King Klinton blames NRA for mass shootings!!

B

BigPig

New member
Clinton Appeals To NRA Over Gun Deaths

Reuters Photo

Full Coverage
Gun Control Debate


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Clinton said the National Rifle Association and its supporters must assume more responsibility for the mass killings across the United States in recent years.

The most recent shooting was Wednesday, when a lone gunman killed seven people and himself in a Fort Worth, Texas Baptist church. The attack sparked more calls by Clinton and gun-control advocates for tougher limits on the purchase of firearms.

Officials of the NRA and its many supporters across the country and on Capitol Hill say mass killings will fall if the federal government would enforce existing gun laws more strictly.

During a speech to the annual dinner of the Congressional Black Caucus, Clinton said: ``The NRA and that crowd have to stop using arguments like this as an excuse to avoid our shared responsibility'' to end the killings.

In fact, the spate of schoolyard shootings and terrorist bombings of the World Trade Center in New York and the Oklahoma City federal building ``has been the most painful thing that (Vice President Al Gore) and I and our families have had to endure,'' while in office, Clinton said.

--This is part of the story, the rest was about the tax cut.
---This is un-F***ing-believable!!! Then again, what was I supposed to expect from a liberal??
 
Lets talk about the Black Caucus (maybe we should now say African American Caucus). Isnt that essentially a special interest group engaged in gun control among other things?
Where the **** is our caucus????

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

Ed
 
I wish I could remember where I saw this comparison so I could give them the proper credit.
To paraphrase a little bit, if you applied the same rationale that allows you to hold the NRA and its supporters responsible for all these mass shootings, then you could blame all Catholics every time a pedophile priest sodomizes some altar boy.
 
Mr. Bunner:

Please tell us why race should play any factor at all in a discussion of second amendment rights.

Bill DePaulo
abruzzi@bigfoot.com
 
Abruzzi-
I won't answer for Ed, just for me. The formation of a "Congressional White Caucus" would point up the absurdity and reverse discrimination inherent in Politically Correct thinking.

In short, the Congressional Black caucus only serves to divide Americans along racial lines. It is a special interest group in name and deed.
Rich
 
I understand you don't like racial divisions. Neither do I. I repeat my question -- what does race have to do with second amendment issues?
 
All the original gun control laws were expressly racially directed.
Current gun laws have very deep racial roots...i.e urban areas, Clinton's disarming of federally funded housing, etc.
The primary and predominant victims in strict gun control areas are minorities, and as gun control got stricter, the minority body count rose.

Gun control is very much a racial issue as well as a political isse

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
I find it ironic that the NRA would be blamed for gun deaths. The NRA is the first and formost organization teaching proper firearms safety and handling, but these liberals don't give a **** because it involves guns and "guns are bad".

abruzzi,
Race doesn't have a thing to do with the second amendment. Every one is equal. Rich is right, the reason for Eds comment was to break the Political Correctness and show how abusurd Politicaly correctness is. If you notice it is the liberals that support the race organizations, organizations which further the gap between races and racial equality. Such organizations are created to stir unrest among the masses and keep us as a nation divided.
 
When I said "our caucus" I meant a pro-gun Caucus as I had referred to the Black Caucus as a special interest group interested in gun control.
Do you believe that I intended to racialize the Second Amendment?

My point which I have repeatedly made throughout this forum is that WE (the RKBA folks of any and all races, colors, creeds, genders or national origin) need a united voice-a caucus,if you will-of at least equal
volume as those who oppose us.
You want to leave race out of it? Fine with me, but we need all the help we can get because we are talking about the righrs of ALL Anericans.

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

Ed
 
I recognize that race had a role -- a significant role -- in the history of gun control in that the earliest restrictions were aimed at keeping blacks from being armed after slavery was abolished.

That does not suggest that race is a valid criteria for any discussion of second amendment rights -- except to the extent that it underscores the core notion that political rights are tied directly to the right to bear arms, a notion with which I agree.

THAT was not the tenor of the comment which provoked my question. The comment I responded to suggested that "our" second amendment rights (whoever the "our" is supposed to be) were in conflict with rights asserted by black citizens.

That is a racist notion. I reject it. I am disappointed (and more than a little bit surprised) to find others on this board apparently looking for a way to avoid the obvious tenor of the remark.

I did not look up the author's personal information until this reply. I consider myself Southern (as do most of my friends from the North) so I don't feel at all hesitant to point out that the author is from Natchez, Mississippi. I would be delighted to learn that he is a recent transfer to Ole Miss from Poughkeepsie.

But the comment suggests that this is the voice of a long dark streak of racism in our culture which deserves no sanctuary on this board. I repeat, I will be delighted to learn that this is a misimpression. But I am not going to voluntarily cease fire in the face of apparent racism. That is a first amendment right -- and a first amendment responsibility.
 
I explained my remarks, which if read with an open mind contain no mention or hint of racism.
It appears that our subsequent posts crossed in cyberspace and are not in sequence, which does not surprise me.
What does surptise me is that in a distorted fashion I am apparently being subjected to some sort of stereotyping based on my place of residence.
If you want to know what I think about any issue, ask me. Dont try to surmise my philosophy based on where I live.If you do,
you make yourself appear to be bigoted and that does not help your credibility.

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

Ed
 
1st: Race has nothing to do with the second amendment. It Does, however, have something to do with the gun confiscation laws on the books. see jpfo.org
Once you find JPFO, look under "Books & Booklets" for "Gun Control Is Racist". All the booklets are worth ordering. You get them all in a packet when you join. This one shows the racist roots of gun confiscation laws in USA.

2nd: The only thing,IMHO, that the NRA can have to do with the shooting is that they have compromised too much with those like klin ton about the laws on the books that they want enforced. So INDIRECTLY can the pres blame them for anything involving shooting? Well, its about the pot calling the kettle black. Had the teachers Disobeyed the laws prohibiting them from going armed to thier classrooms, instead of worring that those laws that some in the NRA want enforced, then there might be a higher population of kids enrolled for the next school year and less greiving parents.

I know that the above statement must offend someone, but I'm not trying to paint every member or administrator in the NRA w/the same brush stroke. I agree with many of the NRAs objectives and have friends and family in it. I'm sure that many of its members support it despite the disagreements present. I'm just trying to look at things Objectively, rather than falling in line w/ OUR party line by backing Mr. pres OR some in the NRA, whose views (some of which) I disagree with whole heartedly. I call it as I see it. If some of the NRA wants to support instant background check legislation, and enforceing the unjust gun confiscation laws that are already on the books, so be it. Its a free country. Well, not as free as it used to be. Thanks to unjust laws and people/activist groups who support them.

------------------
"But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." -Jesus Christ (Luke 22:36, see John 3:15-18)

[This message has been edited by EQUALIZER (edited September 20, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by EQUALIZER (edited September 20, 1999).]
 
In a nation with no gun owning population no one will have to worry about any race,because everyone will be herded in to the Gulags irrespective of race. It will be equal oportunity slavery. Comrade Stalin didnt care about race. He killed them all irrespective of race. But the elites who rule us today love to forment anytype of race antagonisms to furthere their control. I dont see any racial hatred or whatever by Ed. The racists are the power elites who ,in reality, hate us all and would love to destroy the majority of the worlds population in order to bring forth their brave new world. Armed citizens stand in the way of elite domination of our country and any country for that matter! As far as i am concerned,all these race based groups,no matter if white,black, brown or green, are playing into the hands of the central Regime in Washington . Divide and conquer is the motto in Washington.
 
Abruzzi..

Nothing can disavail you of the notion that it was intended as a racist remark, if you choose to believe it was meant so.
Ed said it wasn't so I and others believe him. He is not known for mincing words, nor has there ever been any doubt as to what he means when he says something. One doesn't have to infer what he says.

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
As I stated, I consider myself Southern, so I don't stereotype about Southerners, but I do recognize racial views. And, Rich Lucibella (excuse misspelling) apparently recognized "our" as "white" in his comment. So I don't think I've hedged here. The comments struck me as laden with racism.

But I also said I would be delighted to learn I was wrong. And you have volunteered to tell us your views on race. I stand ready to hear them. Please proceed.
 
I said I would tell you my thoughts on any issue and I will be happy to do so as soon as you designate an issue.

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

Ed
 
Abruzzi..

You have taken over this thread and steered it off topic. Take it to e-mail

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
These comments from bill clinton should erase any doubt as to whether the 2000 elections will be the most important event in this century regarding gun control and the fundamental balance of power in this nation between government and governed. This man is a unprincipled bigot who is acting out the predjudices of his own pathetic childhood and trying to sell them as public policy.

In fact the whole gun control movement deals primarily in predjudice. Waiting to spring into action after tragedies when emotions run high and the populace can be manipulated into a frenzy ... these people market predjudice! Without any factual basis for what they preach, it's the only tool they have to promote their agenda.

I believe bill clinton is the worst President we've had in recent memory. Whoever you decide to vote for, vote! ... make sure every shooter you know votes, volunteer to drive folks to the polls, talk your rangemasters and local gun stores into setting up voter registration booths. '94 was little league compared to what's at stake here. Let's let clinton's own bitter bigotry energize us to give him and his slimy cohorts the final boot!

=rod=
 
The whole misdirection of this thread is due to the fact that I inadvertently turned it in that direction, with my response.

Anyone who knows Ed Brunner (and many of us have for a couple of years now), knows this guy doesn't have a racist bone in his body...period.

Ed-
I apologize for my comments. I see where you were going with the "we". You said "black"; I answered "white". That's not where you were going and I now understand that. If anyone has slighted you, it's me; in assuming that you were referring to non-blacks as opposed to gun owners.

DC-
You're right on with your eval of the thread and I apologize to you and all here for my stupid response. I meant only to point up that extremism breeds extremism. I would delete my comments but I'll allow them to remain as my own reminder to "Think Twice, Post Once".

Rich
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top