Bwa HA ha!
Posted on 07/25/2005 12:14:35 PM PDT by 45Auto
As the Senate moves closer to a vote this week on the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, gun-rights advocates are jubilant over the bipartisan support for the bill, which bans frivolous lawsuits targeting gun manufactures.
National Rifle Association Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said 2nd Amendment supporters have played a large role in politicians’ changing attitudes toward firearms. The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (S 397), for example, has 56 co-sponsors in the Senate and 257 co-sponsors in the House--more than enough votes to pass. It is sponsored by Sen. Larry Craig (R.-Idaho) and Rep. Cliff Stearns (R.-Fla.).
The bill shields gun manufacturers from lawsuits seeking damages from the unlawful misuse of a firearm by a third party. Despite similar support last year, liberal Senate Democrats succeeded in derailing the bill by attaching amendments reauthorizing the “assault weapons” ban.
“I think there’s been a sea change in this issue since the ’90s,” LaPierre said at the news conference last week. “I believe that clearly, if you look across the board, the American public has made it very clear that they believe it is their right to own a firearm, they don’t like politicians messing with their freedom and they want to make the choice on their own whether they own one or not.”
LaPierre said politicians are cognizant of the power the 2nd Amendment holds, particularly during elections. Whether a candidate supports gun rights during a campaign is significant, he said.
“I think it’s really become a historical fact that it’s become bad politics to be on the wrong side of the 2nd Amendment at election time in this country,” said LaPierre, noting that both liberal Sen. John Kerry (D.-Mass.) and former President Bill Clinton acknowledged a candidate must support the 2nd Amendment to win the presidency.
Kerry recognized such power when he played the 2nd Amendment as campaign issue, using brochures and other propaganda in key election states, LaPierre said. He did all this despite voting against gun rights for 20 years in elective office.
“There’s only one reason they [Kerry’s campaign] did this and [it is because] they know where the American public is on this issue,” LaPierre said, “and they were playing to the opinion of the American public, which is: ‘I support the 2nd Amendment. I have a right to own a gun. Politicians, stay out of my life.’”
He continued citing Clinton’s recognition of the importance of the issue: “Even President Clinton said he thought that the gun issue elected President Bush in 2000 and defeated Al Gore. In fact, President Clinton said on [the] Charlie Rose [Show on June 23, 2004] he thought it made a difference in anywhere from three to six states.”
Miss Farber is a senior at Susquehanna University and is interning with Human Events through the National Journalism Center.
Adding with a wink to Kerry and Clinton, "Who's yer daddy NOW?"
Bwa HA ha!
Political realities have never stopped the Dems before. They must be on the take.
As far as democrats and especially the liberals are concerned, they very likely oppose the 2nd amendment in private, but politicially they know that they need to appear to care about gun tights in order not to alienate the political center and right.
There is no doubt that if they held the presidency or were the majority party in the house of congress or the senate, that they would oppose and vote against the 2nd amendment. For now, in order to not lose more voters, they need to appear to care about gun rights.
Hopefully the American people are smart enough to recognize the political motives behind the democrats' "support" for gun rights.
What we are seeing is a lib attempt to capture part of the conservative base. When you see DiFi stalking geese with a shotgun, don't believe for a second that it is the real deal.
I think the last time the Senate killed the bill because the "Assault Weapons Ban" renewal was to be included as an amendment. If a majority of the Senate support Feinstein's inclusion of such an amendment again, then the bill will be killed again.
Democrats still suck.
May the Good Lord smile on this legislation and see it straight through the parliament and to the President's desk unmolested! Thank God for common sense gun laws!
BTTT!
They are all on the take; just so they take it from the right people, i.e., RKBA advocates.
Conversely, if you want off my ping-list, let me know.
And my apologies for any redundant pings.
Funny that's exactly what the RATS said when the AWB/Mag bill was signed AND the Brady Bill was signed. Vermont has common sense gun laws. Think about that one.
They are all on the take. Best to leave it there.
Like Tony Montana, We need to "bury those cock-a-roaches" and get this passed.
Thanks for the ping and BTTT
"What we are seeing is a lib attempt to capture part of the conservative base. When you see DiFi stalking geese with a shotgun, don't believe for a second that it is the real deal."
You are correct. I would not be surprised to see footage of Shrillery out in the "bresh" this fall in hunting clothes and carrying a shotgun, just like John Effin Kerry did last year. And she will couple that with a few sound bites, like "I'm hunting, and I'm not using an assault weapon." And it would not surprise me to learn that her handlers are angling for her to address the NRA convention between now and 2008. Bottom line, if Democrats tell you they're all for your right to keep and bear arms, don't believe them. And take what Republicans say with a grain of salt.
Be Ever Vigilant ~ Bump!
I have never forgiven George Bush 41 for going all prissy and resigning from the NRA, and never will. On this issue, I trust damned few politicians, of any stripe. This is a shame, but sure not my fault.
I have never known what made Bush 41 do what he did. Was he carrying the "kinder, gentler" thing too far to try to reach out to the left? Was it his idea or an idea from his handlers? When Lee Atwater said, "Where are they [gun owners] going to go?" during the 1992 campaign he sure found out.
And Karl Rove or somebody sure gave Bush 43 bad advice on the assault weapons ban. If the Democrats had run somebody in 2004 with middle-class appeal like Slick Willie instead of Frenchified John the outcome might have been different. That should serve as a warning to any Republican candidate in the future who turns his back on gun owners. Are you reading this, John McCain?
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.