Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CSGV TELLS TEXANS TO BUTT OUT OF DC GUN POLICY
Coalition to Stop Gun Violence ^ | May 19, 2005 | CSGV

Posted on 05/20/2005 4:00:28 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks

WASHINGTON – Coalition to Stop Gun Violence Executive Director Josh Horwitz today accused a pair of Texas lawmakers of “playing cheap political games” with the District of Columbia’s gun laws at the expense of democracy in the nation’s capital.

Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn, both Texas Republicans, held a news conference to announce the introduction of the District of Columbia Personal Protection Act of 2005, which would repeal the city’s gun laws, in the Senate.

“The citizens of the District of Columbia should have the power to decide by democratic means whether and how firearms will be regulated in the city where they live,” Horwitz said. “The names of the people pushing to repeal Washington’s gun laws have never appeared on a ballot in the District of Columbia, yet they feel free to tell DC what to do.”

Last September, the U.S. House passed an earlier version of the bill, introduced by Reps. Mark Souder (R-Ind.) and Mike Ross (D-Ark.), on a 250-171 vote, but the Senate did not act on the proposal. November elections have emboldened the gun lobby to push the issue more aggressively, and Souder and Ross reintroduced the House bill in March

“The District of Columbia Personal Protection Act is perhaps the most important example of how Congress continues to trample on the rights of DC voters to make basic decisions about their government whenever they find it politically convenient,” Horwitz said, noting that DC residents do get voting representation in either house of Congress.

Sen. George Allen, the chairman of the Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee, appeared at the press conference, and Horwitz said he does not think it is a coincidence that Hutchison is preparing to run for governor of Texas.

“George Allen is going to encourage politicians whose constituents live thousands of miles away to monkey around with DC’s gun laws as an easy way to score points with the gun lobby,” Horwitz said. “This is a transparent attempt to pander to a special interest group without having to worry about the people who have to live in DC.”

“If Kay Hutchison is so concerned about crime, there’s plenty of work to do back home in Texas, which has the twelfth highest violent crime rate of all states and has two of the ten most dangerous large cities in the country,” he said.

Morgan Quitno Press, which compiles statistical comparisons of cities and states, ranks Texas No. 12 in violent crime (table at www.morganquitno.com/CR05sam2.pdf). It rated DC No. 2, Dallas No. 5, and Houston No. 9 on its list of most dangerous cities with more than than 500,000 people (table at www.morganquitno.com/cit05pop.htm).


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: 2a; 2ndamendment; bang; banglist; csgv; davidkopel; davidkoresh; democracy; florida; freedom; georgeallen; guncontrol; guns; jebbush; kaybaileyhutchison; nra; oklahomacity; personalprotection; randyweaver; republic; roscoepound; rubyridge; secondamendment; selfdefense; vigilantes; waco; waynelapierre
When local Democracy results in an attack on human rights, then an attack on local Democracy by pro-freedom interests is a GOOD thing.
1 posted on 05/20/2005 4:00:31 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Coalition to Stop Gun Violence Executive Director Josh Horwitz today accused a pair of Texas lawmakers of “playing cheap political games” with the District of Columbia’s gun laws at the expense of democracy in the nation’s capital.

An oxymoron, of I ever heard one.

2 posted on 05/20/2005 4:03:03 PM PDT by Minuteman23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
CSGV TELLS TEXANS TO BUTT OUT OF DC GUN POLICY

Um, a brief note to the clueless gun grabbers. DC is subject to the federal government, that is, to the senate and the house of representatives. When it comes to policy for DC, senators and reps aren't "butting in" - they're the well-established and recognized controlling legal authority.

3 posted on 05/20/2005 4:03:16 PM PDT by coloradan (Hence, etc.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
“The citizens of the District of Columbia should have the power to decide by democratic means whether and how firearms will be regulated in the city where they live,”

I thought the Constitution already decided that, unless DC isn't part of the US. Come to think of it, it wouldn't be such a bad thing if it weren't.

4 posted on 05/20/2005 4:05:20 PM PDT by Tabi Katz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
“The names of the people pushing to repeal Washington’s gun laws have never appeared on a ballot in the District of Columbia, yet they feel free to tell DC what to do.”

Isn't this Josh Horwitz doing the same thing? Has his name appeared on a DC ballot? I'm sure he'd have no qualms about pushing even stricter laws against self-defense on DC residents.

5 posted on 05/20/2005 4:07:03 PM PDT by LibFreeOrDie (L'chaim!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Texans tell CSGV to [this post pulled by moderators].
6 posted on 05/20/2005 4:07:29 PM PDT by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
“The names of the people pushing to repeal Washington’s gun laws have never appeared on a ballot in the District of Columbia, yet they feel free to tell DC what to do.”

So? You people feel free to tell us that we shouldn't be allowed to have firearms. You feel free to lobby lawmakers to pass more gun control laws. Shut up.

7 posted on 05/20/2005 4:08:13 PM PDT by Luna (Lobbing the Holy Hand Grenade at Liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Then Joshy Horror and his buddies like Chris Van Hollen in Maryland should stop pushing for gun bans that effect my state. Capice?
8 posted on 05/20/2005 4:10:21 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan (Fire Stabenow in 2006!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
...at the expense of democracy...

What? "Democracy" is just a buzzword used to get morons, also known as CSGV supporters, worked up.

9 posted on 05/20/2005 4:11:00 PM PDT by MichiganConservative (Government IS the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Another submission by the CSGV:

CSGV: GUN CULTURE THREATENS DEMOCRACY

Op-Ed Challenges "Guns Equal Freedom" Formula

Gun lobby threatens our very way of life

The price extracted by guns is simply too high

By JOSH HORWITZ
SPECIAL TO THE REVIEW-JOURNAL

When the National Rifle Association's top lobbyist, Wayne LaPierre, addresses the crowd at "FreedomFest 2005" at the Bally's/Paris Resort in Las Vegas today, he will be preaching a message that has served his organization well: guns equal freedom.

As LaPierre puts it, "The Second Amendment is the fulcrum of freedom in our nation, because freedom and the Second Amendment are mutually interdependent. They are the 'chicken and the egg;' neither can exist without the other."

LaPierre can expect a friendly reception from the right wing activists at FreedomFest. Aggressive support for gun rights provokes none of the intramural squabbling that sometimes threatens to divide social conservatives and their libertarian allies in the GOP.

By framing the gun debate as a choice between protecting liberty and the illusion of safety, the gun lobby has painted itself as a defender of basic American values.

Too often, gun control advocates walk into the trap and concede that values like democracy and independence must be sacrificed to fight gun crime.

"At what point will Americans agree that the price exacted by guns -- the gun lobby's 'price of freedom' -- is simply too high?" asks Josh Sugarmann of the Violence Policy Center.

This formulation is not smart politics, because Americans rightly treasure freedom. More importantly, it fails to hold LaPierre and the gun lobby accountable for a philosophy that is at odds with freedom and the institutions that support it.

The most recent example of the tension came last month, when Florida Gov. Jeb Bush signed a bill that allows people to use deadly force -- including guns -- when faced with a violent threat, even when a confrontation could be avoided by simply walking away. The new law goes far beyond self-defense, which was already a well-established right in Florida, to invite vigilantes to substitute their judgment for the judicial system.

David Kopel, a leading gun rights theorist, acknowledges the potential tension between an expansive right of self defense like the one embodied in the new Florida statute and the rule of law, but dismisses the concern out of hand, arguing that "people's taking the law into their own hands has always been a core principle of the American legal system, and the American attitude toward guns is simply one manifestation of that principle."

This warped conception of popular sovereignty is at the root of the most egregious anti- democratic proposition advanced by the gun lobby: that citizens need to arm themselves to safeguard political liberties against threats by the government.

Kopel has called guns "the tools of political dissent," and LaPierre wrote in 1994 that "the people have a right, must have a right, to take whatever measures necessary, including force, to abolish oppressive government."

As famed legal scholar Roscoe Pound observed, however, "A legal right of the citizen to wage war on the government is something that cannot be admitted. ... [because] bearing arms today is a very different thing from what it was in the days of the embattled farmers who withstood the British in 1775. In the urban industrial society of today a general right to bear arms so as to be able to resist oppression by the Government would mean that gangs could defeat the whole Bill of Rights."

The standoffs at Ruby Ridge and Waco -- often cited as proof that the government can and does abuse its power -- illustrate why armed resistance is a dead end. Randy Weaver and David Koresh may have had good reasons to distrust the government, but they had no right to use private arsenals to keep the police at bay. Our system includes democratic safeguards, such as juries, that do not rely on the private force of arms.

After the Oklahoma City bombing, the gun lobby toned down its rhetoric, casting an armed citizenry as a deterrent to oppression rather than a potential rebel force against a democratic government. "The Second Amendment is America's first freedom because it is the one right that protects all the others," LaPierre says.

This argument sounds reasonable but is no different in substance that what gun rights absolutists were saying before Oklahoma City. If they believe in the right to take up arms to resist government policies they consider oppressive, even when these policies have been adopted by elected officials and subjected to review by an independent judiciary, then they are opposed to constitutional democracy.

When LaPierre talks about guns and freedom, he wraps himself in a flag that the NRA is simultaneously ripping to shreds. Protecting vigilantes from criminal prosecution and urging citizens to stockpile weapons for a showdown with the government are more than just threats to public safety -- they are threats to our democracy and our way of life.

Josh Horwitz is executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, a non-profit advocacy group based in Washington, D.C.

### The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence was founded in 1975 and is composed of 45 civic, professional and religious organizations and 100,000 individual members working to reduce gun violence. Our mission is to stop gun violence by fostering effective community and national action. For more information about the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, visit www.csgv.org.

[Since these guys are making a big stink about the threat of guns to Democracy, I'm going to look up some quotes by our Founders and others about the dangers of Democracy. Being armed against oppressive democracy is as good as being armed against oppressive dictatorship, IMO. What if the U.S. Congress approved of concentration/death camps for dissidents, for example, and the President signed this abomination into law, and the law was OK'd by the "independent" judiciary. What then? --TSR]

10 posted on 05/20/2005 4:13:28 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Deport them all; let Fox sort them out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
“The citizens of the District of Columbia should have the power to decide by democratic means whether and how firearms will be regulated in the city where they live,” Horwitz said. “The names of the people pushing to repeal Washington’s gun laws have never appeared on a ballot in the District of Columbia, yet they feel free to tell DC what to do.”

(The Racist Roots of Gun Control)

Washington, D.C. has some 85% people of color.

11 posted on 05/20/2005 4:15:24 PM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
“The names of the people pushing to repeal Washington’s gun laws have never appeared on a ballot in the District of Columbia, yet they feel free to tell DC what to do.”

Ain't that sweet. The representative from D.C. is not allowed to sponsor legislation the House of Representatives (she can sit on committee and participate in debate, but gets no vote on legislation) and they have no Senators. So in effect, if we follow this logic, no one can ever change D.C.'s gun laws!

12 posted on 05/20/2005 4:17:27 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Abe Lincoln locked many dissidents up.......


13 posted on 05/20/2005 4:17:48 PM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
“The citizens of the District of Columbia should have the power to decide by democratic means whether and how firearms will be regulated in the city where they live,”

Good! Let's put it up for a vote then. For, as far as I know, the D.C. gun ban has never appeared on a ballot in D.C.

14 posted on 05/20/2005 4:19:00 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
ranks Texas No. 12 in violent crime (table at www.morganquitno.com/CR05sam2.pdf). It rated DC No. 2,

How big is DC? Even Texas' largest towns ranked lower than DC.

15 posted on 05/20/2005 4:19:13 PM PDT by TXBubba ( Democrats: If they don't abort you then they will tax you to death.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
OK, I found a gold mine on Indixie.com

Any CSGV demo-shills lurking on this thread, listen up:

QUOTES:

 

16 posted on 05/20/2005 4:26:05 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Deport them all; let Fox sort them out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

"guns equal freedom."

Correct!

This writer's bizarre thesis seems to be that something has changed in society such that we are no longer afforded our God given right to fight against tyranny.

Guess we just have to shut up and submit. NOT!


17 posted on 05/20/2005 4:26:23 PM PDT by BenLurkin (O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Josh is simply working for all the drug leaders, criminal gangs, rapists and murderers in the District. And, I can understand, as a true liberal, his point of view. He doesn't want the guys, the drug dealers et cet, on his team to risk getting hurt. Sure, they are armed, it is part of their work to be armed.

But, they need to know that their "customers" aren't armed. Imagine if every rapist went out to work knowing that every one of his potential "cutomers" might actually have a pistol? It would be chaos!! Josh's folks wouldn't be able to conduct their trades in their home terrirory, they'd have to go to Maryland. So, let's be reasonable here and look at it from the point of view of the folks that Josh is for and his blind belief about guns. Remember, even the folks who believe the earth is flat love puppies and support other folks who want the same outcomes.

18 posted on 05/20/2005 4:27:17 PM PDT by Tacis ( SEAL THE FRIGGEN BORDER!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks; All

I suspect the article that these quotes came from is well worth the time to read, if one has it.


19 posted on 05/20/2005 4:27:26 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Deport them all; let Fox sort them out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

That's part of the gun control logic: that was then, this is now...


20 posted on 05/20/2005 4:28:12 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Deport them all; let Fox sort them out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: abner; Abundy; AGreatPer; alisasny; AlwaysFree; AnnaSASsyFR; Angelwood; aristeides; Askel5; ...

PING!

Democracy and freedom aren't always the same thing...


21 posted on 05/20/2005 4:29:47 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Deport them all; let Fox sort them out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

DC's strict gun laws must be the reason they have no crime to speak of. /s


22 posted on 05/20/2005 4:35:21 PM PDT by Tabi Katz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Luna

I wonder: if they think that is okay to deny the right to bear arms by a simple vote, then the prohibitions on slavery could likewise me nulled..


23 posted on 05/20/2005 4:37:56 PM PDT by ALPAPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Excuse me but Congress rules the District of Columbia. Any time Congress wants to override the local DC politicians, they are free to do so.


24 posted on 05/20/2005 4:45:26 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Andrew Heyward's got to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

How about, "Texas will butt out of DC policy when DC butts out of Texas policy!!!!!!"

Deo vindice!


25 posted on 05/20/2005 4:53:13 PM PDT by Liberty Ship ("Lord, make me fast and accurate.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

You're finally going to be allowed a gun in DC? I might move there after all...


26 posted on 05/20/2005 5:01:45 PM PDT by GVnana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TXBubba

I'm just glad to see Kay Bailey actually doing something for once....


27 posted on 05/20/2005 5:07:37 PM PDT by tarawa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Hey Josh...I'm a Texan living in Idaho.

The answer is NO!

Kinda smarts when things start workin in reverse doesn't it you gungrabber? 'bout time some folks came into your neck of the woods and took the fight to you like you marxist/liberal/gungrabbin, constitution perverting folks have been trying to do to us all these years.

28 posted on 05/20/2005 5:19:45 PM PDT by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Ludwig Lewisohn: "Democracy, which began by liberating men politically, has developed a dangerous tendency to enslave him through the tyranny of majorities and the deadly power of their opinion."

And that is exactly why the Bill of Rights was put into the Constitution: to prevent government from using majority vote to suppress the minority. And in that, the RKBA was the foremost thought of the guys who founded the nation. For in an armed citizenry, mob rule is not possible, nor is any form of tyranny from within. The only problem is the lack of will on the part of the people to exercise their authority in the matter.

29 posted on 05/20/2005 5:27:31 PM PDT by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Tabi Katz
I thought the Constitution already decided that, unless DC isn't part of the US. Come to think of it, it wouldn't be such a bad thing if it weren't.

Actually, I think that one of the lovely federal judges there came to the conclusion that the bill of rights doesn't apply in the District of Columbia.
30 posted on 05/20/2005 5:30:15 PM PDT by kingu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

This Floridian tells CSGV to go Hades.


31 posted on 05/20/2005 5:30:36 PM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

self bump for later reading


32 posted on 05/20/2005 5:46:40 PM PDT by Neil E. Wright (An oath is FOREVER)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

"..gun laws at the expense of democracy in the nation’s capital. "

Seems like nothing leftists object to is not an assault on democracy.


33 posted on 05/20/2005 8:14:31 PM PDT by School of Rational Thought (Republican - The thinking people's party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ALPAPilot

H'm. That's an interesting thought.


34 posted on 05/21/2005 10:43:29 AM PDT by Luna (Lobbing the Holy Hand Grenade at Liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

"CSGV TELLS TEXANS TO BUTT OUT OF DC GUN POLICY"

Is he willin' to slap leather with them Texans, or
is he just another blood-sucking, non-profit executive
director shootin' off his mouth?

(The ARE some non-profit executive directors who
are not blood-sucking.)


35 posted on 05/21/2005 10:50:41 AM PDT by righttackle44 (The most dangerous weapon in the world is a Marine with his rifle and the American people behind him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
“This is a transparent attempt to pander to a special interest group without having to worry about the people who have to live in DC.”

Somebody has too, the DC politicos certainly don't. DC's murder rate is much higher than Texas', where every one, not prohibited by federal law, can own anything the feds allow. That includes machine guns with the proper federal paperwork. That's all because there is no law against it, or in the case of the MG's an exemption in the law. We can also carry concealed handguns, with permission of the state.

36 posted on 05/21/2005 11:41:48 PM PDT by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibFreeOrDie
Isn't this Josh Horwitz doing the same thing?

Worse, he and his organization try to tell Texicans and Tejanos what arms we can or cannot own. Considering that the right to do so is protected by both the federal and state constitutions, I'd say it was Mr. Horwitz that is way out on a limb, and sawing fast.

37 posted on 05/21/2005 11:44:22 PM PDT by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Liberals like blacks to be defenseless and disarmed. At least they come by their racism honestly. Any black who dreams of protecting himself by arming himself is a slave fleeing the Liberal Plantation and deserves what he has coming to him. Cause liberals don't tolerate blacks who get "too uppity."

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
38 posted on 05/21/2005 11:47:54 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Well, we all know just how successful the gun ban in DC has been!

They should butt out! Let them keep setting records year after year. /sarc

Mark


39 posted on 05/21/2005 11:48:45 PM PDT by MarkL (I've got a fever, and the only prescription is MORE COWBELL!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks; MeekOneGOP; PhilDragoo; Happy2BMe; potlatch; ntnychik; Travis McGee; ...

"Citizens need to be armed
to protect themselves against
a tyrannical government."

                -- Senator Ted Kennedy



40 posted on 05/22/2005 12:11:11 AM PDT by devolve ( That Music Still Continues: http://pro.lookingat.us/ElvisLive.html - more traffic than DU-Koz-LDot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: devolve
"Citizens need to be armed
to protect themselves against
a tyrannical government."

-- Senator Ted Kennedy

Poor Mary Jo wasn't armed.

Mary Jo Kopechne

Those young voters don't know how Miss Kopechne, trapped inside Kennedy's Oldsmobile, gasped for air until she finally died, while the Democrats' leading Iraq war critic rushed back to his compound to formulate the best alibi he could think of.

Neither does Generation X know how Kennedy was thrown out of Harvard on his ear 15 years earlier -- for paying a fellow student to take his Spanish final. Or why the US Army denied him a commission because he cheated on tests.

As they listen to the Democrats' "Liberal Lion" accuse President Bush of "telling lie after lie after lie" to get America to go to war in Iraq, young voters don't know about that notorious 1991 Easter weekend in Palm Beach, when Uncle Teddy rounded up his nephews for a night on the town, an evening that ended with one of them credibly accused of rape.

It's time for Republicans to state unabashedly that they will no longer "go along with the gag" when it comes to Uncle Ted's rants about deception and moral turpitude inside the Bush White House. And if the Republicans don't, let's do it ourselves by passing this forgotten disgrace around the Internet to wake up memories of what a fraud and fake Teddy really is.



Senator Teddy, wearing his controversial neck brace, leaves St. Vincent's
Church with his wife, Joan, after the funeral Mass for Mary Jo Kopechne.


41 posted on 05/22/2005 3:56:34 AM PDT by MeekOneGOP (There is only one GOOD 'RAT: one that has been voted OUT of POWER !! Straight ticket GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
"'bout time some folks came into your neck of the woods and took the fight to you like you marxist/liberal/gungrabbin, constitution perverting folks have been trying to do to us all these years."

Exactly.

The only way we can regain and preserve our liberties is to go on the offensive;
for too many years defenders of gun rights have operated only on the defensive, just hoping through compromise to minimize the losses.

That's given us the Brady Bill and other travesties.
Now it's time to work on getting some rights back.

42 posted on 05/22/2005 6:24:50 AM PDT by Redbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Redbob
Amen. But I would word it as follows.

Now it's time to work on getting those unalienable, God-given rights that we already have, and always have had, once again recognized in law as they should be.

We never lost the rights, just the law's recognition of them and the resulting infringements.

43 posted on 05/22/2005 7:16:25 AM PDT by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Josh Horwitz was never elected to office so by his standard he should also butt out.


44 posted on 05/22/2005 8:30:53 AM PDT by KingNo155
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson