More "common sense" gun control - Clinton won't end buybacks of firearms

JimR

New member
From today's paper. Basically, Clinton thumbs his nose at Congress once again and misuses funds for a stupid program.

I suspect the link will be bad tomorrow, so have posted the article.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Clinton won't end buybacks of firearms
James Dao - New York Times
Sunday, July 30, 2000

Cleveland --- Defying congressional Republicans, the Clinton administration says that it will continue paying local governments to buy guns from private owners despite orders from House budget appropriators to end the program.

Known as Buyback America, the $15 million program is intended to reduce gun violence in cities, particularly around public housing projects, by helping the police and housing authorities purchase firearms for about $50 each, with no questions asked.

Since President Clinton unveiled the program last September, 70 cities, including San Francisco; Hartford, Conn.; Atlanta; Baltimore, Md.; Newark, N.J.; and Houston; have spent $3.5 million to buy more than 17,300 guns, most of which have been destroyed.

But from its inception, the program has been sharply criticized by the National Rifle Association and by opponents of gun control in Congress, as a waste of money that leaves guns in the hands of criminals.

In June, Rep. James Walsh (R-N.Y.), chairman of the House appropriations subcommittee that oversees the Department of Housing and Urban Development, told the agency's secretary, Andrew Cuomo, to stop financing the program.

In a letter to Cuomo, Walsh said that existing law did not authorize such spending, a position supported by the General Accounting Office, a nonpartisan congressional research agency. Programs in at least 30 cities have been put on hold because of the dispute.

But in a statement Clinton planned to release today, he asserts that the housing department has clear legal authority to finance the program, which he contends will help prevent ''an untold number of gun accidents, suicides and crimes.''

''Despite HUD's clear authority to carry out this important program, the gun lobby and other opponents of common-sense gun safety measures continue to challenge this initiative,'' Clinton says in the statement. ''Congress should put the public safety interests of American families above those of the gun lobby and support these efforts instead of working to undermine them.'' [/quote]
 
Do the math, Slick Willie. You spent an average of $202.31 per firearm. If the owners received $50.00, what happened to the other $152? Oh, that's right...Hillary's got a campaign to run.
Rich
 
Note the subtle spin the author places on Clinton's actions.

"Cleveland --- Defying congressional Republicans, the Clinton administration . . . . ."

Bill Clinton did NOT defy congressional Republicans. He DID defy the US Congress.



------------------
Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

Barry Goldwater--1964
 
Rich, I did the same thing ... typical sloppy reporting on the part of the NY Times. A good journalist would have asked that obvious question.

I'm tempted to say I would never contribute to a charity that wastes 75% of my contributions on 'overhead', but ..... we all 'contribute' to this particular 'charity'. At gunpoint, in essence.

I wonder if Congress will ever have the juevos to rein in this dictator?

Regards from AZ
 
Back
Top