doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Heading Off Gun Control - Take Action!

Alabama is safe in the Senate with Shelby and Sessions. We could count on the vote of most of the house reps although I am not certain about the new Dem or A. Davis who is already on the Obama band wagon.

In today's (11 Nov) CNN.com is article about large number of folks leagally buying guns http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/11/11/obama.gun.sales/index.html Notice this article is under "CRIME"!!

That article contains following .. "With the U.S. economy in a tailspin, however, the president-elect's advisers say gun legislation is not a high priority." Might as well support a long life for that prioritization.

Niklas

Hello Niklas,

Just emailed CNN asking why the article was under "Crime".
Probably to no avail, but it just took me a second.

JC

I was at the NRA convention a couple of years ago in St.Louis.
I was shocked by the turnout. I went as a warm body - but there were thousands and thousands standing in line to get in an already filled convention center. Missouri is very pro-gun and hunting, this might not have had happened in east or west coast.
I'd be all for the center of the country setting-up camp, and letting the blue zoo have at it.

JayCee,

Did same, have same expectation. But, if they never here from us ....

Niklas

JayCee & NiklasP.....I e-mailed CNN, but still feeling frustrated and angry, I called CNN Headquarters in Atlanta.
And bullied my way through all the recordings, and interceptor- shield secretaries until I got hold of Kevin Bohn; the senior editor of the article. I politely called him everything from biased, to prejudiced, to being the by-product of questionable ancestry, and like that. I also offered to relinqish my 2nd Ammendment rights, if he would give up his 1st Ammendment rights.
An offer he declined to accept. I pointed out to him that the proper place for the article should have been under the heading of Sports, or at the very least, under economics. As the fact of Obama's win in the election, inadvertantly provided an "Economic Stimulus Package" to gunshops, everywhere! And I belligerently informed him that criminals don't give a sh*t that Obama may infringe on their right to use guns to commit crimes.......
We terminated the phone conversation on less than friendly terms!
I then called NRA Headquarters and ran the article by them....
And, of course, they didn't know nothing about it; but promised to look into it, and take the appropriate action.......
Thanks for your diligence in bringing this article to our attention.............. Grant.

Printed in Missoulian newspaper, 11/12/08

NRA’s sharp turn to the right disappointing, misleading
By PAT WILLIAMS

During my nine terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, I had a 100 percent voting record with the National Rifle Association. Not once did I vote for gun control; not for the Brady Bill, nor ammunition registration, not for the assault weapons ban, nor any of the other futile attempts to fight crime by simply putting people’s name on a list.

The NRA endorsed me in each of my election campaigns. For a time following my first election, I was a bit of an NRA poster boy and adorned the cover of one of their magazines. The honor was not because of my anti-gun control voting record, but because of my legislative efforts to improve game animal habitat here in Montana and West. Thus, I have been both saddened and alarmed to watch that organization’s three-decade-long lurch toward the political Far Right. Beginning in the 1980s, the NRA has done a disservice to both its members and the historic legacy of hunting and game habitat in the United States. Far too much of the NRA’s time and its members’ money are consumed in the seemingly insatiable effort to elect candidates on the political fringe who also happen to oppose gun control.

The organization’s primary focus should be on vastly improving game habitat in America, advancing hunting fair play, and the safety of our youngest hunters. But this is not your grandfather’s NRA. This organization has eagerly espoused the politics of resentment and become a pawn of one political party.

In this there is good news and bad news for gun owners. First the good news: The federal government, your elected officials, never have and are not now conspiring to take our guns. No such legislation has ever been introduced in the U.S. Congress. The bad news? Groups such as the NRA have been hoodwinking you about that very issue n wastefully spending your hard-earned dues money on politics, and useless protesting by having people like Charlton Heston give that phony “pry it from my cold dead fingers” speech.

A case in point is the recently publicized rush by some gun owners to “stock up” on assault weapons before they are banned by the NRA’s latest boogey man, Barack Obama. The urge to blame President-elect Obama is a transparent example of how utterly partisan the gun groups and far too many of their adherents have become.

Sen. John McCain, not Barack Obama, is the person with the Congressional record of voting for gun control. McCain is for registration at gun shows, supported a ban on assault weapons and, prior to his run for the presidency, was working with his friend Joe Lieberman to mandate trigger locks and close the gun show loophole. Obama’s votes in the Illinois legislature have also been somewhat pro-gun control, but it is McCain, not Obama, who cast the pro-gun control votes in the Congress.

So, why don’t more gun owners understand what is really happening? That’s a good question for the NRA and the other so-called pro-gun groups who are lining their pockets with your money.

Pat Williams served nine terms as a U.S. Representative from Montana. After his retirement, he returned to Montana and is teaching at the University of Montana, where he also serves as a senior fellow at the Center for the Rocky Mountain West.

The above post is a typical RHINO spin on gun control and is an example of the kind of mis-information they dispense on just about every subject.
I personally took John McCain to task on the non-existant "Gun Show Loophole" and believe he changed or at least moderated his position on that subject.
Obamas anti-gun voting record is well known,has been posted here previously for all to see and doesn't need repeating.
The above poster,who IMO is a Judas in disguise, is more dangerous to us than the most rabid socialist gun grabber.
Millions of Americans know the above post is B.S. and that's why they're flocking to gun stores and buying up everything in sight.
Jim

For the record, 'Grouse Guy' is the same Benjamin Deeble who is a biologist for the National Wildlife Federation - as well as the self-appointed 'point man', as of late, for persuading the rest of us Montanans to give up on lead upland hunting ammunition.

When I presented him with Obama's gun voting record by e-mail earlier this year, he responded that it was a load of "horse puckey" (save all his e-mails), and that 'Obama didn't want our guns'. When I asked how he might have gotten that impression, he stated that (as paraphrased) 'he (Obama) isn't even talking about gun legislation'! Well, he doesn't need to talk about legislation apparently....just sign them as they come across his desk.

How people like Mr. Deeble (and Pat Williams) can pooh-pooh Obama's gun agenda while the expired Clinton Assault Weapons Ban is already being dusted off, injected with steroids, and readied for passage within the U.S. House ASAP is beyond me.

As for the lead phase-out issue here in our state, 'Grouse Guy' hurried the board of the Big Sky Upland Bird Assoc. (BSUBA) through a hasty vote to accept his proposal for studying the impacts of removing lead from our upland equation. We, the general membership, knew nothing about it until some four months later. That proposal went to the Montana Wildlife Federation, where it was accepted by a majority of their 40-some voting members as being fit for a formal resolution destined for our Fish, Wildlife, & Parks people.

Problem was, these 'voting' members were largely comprised of the presidents and representatives of some 20 Rod & Gun Club (MWF affiliates) throughout our state who somehow also thought it best not to notify their general memberships of what they were supporting.

What I can tell you is that every affiliate club we've been able to canvass so far, was totally in the dark as to what their leaders had voted in for them. And it was due to their voiced shock and outrage that MWF recently tabled the resolution until further discussion can take place within BSUBA....IOW, back to the drawing board.

For those interested in such doings, all of this was discussed at perhaps too much length some months back on this board and can probably be accessed by viewing our individual message profiles.

As for past Congressman, Pat Williams, and with due respect for those good things he did accomplish, he was in many's opinion one of the more liberal national politicians Montana has ever produced - and who is now teaching at perhaps the most liberal university here in the inner northwest....the University of Montana in Missoula.

Enough said,


Robert Harris

P.S. On second thought, maybe enough wasn't said. The same Missoulian newspaper that published former congressman Pat Williams piece provided above, also published this past Sunday a piece called "Stocking Up" by reporter Michael Jamison. His article details the deluge of customers descending upon Montana gun shops and sporting goods stores to buy those guns and ammunition items that may be affected by future legislation.

Even this Missoulian reporter allowed in his piece that changes re: certain hot-button topics such as the resurrected assault weapons ban, the availability of concealed carry permits, and gunshow sales, etc. may have ramifications for the shooting public. Mind you, they would never admit (or print) this information prior to the election, but now that it is a done deal...what the hey! Too bad Mr. Deeble didn't bother to share that one with you......

I sent the NRA an email four days ago, asking how many members the NRA has as of now. Today I received the reply that "we have about 4 million members". I knew that. Is "about 4 million 3.5 million, 4.5 million?" Damned disappointing answer. I wanted a more exact figure.