I think we all take the articles posted here with a grain of salt. Those of us who own firearms know the mainstream press couldn't possibly report the NRA position in a favorable light so they had to leave out some facts.jonsimon wrote:
I like how now that its the NRA we're talking about, suddenly you all consider the idea that the article may not be giving the whole picture. Yet, every other thread in this section assumes a news article must be telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
I cannot understand why the NRA would use this as an argument, since there already is existing US legislation that permits the Justice Dept. to act upon such lists.gfyspoon wrote:
http://www.nranews.com/blogarticle.aspx?blogPostId=212
"I'll be very clear-Frank Lautenberg's proposal is un-American. There's no other way to put it.
His legislation would give the Justice Department the full power to put anyone they "suspect" of being involved in terrorism on a secret watch list and deny them the right to purchase a firearm."
Seems they are more worried about a "secret" goverment suspect list than the right to bear arms on this issue.
See section 505 of the Patriot Act, for instance.
The thing I find most odd is that the neo-cons will support the president and his taking "terrorist suspects" into custody under Patriot Act laws that allow these "suspected terrorists" to be jailed, without counsel, without knowing the charges against them, but as soon as the NRA says they are under attack because some one "suspected of terror" was denied weapons...when the same charges could land them in Gitmo without an attorney and right to a fair triall. Hmmmmm
And while I am not an NRA member, I do hunt with with a bow and rifle, and have owned a hand gun for more than a decade.
And while I am not an NRA member, I do hunt with with a bow and rifle, and have owned a hand gun for more than a decade.
Very good point... and frightening....apollo_fi wrote:
I cannot understand why the NRA would use this as an argument, since there already is existing US legislation that permits the Justice Dept. to act upon such lists.gfyspoon wrote:
http://www.nranews.com/blogarticle.aspx?blogPostId=212
"I'll be very clear-Frank Lautenberg's proposal is un-American. There's no other way to put it.
His legislation would give the Justice Department the full power to put anyone they "suspect" of being involved in terrorism on a secret watch list and deny them the right to purchase a firearm."
Seems they are more worried about a "secret" goverment suspect list than the right to bear arms on this issue.
See section 505 of the Patriot Act, for instance.
It would appear that, not only has the NRA acted too late in their defense of gun rights, but that Congress doesn't even fully understand the true power of the Patriot Act if they're passing laws that give the government redundant powers in terms of spying on and arresting its citizens.
Unfortunately, congress is messed up. It would have been political suicide to vote agianst the Patriot Act...after all, anyone voting against it would automatically be "unpatriotic." Same thing with No Child Left Behind! It only harms the poor schools, but anyone voting against it could be accused of hindering the educational system...BUT HEY, WHAT'S IN A NAME?
Pretty much.... It seems like the only bipartisan agendas of Congress are pay raises, corporate welfare, and power grabs.
The Bush administration has been urged to withdraw its support from other bits of paper drama as well. How many people are there right now who don't agree with every bit of the Patriot Act, for example?
But would this bill also prohibit sales of box cutters?WASHINGTON - The National Rifle Association is urging the Bush administration to withdraw its support of a bill that would prohibit suspected terrorists from buying firearms. Backed by the Justice Department, the measure would give the attorney general the discretion to block gun sales, licenses or permits to terror suspects.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2007-05-05 22:26:50)