PDA

View Full Version : Glimmer of hope?


Mannlicher
2nd April 2009, 20:51
Maybe, just maybe, we get a breather...

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is now the second member of President Obama's cabinet to get shot down by the White House over the politically sensitive issue of assault weapons. After meeting with Mexican President Felipe Calderón, Clinton said that reinstating the U.S. ban on assault weapons—which was passed in 1994 and expired in 2004—is one step this country could take to curb the flow of guns to Mexico's drug cartels. "These military-style weapons don't belong on anybody's street," Clinton told NBC. Within hours, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters that he was unaware of "any plans" to push for such a ban—even though Obama had backed one during last year's campaign.

Attorney General Eric Holder had a similar experience a few weeks earlier. After he endorsed a ban at a Feb. 25 press conference, Justice officials were instructed by White House aides to drop the issue, according to administration and congressional aides who asked not to be named due to political sensitivities. What's behind the shift? A budding relationship between the gun lobby and Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill. After Holder mentioned the ban, the National Rifle Association sent out action alerts to its members and bombarded Hill offices with calls. Sixty-five House Dems dashed off a letter to Holder opposing such a ban, while Speaker Nancy Pelosi—echoing the NRA's mantra on all gun-control issues—said she backed "enforcing the laws we have now."

NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre told NEWSWEEK that Hill Democrats have "learned their lesson" from 1994, when they enacted the ban and subsequently lost control of Congress. They've also learned that cozying up to the NRA can pay big dividends. Last year Democrats received 20 percent of the nearly $1.2 million that the NRA pumped into congressional campaign coffers—more than twice what it gave to Dems just six years earlier. The way things are going, this could be more than a shotgun wedding.

Greywolf
2nd April 2009, 22:55
LaPierre really should keep his pie hole shut. The NRA is going to bask in "their" laurels from Heller (which they initally opposed!), and create a dangerous, false sense of complacency among the membership. Make no mistake, gun control is NOT off the Democrats' radar, it's just off their list of public talking points.

Be vigiland against sneak attacks and flanking movements. Incrementalism, regardless of how small the increments, is nonetheless "infringement," and we need to hold the gummint's feet to the fire on that point.

Hunter
3rd April 2009, 02:44
I know the NRA has good intentions but with what LaPierre makes a year it is hard for me to believe they have our best interest in mind.'

Still I am hopeful.

Don't Tread On Me.

Mannlicher
3rd April 2009, 06:44
Like most organizations, the NRA has it's foibles, but there is no denying that the NRA is on the right side of the issue, and does a lot for gun rights and gun owners.

Hunter
3rd April 2009, 10:48
I totally agree that the NRA does a lot for us. Many of it's staff have our best intrests in mind. I have met a few of the board directors and some of them just did not impress me.
I believe some are in it just to be in it.
I believe the NRA has gotten too big for it's britches.

Frank
4th April 2009, 00:59
...I believe the NRA has gotten too big for it's britches.... We need to count on its bigness and help it get bigger. Politics is pretty strictly a numbers game. How seriously a lobbying organization is taken is pretty much directly related to how many members it has -- membership equates to voting and economic power. Where the rubber meets the road, results depend a whole lot less on things like ideas and what's right and a whole lot more on power and using it wisely and well.

Hunter
4th April 2009, 13:52
Frank, I totally agree.
Please don't get me wrong, I support the NRA and am a life member. I believe they do the right think for the most part but sometimes they are diluted.
Some of the upper management I have met have a "holier than thou" attitude.

Frank
6th April 2009, 02:42
...I support the NRA and am a life member....Some of the upper management I have met have a "holier than thou" attitude.Can't argue with you there. That's always a potential problem in any bureaucracy.

flyfish
11th April 2009, 22:16
While the NRA isn't perfect I am unaware of a viable option to their influence. But I'm listening.....

kenhwind
11th April 2009, 22:37
I support the NRA myself, but they make money off of this "Gun Control" issue.
Lets Not rule out some other very effective gun rights lobby groups either.
The NRA has clout no doubt. I donate every time I order something online.

d90king
11th April 2009, 23:22
There are certainly other organizations that help protect and further 2a causes. The fact still remains that we all must be proactive and get involved on a personal and local level. Everybody has a voice to their representatives(remember they work for you and you elect them) through www.congress.org and many other channels. It is important on a local level also judges, Sheriffs etc.