Bush backing gun control measures

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dennis

Staff Emeritus
Bush backing gun measures

Bush now endorsing “reasonable” gun control measures

((bold for stress and footnotes added by Dennis))

San Antonio Express-News, 8/28/99 pp 1A, 9A

by Terry Neal and Ben White, Washington Post

Atlanta - In a visit to a city still reeling from two highly publicized murderous rampages,
Texas Gov. George W. Bush said Friday he supported “reasonable” gun control measures
like those backed by Republicans in Congress this year.

The GOP presidential candidate said he supports raising the age for gun ownership
from 18 to 21
(1) and banning certain high-caliber ammunition clips.(2)

Bush also said he supports closing the loophole allowing unlicensed dealers to sell guns
at gun shows without background checks for purchasers
(3), provided he said, new
background checks could be performed instantaneously.

Democrats are insisting on up to three days for an FBI background check.

“I support them all; they all are reasonable measures,”(4) Bush said during a
campaign stop here, adding he is still committed to the idea “innocent people, law abiding
citizens ought to be allowed to own a gun.”

Bush was asked about provisions in a Republican bill to be negotiated in
Congress
(4) next month, and while he generally supports the GOP congressional
consensus on gun control measures, aides said he hadn’t been asked about some of the
specific provisions.

On Friday, Bush said he believed it’s possible to “have reasonable laws to keep the guns
out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them. That’s why I support instant
background checks
.”

However, he echoed a common sentiment among Republicans -- not enough has been
done to enforce current laws.

“When we find someone illegally selling a gun, there should be a consequence,” he
said.(3)

Democrats immediately pounced on Bush’s statements, saying he was trying to obscure
his right-wing record on gun control.(4)

They noted Bush opposes mandatory child safety locks on guns and had signed legislation
allowing most citizens to carry concealed weapons as well as legislation pre-empting the
ability of cities in Texas to file lawsuits against the gun industry.

Democrats also repeated criticism Bush received from opponents who said he had done
little to push a bill in the legislature mandating background checks at gun shows.

Gun control advocates Friday also criticized Bush’s record as governor.

“The governor is vehemently anti-gun control and he has done more to promote gun
violence than to prevent it,” said Nina Butts, spokesperson for Texans Against Gun
Violence.

Bush, however, did sign a juvenile crime bill during the 1995 legislative session making it
a crime to allow minors access to guns.(5)

Bush also signed a bill making jail time mandatory for juveniles caught with
firearms.
(5) Nonetheless, Bush’s efforts to keep guns out of the hands of children
haven’t mollified supporters of stricter gun control.


====================
Comments:
1. Raise the age for gun ownership from 18 to 21.
- That would not have stopped the carnage at Columbine or anywhere else the kids steal
the guns from their trusting loved ones, or from neighbors, or from strangers.
- Military personnel can die for their country in Kosovo and elsewhere but can NOT
defend themselves, their loved ones, or their property in America.

2. I suppose “high-caliber” will mean .50s, then center-fire rifles, then .22s, then air rifles.
There’s no “mollifying” the gun-control advocates.

3. “Loopholes at gun shows” will be federal law worded to:
- Prohibit the giving of a gun to a family member without a background check.
- Prohibit passing my guns on to my kids when I die!
- Require my loved ones to take MY guns to a gun dealer, undergo the “instant” check,
pay taxes and fees, or they become felons. Bull exhaust!

4. This Son of a Bush is another Teflon Don, but his intent to compromise our RKBA
should be obvious even to the most rabid Republican. Bush will be “forced to
compromise” with the Democrats to enact even more severe gun control laws than he
currently advocates.

5. So if an intruder attacks my 19 or 20 year old daughter even in our own home, she
must submit to violence or we both to jail. Hello, Amerika!

===========================
This “Son of a Bush” will sell us out, down the drain!

All the Republicans and Democrats are arguing about is how to destroy our RKBA!

If you like Clinton, you’ll love Bush! Bush is soooo much more subtle.
That’s what makes him so much more dangerous!

But he revealed his nature when he spoke of Republican gun control measures,
“I support them all; they all are reasonable measures,”(4) Bush said.

Behind that smile is a tyrant!

Don’t join the sheeple! Don’t follow the lemmings to the total loss of our Right to Keep
and Bear Arms.

Forsake the Republican/Democrat political machine.

Vote for a change!


[This message has been edited by Dennis (edited August 28, 1999).]
 
I guess he learned it at his daddy's knee. I really do not like or trust Junior, and I am damned tired of holding my nose when I vote for the pol that stinks least.



------------------
The Bill of Rights, and the Golden Rule are enough for civilized behavior. The rest is window dressing. Shoot carefully, swifter...
 
So young George supports the Lautenberg amendment? Gee, when did *that* become "reasonable"
 
No, he didn't learn enough at his father's knee; His father had the sense to claim to be pro-gun until AFTER he was elected. "W" showed his cards about 14 months too early.

The NRA's excuse for not opposing Dole was that he'd us his power as Senate leader to do us dirt, if we didn't stay out of his way. Wonder what excuse they'll find to not oppose Bush in the primaries?
 
They are all damn Socialists, only to different degrees.

The Democrats are driving us down the road to Socialism at 60 mph. The Republicans only want to reduce the speed to 35 mph. But we'll get there either way.

What we need is to get rid of all the establishment politicians & judges and start over.

I hope we can do this peacefully, but they are so well entrenched, I doubt it. I am still praying for a miracle though. ;)
 
A politically stupid move.

The anti-gun folks were already against him, and this will do nothing to change their minds.

The pro-gun folks are now pissed off at him, and little will change their minds now.

Grrr. Again, we must choose the lesser of two evils, knowing that we vote for evil. Pretty soon I'll start voting for Cthulu and get the trip to hell over with (none of this 60-vs-35 mph trip stuff).
 
so if we end up with a choice of bush or gore,you guys will vote for gore?
i know people who are rabid anti-abortion and will not vote for republican candidates if they are not committed enough on the issue.
so what happens?
they end up with liberal democrats.
regretably i think we are entering a period where the best we can do is a wishy-washy republican.
at least he signed the concealed carry in texas. the more states that have it the better.
 
nebob,
You're just trying to pull my chain, right? :)
-------
If it's gun control you want, then just vote for Gore.
He will give you more and more, of what you're looking for.

If you DON'T want gun control, you can not vote for Bush!
Read his lips, it's gun control! He'll push it up your tush!

Republicans and Democrats, conspiring days and nights,
Then announce their "compromise", and steal away our Rights!

Don't fall for voting "against" Gore, vote against the "institution".
Vote FOR the only party, that will restore our Constitution.

Vote for a change!
Vote Libertarian!
:D :D


[This message has been edited by Dennis (edited August 28, 1999).]
 
Are the Libertarians on the ballot in all 50 states? We need a third party in every state ballot next year(providing we even have a election!) I know i can never vote republican again. That party has given Bully Bill a clean shot at possible Kingship.Hope we have another election;nothanks to the Republicans who have let Klinton rule by executive order for 7 years.
 
Awright, so Bush is a loser, Gore is even worse. I'm considering an alternative. BTW: I don't believe in the "wasted vote" cause even a losing candidate who draws enough votes gets the winners attention.
So, the real question is does a third party candidate really stand a chance?
 
www.rlc.org . The Republican Liberty Caucus may be a place for some to begin looking for political alternatives. Yep, they are still Republicans, but go ahead and check them out. Their newsletter is a good read and yes, like any entity, they will ask for money. I truly beleive if the Republican Party is to keep its viability, it must recognize those of us who share the common values of freedom compromise a larger potential voter base.
 
ctdonath,

ROTFLMAO!!! I havent laughed that hard since Dennis' "sizzling Quislings" comments ;)

Voting for Cthulu...Im dying over here! How does one get to R'ylah (sp), anyway???
Wait!!! Dont tell me ;) I dont want to know!

:) :) :) :) :) :)
 
G-Freeman,
I went to the link you suggested. They sounded real good, including their support for our RKBA. They have many Libertarians on board.

But, in the FAQ, I found this:

(quote)
"10. Would the RLC support a Libertarian Party candidate?

The RLC does not support LP candidates in a race where there is a GOP candidate."
(unquote)

Therefore, I must consider that the RLC is merely a splinter group of the Republican Party falsely trying to convince RKBA advocates to vote Republican (and vote away our gun rights.)

To put it simply, "It's a trick".

It's like the U.S. Army giving smallpox-laden blankets to freezing Indians.

PS (half-hour later)
I don't mean to sound upset with YOU! Thank you for guiding me to RLC. I'm just angry with the Republican Party. I truly they betrayed me (and others).

[This message has been edited by Dennis (edited August 29, 1999).]
 
dennis, i'm not trying to pull your chain. it's just what is called reality.
you want to vote for libertarians? good!
you want to vote for a another third party?
fine!
what will happen in a close race?
your vote is a vote, in reality, for a democrat.
don't think so?
how did clinton get in the first time?
ross perot got the usual republican votes.
and then we got screwed and tatooed!
i personally can't stand moderates who worry about appeasing the media and the dammed soccor moms!
but i don't think a true conservative can get elected president anymore. maybe to congress, but not president.
 
nebob,

I was getting ready to hammer your argument when, in a rare flash of common sense
(blush) I checked your profile. You joined us August 1st. Hooray! If nobody said,
“Welcome!” it’s my oversight. Glad you joined us.

In fairness to me, before I checked your profile, I truly thought you were pulling my chain
because of the past long, long threads we had on “Republican v. Libertarian” and the two
Clinton elections.
(Hard to say that without gagging!)

In fairness to you, I should have checked your profile earlier. Sorry, my fault.

If you have just a minute (chuckle, more like an hour!!), please scan the following threads:

1) 1996 Presidential Election - Votes are in!
http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=23548


2) Republicans v. Libertarians, part 1
http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=23676


3) Republicans v. Libertarians, part 2
http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=23858

So (everybody breathe again) I won’t go through the entire drill. I’ll try to be brief.

===========================
All,

The Republicans are trying to drag a red herring into the voting process. Even though
they are a party who replaced another, they now say it can’t be done. “Only the
Republicans,” they pompously intone, “can stand against the Democrats, therefore a vote
for any non-Republican is a vote for a Democrat.”

Cow exhaust! Bogus! Additional varied and vulgar terms of derision!!!!

1) A vote is FOR someone - not AGAINST someone.
Don’t fall for their red herring!
2) Perot did not “cost” the Republicans the election. The Republicans didn’t offer a
platform or a candidate that matched their obvious history or stated intentions.

MOST IMPORTANT!

Bush stated he is FOR gun control. When presented with the Republicans’ gun control
agenda, Bush said, “I support them all; they all are reasonable measures.”

1) The Republicans repeatedly and publicly promise MORE gun control.
Sen. Trent Lott, big shot Republican, promised “compromise” with the Democrats’ gun
control demands!
2) The Reality is: a Republican vote is a vote FOR GUN CONTROL!
3) *I* refuse to vote for gun control.
4) If the gun owners of America voted their conscience, instead of their petty fears,
we would wipe out gun control in ONE election! If 60% of the gun owners voted against gun control, there would BE no gun control! We are the biggest "interest group" in America!

But the sad “reality” is, we truly are “A Nation of Cowards”!

Vote Republican if you are afraid of freedom.
But don’t you EVER say I voted for Gore.

That is NOT fact.
That is NOT reality.
That is a LIE!

I voted for freedom!



[This message has been edited by Dennis (edited August 29, 1999).]
 
All of this is posturing and counter-posturing. The ONLY way we will ever get our freedom back short of a revolution is to seriously support and campaign for candidates who are committed to supporting and defending the Constitution.
There is still more than a year left!
WE need to develop a candidate who is electable and the media will not give coverage to one of ours. I dont know the answer but we are presently going nowhere.
We have a lot of work to do. What do you think will be different after the election???

------------------
Better days to be,

Ed
 
Dennis, I didn't think you were mad at me. I just reread Harry Browne's essay on The Republican Betrayal...A to Z. Believe it or not it was printed in the last newsletter I got from the RLC. Your skepticism is healthy and any political animal should have its mouth looked into closely. Libertarians do have the answers and the pro-freedom movement still has a chance to affect the political debates in the future. I offered the link not as a promotion of them, just a source of information. My journey of learning as much as I can about freedom takes me among a wide range of viewpoints. I have yet to reach the point of accepting defeat on principle alone, like some of my Libertarian friends. LP candidates who have been elected to State office have done so with Republican endorsement(Alaska and New Hampshire for example). I doubt that Ron Paul would have won on the LP ticket in Texas. He is definately one of the good guys. According to Thomas Walls, RLC Director, when asked if he would switch back to the LP, Ron reponds "I never left it." I agree you have no one to answer to but yourself as to how you vote. The only statement I disagree with is the broad brushed "nation of cowards" thing. I'm guilty of the same at times, but brave battles are fought daily here. A trip to a childrens' cancer ward is a good reminder of that.
 
GF,
REALLY good points. Thank you.

Yeah, I'll have to back away from the "Nation of Cowards" comment. Perhaps I would feel better about my snotty remark if I didn't try to use the quote. Rather than a Nation of Cowards, how about a nation of the apathetic, the willfully unknowing, the "intertia" voters ("I've always been a ____..."), and the *political* cowards. (Sorry, just couldn't leave it out completely! :) )

Years ago, (I was in high school) I worked part of a morning in a children's burn ward. It shook me so badly, my supervisor felt compelled to give me the rest of the day off. Naturally, I had to be re-assigned.

Some people are brave by nature. Others are forced to be brave by circumstance. I can handle being shot at. I don't think I could handle the children's wards (even today). I accept your point 100%. (Although I'm still peeved at the folks who vote for candidates' personal characteristics rather than voting for issues.)

Ron Paul? Good guy! Big time! Let's get him and the other Libertarians out of the Republican corral, get them some support, and let 'em run their OWN race. ;)

By the way, my loyalty to political parties is not as deep as to my ideals. Show me a political party closer to my ideals than the Libertarians and I'll switch! (I just haven't found any!)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top