel their wrath too. After the 1st is shredded the forums that preach 2A stuff will be attacked, but for two reasons: To stop the "preaching" and to remove a communications link that could lead to - whatever. Well, maybe not in that order.

The old formula - divide and conquer.

Add this thought, folks... 4 or 8 years of Kerry would build a Liberal base strong enough to be followed by another 4 or 8 years of HRC.

I shudder at what I might leave to my grandchildren. We need these next 4 years!

-Andy

 

[GLOCKME]

All I can say is....

Thank God we have a President that will be the next President of these our Great United States...

Go W...

If you think Skerry is a "sportsman" I have a bit of Prime swampland for sale..

 

[Roon]

Gotta say I sit here shaking my head at some of this debate.

Libertarian? Hell, why not go all the way, become an Anarchist.

I'm a pragmatist. Right now, the enemy of my enemy makes the situation work for me. If that person becomes my enemy, well then, that's another day and I'll deal with it then.

I mean, why create a fight when it can be avoided.

I reckon I'm just too practical. But I figure 95% of folks here are pragmatists, and I'll go run a poll to see whats up.

 

[Ryder]

I think gunowners have lead the way in building this country. I can't see participating in tearing it down so my vote is for freedom. It will not hurt Bush to send this message. Gore won this state the last time, Kerry will take it this time.

 

[sigman69]

WE have a choice....Kerry or Bush...maybe Bush isnt the best but he is alot better than Kerry on gun rights....so ANYONE that is voting third party...go ahead but we better not hear you guys complain when Kerry is in there pushing to ban on guns and other new stricter gun laws.....

 

[MP5]

The Second Amendment must not only survive, it MUST be known and believed as the saving grace to what we know as the United States of America.

That's going to require a major cultural shift before a major legislative shift. I think future Congressmen and Presidents will by and large keep heading towards the moderate, wishy-washy middle ground that gets them elected. Until there's a big cultural change where the populace comes to value the Second Amendment (and civil liberties in general), I don't foresee the federal government suddenly taking a truly strong, continued RKBA stance, regardless who's elected. Currently, mainstream America by and large seems happy to give up its rights (by voting for people like Bush or Kerry). We strong supporters are still a fringe, afaik.

so ANYONE that is voting third party...go ahead but we better not hear you guys complain when Kerry is in there pushing to ban on guns and other new stricter gun laws.....

There's a very serious pesonal moral question at stake: do you sell out or compromise your principles (like the politicians casually do) and vote on purely pragmatist grounds (the lesser of two evils), or do you vote your conscience?

 

[RealGun]

I am pretty certain, based upon some low profile gun politics in South Carolina, that LPers want Kerry to win in order to heighten the contrast between the establishment and the LP platform. That is a very high stakes gamble that I do not support in the slightest. It would take many years, if even possible, to undo the damage that Kerry could do.

I think what they want is to appear to be the only 2A ombudsman. I think that would be wrong, because the platform in total would not attract enough votes to elect anyone and would simply subtract the gun vote from real political influence.

I think what is needed is solidarity, so whoever is endorsed by major pro gun organizations should be the choice for those voters who really care about their RKBA. Those who think otherwise seem to me to clearly have a different agenda, actually disingenuous about their support for gun ownership rights as a priority.

I expect that after the election, should we be looking at a Kerry presidency, many here will not be so open about who they voted for, if they live in States that had close races that Kerry won by a nose.

 

[buzz_knox]

It will not hurt Bush to send this message. Gore won this state the last time, Kerry will take it this time.

Sending a message cost Bush I the country, not just a state.

The whole sending a message idea is a myth. Politicians do not see that you voted for X for a particular reason; they just see a vote they didn't get. Maybe, just maybe, you'll be involved in a poll where one of the questions fits your particular reason. But that's doubtful.

A much more powerful message is sent via a letter, where you can explain why you do things. But don't bother sending them to a candidate you didn't vote for. They are only interested in the votes they can possibly get, and if you are ardently pro-gun, Kerry has already counted you out.

 

[buzz_knox]

I expect that after the election, should we be looking at a Kerry presidency, many here will not be so open about who they voted for, if they live in States that had close races that Kerry won by a nose.

If it were a principled stand, then I suppose they wouldn't be quiet about it. But the feeling I get is that it's more about "I hate Bush" than anything. And when Kerry signs the UN treaty on small arms, then they'll shut up.

 

[riverdog]

For those who don't actually know how President Bush feels about the 2nd Amendment, read his interview in this month's "American Rifleman". He believes in the right of the individual to keep and bear arms, rather than applying only to state militias. "My opponent believes that the Second Amendment only protects the rights of state militias. I think that makes the Second Amendment meaningless."

I'm not sure how Bush really feels about the AWB, but I'm fairly certain he knew it would never reach his desk. Regardless of the political stand he took on the AWB, Bush has a significantly better position on the 2nd Amendment than John F'n Kerry. Kerry is the most anti-gun Presidential nominee in U.S. history and as buzz_knox just mentioned, he would sign the UN treaty on small arms.