Maggie_T
03-09-2001, 02:07 PM
WarLady1
Owner/Op/Moderator
posts: 451
(1/18/01 1:21:30 pm)
Reply
ANTI-GUN EXTREMISTS GO OFF HALF COCKED
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
dailynews.philly.com/cont...17.htm?tem
by John R. Lott Jr.
Ted Kennedy accused Robert Bork of wanting to force blacks to sit at "segregated lunch counters," to let governments at their whim "censor" writers, to ensure that "schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution."
But, as false as those accusations were, no one claimed that Bork was in league with mass murderers. There was still some line, however far out there, that wasn't crossed.
Now, during a mass press conference last week with activists from dozens of liberal organizations, Handgun Control announced that "Perhaps most disturbing of all, Mr. Ashcroft apparently believes in . . . the same extremist theory subscribed to by Timothy McVeigh."
If it wasn't to link Sen. John Ashcroft with a mass murderer, what is the point of the statement? Of course, McVeigh's views on the Second Amendment seem irrelevant here. He killed 169 people with a bomb, and Handgun Control isn't objecting to Ashcroft's views on fertilizer control.
It is difficult to believe that anyone takes McVeigh's musings seriously.
Yet in any case, McVeigh and Ashcroft aren't even in the same universe on the issue of guns. McVeigh disdained the NRA because of its willingness to accept some regulations. Sen. Ashcroft strongly supports people's right to own guns and be able to defend themselves from criminals - but, in 1999 alone, he voted six times for more gun laws.
Unfortunately, this is not an isolated example of Handgun Control's extremist rhetoric. Take their logical leaps linking Ashcroft with the threats posed by militia groups illegally possessing machine guns: "One militia leader in Colorado was successfully prosecuted for illegally possessing a machine gun; another stockpiled an arsenal of weapons. As Ashcroft and the militia share similar views of the Second Amendment, one wonders: will he vigorously enforce and prosecute the gun laws against them?"
How about Handgun Control's claim that Ashcroft supported a concealed-handgun law that "would have allowed convicted child molesters and other violent criminals to carry Uzi pistols into bars, sports stadiums, casinos, day-care centers, on school buses and onto school grounds."
Never mind that the law had one of the most extensive criminal background checks and restrictions on where the guns could be carried. Never mind that federal law forbids carrying guns within a 1,000 yards of a school. Even the one correct reference to an Uzi pistol is designed to mislead and conjure up images of machine guns, when Uzi is simply a brand name and the pistols they make are no different than any other type of pistol.
Handgun Control claims that "John Ashcroft cannot be trusted" to enforce our nation's gun laws, but no evidence is provided that he failed to enforce gun-control laws while he was attorney general or governor of Missouri.
The worst complaint seems to be that Ashcroft supports throwing out the gun-purchase records now being kept by the federal government. There is only one problem with this complaint. Ashcroft proposes to do precisely what the law says: The federal government may not keep these records on its citizens. It has been the Clinton administration that isn't obeying the law by retaining them.
If Ashcroft's views were as dangerous as the gun-control lobby claims, why has he regularly earned the support of all the major law-enforcement organizations in Missouri?
This last election, he was endorsed by everyone from the St. Louis Police Officers Association, the largest police union in the state, to sheriffs and police chiefs statewide. If these claims were true, why weren't other senators speaking out before he was nominated to be attorney general? Why were liberal Democrats like Sen. Daniel Moynihan saying that "John Ashcroft will be a superb attorney general"?
Advocacy groups sometimes go to extremes to stir up their constituents and generate contributions. Yet many winced when the NRA called some federal agents "jackbooted thugs" after Waco and Ruby Ridge. Former President George Bush even resigned from the NRA in protest, and a chastened NRA apologized.
But where is the outrage from the left - or for that matter, anyone - when Handgun Control shamelessly links a dedicated public servant to a mass murderer?
"I believe in grace, because I have seen it; in peace, because I have felt it; in forgiveness, because I have needed it." -- George W. Bush in his acceptance speech in Philadelphia.
tacitus c
Gold Star Member
posts: 236
(1/18/01 1:27:13 pm)
Reply Re: ANTI-GUN EXTREMISTS GO OFF HALF COCKED
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just more spin and lies from the left. Anyone that can't see through their smoke and mirrors is a total moron. Linking McVeigh & Ashcroft shows you how desperate they really are in their attempt to discredit Mr. Ashcroft. The more they whine and spread their lies, the more reasonable thinking Americans will see them for what they really are, a group of malcontents that only want their agenda enforced, not the law.
Clinton Legacy: A Republican Congress and Executive Branch and a President that will bring respect back to the office.
Owner/Op/Moderator
posts: 451
(1/18/01 1:21:30 pm)
Reply
ANTI-GUN EXTREMISTS GO OFF HALF COCKED
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
dailynews.philly.com/cont...17.htm?tem
by John R. Lott Jr.
Ted Kennedy accused Robert Bork of wanting to force blacks to sit at "segregated lunch counters," to let governments at their whim "censor" writers, to ensure that "schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution."
But, as false as those accusations were, no one claimed that Bork was in league with mass murderers. There was still some line, however far out there, that wasn't crossed.
Now, during a mass press conference last week with activists from dozens of liberal organizations, Handgun Control announced that "Perhaps most disturbing of all, Mr. Ashcroft apparently believes in . . . the same extremist theory subscribed to by Timothy McVeigh."
If it wasn't to link Sen. John Ashcroft with a mass murderer, what is the point of the statement? Of course, McVeigh's views on the Second Amendment seem irrelevant here. He killed 169 people with a bomb, and Handgun Control isn't objecting to Ashcroft's views on fertilizer control.
It is difficult to believe that anyone takes McVeigh's musings seriously.
Yet in any case, McVeigh and Ashcroft aren't even in the same universe on the issue of guns. McVeigh disdained the NRA because of its willingness to accept some regulations. Sen. Ashcroft strongly supports people's right to own guns and be able to defend themselves from criminals - but, in 1999 alone, he voted six times for more gun laws.
Unfortunately, this is not an isolated example of Handgun Control's extremist rhetoric. Take their logical leaps linking Ashcroft with the threats posed by militia groups illegally possessing machine guns: "One militia leader in Colorado was successfully prosecuted for illegally possessing a machine gun; another stockpiled an arsenal of weapons. As Ashcroft and the militia share similar views of the Second Amendment, one wonders: will he vigorously enforce and prosecute the gun laws against them?"
How about Handgun Control's claim that Ashcroft supported a concealed-handgun law that "would have allowed convicted child molesters and other violent criminals to carry Uzi pistols into bars, sports stadiums, casinos, day-care centers, on school buses and onto school grounds."
Never mind that the law had one of the most extensive criminal background checks and restrictions on where the guns could be carried. Never mind that federal law forbids carrying guns within a 1,000 yards of a school. Even the one correct reference to an Uzi pistol is designed to mislead and conjure up images of machine guns, when Uzi is simply a brand name and the pistols they make are no different than any other type of pistol.
Handgun Control claims that "John Ashcroft cannot be trusted" to enforce our nation's gun laws, but no evidence is provided that he failed to enforce gun-control laws while he was attorney general or governor of Missouri.
The worst complaint seems to be that Ashcroft supports throwing out the gun-purchase records now being kept by the federal government. There is only one problem with this complaint. Ashcroft proposes to do precisely what the law says: The federal government may not keep these records on its citizens. It has been the Clinton administration that isn't obeying the law by retaining them.
If Ashcroft's views were as dangerous as the gun-control lobby claims, why has he regularly earned the support of all the major law-enforcement organizations in Missouri?
This last election, he was endorsed by everyone from the St. Louis Police Officers Association, the largest police union in the state, to sheriffs and police chiefs statewide. If these claims were true, why weren't other senators speaking out before he was nominated to be attorney general? Why were liberal Democrats like Sen. Daniel Moynihan saying that "John Ashcroft will be a superb attorney general"?
Advocacy groups sometimes go to extremes to stir up their constituents and generate contributions. Yet many winced when the NRA called some federal agents "jackbooted thugs" after Waco and Ruby Ridge. Former President George Bush even resigned from the NRA in protest, and a chastened NRA apologized.
But where is the outrage from the left - or for that matter, anyone - when Handgun Control shamelessly links a dedicated public servant to a mass murderer?
"I believe in grace, because I have seen it; in peace, because I have felt it; in forgiveness, because I have needed it." -- George W. Bush in his acceptance speech in Philadelphia.
tacitus c
Gold Star Member
posts: 236
(1/18/01 1:27:13 pm)
Reply Re: ANTI-GUN EXTREMISTS GO OFF HALF COCKED
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just more spin and lies from the left. Anyone that can't see through their smoke and mirrors is a total moron. Linking McVeigh & Ashcroft shows you how desperate they really are in their attempt to discredit Mr. Ashcroft. The more they whine and spread their lies, the more reasonable thinking Americans will see them for what they really are, a group of malcontents that only want their agenda enforced, not the law.
Clinton Legacy: A Republican Congress and Executive Branch and a President that will bring respect back to the office.