NRA evp on NBC today

Status
Not open for further replies.

ruger45

Moderator
NRA EVP Wayne LaPierre gives 2nd amendment rights away! By Chris W. Stark - Director Gun Owners Alliance P.O. Box 1924 Crosby, Texas 77532-1924 Ph. 1-281-787-4111 Fax 1-281-328-7505 http://www.GOA-Texas.org email: Director@GOA-Texas.org 04 March 2000 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Copyright © 2000 by http://www.NealKnox.com Republication permitted ONLY if this e-mail alert is left intact in its original state. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Just more hard proof of how we desperately need to elect staunch pro-gun NRA Board of Directors that will not compromise our 2nd amendment rights away. LaPierre & Heston need to be given their walking papers too. To voice your disgust with NRA policies, first of all, VOTE the compromisers out by going to http://www.goa-texas.org/BoD-1.htm (see list below) then call the NRA and voice your disgust at:

1-800-NRA-3888 or 1-703-267-1000 or e-mail: membership@nrahq.org (Editor's Note: Wayne LaPierre & Charlton Heston 703-267- 1020 fax 703-267-3909)

Additional NRA abuses can be found at http://www.goa-texas.org/NRA.htm

Time to light up Congressional switchboards and apply the heat! For a list of phone numbers for U.S. House of Representatives and Senators, go to:
http://www.gunowners.org/h106th.htm
http://www.gunowners.org/s106th.htm

With Respect,

Gun Owners Alliance Chris W. Stark - Director

# # # # # # # # # #
http://www.nealknox.com/alerts/msg00249.html

March 4 Neal Knox Update - President Clinton has called a meeting for Tuesday with Congressional leaders to demand passage of his package of gun laws.

On Wednesday, he was on the NBC Today show and CBS Dan Rather declaring that NRA has a stranglehold on Congress and is opposed to all gun laws.

On Thursday, NRA E.V.P. Wayne LaPierre was on NBC Today detailing what all new gun proposals NRA supported. He listed last June's House-approved gun package which included a requirement that dealers sell trigger locks with each handgun, requiring NICS checks on pawn shop redemption's, banning importation of over-10-round magazines not included in the 1994 ban, prohibiting "unsupervised" access by juveniles to "assault weapons" and high-cap magazines, a lifetime ban on gun ownership for juveniles convicted of violent offenses, and mandatory background checks on buyers from gun shows table operators.

While show host Katie Couric wasn't impressed by the list of gun laws NRA supports, NRA members lit up NRA's phones and the Internet, insisting that many of those provisions violated the Second Amendment.

LaPierre informed Couric that it was the House Democrats, with White House backing, who killed the entire gun package because it didn't have Sen. Lautenberg's draconian gun show background check bill -- which could kill gun shows due to its almost impossible-to-meet requirements on show sponsors.

Sen. Lautenberg, during a press conferences with Sens. Richard Durbin and Charles Schumer this week, stated that his intent was to eliminate gun shows entirely. His amendment would go a long ways toward that goal.

With Clinton declaring that his trigger lock package would have saved the First Grader killed in Michigan -- which is patently ludicrous since the murder gun was stolen and found in a crack house -- most of the focus of Tuesday's meeting is likely to be directed toward trigger locks.

Virginia Rep. Tom Davis, chairman of the Republican House reelection effort, sponsored the amendment requiring handguns to be sold with trigger locks or other security devices last June. With NRA's blessing, it passed 311-115.

Gov. George Bush said Wednesday that if such a bill came to his desk he would sign it, but he felt use of such devices should be up to the homeowner. He asked if advocates of requiring trigger locks to be kept installed wanted Federal "trigger lock police" to assure compliance.

The sticking point in Clinton's package is, as it was last June, the NRA-backed gun show amendment by Rep. John Dingell, which would impose workable requirements on gun show promoters and allow an "Instant Check" to take no more than 24 hours instead of Lautenberg's five business days.

Clinton is again unlikely to allow the NRA-backed package to pass unless it has the NRA-opposed Lautenberg's gun show amendment, for he wants to keep the gun issue alive, particularly "trigger locks."

However, if the press begins to report the political game- playing over trigger locks, Clinton and the Republican leadership, at least Speaker Dennis Hastert and Judiciary Chairman Henry Hyde -- might yet agree to pass the trigger lock bill and the other NRA-backed provisions.

The reaction of other House Republicans, led by Majority Leader Dick Armey and Whip Tom Delay, and the 40 or so pro-gun Democrats, led by Rep. Dingell, is a bigger question.

Clinton may well figure that he has more than enough other pending gun law demands to take nine-tenths of a loaf now, but I don't expect that to happen until he's had a few more months to wring the maximum crocodile political tears out of trigger locks.

Isn't it amazing that a reportedly recent Houston sharpened screwdriver murder of one grade school kid by another has had no national publicity? And that this week's killing of two women by three American kids who heaved large rocks off a highway overpass in Germany, has gone almost unnoticed?

Please use the ballot in your March NRA magazines, and urge your friends and fellow voting NRA members to double the power of their ballots, by voting only for these 13 stalwarts:

Sally Brodbeck Weldon Clark William Dominguez David Gross Fred Gustafson Michael Kindberg Joe Olson Frank Sawberger Tom Seefeldt John Trentes Miles Ugarkovich Glen Voorhees Neal Knox

The biographies of our candidates can be seen on: http://www.paulrevere.org/nrabod/index.htm

Our gun rights depend on who is at the helm of NRA.

Yours for the Second Amendment,

NEAL (s)

Neal Knox

P.S. For a copy of LaPierre's Denver speech, or other corroborating information, send a self-addressed stamped envelope. And please, if you can, send a few dollars to print and mail more copies of this letter. ************************************************************* From The 2ndAmendmentNews Team

Once agian even if you get all 13 of Knox's kickbutt team re-elected guess what their are 45 BOD members.That means 32 to keep compromising for your money. Everytime I think the NRA's gonna turn around (improve) and kick me in the teeth for all the negative but factual things Ive siad about them I have the distinct annoyance to read something like this. I may be a part of small orgs but atleast they dont do crap like this and they represent my interests not those of politicians trying to win votes.
www.ccrkba.org---- www.gunowners.org

Patriot.45


But Jim does have a point the gunrights groups do need to work out their differences.
Now who should change..

things you should do other than compromising
below www.jpfo.org www.jbs.org www.citizensofamerica.org
and JPFO has in my opinoin the absoloute best stickers or shirts you can find to use and make a point.

------------------
"those who sacrifice
liberty for security deserve neither"
 
ruger45, this is old news. This is from 3/4/00, before Wayne began to pound Clinton publicly and the NRA vs. the Clinton administration war began. It is extremely misleading to be reprinting this now since it simply does not apply and the NRA has become much more agressive in not compromising on any of this stuff.
 
Well there's two issues here. Three if you count that this is dated, which is a good point but I'll skip that for now.

The Dem/grabber/Clinton coalition in DC owns the Presidency and the Senate. The NRA/GOP coalition owns the House. Given that they're outnumbered 2:1, they've done a *fantastic* job in halting all Fed gun control at the Fed level. Has that required the flinging of a bit of BS for public consumption? Sure. So what?

I care about final effect.

In California, it's all-Dem at all three positions. And we're getting our clocks cleaned, with the exception of beating the worst thing the Dems came up with last year via extreme effort (ending preemption). The NRA wants the GOP to take back the Assembly so that they can do the same excellent job at halting the BS in CA that they've done in DC, plus avoiding a Gerrymander from hell coming up next year - if all three positions are Dem, they can do whatever they want in CA including making "one man, one vote" an absolute joke. If a GOP Assembly objects, it goes to the courts which have a recent history of fair re-districting.

Therefore the NRA's Calif. November strategy should be supported to the hilt because they've proven this gameplan at the Fed level.

Second major point: Ruger45, according to your statements at this thread: http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=28092
...either the GOA or you personally have grossly edited other people's words for the purposes of slandering the NRA.

So can you please explain why we should put much stake in your rebroadcast of GOA reporting of NRA words, given this history?

Jim
 
WestTexas: Big whoopie, they started to pound Clinton just before the Board elections, and stopped right after they won. It was nothing but an internal campaign ploy, not a genuine effort to defend our rights.
 
It scares me (even though I'm a member) to have to say this; but the NRA would not have much membership if gun rights were not at stake so it's in their best interests for it to continue.

Do they ever mention the "assault weapon" ban?

The second amendment is always here, every law is "whew, glad we staved off the one that violates the second amendment".

Their membership will rise profoundly after the battle shifts back to hunting weapons.


Battler.
 
Texas besides agree with Bellmore's comment my point is the stand they took or did not take.
And answer this one Texas has their position changed and if so can you show us when they stated that they oppose these measures.Also the fact that as far as the NRA goes if Clinton handnt wanted to try to makes some sort of 'campaign issue' out of the bill and told his dem's to vote against it these
what *I* call anti-gun measures would have passed.
Thank you for the insight on the timing
Bellmore.It seems as if you and Battler clearly see that Im not trying to blast NRA members but only the leadership which is far from representing your and previously my wishes.
But I see them hearing the money rolling in a lot more than the few members it appear's who will question them.
Again Im with you Battler Ive never heard any comment on their changing their position on the assault weapons ban.
I personally offhand cant refer to a time when they have stated support for it but their endorsed candidate for president has
and their supported measure of 'mandatory trigger lock sales'.
Which have been around to purchase for many years.
And yes Bush appears to be our best bet for
pro-gun president but at the risk of getting this thread shutdown I have to say when it comes to senate and House weve often had much better third party options especially libertarian than the classic falandering republicans.
www.gunowners.org
NO compromise, www.jpfo.org
guncontrol is racist


------------------
"those who sacrifice
liberty for security deserve neither"
 
I see that Mr. March has not responded to your charges, Ruger45. Mostly his defense of the NRA is smoke, and he cannot answer real questions. I don't think he even believes his own crap.

------------------
"Vote with a Bullet."
 
Chris W. Stark, Director of Gun Owners Alliance TX should have zero credibility with anyone that is seriously working to save the 2nd Amendment. Chirs Stark and his little piss ant operation can only thrive at the expense of other larger progun organizations. He has to tear them down in order to build himself up. That is why he will never, and can never, say a good thing about the NRA! Stark is nothing more than Neal Knox's shoe shine boy! End of story!

Joe

[This message has been edited by nralife (edited July 25, 2000).]
 
Ahhh the ever honorable tradition of attacking the personality or history of the person delivering the message in order to devalue the message.
Now thats a new one.
Obviously this means that Lapierre did not get on NBC on national TV and list off the many gunlaws he the VP of the NRA supports and thus all NRA members wind up supporting as they send them money.
This also means that when my Congressmen said that he voted for the bill containing these messures because the NRA supported them that he was full of crap and had no idea what he was talking about including my senator Bill Frist(R-TN).
Hmmm so happy that their are NRA lifer's around to set me straight.
Eventually I might think up a sarcastic reply for your comment NRAlife but these things come to me slowly....
Nice to here from you Claemore.At times I wonder if their are only sheep out here engineered to follow their sheppard without question.
People if you want to support the NRA thats your choice but atleast considering including a question about these anti-gun measures above next time you deem to send money to help 'enforce more gunlaws'.
The BATF must still be rolling over that one.
Interested in a group that wants to repeal such unconstitutional gunlaws look below www.gunowners.org
NO compromise www.jpfo.org
you have no right to police protection www.jbs.org
the only org lobbying congress to get us out of the United socialist nations

------------------
"those who sacrifice
liberty for security deserve neither"
 
Don't worry about the NRA. Worry about preventing Gore from getting in the White House.

Ask 10 friends to vote. Suggest who they vote for, and remember to vote, yourself.

------------------
NRA Life Member
Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners(MCRGO)
 
Guess I missed Jim's post the first time.
The paragraph was not completed and youve brought out three times now I beleive that who ever did not finish the copy left out that along with the gunconfiscation on a whim
that their were unspecified pro-gun things thrown in.
I simply replied that this does not change the same fact brought out in your complete copy of the article that they supported the measure as a part of a larger bill and that
to accept poison with medicine does not make it peachy for me.
Show us where the NRA denies supporting any of these measures above considering your questioning the validity of the post forwarded from an NRA BOD member Neal KNox.
Pherphaps we wouldnt have to worry about so much compromise if the NRA would atleast tell us when our reps do sell us out when it comes to guncontrol.
As they did not do when the republican leadership supported S.254 in the senate
Lott,Hatch and Mccain backed the bill wholeheartedly.
I want the truth not whats good for the republican party.
My uncle's Democratic congressmen has voted more often against guncontrol and co-sponsored Pro-gun bills than my republican congressmen.
Course hes out of MS but still....
But then again you do seem more informed on NRA activities Jim maybe you have received an alert on these statesmen's votes.
IF so Id love to see it.
www.jpfo.org
check out their envelope stickers
go to online store and then stickers (not bumper stickers) www.keepandbeararms.org


------------------
"those who sacrifice
liberty for security deserve neither"
 
This tearing-us-apart scheme of berating the NRA does little good for our cause. Obviously, politicians are realists and have elections to win to keep them in office. Even if a pro-gun politician is faced with the decision of whether to vote for a bill that has moderate gun control, or lose his seat in the next election, I'm betting that he'll take the position of the party most vital to his re-election. If we grow and expand the NRA, they'll have even more clout than they do now as the 2nd most powerful lobby in the US. With more members, more voters, and more money, the NRA could make more legislators listen. The GOA is no compromise, and I'm a member, but the NRA is the big ticket item, and I think EVERY firearms owner should support both, plus SAF and FPFO. These things are additive and complementary.
 
Claymore70 says:

"I see that Mr. March has not responded to your charges, Ruger45. Mostly his defense of the NRA is smoke, and he cannot answer real questions. I don't think he even believes his own crap."

Well let's see. The grabbers try and put through a "total grab" bill in Congress. Several, in fact. The NRA/GOP alliance proposes a *genuine* compromise, where BOTH sides gain and lose a bit. The grabbers are aghast at this "intransience" and the end result is NO anti-gun bill passed at all.

And THEN, as a PR move, LaPierre crows about how their side is willing to offer at least something, while the other side is being jerks.

Result #1: NO GUN BILL PASSES.

Result #2: the grabbers end up taking a PR hit on TOP of not getting their grabber BS bills passed in the first place.

Now that's sneaky. RIGHT ON!

And then you, and Ruger45, are willing to use this this whole series of events to BASH the NRA?

What the hell are you guys smoking?

If a flood of bad gun bills had actually PASSED at the Fed level, you'd maybe have a point. Even then, outnumbered 2:1 it wouldn't automatically have been their fault if something had slipped through.

BUT NOTHING DID!

Why are you ripping into the NRA?

Oh, and as to why I didn't chime in here earlier: I've been interviewing security company managers in San Francisco, trying to pin down a rumor that the dire lack of CCW permits in SF (pop 750,000, # of CCW permits *12*) is causing a serious shortage of armed plainclothes executive protection workers. People are making $40/$50 an hour just standing around strapped, and there aren't enough off-duty and retired cops to meet to the need. So foreign embassy workers are making big bucks in their off hours doing the same thing, packing on their diplomatic immunity - with no bond, training, licensing and they can't even be prosecuted in a bad shoot. Jeeeeesus. In other words, highly restrictive CCW policies are causing weird crazy $hit that even Rosie O'Donut would gag over, and I've got a local paper interested in what I can dig up, embarassing the hell out of grabber top cops and the politicians that support them.

How was your day?

Jim
 
Why didn't the NRA just say No Way. Will not support any of the bill. Why did they suggest InstantCheck? Why do they support the hicap mag ban? Why do they want the laws from '68 Gun Control Act enforced? Why don't they want us to have assault rifles? Why? Why are they buddy buddy with the ATF? Probably because they are using a diversionary tactic, huh? Yeah, except it's you all that are being diverted.

------------------
"Vote with a Bullet."
 
Studied any military history?

If so, a question:

"What happens when the leadership of a nation demands that the generals absolutely, positively never retreat, and that the soldiers die to the last man rather than give up an inch of ground?"

NO nation has ever survived the issuance of such orders as "broad policy".

That's what you're demanding the NRA do. And yes, it's a war. There's local "fronts" in each state, and at the Fed level separate battlegrounds in the legslature and the courts.

But it's all interlinked in the final battleground: public opinion.

And now you, as a wanna-be general with no qualifications who won't even use your real name, want to dictate a guaranteed losing strategy on the NRA and if not, you'll scream "traitor"?

I'm not impressed.

Jim
 
Apples and oranges, Jim.

If I read your argument correctly, you're saying that we MUST accept some losses(standard capacity magazines, "assault" weapons, registration) in order to keep from being annihilated... despite the very clear "shall not be infringed" wording of the highest law of the land. Is that about right?

Sorry, I don't buy it.
 
Glad Im not the only one those thoughts for surrender stir emotions in.
WESTTEXAS-I find you NRA diehards continual comments of more and more clout very humorous because of what you dare to consider putting such clout behind.
Enforce Gunlaws including gunlaws we wording for from NAZI germany.Are you looking forward to the time when NRA's project exile passes in all its glory Texas and all the liberal mayors and governor's have then been given all the federal money they need to train their local police to enforce all of these 'protective gunlaws on the books' not to mention having their aid's search the books for all sorts of interesting gunlaws to enforce now that theyll have the manpower to do so.
But keep telling yourself theyll only be pinpointing the criminals.
JIM-NO bills passed, is that your attempt at a save?My God how ignorant do you think we are.Im not sure how regulary the NRA members are informed and even if they gave details on this vote or did they simply say 'we won anothervictory and fought hard to do so'.
But the GOA members were able to see that the majority of the republicans voted for these anti-gun measures and as I said and anyone can see for themselves by checking the votes it was mostly the democrats that killed the bill because Comisar Clinton felt he could turn it into some kindve 'campaign issue'.
Point- the million commie march.
Meant to say would have become law but spacer
not working on here only deletes.
IF the liberals had wished hr1501/s254 it had nothing to do with the NRA's defense or in actuallity the great lack their of it.
LAPIERRE---Willing to sacrifice our rights a little of them now, some of them earlier,(gunfreeschool zones) some of them maybe earlier (assault weapons ban, support of nics registration.)
Were finally seeing eye to eye JIm
and I entirely agree with you this time.
But I have to add what you wont.To remain the 2nd most powerful lobby and one that the liberal media seems all too happy to keep giving credit to LApierre will keep on sacrificing and sacrificing for political compromise to keep the NRA and the repubcicans in some sort of media/public favor.

What battle has ever been onn hen the soldiers were told not to surrender?
Maybe not a battle but I think atleast one war was won that way maybe it was the
Mighty British vs. the outnumbered outskilled
american colonies.

But does it really matter if you cant ever be
wrong,if the NRA cant ever be wrong.

Patriot.45


------------------
"those who sacrifice
liberty for security deserve neither"
 
Coinneach, if the Supremes declare the 2nd an individual right, the whole nature of the game changes. Nearly all of those temporary setbacks can then be overturned in court.

The legislature is not the only type of battle being fought. If we can't elect the right people, who in turn put the right package of Judges together, then long-term we're screwed.

Given the current mentality of the average voter, that means we must appear "reasonable" on the gun issue. Bush polling better than Gore on guns is just...incredible, a strong indication that the NRA/GOP gameplan is working.

Ruger45, as to the recent votes: understand that the legicritters all meet on the sides, their staff members talk to each other even across party lines. They often have a pretty good idea who is gonna vote for what. If a fundamentally pro-gun legicritter deliberately votes FOR a grabber bill that he/she/it knows won't pass, he can raise his approval rating without harming the RKBA cause. Does that happen? You bet. Does it bother me? No, except that it makes sorting out who the good guys are pretty damn difficult. In a perfect world, we wouldn't need to play these sorts of games but when you've got a pro-RKBA legicritter from a liberal, grabber-minded area, some of that is necessarily gonna happen.

Politics is UGLY. That sort of thing goes past ugly and into nauseating, even for me.

But...

Nothing passed. Not a single damn thing got past the NRA/GOP roadblock in the house, for two years running.

Forgive me for not being able to label the final results "treasonous".

Jim
 
WESTTEXAS-It seems humorous everytime I hear NRA diehards talk about clout when you examine what you dare to want to put clout behind.Will you be happy when the NRA's current project exile bill passes congress in all its glory.
Lobbying congress to give more money to the states to enforce the gunlaws on the books.
I know all the liberal mayors and governors
will be as they search the law books for more burdensome gunlaws to enforce and train their local law enforcement in these different laws.
More Clout to make sure all individuals (non licensed) now record their address and gun serail number on a sheet that winds up in the
ATF's hands and called into them for them to record vocally and then possibly on a computer.
yeahhhhhh I want the NRA to have more clout.
Just like I want to shoot my foot off.
JIM--NO bills passed, is that your attempt at a save for their obvious compromise??
How ignorant do you think we all are?
I dont know how often NRA member are informed of such things but all GOA members have been shown the votes of the reps on these measures.
If were up to the republicans normally following the NRA s.254/hr1501 would have become law.
But because for a rather obvious reason Clinton wanted to turn it into some sort of
'campaign issue'.
Point--Million commie march.
Thus the democrats received the credit for having the majority in voting down these measures.
It had nothing to do with the NRA's lobbying in our defense or actually in this case as many others the great lack their of it.
LAPIERRE-willing to sacrifice a little--
yes sacrifice a little of what , our freedom a little now a little earlier ( so called 'gunfree school zones)a bit earlier (nics gun registration, great lack of opposition to the assault weapons ban) and some would say a lot earlier with a great lack of opposition by the then leadership of the NRa to the GCA of 68.
WE completely agree on that one Jim.But I think Ill say what you wont.The NRA leadership with a incredibly loyal membership will continue to sacrifice our freedom bit by bit to keep the NRA the 2nd largest lobby n america and to keep the NRA and the republicans in some sort of political favor with the media and the public
of those 'polls' were never a part of.
Like the one where most people supportthe use of 'trigger locsks'.
Last time I asked an NRA rep their feelings on the registration form 4473, he said
'well thats federal law theirs nothing we can do about it'
yep the the NRA has as Claemore70 put it run you through a lot of diversionary tactics
but I wish I could atleast remember when they
even talked about trying to repeal a gunlaw.
Will any of this change anything as some begin to slowly add these things up in the years to come?
NO
Because their the largest pro-gun voice out their and if we didnt have this organization
(that supports nics registration,mag bans, who knows what 'gunfree zones',carry only by permit,'assault weapons'bans,the GCA of 68)
we lose our guns.
Now I just need a tape with that on it to play for me all night as I sleep ,by moring Ill be convinced.

No battle may have ever been won Jim by tellin the troops not to ever Surrender
even where freedoms concerned
But I do think theirs been one war
maybe it was that one between the mighty well trained army of the british and those outnumbered outskilled american colonies
maybe...
I like to think its good that most patriots didnt pick the side then with the most members.
I know I know bad comparison.
Has nothing to do with this discussion
LOL.

Patriot.45


------------------
"those who sacrifice
liberty for security deserve neither"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top