Violence Policy Center has No Scruples

J

Jeff Thomas

New member
I think all of us in TFL are absolutely disgusted at the massacre in Littleton, CO today. My revulsion to that incident was made even more sickening when I saw that the Violence Policy Center was already making hay with this incident, barely after those poor children were cold. See www.vpc.org/press/9904col.htm .

A friend copied me on an email he wrote to these cynical fools at comment@vpc.org:

_____________________________________________

Bill McGeveran
Violence Policy Center

Dear Mr. McGeveran,

The poor kids in Littleton, CO are hardly cold, and your organization is already cynically using them to further your political agenda. Shame on you. I wonder if organizations like yours almost rub your hands in glee at such a tragedy so that you can spread further distortions.

I've perused your web site before, and it appears that you deal in lies, distortion and deceit in order to win others to your perspective. Perhaps you might want to ask yourselves how additional laws would have stopped this episode. Many of the existing laws listed on your 'Fact Sheet' were probably already broken even before this sad affair began. But no, people like yourselves never want to use logic in policy matters. You just work by emotion, and you prey on the emotions of others.

Well, I certainly hope there is a special place in Hell for people like yourselves - well-meaning, but so naive that you'll put us all at risk for your own political ends. And willing to use these poor children for your political goals just a few minutes or hours after their deaths. Shame on you.

Sincerely,
_____________________________________________

Intellectually, I should expect this kind of crap. In my heart I find it hard to forgive people like this for such dishonest "logic".

How sad.

[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited April 21, 1999).]
 
Sarah Brady and HCI are licking their chops as well. How crass, from http://www.handguncontrol.org/press/april20-99.htm :

_____________________________________________

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 20, 1999

GUN LAWS AND PROPOSED GUN LEGISLATION IN COLORADO

(Note: We are providing this backgrounder in response to many requests for information about guns and gun control in Colorado as the school shooting in Littleton unfolds. Handgun Control and the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence will provide further information and comment when more information about this shooting is available.)

Colorado has an instant check system for purchasing firearms. Background checks completed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Colorado’s minimum age requirement to possess a handgun is 18, unless the minor is in a hunter safety course, practicing at an established range, is engaged in competition, or is hunting or trapping with a valid license.
There is no minimum age for possession of rifles or shotguns.
It is illegal in Colorado to sell or transfer a handgun to a minor younger than age 18.
Colorado has no Child Access Prevention law. CAP laws hold adult gunowners legally responsible if minors have access to their firearms and use them to harm themselves or others. Sixteen other states have CAP laws; in those states the rate of accidental death to children from firearms has fallen an average of 23%.
In the last "Children and Guns" Report Card issued by Handgun Control in September, 1998, and which graded states for the stringency of their laws preventing minors’ access to guns, Colorado received a "C."
The gun lobby is pushing two gun issues in the Colorado legislature:

The first bill, H.B. 1305, which has passed the House and Senate and is now in conference committee, would eliminate all local, city and county firearms laws and forbid localities from passing any additional gun control measures in the future. The city of Denver, which currently has an assault weapon ban, is the specific target for this pre-emption legislation; if passed in the next week, the new law would allow the National Rifle Association to display assault weapons at its annual convention, which begins April 30 in Denver. The pre-emption legislation would also allow gunowners to drive to and through Denver with guns in their cars, which is now prohibited, and would eliminate other local ordinances of the sort enacted in Littleton (see attached.)
The second bill, S.B. 84, mirrors the proposition which was just defeated in a Missouri referendum and would radically weaken Colorado’s concealed-carry law. Currently Colorado police and sheriffs have discretion in issuing concealed-carry licenses; if the proposed legislation is enacted they will be forced to issue concealed-carry licenses to anyone meeting the requirements. Under this bill, people convicted of certain misdemeanors would be free to carry very dangerous weapons, including assault pistols, almost anywhere in the state. The CCW legislation has passed the Colorado Senate, will be voted on by the House very shortly, and Governor Owens has indicated he will sign it. Former Governor Roy Roemer vetoed similar legislation in 1997.
_____________________________________________

Couldn't they have at least waited to hear the facts before they used these poor kids? I am so utterly disgusted with the anti-self defense lobby tonight.

May those poor kids rest in peace.

[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited April 21, 1999).]
 
Jeff,
I couldn't agree with you more. They're nothing more than ghouls feasting on the bodies of those kids.
You got an e-mail address on these a$$holes? Looks like I'll be breaking my no nastey e-mail rule twice tonight.
 
Grayfox, I don't see an email address on their page. Their other contact info is:

Handgun Control, Inc.
1225 Eye Street, NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20005

Phone: (202) 898-0792
Fax: (202) 371-9615

Tell Sarah I said hello, and I hope her lobotomy comes out just fine.
 
We, the shooters and firearms owners, deeply regret these events. We morn and cry for the victims. We want such things not to happen. We would do anything we could to stop such events up to taking the chance we would be harmed. While the anti-firearm ownership groups relish and hope such things happen just so they can point toward them as a reason for more anti-personal freedom laws. They don't seem to care that people have been killed, they don't seem to care that people are hurt, in fact they don't care what happens as long as it DOES happen and they can point to victims.

They do not deserve the name HUMAN or the title humane as they are as bad as those that commit these acts. May they all burn in whatever hells they deserve. They are the criminals and should be treated with scorn and loathing.

------------------
Ne Conjuge Nobiscum
 
Sarah Brady doesn't give a damn about what she spouts. She's in it for the money. She has a salary of $107,000, an expense account, and is gauranteed $7,000 every time she makes an appearance or gives a speech.
To me, in my opinion she is lower than the cheapest, crack smoking hooker in the country. Hell, she's lower than whale poop, and we know where that stuff is.
What I find frustrating as hell, is she can get on TV just about any time she want to spout her vile crap, but our side is never extended the same privilege. Makes me think. If the media does not let us give our side in a fair manner? Is that a violation of our First Amendment rights?
 
Paul B..

RE: violation of 1st amendment by media. This is a tricky one since the media is privately owned, i.e. I am not obliged to provide you a venue on my media. However, since it is regulated by the FCC perhaps that could make them (the media) eligible to prosecution.


HCI doesn't provide an e-mail address publically, they like one way communication

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top