Posted on 06/10/2007 8:30:55 PM PDT by JCEccles
1. Anti-gun terror bill (S. 735 )
On June 7, 1995, the Senate passed an anti-gun terror bill (S. 735) by a vote of 91-8. This version of the terror bill included: a BATF pay increase of $100 million; a provision authorizing "roving wiretaps" allowing government officials to wiretap one's home if a person under investigation visits the home -- even if one had no knowledge the person was a suspect; a weakening of the Posse Commitatus law to give the military more authority to get involved in law enforcement in certain circumstances; a grant of power to the FBI to conduct "fishing expeditions" and secure one's financial and travel records in certain circumstances without any evidence one has committed a crime; and finally, the "Randy Weaver entrapment provision" which extends the statute of limitations for violations under the National Firearms Act of 1934 from three to five years. Thompson voted in favor of the bill.
2. Anti-gun terror bill -- final passage
On April 17, 1996, the Senate passed the conference version of the anti-terrorism bill by a vote of 91-8. The final version of the bill (S. 735) contained several problems, including ones that will: order an "anti-hunter" rifle and ammo study; authorize a $40 million pay increase for the BATF (through the Treasury Department); potentially punish gun dealers (and individuals) for selling ammunition to someone they should have known would commit a violent crime; federalize many state crimes, thus tremendously increasing the scope and jurisdiction of the BATF; restrict the right of habeas corpus in such a way as to severely damage the ability of the courts to rescue honest gun owners who are unjustly incarcerated; allow the government to use "secret evidence" against certain individuals; remove protections against wiretapping wireless data; and require banks to freeze the assets of domestic groups in certain situations. Thompson once again voted in favor of the bill.
3. Taggants in gunpowder
On September 12, 1996, the Senate voted (57-42) to keep an anti-gun amendment off of the Treasury-Postal appropriations bill (H.R. 3756). The Kerry amendment -- which Thompson voted for-- would have made funds available for a study of tagging explosive materials, including black and smokeless powders (thus setting the stage for registering ammunition). The amendment also sought to further demonize firearms by selectively examining the misuse of firearms by criminals. The study would not examine the number of times firearms are used to save the lives of decent citizens.
4. Lautenberg Domestic Confiscation gun ban
On September 12, 1996, the Senate passed the Lautenberg gun ban as an amendment to the Treasury-Postal appropriations bill (H.R. 3756). The Lautenberg Domestic Confiscation Gun Ban disarms gun owners for small (misdemeanor) offenses in the home -- "offenses" as slight as spanking a child or grabbing a spouse. This lifetime ban, in certain cases, can even be imposed without a trial by jury. It is also retroactive, so it does not matter if the offense occurred 20 years ago. Thompson voted in favor of the amendment.
5. Free Speech restrictions
On October 7, 1997, the Senate defeated an "Incumbent Protection Bill" (S. 25) which would have resulted in the government regulation of GOA's newsletters and other communications with its members, while expanding the relative political power of the liberal media and other anti-gun forces. Senators failed in their effort, 53 to 47, to shut down a filibuster of the bill that was ostensibly aimed at reforming campaign finance laws.
6. Smith "Anti-Brady" Amendment
On July 21, 1998, pro-gun Senator Bob Smith (R-NH) introduced an "Anti-Brady" amendment that passed by a vote of 69-31. The Smith amendment would prohibit the FBI from using Brady background checks to tax or register gun owners. Further, the amendment requires the "immediate destruction of all [gun buyer] information, in any form whatsoever." Finally, if the FBI disregards this latter provision, the Smith language will allow private citizens to sue the agency and collect monetary damages, including attorney's fees. Thompson, in keeping with his tendency to usually vote for expanded federal police power, voted against this limitation of FBI registration of gun owners.
7. Anti-gun Clinton judge appointment
On February 11, 1998, the Senate voted 67-28 to confirm Margaret Morrow to the Federal bench. GOA vigorously opposed this Clinton-appointed judge, as she has not only taken strident anti-gun positions, she has showed herself to be a gun control activist.
8. Anti-gun Surgeon General
Having nominated anti-gun David Satcher for Surgeon General, President Bill Clinton was forced to wait several months as debate raged over his controversial pick. But on February 10, 1998, the President finally realized victory. By a vote of 75-23, anti-gun Republicans teamed up with the Democrats to kill the filibuster over the Satcher nomination. Mr. Satcher was later confirmed by a vote of 63-35. Since the key vote was to end the filibuster, that is the one that was rated by GOA.
9. Ending the filibuster of a major anti-gun crime bill
On July 28, 1999, the Senate ended a filibuster led by Senator Bob Smith (I-NH) -- a filibuster intended to keep anti-gun crime legislation from progressing any further. After the 77-22 vote, the Senate moved to send the language of the anti-gun Senate crime bill (S. 254) to a House-Senate conference committee. Thompson voted to break the pro-gun filibuster.
10. Young adult gun ban
The young adult gun ban could severely punish parents who allow their kids to even touch a so-called semi-automatic "assault weapon." While the amendment allows for certain exemptions, there are some imponderable questions which NO senator could answer, but which a parent would have to answer in order to avoid incarceration. For example: What is a "semiautomatic assault weapon"? The definition, plus exemptions, takes up six pages of fine print in the U.S. Code. Second, a child can handle a banned semi-auto if he is in the "immediate and supervisory presence" of a parent or if he possess a written permission slip from the parent. But what happens when, during a target practice session, the parent walks to the car to retrieve his lunch and the juvenile is no longer in the parents "immediate" presence and does not have a permission slip? A parent can receive jail time for this infraction. The provision passed the Senate on May 13, 1999, with Thompson voting in the majority.
11. Adopting the "Gun Control Lite" strategy
On May 13, 1999, a majority of Senators -- including Thompson -- defeated a motion to table (or kill) an anti-gun amendment introduced by Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Larry Craig (R-WY). This amendment was offered as an alternative to gun control proposals being pushed by Sen. Frank Lautenberg.
12. McCain's Incumbent Protection (2000 version)
By 59 to 41, the Senate passed S. 27, to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act to include Incumbent Protection provisions. The bill severely curtails the ability of outside groups such as GOA to communicate the actions of incumbent politicians to members and supporters prior to an election.
13. Incumbent Protection (2002 failed filibuster)
This was the key vote in the Senate regarding the odious Incumbent Protection bill in 2002 (H.R. 2356). The legislation (see note 35 above) finally became law that year. As he had on previous occasions, Thompson voted in favor of the bill.
He’s got no fire in his belly. He doesn’t deserve anything. Willard’s worked SO hard.
Yeah, Willard’s been at all the debates. He’s been working hard for US. And how do we thank him? By going off gallivanting around with Fred Thompson.
I don’t even know what all this stuff about Fred Thompson voting for anything is all about. I heard he was too lazy to get out of his chair and cast a vote for anything.
Don’t tell anyone, but I hear he’s a member of CFR and supports a globalist agenda to merge the world and make us all socialists!
No problem.
I’ll just be over here building my three-sided burger, if you know what I mean.
[wink wink]
PLEASE keep posting this. Everyone should know about the anti-gun surgeon general. ROFL!!!
Have you ever succeeded at anything you’ve ever tried to do? LOL
That's why GOA is not really useful as a source for candidates positions. They really appear to be paranoid, every mention of firearms has them cringing. Although I have disagreed with the NRA from time to time, they are still the preeminent group protecting our Second Amendment rights. Without the NRA we might have had Algore as president. I'll go along with their assessment of candidates Second Amendment positions.
Here’s the thing. He hasn’t been a born again conservative. As the title sys, he is “consistent”. He doesn’t stray abruptly. I can live with a man who’s honest even if i don’t 100% agree with all his votes.
And I still wish to give him the chance to present his case. So far we haven’t gotten his presentation.
Until then, he seems the best candidate thus far.
I guess having the President of the NRA campaigning for you is a coup....
“Fred... voted for numerous measures in support of Second Amendment rights. (Charlton Heston campaigned for him in ‘94.)”
- Mark Alexander, HaveGunWillVote.com
*****
The GOP Candidates on the Second Amendment
“The NY Sun reviews the position of the serious GOP presidential candidates on the most battered of all constitutionally-enshrined God given rights, that of self defense from crime and tyranny...
By comparison [to Romeny, guiliani and McCain], Mr. [Fred] Thompson’s relationship with gun-rights groups is sterling. A 2000 report from a campaign-finance watchdog group, Common Cause, found that the NRA, Gun Owners of America, and the Georgia Gun Owners PAC donated $188,954 to Mr. Thompson between 1993 and 1999; the groups donated more only to Dr. Frist.”
alphapatriot.com
*****
* Voted NO on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
* Voted NO on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
* Voted YES on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
* Voted YES on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998)
*****
I swear, there are some real morons posting around here. I was always proud of the caliber of posters on FR, but my good opinion is getting a real beating lately.
I'll give you one area where Romney isn't a flip-flopper. Romney's in favor of gun bans and (as far as I know) always has been.
I don't have a horse in this race yet. But the Romney, Rudi, and Thompson cheering squads are getting annoying. It's perfectly OK to criticize a candidate. One is not committing apostasy by raising questions about Thompson's commitment to the second amendment or Romney's dithering on choice or Rudi's dressing up like a drag queen. These are serious questions and deserve more than a raspberry.
Face it, we have a choice this year between candidates who are deeply imperfect, on the one hand, or that almost certainly could not win a national election, on the other hand. It's way too early to be choosing up sides and pretending your guy is perfect.
I cannot get too disturbed with any attack on Fred Thompson that starts it criticism by condemning him for anti-terror votes. Unless you are a criminal, why in the world would a gun owner (yes I am a gun owner) care about taggants in gunpowder and other explosives?
Fred gets my vote.
“And I still wish to give him the chance to present his case. So far we haven’t gotten his presentation.
Until then, he seems the best candidate thus far.” ———Mobile
I am just curious if you see those as conflicting statements?
No. They are NOT “contradictory”. I feel is is best, but I want to wait until he lays out the case. I never said he is the ONLY candidate and I also did not say he is my candidate REGARDLESS of what he says. He could make me lose interest in him.
But ONE thing is sure. I HAVE listened and evaluated the rest of the pack. I hate them all. If I end up not liking Thompson, I don;t see how I can vote for any of them!
I am not sure what Hunter, Huckabee or any of the rest for that matter did to incur your hatred, but I surely hope Fred works out for you.
I am.
Lots of them.
I am NOT threatened by any of the elements you have cited; and I am certainly more heartened by a Fred D. Thompson candidacy than any of the other *electable* candidates.
But,...I bet you feel MUCH more threatened by Fred’s candidacy that I do his firearms related votes.
Raising questions is one thing; posting incomplete or misleading information designed to give a false negative impression is another thing. We've already seen this type of attack made on the immigration issues, where various votes for LEGAL immigration and a one-time amnesty for political refugees from Nicaragua and Cuba are misrepresented as being soft on ILLEGAL immigration.
In this case, we have a poster cherry-picking some mostly obscure votes to portray Thompson as anti-2A when his record on the issue is very solid, as evidenced by his overall record and ongoing endorsements from pro-2A groups. Again, it's one thing to point out a real discrepancy and say "what's up with that?", it's another to paint a misleading picture by cherry-picking information. This piece is anti-Thompson advocacy, not "raising questions".
You and me BOTH!
(As to the others, they just have no chance to win. Huckabee strikes me as great VP material and could make a passable stand-in should his Prez become incapacitated, but I don’t see him as the kind of leader that I want to guide this country. Hunter I like, but he just doesn’t seem to have the staying power. I don’t even buy Romney as a Republican, much less a “conservative”. Rudy seems to be a great guy as a Mayor, but he is far too liberal on every social issue I hold dear.And I’d rather eat broken glass then be forced to vote for John McLame. That man is just simply an unstable person.)
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.