Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

[AWB]Dems prep ground for 2014 Electoral Defeat

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by HP
    Adolphus Busch IV Resigns From NRA After Gun Control Defeat In Senate

    WASHINGTON -- Adolphus Busch IV, heir to the Busch family brewing fortune, resigned his lifetime membership in the National Rifle Association on Thursday, writing in a letter to NRA President David Keene, "I fail to see how the NRA can disregard the overwhelming will of its members who see background checks as reasonable."

    The resignation, first reported by KSDK, came a day after the Senate rejected a series of amendments to a gun control bill, including a bipartisan deal to expand background checks for gun sales. The NRA had vigorously opposed all those measures.

    "The NRA I see today has undermined the values upon which it was established," wrote Busch. "Your current strategic focus clearly places priority on the needs of gun and ammunition manufacturers while disregarding the opinions of your 4 million individual members."

    Reached for comment on Busch's resignation, NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam told The Huffington Post, "We disagree with his characterization, but we wish him all the best."

    Busch joined the pro-gun organization in 1975 and has spoken before of his love of hunting. But the NRA has moved in a direction that Busch would not follow. "One only has to look at the makeup of the 75-member board of directors, dominated by manufacturing interests, to confirm my point. The NRA appears to have evolved into the lobby for gun and ammunition manufacturers rather than gun owners," he wrote.

    Busch told Keene, "It disturbs me greatly to see this rigid new direction of the NRA." He singled out the gun lobby's reversal of its 1999 position in favor of universal background checks, as well as its opposition to an assault weapons ban and a ban on high-capacity magazines. "I am simply unable to comprehend how assault weapons and large capacity magazines have a role in your vision," he wrote.

    "Was it not the NRA position to support background checks when Mr. LaPierre himself stated in 1999 that NRA saw checks as 'reasonable'?" Busch wrote, referring to NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre's testimony at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in the wake of the 1999 Columbine High School shooting.

    At that time, LaPierre said the NRA believed that universal background checks were a "reasonable" choice. The group even took out ads in major newspapers that read, "We believe it's reasonable to provide for instant background checks at gun shows, just like gun stores and pawn shops."

    One week after that hearing, LaPierre rolled out the same argument that he would use 14 years later to attack President Barack Obama's gun safety proposals -- namely, that until the government prosecutes more background check violations, there is no point in expanding them.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3112750.html

    Oh wow, it's like all those things we've been saying about the NRA being a bunch of industry stooges who don't give a damn about their normal members turn out to be completely true. Whodathunkit..

    Comment


    • Originally posted by kentonio View Post
      Ok so I understand people arent often charged for failing background checks. What else is counted in this 'long list' of existing laws that are not being enforced?
      When people get caught with illegal guns the charges get dropped so that they spill the dirt on higher-ups in the gang.

      Not that it matters if we enforce the laws or not. Gun laws are retarded because you can only enforce them after you've caught the guy.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by regexcellent View Post
        When people get caught with illegal guns the charges get dropped so that they spill the dirt on higher-ups in the gang.
        a) Do you really thing this is common in relation to the number of people actually caught with illegal guns?
        b) If this was happening on a large scale, do you not think there would be a lot less gang leaders roaming the streets?
        c) Why is this bad?


        Originally posted by regexcellent View Post
        Not that it matters if we enforce the laws or not. Gun laws are retarded because you can only enforce them after you've caught the guy.
        You mean exactly like every other law ever?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by kentonio View Post
          Ok so I understand people arent often charged for failing background checks. What else is counted in this 'long list' of existing laws that are not being enforced?
          As an example:

          Federal gun crimes include illegal possession of a firearm in a school zone, illegal sale of a firearm to a juvenile, felon, or drug addict, and illegal transport of a firearm across state lines. In Chicago, the majority of gun charges last year were for firearms violations.

          The districts of Eastern New York, Central California, and Northern Illinois ranked 88th, 89th and 90th, respectively, out of 90 districts, in prosecutions of federal weapons crimes per capita last year.
          I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
          For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

          Comment


          • I don't think you're charged for failing a background check per se, you're just refused sale. Charges come when when there is fraud involved.
            No, I did not steal that from somebody on Something Awful.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by kentonio View Post
              You mean exactly like every other law ever?
              No. You catch the guy after he's been arrested for another crime.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by DinoDoc View Post
                Did you actually read your own link?

                Requests for comment from the U.S. Attorney's offices in New York and California were not immediately returned. But the U.S. attorney's office in the Northern District of Illinois maintains that federal weapons law enforcement is among the top priorities of their office. "We have a number of different methods of attacking gangs, guns, drugs and violent crime," says spokesman Randall Sanborn, who notes that many gun arrests are reviewed to determine whether the arrest should stay with the county or be brought to the federal level. "We look at which court the defendant is likely to get a substantially greater sentence... More cases that used to be brought federally are now staying in state courts because [they are] now able to get a sentence equally great or greater," he says.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by regexcellent View Post
                  No. You catch the guy after he's been arrested for another crime.
                  The guy is arrested when the crime is discovered. You can't just say that because many instances of this come to light when someone is arrested for another crime (because that's when it's discovered) that there's no point in having laws. That is just ridiculously stupid.

                  Comment


                  • It's a recycled link. He pulled it from another source.
                    “As a lifelong member of the Columbia Business School community, I adhere to the principles of truth, integrity, and respect. I will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.”
                    "Capitalism ho!"

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X