FreeRepublic.com "A Conservative News Forum"
[Refresh | Latest 20 | Post | Search | Register | Login | Logoff | More | Home | Report Abuse | Help!]

Topic: Crime/Corruption

Gun law requires tougher controls

Seattle Post-Intelligencer
June 14, 1999 Post-Intelligencer editorial board

The majority of Americans believe that protecting individuals' rights to own guns is secondary to controlling gun ownership. They should demand that their representatives, not the National Rifle Association, write the legislation to tighten gun show sales.

If this doesn't bring constituents to their feet -- the NRA dictating how House Judiciary Committee. aides write the bill -- what will?

The NRA may demur, but don't discount the influence of its $1.6 million contribution in the last congressional campaign cycle along with the $1 million it has spent in the weeks since the Columbine High School massacre.

The practice of aides and special interests negotiating a product to present to legislators is de rigeur in Congress. But after the Senate showed new inclination to heed the views of its violence-weary constituents by adopting several decent restrictions on gun shows, the House almost. immediately reverted to form.

President Clinton aptly reflected the thoughts of 65 percent of Americans who desire reasonable controls on guns: "This is a classic, horrible example of how Washington is out of touch with the rest of America."

Although the bill may morph into something else by the time it reaches the floor Wednesday, it is much weaker than the Senate version:

Record-keeping requirements at gun shows would be relaxed.

Tracing firearms sold there would be more difficult.

Vendors without stationary positions at the shows would be exempted from doing background checks.

Restrictions on shipping guns across state lines would be eased.

One NRA request was denied -- that the time for a background check be limited to 24 hours instead of 72. That's non-negotiable because gun shows are traditionally on weekends when it is virtually impossible to check courthouse records.

One loophole closed, so many more to go.

One mind closed, so few left to go ... Ever notice how it's an abomination when the NRA "writes the bills," but it's perfectly acceptable when Sarah Brady does? Any mention in this trash about how much HCI has spent since the Columbine shooting? Nope. Always the big, bad NRA.


Posted by: IronJack (sfs01@home.com)
1 06/14/1999 19:13:39 PDT
To: IronJack

Another article by a faceless editorial board making unsubstantiated claims about what the American people want.

My birds enjoy reading this rag :-)


From: Myrddin
2 06/15/1999 00:43:37 PDT
To: Myrddin

just using the nra to take the guns - when the guns are gone - and this country is dead meat - the dumb asses and the sheeple will wonder what happened - but it will never happen - eventually all the people that own guns will wake up to what klinton and his storm troopers are up to and the crap will stop there - but it will be close - the first law is never trust the government - the press - the media - the liberals - and 90% of the politicians - just consider it all lies until you can confirm what happened - and then get off your ass and do something about it


From: deepsixx
3 06/15/1999 04:27:01 PDT
To: Myrddin
Your birds and my fish.

Your point about the "editorial board" is well-taken. No single name -- no single blame. If anyone out there actually subscribes to the SPI, now might be a good time to let that subscription lapse. Actively!
From: IronJack (sfs01@home.com)
4 06/15/1999 05:54:52 PDT

To: IronJack
Your point about the "editorial board" is well-taken. No single name -- no single blame.

Not quite right. The rule in journalism is, for unsigned editorials on the editorial page, the guy at the top of the masthead is personally responsible. He either wrote it, or approved it as his own words. "Unsigned" editorials come directly from the chief editor honcho in the masthead box.

So be sure to flame him directly, by name.
From: 300winmag
5 06/15/1999 06:15:16 PDT

To: IronJack
Just curious: Has anyone else asked NOW or Gloria Steinem or any of that ilk, "What reasonable restriction on the 'right' to abortion should be passed?"

Note that the right to bear arms is in the Constitution. The 'right' to privacy was invented out of whole cloth by the Supreme Court.

TS
"Put a piece of velco on each knee and when you hear this sound ..." [RIIIIIIP] "Stop and think!"
Ted Dansen, "Becker"
From: Tanniker Smith
6 06/15/1999 11:28:35 PDT

[Refresh | Latest 20 | Post | Search | Register | Login | Logoff | More | Home | Report Abuse | Help!]

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
Forum Version 1.6 Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED