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.

Will Tom Ridge defend your freedoms or threaten them?

Josey1Josey1 Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
edited October 2001 in General Discussion
Will Tom Ridge defend your freedoms or threaten them? Some of your fellow Pennsylvanians are questioning the former governor's track record. Maybe you should be, too. Mike Slavonic is the Legislative Committee chairman of the Allegheny County Sportsmen's League. The nonprofit organization describes itself as "an educational organization dedicated to the preservation of our natural wildlife resources through hunting and fishing. "The ACSL also teams with other pro-gun organizations and works to preserve the fundamental Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms as protected under Article 1, Section 21 of the Pennsylvania Constitution's `Declaration of Rights,' and the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution educating Legislators and the general public regarding the Constitutional prohibition on any form of gun control, and the historic failures of gun control legislation as a crime control tool." In a telephone interview, Slavonic said, "We know Ridge's record." While Slavonic stressed that the Sportsmen's League supports President Bush during these trying times, he said its support for Ridge as head of the Office of Homeland Security is another matter - i.e., there is none. There are six privacy issues regarding Ridge and his tenure as governor that Slavonic wants you to consider: 1) The constitution says the right of citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be questioned. Slavonic says the database the state maintains of law-abiding gun owners does question them, violating that provision. Coincidentally, criminals cannot be made to register their firearms because the Fifth Amendment protects them from self-incrimination. (Haynes v. U.S. 1968) 2) The ACSL was very concerned about Ridge's enthusiastic support of the Conference of States resolution. In fact, he wanted the de facto constitutional convention held in Philadelphia. Slavonic said constitutional experts were near-unanimous in agreeing that the proposed convention placed the U.S. Constitution in jeopardy. 3) Ridge's support of the roving wiretap bill (SB 635), according to Slavonic, absolved government agencies of accountability if they made "good-faith" mistakes, like wiretapping without a warrant. 4) Did Ridge want the feds to be free to enforce state laws, with immunity from criminal and civil liability, even though they weren't trained to understand them? Slavonic said Ridge did not appear to oppose SB 75, which expanded the power of the federal government. 5) By not opposing SB 806, Ridge essentially was allowing the dumbing down of the state constitution. Slavonic says Section 8 of Article 1 of the state constitution gives you more protection from illegal search and seizure than the U.S. Constitution. Yet Ridge wanted the state version to be construed as being in conformity with the inferior Fourth Amendment. 6) Slavonic reminds law-abiding gun owners that Ridge voted for the banning of semiautomatic weapons when he was a congressman. Since he was willing to do that as a representative, you have to wonder what else he'd be willing to exchange for the promise of a little more security. And since Ridge was so willing to compromise many of your freedoms during peacetime in Pennsylvania, what will he be willing to do during wartime throughout America? The ACSL concerns may be on target. Dimitri Vassilaros is the morning radio talk host on News Radio 1170 WWVA. His e-mail address is dimitriv@stargate.net. http://www.triblive.com/live/news/news_story.html?rkey=180527+sid=46ee75314d15a11f6b4ed04976efd69f+cat=news-columns-dimitri+template=news1.html

Comments

  • rgrjit8rgrjit8 Member Posts: 109 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Did anyone catch his swearing in?Was it just me or did the guy look about to piss himself with joy? He appeared to have to actually force himself to refrain from grinning broadly and to maintain his oh-so-serious "sacrifice for the good of America" pose.Imagine the power trip!At the helm of a brand spanking new federal bureacracy with undefined power and the ability to capitalize upon national panic to be issued a virtual blank check for his budget!Hell, I bet every slob with a bad haircut who has ever rubbed elbows with a cop at a donut shop will soon be touting themselves as "security experts" and will line up for a crack at sinecured bliss....I'm in the wrong line of work...[This message has been edited by rgrjit8 (edited 10-12-2001).]edited to eliminate lateral scrolling[This message has been edited by rgrjit8 (edited 10-12-2001).]
  • beantolebeantole Member Posts: 1,086 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I don't trust this guy and never have ever since I read of his illegal gun registry inPennsylvania. He was a bad choice by Bush.Bad, Bad Bad!!
  • woodsrunnerwoodsrunner Member Posts: 5,378 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Can anyone tell me what this new position is supposed to do, that wasn't already covered by FEMA (civil defence) origionally?? I've been asking this question since it was anounced. Nobody seems in the least concerned.
  • Andrew AdamsAndrew Adams Member Posts: 227 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    As I responded to an earlier post in a similar vein, I love Gov. Ridge. He is one of the finest Americans I know. He is also quite happy to have this job, as he does want to be President and I think he realizes that this post is his springboard to run in 2008.I didn't realize that these attacks were being leveled by Mike Slavonic. At one time in my life, I was extremely active in the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs and got to meet a lot of these people. Slavonic was run out of most reputable gun organizations because his views are quite radical. It doesn't surprise me that he would be the one charging Gov. Ridge with being a bad guy. As I understand it, the role of the Dept. of Homeland Security has the formidable job of coordinating the efforts of the FBI, CIA, DIA, NSA, Customs, Border Service, Secret Service, BATF, and about thirty other organizations to work together to insure our safety. For years the left hand hasn't known what the right was doing, and it is Ridge's job to make sure that isn't the case any more.In my view, President Bush could not have picked a better man for this job. Governor Ridge is an excellent manager, and also knows a thing or two about security. As I understand it, he was a hero in Vietnam, and also served well as both my Congressman and my Governor.I don't understand how Gov. Ridge came to be labeled as anti-gun by some of you. In his six and a half years as governor, no new restrictions on Pennsylvanians were imposed, nor did Ridge ask for any.There is no one that I would rather have fill that post than Governor Ridge.My only concern with the creation of the Dept. is what happens the next time America has a brain fart and elects a liberal as President, who gets the post then??? Feinstein??
    When you want to dial long distance...AT&T, .223, or Jeremiah 33.3?
  • beantolebeantole Member Posts: 1,086 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Andrew Adams: I object to him being appointed because he trashed the constitution and the law as governor of Pennsylvania. He insisted onkeeping an illegal registry of all gunownersin the state and is currently being sued for it. I'm not going to give him a pass because he served in Vietnam. So did McCain and me.
  • Andrew AdamsAndrew Adams Member Posts: 227 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    My understanding of this registry deal is this. If I am wrong, I'm sure you guys will correct me, and I hope you will.If I understand correctly, the situation with the registry was that the PASP were retaining records from the Brady Check for thirty days before destroying them. If this is the extent of the situation, then I am not willing to burn Gov. Ridge at the stake for it. If there is more to it that I don't understand, then maybe my feelings will change, but on the basis of this, I am not willing to abandon my support for the man. I've talked personally with Gov. Ridge and have found him to be an open and decent man that I am proud to know.
    When you want to dial long distance...AT&T, .223, or Jeremiah 33.3?
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    ANDREW ADAMS- I think you are incorrect, but I am not sure.First of all, the PA state police have been keeping records of handgun owners for many decades. Though Ridge has not done anything about this illegal act, he is not to blame for the illegal act, but is to be blamed for not doing anything about it.The record keeping is not done via Brady, but by the state form that you fill out when you buy a gun in the state. It is interesting to note that the present PA congress is trying to make a law that says the PA state police can ignore the law? Is that special or what? Rather than going after them for breaking the law, they want to make a law that excuses them from breaking the law.
  • badboybobbadboybob Member Posts: 1,658 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I say quit arguing about it, get behind the guy, and if he tries to start to mess with our rights them hammer him. Meanwhile let's see what kind of job he does. He's under the spotlight and knows it. Give the guy a chance.
    So many guns to buy. So little money.
  • gunpaqgunpaq Member Posts: 4,607 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I am confident that as long as Ridge is at the helm of this new government agency our rights will be a primary consideration. The real problem exists after Ridge's term expires. I am certain that within five years our rights will no longer be a consideration and personal arms registration and confiscation will take place once Ridge leaves his new post.
  • stanmanstanman Member Posts: 3,052
    edited November -1
    We don't need 1 more federal agency to soak up our hard earned tax dollars! We need the agencies we already have to get off their * and do the jobs they're being paid to do!Ive spent some time in government employ, and believe me, giving the taxpayer the most bang for his buck is the last thing on their minds!The Office of Homeland Security is G.W.'s attempt at 'feel good legislation', nothing more.
Sign In or Register to comment.