NRA backer Dingell favors gun control bill (Text of bill - HR4757)

Detroit News/LA Slimes ^ | 5-24-02 | Eric Lichtblau and Nick Anderson

[Shooter 2.5]

The GOA has been around during the same political fights as the NRA. So far, I haven't seen the GOA do a thing except complain about the NRA.

Just like you're doing right now.

[alpowolf]

Third party candidates 'can't win', because they HAVEN'T won. When have they won? Twice. Angus King in Maine, and a celebrity in Jesse Ventura. What about the house and senate? Bernie Sanders and James Jeffords are dems(caucuses with them). There are no 3rd party winners in the state house or senate in Michigan. Where are the results

You raise a good point, but I think that the issue is not whether the 3rd party candidate actually wins or not. The issue is whether whoever does win knows that the gun owners can turn them out. If we show that we're not afraid to sack Republicans, even Democrats will think twice before crossing us.

[Dan from Michigan]

Well, we will go after bad republicans as well. We've backed supposedly pro-gun democrats(later was backstabbed) over republicans, and ousted one of them in 96 or 98.

What we want to do is to primary out bad reps out there in either party.

[Shooter 2.5]

You're right. Hit them in the primaries. After that, we mostly have to play with the cards we have.

We can't let the dems cover up the Second Amendment issue. We have to continue to expose the dems for the anti's that they are.

[alpowolf]

That sounds like a good plan.

[Joe Brower]

I can't say I'm familiar with "Bill W" or "Jimmy K", but verbiage like that you listed above are just incremental steps to nickel and diming away our right to self-defense. Heck, before you know it, you'll be ruled mentally unfit to own firearms simply for thinking about... owning firearms.

Chilling, isn't it?

[from occupied ga]

You only asked one question - the one about the press. The rest were of the form "prove it to me" If what I said doesn't convince you that the NRA is bunch of lying duplicituous sell out traitors, then nothing else I'd say will do so either. You'll just have to find out for yourself when the knife come in your back, but I suggest that you pay attention to what they actually do rather than what they say they do. The two are not the same.

As far as the press I don't know why JPFO, GOA etc are not quoted. I have a theory that you'll probably dismiss, but since you asked:
We all know that the press has a strong pro totalitarianism anti individual freedom bias. By defining the debate as the NRA (which is a pro-compromise organisation no matter what you think) vs the anti-gunners. The media eliminates an entire side of the debate. That is the side represented by those of us who would like to see all gun control laws going back to the '30s eliminated. By misrepresenting the NRA as the gun owners' extreme view, the media never give the real right/paleo-libertarian/conservative view any exposure. The media is then shaping the debate for those who don't know any better to represent an extreme totalitarian view on one side, and a middle of the road compromise view on the other. The media defines the choices as immediate surrender demanded by scum like Feinstein, Kennedy, Clinton and Schumer on one side and gradual surrender as represented by the NRA.

[Shooter 2.5]

It's all about votes. When you don't have the votes, the only thing left is to compromise, When you have the votes, then you can get the Bills you want. That's politics 101. 95% of the gun owners don't care if there is gun control or not. They couldn't care less.

We need more members in all of the gun groups and it's not going to happen by fighting among ourselves. I gave you a list of things that you could have answered and you didn't. If the GOA is so good, join them, tell us what they do that's so wonderful and quit whining about what the NRA does or doesn't do.

[from occupied ga]

quit whining about what the NRA does

You certaintly have a rude and obnoxious manner for someone who supposedly is participating in an intelligent discussion. Normally I don't respond to someone who come across as an insulting flameboy, but since you're progun I'll make the effort. According to you telling it like it is about the NRA is whining. Sorry if the truth about the NRA hurts your feelings, but the facts are the NRA is compromising away our rights. As far as your false assertion

It's all about votes. When you don't have the votes, the only thing left is to compromise,

This is complete hogwash. Never compromise unless you get a lot more than you lose. NRA compromises are just graduated surrenders with the pro gun side gaining nothing.

If you are serious about restoring rights (rather than giving them away piecemeal), you stir up your members to write and call their elected thieves and liars to support a pro gun position. When Americas only native criminal class feels the heat, then they begin to see the light. The NRA has 4 million members most of whom joined under the mistaken impression that the NRA was going to fight against gun control. Those members would be just as happy to pressure their elected theives and liars (and in many cases a lot happier) to a no compromise position if the NRA leadership would head in that direction. For that matter GOA is going along with the NRA these days, so apparently the only no-compromise organization out ther is JPFO.

[Shooter 2.5]

"Never compromise unless you get a lot more than you lose."

Go back to politics 101. The anti's have been winning for the last 40 years because too many gun owners voted for their pocketbooks and the 5% who are activists aren't going to change that fact. What you are doing is whining about what an organization is or isn't doing. Why don't you simply join another gun group and then you can tell everyone how they stopped the Brady Bill, sunsetted the Assault Weapons Bill and created a National CCW Law. Until then, quit causing division in the ranks and learn to work together.

[from occupied ga]

Well I see that polite comments to you are wasted.

What you are doing is whining about what an organization is or isn't doing.

So in keeping with your tone, when you've learned not to be a rude a$$hole in a forum, come back and we'll chat some more.

Until then, quit causing division in the ranks and learn to work together.

I see. Learning to work together means unquestioning acceptance of the NRA's, yours, and Neville Chamberlain's winning strategy. No thanks. Go practice what you preach about working together.

[Shooter 2.5]

You still don't get it. No one said that blind allegience is the way to go but if I'm not happy with the group, I take my grievances to THAT GROUP and not on a public forum where all it is is whining.

You're causing division just by the fact that you havn't said one word about what the other organizations do. Come back when you're a member of that so-called "no compromise" group and you can convince someone that the group you're in is better than any other. Then maybe someone will join that group and you can get something done.

[Shooter 2.5]

You still don't get it. No one said that blind allegience is the way to go but if I'm not happy with the group, I take my grievances to THAT GROUP and not on a public forum where all it is is whining.

You're causing division just by the fact that you havn't said one word about what the other organizations do. Come back when you're a member of that so-called "no compromise" group and you can convince someone that the group you're in is better than any other. Then maybe someone will join that group and you can get something done.

[from occupied ga]

You still don't get it.

You are totally clueless both as to strategy for conservatism and as to the proper use of a forum. The purpose of this forum (in case you haven't bothered to read it) is "champion causes which further conservatism in America"

You don't want to see any criticism of your precious NRA in spite of the fact that the NRA management are a bunch of liars and hypoctites. What makes you think that I didn't talk to them about it. In fact if you had bothered to read what I said, you would have discovered that I mentioned talking to Bill Davis. I also talked to your "good buddies" Wayne L and Randy Kozuch. It was about as productive as talking to Sara Brady. But whether or not I talked to them is irrelevant. The purpose of this forum is to further conservatism, and if by pointing out the undisputed fact that the NRA frequently works for and endorses gun control does this then I am doing what this forum was intended for. Your desire to supress my criticisms of the NRA show you to be as intolerant as any liberal and as unwilling to accept reality.

... and not on a public forum where all it is is whining.

If you can't take the heat (in this case expression of on opinion other than your own exalted one) stay out of the kitchen.

[Shooter 2.5]

When you don't have the votes, you're going to lose. We don't have the votes. Please take your whining elsewhere.

[from occupied ga]

Please take your whining elsewhere I see, anyone who doesn't agree with you is a whiner. Compromise is good (Nevile Chamberline thought so too) frankly, you're beginning to bore me with your lack of intelligent response.

[Shooter 2.5]

Show me where the votes are going to come from. Do you have a magic machine that will suddenly make anti-gun politicians suddenly vote for self defense? Again, for the third time, we don't have the votes in the Congress or the Senate to overturn or stop gun control. That's why we're forced to compromise. The NRA, JPFO, SAS, SAF and every reputable gun group understands this. That's why they use voter cards to identify anti-gun politicians but 95% of the gun owners don't vote or care.

[Lazamataz]

I'd like to see Dingell pair this bill with the removal of the 'restraining order' gun ownership ban, since restraining orders are offered by judges for the asking in almost all divorce cases.

[Lazamataz]

Good thing you told me about GOA. I was considering joining them.