Ashcroft's NRA membership under attack!

nralife

New member
Ashcroft's NRA membership under attack

Source: The Dallas Morning News
Published: 1/25/01 Author: Michelle Mittelstadt


White House says nominee will enforce gun laws

01/25/2001

By Michelle Mittelstadt / The Dallas Morning News

WASHINGTON – Gun-control advocates are calling on Attorney General-designate John Ashcroft to relinquish his National Rifle Association membership, saying it would be a conflict for him to remain affiliated with the gun lobby while enforcing the nation's gun laws.

"It's a clear appearance of conflict," said Josh Sugarmann, executive director of the Violence Policy Center, a Washington-based group advocating stricter gun laws.

"Ashcroft should resign from the National Rifle Association, not just for their past history and their views regarding law enforcement, but also their current views and what they have articulated as far as what they expect from the administration," he added.

Also questioning Mr. Ashcroft's NRA membership was Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who on Wednesday became the first Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee to announce her opposition to the nominee, citing a record she said can "only be characterized as ultra-right-wing."

"To have an attorney general that is a present member of the NRA certainly shows a bias," the California Democrat said. "I would think that any nominee to virtually any post would refrain from membership in any controversial organization. And the NRA is a controversial organization."

Mr. Ashcroft, whose candidacy is under attack from liberal interest groups in part because of his staunch opposition to gun control, would not decide whether to leave the NRA until after confirmation, a White House spokesman said.

"If confirmed, Attorney General-designate John Ashcroft will vigorously prosecute gun crimes, and he will have zero tolerance for any criminal misuse of firearms," spokesman Taylor Gross said. "With respect to membership in the NRA, an organization committed to the lawful and responsible exercise of constitutional rights, he has not addressed that question and will not do so until after his confirmation."

Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott has said all 50 GOP senators would vote for Mr. Ashcroft. And at least two Democrats have said they planned to do the same.

Democrats blocked the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation vote scheduled Wednesday by Republicans, exercising their right to a one-week delay. The panel's top Democrat, Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, said the delay was necessary to await answers to questions submitted by senators after Mr. Ashcroft's two-day appearance before the committee last week.

The committee's chairman, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, bridled at what he termed a stalling tactic. And he said some of the 348 questions submitted by Democrats were an intrusion on confidential discussions that Mr. Ashcroft, a Missouri senator until his November defeat, had with other Republican senators.

"Now certainly members are entitled to ask follow-up questions to a nominee, but this seems going to the extreme," he said.

Democrats defended their questions.

"This is a painful nomination for many, many Americans," said Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis. "And it is absolutely appropriate, and even in the interests of the nominee himself in the long term, that this be reviewed carefully."

President Bush said he was untroubled by the Democrats' delay in considering his most controversial Cabinet pick.

"I think they're making sure that when they confirm him all questions have been answered," he said during a White House meeting with congressional leaders from both parties.

Mr. Ashcroft's membership in the NRA, which spent more than $330,000 on behalf of his re-election campaign, was not questioned during the hearing. But Democrats did examine his record opposing the ban on assault weapons and the required use of trigger locks, and his support for a Missouri concealed-carry referendum in 1999.

During the sometimes contentious questioning at his confirmation hearing, Mr. Ashcroft repeatedly pledged to enforce existing gun laws – even an assault weapons ban he had referred to as "wrongheaded."

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., who has emerged as Mr. Ashcroft's sharpest critic, said he was less concerned about the nominee's membership than his views.

"I'm most interested in his ... long-standing positions on the gun issue and his own standing about what you do as the attorney general," he said.

Handgun Control Inc., which opposes the nomination, shared a similar view. "I'm not going to say what he can belong to and what he can't belong to," spokesman Brian Morton said.

But Mr. Sugarmann of the Violence Policy Center said it would be inappropriate for the chief law enforcement officer to retain membership in an organization that has battled to undo certain gun-control measures and has used harsh rhetoric against federal law enforcement agents – calling them "jackbooted government thugs" in one 1995 fund-raising letter.

"I think it's very important that when you're the chief law enforcement officer and you oversee law enforcement, you should not be a member of an organization that has repeatedly and vociferously attacked law enforcement," Mr. Sugarmann said.

NRA spokesman Bill Powers scoffed at criticism about Mr. Ashcroft's membership.

"To say that Senator Ashcroft is not fit to serve as attorney general because he's a member of the NRA is a pretty silly argument to make," he said.

As for the criticism that the group's rhetoric has been anti-government, Mr. Powers said: "I don't think we take positions contrary to the government."
 
This makes me very cross! I wish profanity was allowed here at TFL . . . . .

The NRA has never done anything but encourage all citizens to obey all gun laws, no matter that they might disagree with them. How could anyone have a problem with that? Isn't that exactly what the democrats want out of Ashcroft? To enforce laws, no matter how he might disagree with them?

The NRA has always supported law enforcement. They have been critical of illegal and unconstitutional acts committed in the name of law enforcement, but that's not really law enforcement, is it?
 
Someone needs to tell them that it is quite fine for Ashcroft to be "Ultra-right wing", becuase all of his attackers are Ultra-left wing.
 
And how many anti's are in a position of power, sen fienstien(Sp?)

Does she belong to any of these anti groups?

The senators and representatives that are NRA members better get out in front of a camera.
 
I guess I will never understand why Republicans don't grow some backbone.

"We'll be demonized if we counterattack".

You're ALREADY being demonized!! You can be demonized and capitulate, or you can be demonized and fight!

Maybe I'm naive, but I keep dreaming of the day when a wave of fresh, young conservatives deposes the impotent, white-haired old men that currently pass for Republicans.
 
After hearing about how he kissed Feintsteins butt I think he should turn in his card cause he doens't deserve to be a member.
 
This sure sucks. Did anyone ask Reno if she was a card carrying HCI member? I'm proud to be a member of the NRA, as well as are my wife and kids. I wonder if just being related to a NRA member makes you unPC. MWT
 
Jef says...


Maybe I'm naive, but I keep dreaming of the day when a wave of fresh, young conservatives deposes the impotent, white-haired old men that currently pass for Republicans.

That is my dream as well. The Republican party is in serious need of some leaders that know how to communicate and who have a backbone. Trent Lott, Dennis Hasteart sp?, and Dick Army have had their 15 minutes of fame and should step down. It is time for new young aggressive blood!

The NRA has done more to protect this country's freedoms than any other organization... not to mention the thousands and thousand of police officers who have learned how to shoot from NRA certified instructors... and somehow the liberals can still demonize us.

Being a member of the NRA should be mandatory before anyone becomes Attorney General in this country!!!

BTW all, I guess that anyone holding an ACLU card should be disqualified as well... Hmmm? LOL


Joe
 
Counterargument should be simple. Find examples of organizations that the critics are pandering to, or are members of. This could be ANY politically active group.
How about NOW for example? Can someone be a political figure, and be a member of NOW? Would that not influence their decisions, to be a member of an ultra-left-wing feminazi group?

The argument could be applied to ANY organization, and this counterattack should be used to stuff it in their faces.

Furthermore, if anyone needs to be in power over enforcing gun laws, the NRA has proven that they will deal MORE harshly with criminal misuse of guns than the liberals will. And, the laws that they push for will actually have some effect in reducing crime.


The liberals have (or think they have) done a failry good job of making the NRA out to be an evil empire, to the point where it is (supposedly) anathema to be associated with them. And, no one defends the NRA when they get attacked, which I always find odd.
 
Wait a second guys,

Now, we've been told time and a again that reporters in the media are able to squelch any personal bias they may have.
After all, even though most of them are leftists, don't they do a good job of presenting news in a fair, unbiased way?

:rolleyes:

I think that if left-wing reporters can keep from being biased in their reporting, Mr. Ashcroft can do the very same thing in his line of work.
 
Back
Top