Skip to comments.NRA uses Justice memo to accuse Obama on guns
Posted on 02/23/2013 11:22:50 AM PST by Olog-hai
The National Rifle Association is using a Justice Department memo it obtained to argue in ads that the Obama administration believes its gun control plans wont work unless the government seizes firearms and requires national gun registrationideas the White House has not proposed and does not support.
The memo says requiring background checks for more gun purchases could help, but also could lead to more illicit weapons sales. It says banning assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines produced in the future but exempting those already owned by the public, as Obama has proposed, would have limited impact because people now own so many of those items.
It also says that even total elimination of assault weapons would have little overall effect on gun killings because assault weapons account for a limited proportion of those crimes.
(Excerpt) Read more at bigstory.ap.org ...
Oh that nasty NRA. “Using” written ‘smoking gun’ against the evil empire. Imagine that!
Not a single mention of Fast and Furious. Nothing to see here. Move along.... It didn't happen. It was all an illusion.
There should be a national registration on liberals,things woulds be safer.
Most of the killers are liberals.
Here is a new Free Republic thread featuring a new essay and 5-minute YouTube video titled Democide: Socialism, Tyranny, Guns and Freedom. The video has had 16,000 views in the first two days. Now the commie rat bastards have discovered it, and they are NOT happy.
I wrote the essay and helped to produce the video. Its an effort to lift the debate from Newtown small ball to the big leagues of democide, where these efforts at reasonable and commonsense gun control laws always lead to death by the million in the end.
“. . . wont work unless the government seizes firearms and requires national gun registration ideas the White House has not proposed and does not support.”
-—Ideas the White House does not support -—
I see that AP has taken it upon itself to speak for the White House.
Instead of reporting that “the White House says” it does not support something, it states, as a fact that is within its (AP’s) own knowledge, that the White House does not support it.
It is proclaiming itself able to tell the public what the White House does and does not believe. AP is the voice of the White House.
Just one example that springs to mind: would the AP consider this legitimate reporting?
“Several women have come forward to accuse Herman Cain of unspecified sexist actions, which Cain did not do.”