Posted on 06/14/2008 5:20:50 AM PDT by shrinkermd
WASHINGTON -- Eight years after a national debate over gun control helped keep Democrat Al Gore out of the White House, the National Rifle Assn. and its Republican allies are launching a new campaign to defeat Barack Obama.
But this time, the issue that GOP strategists once relied on to provide crucial votes in close elections has lost much of its political punch.
The NRA may have become a victim of its own success.
Congress hasn't passed major legislation to restrict gun use in 14 years. Democrats -- scarred by past NRA campaigns -- almost never talk about the issue anymore.
And Americans now show little interest in gun control. Just half want tougher rules for gun sales, compared with nearly two-thirds in 2000.
"The issue has been essentially removed from the political agenda," said Robert Spitzer, a political scientist at the State University of New York in Cortland who has written extensively about the politics of gun control.
This marks a major victory for gun rights groups, which less than a decade ago were fending off demands from both Democrats and Republicans for strict new limits on gun ownership after the 1999 Columbine school shootings.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Al Gore didn't lose an election he was "kept out of the White House." We are not debating Barack Obama we are "launching a new campaign to defeat Barack Obama."
To become an LA Times writer a basic requirement is to master "liberal semantics" such that each sentence is a judgement on the opposition.
I say, let's lose more influence this way!
However, I'm a little nervous about the upcoming Supreme Court decision regarding the D.C. gun ban.
very orwellian,,, 2+2=5
“However, I’m a little nervous about the upcoming Supreme Court decision regarding the D.C. gun ban.”
I had fully thought the Supreme Court will rule against the D.C. ban, but since the supreme’s gave terrorists certain Constitutional rights I’m not so sure anymore.
.....gun rights attitudes have shifted in my lifetime....it used to be mostly about hunting/shooting....now it’s about personal protection....who wants to be at the mercy of a thug?....no wonder the gun grabbers are in retreat on this.
The LAT - In its dreams.
LOL! I noticed the same "disconnect" between the headline and the contents of the article. But I'm not slacking back my support for the NRA one jot---"the price of liberty is eternal vigilance". Besides, there are a lot of un-necessary restrictions to firearms ownership, carry, and usage that need to be "rolled back".
This fool is clearly out of touch with reality...must have done his "research" at the local comic book store.
My wife and I joined the NRA last Friday. I have a feeling the Association is going to experience a dramatic spike in new membership over the coming months - regardless of the outcome of the election.
As an aside, my wife and I are looking for an NRA affiliated gun club to join and take the appropriate gun safety courses for our Class B license to carry in Massachusetts (Cape Cod/Plymouth area). I know there are quite a few per the NRA website but just soliciting recommendations from local NRA freepers.
Thanks
Wally Balls
Deliberate lie.
If your going to get a license, get a class A. There is no sense in doing all the work and getting a class b.
Well, the NRA has lost my support and will not get it back if they continue to back John Murtha.
First, the NRA deserves credit for not allowing the debate to center around hunting rights....a liberal tactic to divide gun owners.
Second, while few at the federal level want to raise the issue of gun control, there are plenty at the state/local level that have no such fear.
Hence, as another poster noted.....the price of freedom is eternal vigilence.
The NRA has plenty of clout... don’t let the Liberal media try to fool you.
Since neither person has a pro-gun historical position what is the NRA to attack.
Pathetic.
In an interview by the NRA in regards to a UN treaty about small arms confiscation, John McCain replied that any treaty the US signs must not override the Constitution but should comply with our Constitution. I doubt that is Obama’s view.
Yeah! And U.S. military clout in Iraq is waning because AQ and Sadr militia are dead or afraid to show their faces lest they join the dead.
Because we know the enemies of freedom will never stop, some friends and I became Life Members this spring. Noam Levey can go suck on that.
Some people will search for an excuse to do nothing.
There are a lot better organizations for gun owners out there than the NRA. The NRA had a chance to help get rid of an anti-American Murtha and endorse a pro-American Diana Irey. They both got A ratings, why not go with someone that doesn’t do “what Nancy tells” them to do? I refuse to support any organization that supports Murtha. If my membership hadn’t have been paid in advance I’d have quit in 2006. It expires in 2009 and if they endorse Murtha I’ll not renew. I’ve tried and tried but I haven’t been able to come up with a scenario where what you think of me matters.
Meanwhile back in Sacramento California the Leftist in the senate are proposing a draconian measure to severely restrict ammunition sales...
We'll never be rid of them and must remain vigilant against them.
To become an LA Times writer a basic requirement is to master "liberal semantics" such that each sentence is a judgement on the opposition.Excellent evaluation of how the process works.
But it doesn't just apply to the LA Times.
No there isn’t. The NRA is the group the libs and the media fear the most.
The SAF did join the NRA with the Katrina lawsuits. The GOA was AWOL.
The Second Amendment Sisters did fight against the Million morons and won but that’s all they did.
JPFO is an educational group and doesn’t lobby Washington.
76 million gunowners sit on the sidelines and think of excuses to do nothing. Thank you for your current NRA membership.
Yet, in NJ, a ban on firearms above .50 cal...
Murtha is a horrible example but he apparently is good on guns. Unlike many liberal issue groups (think NARAL and NOW), NRA endorsements are essentially non-partisan and require only a demonstrated commitment to gun rights.
If the Supreme Court rules against gunowners and for terrorist. The 5 members of the Supreme Court that are beholden to the left-wing law schools and the ACLU, they have a case in front of us let’s rule in their favor.
It would put the issue front and center but the Democrats wouldn’t get the blame even though I’m sure they are lobbying all 5 of the SCOTUS judges telling them how to vote.
The NRA claims to be a strong supporter of the US Military, so when they had a chance to endorse a conservative that supports our troops and a liberal that called our troops murderers they chose Murtha. And both had “A” ratings. If they want to keep me they won’t endorse Murtha this time around and I’ve told them so. If a few million NRA members would also tell them that Murtha would be gone. I realize that the NRA has done a lot of good but this is one compromise I will not make. FMCDH. Molon Labe.
“The issue has been essentially removed from the political agenda,” said Robert Spitzer, a political scientist
No it hasn’t.
There have been a number of bills introduced in several states, almost written word for word, trying to place id stamping on ammo, making non stamped ammo illegal to possess, raising a bullet tax to pay for enforcement etc.
The NRA has been on top of the back door ammo grabbers trying to regulate firearms by eliminating access to ammo.
The NRA is still as strong as ever, and actually gaining political clout because of the advances in CCW states and reciprocity.
No MR poly sci writer, the NRA is not weaker.
If your going to get a license, get a class A. There is no sense in doing all the work and getting a class b.
_________________________________________________________
Good point...why not go for the gold?
I find that paragraph misleading; Senator Obama's campaign website clearly lays out that he is strongly in favor of gun control:
GUNS
REALITY: OBAMA HAS CONSISTENTLY SUPPORTED COMMON SENSE GUN CONTROL, AS WELL AS THE RIGHTS OF LAW-ABIDING GUN OWNERS
Obama Supported A Package Of Legislation That Would Limit Handgun Sales To One A Month. ''The package closes the Firearm Owners Identification (FOID) card loopholes which resulted in the shooting out in Melrose Park. We're eliminating 17 specific assault weapons. There is no reason why anybody should need an assault weapon to protect themselves or their family,' Obama said. 'We're limiting handgun sales to one a month. 'We're calling for handgun registration. It's very hard right now to track whether or not a felon has turned in his weapons or if he has a FOID card because we don't know how many weapons he has purchased.'" [Chicago Defender, 2/20/01]
Obama Voted To Prohibit Multiple Sales Of Handguns Within A 30-Day Period. In 2003, Obama voted to create the offense of unlawful acquisition of handguns, prohibiting the multiple sales of handguns within a 30-day period. In 2000, Obama was co-sponsor of bill prohibiting the transfer of more than one handgun within a 30-day period. The bill exempted federally licensed firearm dealers who purchase handguns in the regular course of business, military, law enforcement officials and certain hunters. [93rd GA, HB 2579, 5/16/03, 3R L; 23-36-0; 91st GA; SB 1614; 2000]
Obama Disagreed With The NRA That "People Should Be Unimpeded And Unregulated On Gun Ownership;" In Favor Of Handgun Registration And Licensing Requirements. Obama said, "I know that the NRA believes people should be unimpeded and unregulated on gun ownership. I disagree. I do not object to the lawful use and ownership of firearms, but I do think it is entirely it appropriate for the state to monitor it. Too many of these guns end up in the hands of criminals even though they were originally purchased by people who did not have a felony. I'll continue to be in favor of handgun law registration requirements and licensing requirements for training." [Chicago Defender, 7/5/01]
I agree with your sentiment and your logic, but I’ve chosen to stick around (if only to be a PITA to them ;’}
I take advantage of every opportunity to tell NRA officials (and anyone else who will listen) that their “non-partisan” single-issue approach to endorsement system is fatally flawed and counter-productive.
Of course I’m one of those “The worst Republican is preferable to the “best” Dhimmicrat” kinda guys ;’}
Obama as a Muslim believes he can lie to a Kiffar and still be "rightous".
Is it perfect? No, it certainly isn't. I agree more with the JPFO and the GOA on philosophy --- my own belief is that no gun control is acceptable --- but on the pragmatics of getting important legislation bulled through legislative bodies, there's no one to touch the NRA. On the pragmatics of having 4 million voters bearing down on candidates across this nation, there's no organization that has the clout of the NRA. And if we were at 8 million, we would have far more than twice the effect.
The NRA has had tremendous success in getting concealed carry legislation passed in the last twenty years; recent years have brought wonderful success with the proliferation of stand-your-ground laws. By continuing to grow the size and the influence of the NRA, we can try to rollback more gun control.
I think that working inside the NRA to move the organization to a more strong stance against all gun control is the most effective way to influence it.
The NRA always supports the higher rated candidate and especially if he’s already has a track record of a pro-gun voting record. It’s because the NRA has been burned too many times by candidates who claim to support the Second Amendment and then once in office, turn around and vote the opposite. When that happens and once is too many times, there are those who use that as a reason to not support the NRA.
The single issue is not flawed because it comes from a single issue organization. The NRA also supported the democrat in Ohio who is signing pro-gun bills into law. That wakes up the Republican Party that they better get rid of the RINOS if they want to keep a majority.
The NRA would be a better organization if more gunowners would join instead of sitting on the sidelines complaining about what the group could be.
All hail The St. Pete Times!
Long lived satraps in their sinecures!
Me too especially after their recent Gitmo ruling.
If SCROTUS rules for DC, the NRA will see a huge increase in members, as will all pro-gun groups.
Please correct me if I misrepresent the facts but I was under the impression that the NRA endorsed murtha over Irey not so much because of any outstanding record of his, but because, as a newcomer to the game, Irey’s record was sparse.
We had a state race where this scenario was played out and I gave the NRA grief about it because they weren’t seeing the forest for the trees. IMO they discounted what was promised to be a strong ally in favor of a fair-weather “friend”.
Like I said, even though I consider the NRA imperfect, I will continue to support them because they are an effective voice against leftist tyranny...
"The great object is that every man be armed." and "Everyone who is able may have a gun."
Patrick Henry
Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks."
Thomas Jefferson
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth (and) keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them [guns] by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference [crime]. When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour."
George Washington (Address to 1st session of Congress)
I know that some are against getting a permit to carry. In my opinion, however, the more permits that are issued to law abiding citizens the stronger the message sent to our ruling elite. I am fortunate to now live in a "Shall issue" CCW state that does not require registration. To all FReepers who do not: I urge you to work to change that. In fact, I think we should all continue to fight until all states follow the leadership of Vermont and Alaska on firearms laws.
I am a NRA Life Member
What’s the difference between licenses?
A permit carries with it the assumption that the state may decide on the issuance at will - that which they may permit can obviously be denied.
IMO it would be far better to operate on the assumption that the state can only exempt those whose behavior has demonstrated their lack of responsibility to join the general class; the commission of a crime against the general order adjudicated through due process or an act of insanity judged by a competent authority.
***If SCROTUS***
LOL
The article makes more since if you replace NRA with LA TIMES.
What’s the difference between licenses?
_________________________________________
Here’s my limited understanding of the law:
Class B is a license to transport a Pistol, Rifle, shotgun, etc. in some kind of locked container unloaded.
Class A is license to carry a loaded weapon on your person. You must have physical contact with the weapon at all times(can’t carry it loaded in your glove compartment, for instance)
I can’t access the site for some reason but for a complete description take a look at www.goal.org (Gun Owners Action League)
Wally Balls
“Congress hasn’t passed major legislation to restrict gun use in 14 years.”
That pretty much sums up how the NRA has “lost” influence. Bunk.
Obama was a director of the Joyce Foundation, which funds anti-2nd Amendment efforts.
http://www.joycefdn.org/Programs/GunViolence/
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/04/19/obamas-board-helped-fund-handgun-ban-efforts/
Obama was/is pals with Father Michael Pfleger, who wanted a gun shop owner to be “snuffed.”
http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2007/05/outrage_over_fa.html
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.