Posted on 03/02/2010 4:01:57 AM PST by marktwain
The rabidly anti-gun Violence Policy Center (VPC), which sometimes criticizes the Brady Campaign for not being anti-gun enough, has released another of it's "studies." This one covers familiar territory for the VPC, being one of many of its calls for a federal ban of so-called "assault weapons"--defined vastly more expansively than the 1994 ban.
Before we get to the study itself, though, let's take just a second for background. The VPC has for decades been one of the leading cheerleaders for bans of what are, basically, semi-automatic rifles. Back in 1988, their executive director Josh Sugarmann was surprisingly candid about the planned cynical manipulation of the public's and media's ignorance
In a September 1988 report on "assault weapons" that he prepared for the Education Fund to End Handgun Violence, gun control advocate Josh Sugarmann [exectuive director of the rabidly anti-gun Violence Policy Center] candidly observed: "The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons--anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine guncan only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons. In addition, few people can envision a practical use for these guns."
So now to the current "study" (pdf file). The intent, evidently, is to illustrate a growing rate of "'assault weapon' violence" since the expiration of the 1994 AWB. The VPC's problem is that in the two year period over which the study was conducted, there was no such increase.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Like most liberals, they must lie because the facts are not on their side. Not with firearms, not with global warming, not with big government.
Gun control groups have ZERO credibility. They said concealed carry would increase deaths when the opposite happened.
Never believe a liberal.
“...as long as he could get a civilian version of our military rifles...”
-
Why a “civilian version”?
(7:09 EST)
Wasn’t it VPC who had an internal memo stating that the conflation of the terms “semi-automatic” and full auto “assault weapons” was an intentional tactic in order to get all firearms banned?
I think their “dillema” was that if they targeted individual models, manufacturers would simply make other models, and if they targeted function, there was no way to distinguish military style rifles from hunting rifles, and they knew they wouldn’t get that through.
If they weren't carrying the liberal-fascists water, the leftmedia wouldn't give them the time of day.
I do remember such a memo. And it worked. Most reporters are idiots who can’t tell a shotgun from a rifle, so the semi/auto distinction is lost on them as long as a gun “looks like a machinegun.”
Cool.
I’m working on training seminars for the EPA on lead contamination while working on old homes. Let me say this, what a bunch of Barbra Streisand! For one thing according to the EPA, 1 gram of lead dust can contaminate 2500 sq/ft! We need to get our game on, this is going to hit us in a big way very soon.
They can’t have my baseball bat.....
Very unfortunately, that same thing was said by the head of my state rifle and pistol club back in the late 1980’s. Sarah Brady was coming into the state regularly trying to get gun bans passed. When I called him to learn when he was going to testify against her bills, I found that he was not going to. He used the same reason.
After re-reading the article,
the VPC did refer to such a strategy.
I do remember such a memo. And it worked. Most reporters are idiots who can’t tell a shotgun from a rifle, so the semi/auto distinction is lost on them as long as a gun “looks like a machinegun.”You may mean this one:
"The semi-automatic weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public'sThere is also this little gem from the 1970s:
confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic
assault weapons anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to
be a machine gun can only increase that chance of public support for
restrictions on these weapons."
-- Josh Sugarman, 1988, Violence Policy Center.
The founder of HCI, Nelson T. "Pete" Shields, laid out the organ-And what would this post be without a quote from Sarah Brady?
ization's strategy on page 53 of the July 26, 1976 New Yorker
Magazine:
"We're going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is
necessarily -- given the political realities -- going to be very modest."
"Our ultimate goal -- total control of handguns in the United States
-- is going to take time. ... The first problem is to slow down the
increasing number of handguns being produced.... The second problem is
to get handguns registered. And the final problem is to make the
possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition -- except for
the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting
clubs, and licensed gun collectors -- totally illegal."
"Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those(Any typos are MY fault -- I'm one of the rare people who can even typo using cut-and-paste.)
who would resist us have been totally disarmed."
-- Sara Brady, Chairman, Handgun Control,
The National Educator, January 1994, Page 3.
VPC is funded by the MacArthur Foundation, the Joyce Foundation, and the Open Society Institute (George Soros).
The Sarah Brady “quote” is fake. Google “national educator” + Brady.
“The Sarah Brady “quote” is fake.”
I should have known. Too good to be true.
Thanks for the heads-up.
What weapon are you carrying in the picture?
Big Mac?
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.