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

Send Mr. Bush an email...........

4000fps4000fps Member Posts: 786 ✭✭
Bad News for Gun Owners
-- White House says it favors keeping unconstitutional gun ban

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408


1. Please forward this alert to every gun rights supporter you know
-- immediate action is required!

2. Then use the pre-written letter below to contact the White House.
It is imperative that White House officials -- especially the
President -- hear from gun owners immediately regarding the repeal
of the 1994 semi-auto gun ban. You can visit the Gun Owners
Legislative Action Center right now at to send the pre-written
message, or read on for more details below.

(Monday, April 14, 2003) -- In a surprise move this past weekend,
the Bush administration announced its support for keeping the
Clinton-Feinstein gun ban on the books.

The law, which bans common household firearms, is set to expire in
September, 2004. But the Knight Ridder news agency had a
startling revelation for readers on Saturday.

"The president supports the current law, and he supports
reauthorization of the current law," White House spokesman Scott
McClellan said.

The "current law" McClellan was referring to is the ban on
semi-automatic firearms and magazines (over 10 rounds) which was
introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein of California and
then-Representative Chuck Schumer of New York.

The ban narrowly passed in both houses and was signed by President
Bill Clinton in 1994.

Most bad legislation lives on forever. But in an effort to corral
fence-sitters in Congress, Senator Feinstein inserted a "sunset"
provision into the bill. This provision means that the ban expires
in ten years -- specifically, in September of 2004.

At the time, the sunset provision didn't seem like much of a
victory. But it soon became clear that this provision would be our
best hope for repealing the notorious gun grab. Recently, it was
beginning to look like gun owners would have a better than average
chance of winning.

Until the announcement this past weekend.

The White House's statement means that people will not be able to
rely upon a presidential veto if Congress musters enough votes to
extend the ban in the near future.

Despite the fact that both the House and Senate are controlled by
Republicans, the majority of Congressmen are either fence-sitters
or anti-gun.

It is quite possible that the gun grabbers can get 51 votes in the
Senate and 218 votes in the House to reauthorize the semi-auto ban
and make it permanent.

This makes the recent announcement all the more distressing. But
Bush's position is not written in stone -- at least not yet.

Because the above quote was not made by the President himself or by
his primary spokesman, Ari Fleischer, there is still some "wiggle
room" that will allow the President to reverse course and do the
right thing.


George Bush is President today because gun owners went to the polls
and voted for him over Al Gore in 2000. Pro-gun voters delivered
three key Democratic states -- Tennessee, West Virginia and Arkansas
-- and with those states, the victory went to Bush.

This would be a horrible mistake if the President were to turn his
back on gun owners and take a page out of the Clinton-Gore playbook.
Perhaps this statement over the weekend was a "trial balloon." We
can only hope so. If it was a trial balloon, then we need to "shoot
it down" in a hurry.

It is absolutely vital that we succeed in inundating the White House
in opposition to this ban. This unconstitutional law must be
repealed. Otherwise, it will be used as a precedent to ban even
more guns.

TOOLS FOR ACTION: Please use the pre-written letter below and
contact the President today. Please visit the Gun Owners
Legislative Action Center at
to send a pre-written e-mail message President Bush.

Pre-written message

Dear President Bush:

I oppose the Clinton-Feinstein ban on common household firearms.

And that is why I was surprised to hear White House spokesman Scott
McClellan say that you support the current ban, along with its
reauthorization (Knight Ridder newspapers, April 12, 2003).

I am taken aback for a few reasons. First, you clearly ran on a
pro-gun platform in your race for the White House in 2000. As a
result, you were elected President because gun owners all over the
country went to the polls and voted for you. Most notably, pro-gun
voters delivered three key Democratic states into your column --
Tennessee, West Virginia and Arkansas. Without these three states,
Florida would never have been an issue.

Second, former President Bill Clinton has repeatedly stated that
passage of the 1994 semi-auto ban cost him control of the Congress.
In other words, many Democrats lost their jobs because they voted
for this ban. Gun control is a losing issue politically.

Third, the Clinton-Feinstein gun ban is clearly unconstitutional and
outlaws the very guns and magazines that millions of people have
relied upon to defend their homes and families. The website of Gun
Owners of America gives the statistics showing that these banned
firearms are rarely used to commit crimes or murders -- in fact,
more Americans are killed by knives.

I hope that Scott McClellan was in error and that his statement does
not represent your views. And so I trust you will be open and
honest with me. Will you OPPOSE the Clinton-Feinstein semi-auto ban
and OPPOSE its reauthorization?

Please let me know.



Gun Owners of America has completed its exhaustive analysis of the
PATRIOT Act II draft legislation -- a frightening bill which was
inadvertently leaked by the Justice Department to the media and
outside groups. Go to to see
how this monstrous bill would target gun owners, while enlarging the
powers of government officials to harass the citizenry.



  • loruslorus Member Posts: 130 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    where's the email address?
  • Delta514Delta514 Member Posts: 440 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    [email protected] < here's the address

    Ronnie G. Perkins
  • Delta514Delta514 Member Posts: 440 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    To be very truthfull: I thought the Sun rose and set in G.W.'s butt, shows that even at 58 how naive I can be. For I; Sir: Had been predicting an ATF setup long before it happened, guess whom I was e-mailing for guidance? Now my URL is being monitored at three different locations before finding BellSouth DSL. Is it the ATF, FBI, Secret Service? Hell, they are all the same to me. [V]

    Ronnie G. Perkins
  • jetjet Member Posts: 543 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    yes we are all on the short list.
    I made a concious dissision to go on the net and let my thoughts be heard.
    I was aprehensive for a few years but finaly decided, what I want was given to me ( by the people for the people ) and I won't be shut up.
    the law is writen in plain english.

    With media takeing such a large pervasive hold on nubmnuts every where
    I'm not sure how to educate the masses of thier heritage,duty, other than being an example of an american voiceing his opinion.
    please do the same every chance you get.
  • WagionWagion Member Posts: 2,464 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Of cource Bush will back a renewal what did you expect?

    If force ain't work'n... Your not use'n nough of it
  • Delta514Delta514 Member Posts: 440 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Anyone remember: My take on Voting? I think I made a statement (but I am very passionate about my Love of Country and Loyalty to Our Constitution, sometimes I forget what all I have written).

    Point being: Schumer of New York, Feinsein of Kalifornia, = Now! Which 2 states carry the Maximum number of electorial votes? Which 2 states have the bulk of Social Problems? Which 2 states feel the need to convert everyone too their "Thinking" and because of "Their Problems"? Which 2 states have the Largest Citys, with the Largest Population? Which 2 Cities are always on the cutting edge of A-moral experiments? Which 2 Cities in which 2 states have the most "Gang Bangers", the most "Liberal Extremist", which city has the Largest "Stock Exchange" in the world, (money maniptulators), which city has the most "Crooked Law Enforcement Agency", which city has the most homeless and derelict, which city has the Barrio or the Hood?

    Which 2 States would "Change the Constitution", for their "Moral and Ideological Bankruptcy"?

    And these arrogant fools would endeavor to impose their tribulations on whom? My Old Granny said: "Misery Loves Company". I would suggest they fix their own problems, and quit imposing their ignorance on the rest of the United States. Yet Feinstein and Schumer would cast their Blame toward, Kansas, Alaska, New Mexico, North & South Carolina, Ohio, Illinois, Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, Oregon, Washington State, Georgia, Alabama, Kentucky, Missouri, Maine, Nebraska, Iowa, Mississippi, Nevada, Colorado, Utah, Idaho, Michigan, Pennsylvaina, Delaware, Rhode Island, North & South Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin Florida?(to name a few)[xx(]
  • longhunterlonghunter Member Posts: 3,242
    edited November -1
    A good read guys.....sigh...
Sign In or Register to comment.