In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Incoming Artillery For Gun Show Bill

Josey1Josey1 Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
edited December 2001 in General Discussion
Incoming Artillery For Gun Show Bill
Subject: Incoming Artillery For Gun Show Bill From: nealknox@nealknox.com (Neal Knox) Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 14:29:24 EST
Dec. 17 Neal Knox Update -- More incoming artillery: Yesterday's Washington Post carried an editorial titled "Guns Shows and Terrorists." Obviously, its another part of the softening-up barrage designed to support Sen. John McCain's promised effort to pass his and Sen. Joe Lieberman's "compromise" gun show bill.
The New York Times is all aflutter about the surge in firearms sales since 9/11, which seems to be highest in their New York-New England circulation area. (It's logical that's where most first- time buyers are, since fewer folks in the Northeast own guns.) "(T)he vast number of weapons already loosed upon American streets often wind up in the hands of those with insufficient training, gun control advocates say. And they stay in circulation for years," the Times hyperventilates. Among the "experts" they quote is Tom Diaz of Violence Policy Center: "What are you going to do, shoot an envelope filled with anthrax or stop a 747 with a handgun? It's literally crazy." It would be crazy if that's why people were buying, but it isn't. They're not buying with plans of shooting a terrorist, but of defending themselves and their families against the rats who come out of their holes whenever there's a disaster, whether manmade or natural. I shudder to think what kind of raping, robbing and pillaging would follow a devastating chemical, biological or nuclear weapon attack, and law enforcement breaks down -- as it did during the Los Angeles riots. Protection of self and family is the first law. Having the means is common sense.
As we reported last week, Sec. 1062 of the Defense Authorization bill, allowing the government to require demilitarization -- destruction -- of "significant military equipment" (including all surplus firearms) was knocked out of the bill before Thursday's final passage. Now we need to find and knock out those who drafted that language for the last two years. As NRA-ILA Federal Director Chuck Cunningham told the Washington Times for a story that ran this morning, last year Congress instructed the Secretary of Defense to come up with a way to recall specialized equipment that "will not affect legitimate owners of former military equipment." The article quotes John Fausti, executive director of the National Association of Aircraft and Communication Suppliers Inc., as saying the source of the sweeping destruction authority is the Defense Logistics Agency, based at Fort Belvoir, Va. He expects them to push for similar authority again next year.
A Libertarian candidate for U.S. Senate from Colorado was arrested and charged Saturday with openly carrying a loaded weapon to challenge a city gun-control ordinance, He wants a jury trial, a spokesman says. That could be an expensive way to get publicity.
The Boston Globe -- hardly a friend of gun ownership -- reported Dec. 9 that in the turmoil after Russia withdrew from Afghanistan, Taliban Supreme Leader Mullah Mohammed Omar established his brutal theocracy by promising peace. "Omar guaranteed the residents a peaceful and secure community if they agreed to surrender their arms to him. If the residents were ever threatened by someone from outside, Omar pledged to be responsible for their safety. Within three or four days, everybody in the town surrendered their weapons...." Once only the Taliban government had guns, they could beat women who tried to work or teach, or wives who allowed their faces to be shown in public, or to conduct public amputations of arms and feet of anyone speaking ill of the Taliban. The Jews of Germany experienced even worse after they were denied gun ownership by the Nazis; sadly, their offspring didn't learn a thing.
A friend who obtained a copy of the NRA Nominating Committee list emailed me that for the second year in a row, the NRA leadership has declined to nominate Louise Mandrell as a Director -- after the same leadership encouraged the members at the Charlotte and Kansas City meetings to elect her as 76th Director. She attended the Charlotte Board meeting only long enough to get her picture taken while receiving her director pin, and hasn't been back. By not nominating her, they keep the popular singer/fiddler available to run against any of their opponents who might run at next spring's meeting in Reno. "She's become their favorite one-night stand," he wisecracked.
Sign In or Register to comment.