Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26

Thread: Letter to Wayne LaPierre

  1. #1
    Regular Member The Big Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Waco, TX
    Posts
    1,950

    Letter to Wayne LaPierre

    The following is the letter I am sending to NRA Executive VP Wayne LaPierre. My stated purpose of posting this is not to cause NRA bashing but to show that even though I have problems with the organization, it is my belief it is much better to work from the inside rather than to sit outside their window and through rocks.

    TBG


    05/27/12

    Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President
    National Rifle Association 1
    1250 Waples Mill Road
    Fairfax VA 22030

    Mr LaPierre

    I have just finished reading your article entitled “All In” in the June 2012 issue of the American Rifleman. In it you state “Sales of firearms and Right to Carry permit applications are skyrocketing.” I must say this phraseology angered me. It is NOT a “RIGHT TO CARRY” permit, but a Concealed Carry permit. There is a tremendous difference. The US constitution confirms that the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right existing long before the Constitution. We do not need a permit to grant us the “Right to Carry”.

    Here in NV we have an even more strongly worded constitution and it states in Article 1, Section 11, #1 Every citizen has the right to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use.

    I have been a Life Member of the NRA for about 35 years give or take and I nearly resigned my membership some years ago when the NRA began to push for mandatory conceal permit issue instead of fighting for Constitutional Carry. It is quite clear to me that the NRA believes in what I call permission slips. Permits to do what the Constitution calls a fundamental right. It is quite clear that the NRA does at least in some degree believe in and work for firearm regulation and control against the benefit of its members and the community at large.

    Because of this I stopped my financial support of the NRA ILA and now donate it to firearms rights organizations that I feel have a better stand on the right to keep and bear arms. I have kept my Life Membership in the NRA for the sole purpose of being able to vote and put in my 2 cents.

    I am an active member of the open carry movement and Mr LaPierre it is my belief that in general the NRA has some real problems with support from this community. We don’t feel the NRA represents us.

    Your comments and clarification would be appreciated.
    Life member GOA and NRA. Member of SAF, NAGR, TXGR and Cast Bullet Assoc.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Rollbar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    383
    +1

  3. #3
    Regular Member Frantic84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by Rollbar View Post
    +1
    Ditto!
    remove handgun registration in Clark County,NV

    2nd amendment in modern English: The people have the right to own and carry firearms, and it may not be violated because a well-equipped Militia is necessary for a State to remain secure and free.

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    I thought only Jack-Booted Thugs open-carried!
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  5. #5
    Regular Member The Big Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Waco, TX
    Posts
    1,950
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    I thought only Jack-Booted Thugs open-carried!
    You've obviously seen me in my finer duds....

    TBG
    Life member GOA and NRA. Member of SAF, NAGR, TXGR and Cast Bullet Assoc.

  6. #6
    28kfps
    Guest
    Well done.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Peoples Republic of North Las Vegas
    Posts
    109
    BG,

    BRAVO ZULU !!!!!




    Navyblue
    Last edited by NAVYBLUE; 05-28-2012 at 03:15 AM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member The Big Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Waco, TX
    Posts
    1,950

    WOW! A response.

    I have for the first time received a response from NRA/ILA. Trouble is, I didn't write the ILA. I wrote Wayne LaPierre about an article he wrote, see above.

    It was a form letter that almost addressed what I wrote about. In it they took a lot of credit for things they really didn't do. Support they didn't give. It was full of half truths and outright false representations.

    How sad.

    TBG
    Life member GOA and NRA. Member of SAF, NAGR, TXGR and Cast Bullet Assoc.

  9. #9
    Regular Member usmcmustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV & Southern Utah
    Posts
    393
    Any chance you could pdf the letter and post it?

  10. #10
    Regular Member The Big Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Waco, TX
    Posts
    1,950
    Quote Originally Posted by usmcmustang View Post
    Any chance you could pdf the letter and post it?
    I would have loved to but it looks like the wife’s hollerin' at the kids to clean things up worked too well. They tossed out some of my paperwork that one included.

    They were saying how hard they have been working for constitutional carry. The one that struck me the hardest was IA where they said they sponsored and worked for it. The truth is as I understand if from buddies in IA (where I grew up) they had a Conceal Carry law they were pushing at the time and actively worked against constitutional carry.

    TBG
    Life member GOA and NRA. Member of SAF, NAGR, TXGR and Cast Bullet Assoc.

  11. #11
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,606
    Quote Originally Posted by The Big Guy View Post
    --snip-- The one that struck me the hardest was IA where they said they sponsored and worked for it. The truth is as I understand if from buddies in IA (where I grew up) they had a Conceal Carry law they were pushing at the time and actively worked against constitutional carry.

    TBG
    That is my understanding of the situation in Iowa as well - never have felt that the NRA was a friend to open carry.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  12. #12
    Regular Member The Big Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Waco, TX
    Posts
    1,950

    Waynes new commentary

    I just read the new article he has in this month’s Rifleman. It is interesting that they are pushing the "All In" program to rid us of Obama and speak of the importance of it, which I agree. What I find interesting is that he nowhere endorses Romney. My opinion is that they would find it hard to come out and do so as he has a very bad 2A history as well.

    This plays into to the old "the lesser of two evils" routine. I personally have done a lot of soul searching on this and have come to my own opinion that the lesser of two evils is still evil. I understand the importance of getting rid of Obama, but the change has to start somewhere. Voting for either side of the same coin is still voting for the coin.

    We know that a vote for Obama would be a vote to end the 2A as we know it, as there will be nothing to stop him, as he will not be standing for election again. Romney? I can only assume by his history that he will go after the 2A as well but maybe not as hard.

    Over the years we have voted ourselves into one hell of a predicament.

    TBG
    Last edited by The Big Guy; 06-24-2012 at 12:52 PM.
    Life member GOA and NRA. Member of SAF, NAGR, TXGR and Cast Bullet Assoc.

  13. #13
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,606
    Quote Originally Posted by The Big Guy View Post
    I just read the new article he has in this month’s Rifleman. It is interesting that they are pushing the "All In" program to rid us of Obama and speak of the importance of it, which I agree. What I find interesting is that he nowhere endorses Romney. My opinion is that they would find it hard to come out and do so as he has a very bad 2A history as well.

    This plays into to the old "the lesser of two evils" routine. I personally have done a lot of soul searching on this and have come to my own opinion that the lesser of two evils is still evil. I understand the importance of getting rid of Obama, but the change has to start somewhere. Voting for either side of the same coin is still voting for the coin.

    We know that a vote for Obama would be a vote to end the 2A as we know it, as there will be nothing to stop him, as he will not be standing for election again. Romney? I can only assume by his history that he will go after the 2A as well but maybe not as hard.

    Over the years we have voted ourselves into one hell of a predicament.

    TBG
    Try my math as a test.

    Not voting at all you create a +1 for O_mama, as you do not cancel out the vote of someone else voting for him.

    Voting for a 3rd party candidate, whether in protest or because that candidate is the best IYO does the same thing.

    If you want to make a difference, vote for the candidate most in contention with the present occupant of the White House.

    I am of the opinion that after the defeat of the president, who sits in congress and on the bench is more important that who the next president might be, ymmv
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,196
    Quote Originally Posted by The Big Guy View Post
    What I find interesting is that he nowhere endorses Romney.
    Figuring lead time, he probably wrote it long before Romney became the certain Republican nominee, so endorsing him would have been inappropriate.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Peoples Republic of North Las Vegas
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    Try my math as a test.

    Not voting at all you create a +1 for O_mama, as you do not cancel out the vote of someone else voting for him.

    Voting for a 3rd party candidate, whether in protest or because that candidate is the best IYO does the same thing.

    If you want to make a difference, vote for the candidate most in contention with the present occupant of the White House.

    I am of the opinion that after the defeat of the president, who sits in congress and on the bench is more important that who the next president might be, ymmv
    Grapeshot, I couldn't of said it better. Big Guy, I know how you feel. I'm 63 and have been around the block more than once. It took us about (25) years to go from guns, liberty, freedom and God(Reagan 1988) to Obama

    The TEA Party (conservatives, independents, libertarians, moderate democrats) are the future. The President gets to nominate possibly (2) new lifetime judges and is the leader of the free world. The congress and Senate make the laws. There is NOT a majority in either house that is interested in curtailing any gun rights for law abiding citizens. Those who are come from VERY liberal cities that will always vote democratic.

    Keep your powder dry. The future is Jindal(Louisanna governor), Rubio(Florida) Ryan(Mass) and the future conservative/TEA party types we elect. THEY, the Supreme Court and the military protect our freedoms.

    That being said the NRA has always been about weapons in the HOME and youth rifle training. It has NEVER been about concealed carry and open carry. Those who believe they are, are delusional. Go back and read on the "Net the history of NRA over the last 30-40 years and you will see it. I am not anti NRA. Want to join, join. Don't want to, don't. I didn't. I do like their youth programs because the more kids that get introduced to rifles and shooting the more adults we get that are gun owners and pro liberty/freedom.

    IMHO, the NRA is embarrassed about open carry. They get queasy because it sometimes gets attention that they feel is counter productive to THEIR agendas. I like you feel that open carry as it becomes more and more prevalent will be as common as the guy who wears a cell phone on his belt(me, I'm a dork), or a tool belt, or a water bottle. or a MACE container or a pager(remember those).

    BG, I have always thought it would be fun to walk around with a cell phone and MACE on my left side, my S&W 38 on the right, a fanny pack on my rear, ostrich cowboy boots, NEON colored frame sunglasses and a dead rattlesnake attached to my belt between my left side and my zipper and see if anyone would notice I was wearing a
    GUN !!!!!

    NAVYBLUE


    PS: For those of you that thought Obama/Holders's "Fast and Furious" was about tracking guns and to arrest gun runners, let me help. Bush had a similar program started out of Phoenix, BUT they used about 100 guns and arrested the runners BEFORE they got to Mexico. Obama/Holder flooded Mexico with over a 1,000 rifles. As a result at least one Border Agent is dead and around 200 Mexicans have been killed with those weapons. There intent was to flood cartels with the weapons, have many Mexicans die in the crossfire and then use that to get the hoplophobes in such a hysterical outrage that they convinced the undecided to join them in getting Congress to bring back the "assault" weapons ban. Back door gun control. REMEMBER that when you vote and educate your friends.
    Last edited by NAVYBLUE; 06-24-2012 at 02:39 PM.

  16. #16
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,273
    As a former NRA member I believe the NRA has allegiance only to NRA. I congratulate you on your well worded letter. I have nothing against CC, but it p*sses me off that states link open carry to permits, or allow only CC. It is time for NRA to stand behind the constitution, not just use it as a means to make money without actually backing it.

  17. #17
    Regular Member The Big Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Waco, TX
    Posts
    1,950
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    Try my math as a test.

    Not voting at all you create a +1 for O_mama, as you do not cancel out the vote of someone else voting for him.

    Voting for a 3rd party candidate, whether in protest or because that candidate is the best IYO does the same thing.

    If you want to make a difference, vote for the candidate most in contention with the present occupant of the White House.

    I am of the opinion that after the defeat of the president, who sits in congress and on the bench is more important that who the next president might be, ymmv
    I do understand what you're saying and have struggled with it. I am indeed concerned about the courts and the congress but here is the problem with that. If we vote for the lesser of 2 evils we simply continue down the same slippery slope that has led us to where we are now. At some point a line has to be drawn and we have to take a stand. Will it be hard now, yes, but much harder in the future. To put it off any longer we risk never getting our country back. This is no doubt the worst time in the history of our Republic. Going back many years, and we could debate how long, our freedoms and our way of life have been systematically changed. Each time we vote for the lesser of two evils the result is that the next time we get an even a worse choice of evils to choose from and on it goes.. It is a revolution and we who are trying to stop it are not the revolutionaries but the patriots. I, and there are many like me, have drawn our line. Romney is the other side of the same coin as Obama. They may have slightly different methods of getting there but ultimately the end goal is the same among which is the abolition of the second amendment. Putting off what we need to do to make a change only puts it off on our children and grandchildren. I want for my children the America I was promised when I was a kid.

    It is quite possible that the best thing to happen is for Obama to win a second term. WHOOOOA! you say. Consider this. Maybe we have to reach bottom before we can muster the resolve as a people to rise up and take back what is ours. Maybe we can show that though we won't win this time, the future is indeed ours. If we don't have a good showing, the sheep will not join us in the future. It has to start sometime. Let it be now.

    Even though there is a significant number of us, more and more all the time, I still think that Obama is out and that Romney is the anointed one. The question is does he win and feel confident that he can continue the Bush/Obama policies, or will he know he has a fight on his hands. I want him to be real uncomfortable. If I'm wrong and Obama wins, but we make a strong showing, he is going to be real uncomfortable.

    None of us can be sure of the future. We just do what our life’s experiences and our common sense tell us.

    TBG
    Life member GOA and NRA. Member of SAF, NAGR, TXGR and Cast Bullet Assoc.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Peoples Republic of North Las Vegas
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by The Big Guy View Post
    I do understand what you're saying and have struggled with it. I am indeed concerned about the courts and the congress but here is the problem with that. If we vote for the lesser of 2 evils we simply continue down the same slippery slope that has led us to where we are now. At some point a line has to be drawn and we have to take a stand. Will it be hard now, yes, but much harder in the future. To put it off any longer we risk never getting our country back. This is no doubt the worst time in the history of our Republic. Going back many years, and we could debate how long, our freedoms and our way of life have been systematically changed. Each time we vote for the lesser of two evils the result is that the next time we get an even a worse choice of evils to choose from and on it goes.. It is a revolution and we who are trying to stop it are not the revolutionaries but the patriots. I, and there are many like me, have drawn our line. Romney is the other side of the same coin as Obama. They may have slightly different methods of getting there but ultimately the end goal is the same among which is the abolition of the second amendment. Putting off what we need to do to make a change only puts it off on our children and grandchildren. I want for my children the America I was promised when I was a kid.

    It is quite possible that the best thing to happen is for Obama to win a second term. WHOOOOA! you say. Consider this. Maybe we have to reach bottom before we can muster the resolve as a people to rise up and take back what is ours. Maybe we can show that though we won't win this time, the future is indeed ours. If we don't have a good showing, the sheep will not join us in the future. It has to start sometime. Let it be now.

    Even though there is a significant number of us, more and more all the time, I still think that Obama is out and that Romney is the anointed one. The question is does he win and feel confident that he can continue the Bush/Obama policies, or will he know he has a fight on his hands. I want him to be real uncomfortable. If I'm wrong and Obama wins, but we make a strong showing, he is going to be real uncomfortable.

    None of us can be sure of the future. We just do what our life’s experiences and our common sense tell us.

    TBG
    BG,

    My degree is in Economics. I read financial news for about (2) hours a day. I'm retired , I have the time. Trust me we have hit bottom. The Supreme Court is the only ones who can stop Obama or Romney if he gets out of hand. The Supreme Court dealt the anti gunners a serious blow with Heller vs D.C. and hopefully the death of Obamacare. Those judges who decided Heller were appointed by Republicans. With Romney, we have a chance to appoint (1) MAYBE (2) LIFETIME judges. That will go a long way to helping stem the tide of government over reach and hopefully reverse some onerous laws.

    I am no fan of Romney. I am so far right wing, I make Rush Limbaugh and The John Birch Society look like liberals. You DON"T ever want to know my solutions to illegal immigration, city crime, welfare, Congressional/Senate/White House security leaks, MS-13/drug cartels and government workers. All my solutions are legal within the law but most politicians are spineless and can't make the tough decisions. Newt Gingrich and Santorum are moderates compared to me. That being said I am willing to let Romney be President while we continue to elect more patriots/TEA party people to Congress and the Senate.

    There are only (4) things I love. My God, my country, my Constitution and my extended family. For those things I will use my vote AND my gun to defend until my death.

    NAVYBLUE
    Last edited by NAVYBLUE; 06-24-2012 at 10:46 PM.

  19. #19
    Regular Member The Big Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Waco, TX
    Posts
    1,950
    Quote Originally Posted by NAVYBLUE View Post
    BG,

    My degree is in Economics. I read financial news for about (2) hours a day. I'm retired , I have the time. Trust me we have hit bottom. The Supreme Court is the only ones who can stop Obama or Romney if he gets out of hand. The Supreme Court dealt the anti gunners a serious blow with Heller vs D.C. and hopefully the death of Obamacare. Those judges who decided Heller were appointed by Republicans. With Romney, we have a chance to appoint (1) MAYBE (2) LIFETIME judges. That will go a long way to helping stem the tide of government over reach and hopefully reverse some onerous laws.

    I am no fan of Romney. I am so far right wing, I make Rush Limbaugh and The John Birch Society look like liberals. You DON"T ever want to know my solutions to illegal immigration, city crime, welfare, Congressional/Senate/White House security leaks, MS-13/drug cartels and government workers. All my solutions are legal within the law but most politicians are spineless and can't make the tough decisions. Newt Gingrich and Santorum are moderates compared to me. That being said I am willing to let Romney be President while we continue to elect more patriots/TEA party people to Congress and the Senate.

    There are only (4) things I love. My God, my country, my Constitution and my extended family. For those things I will use my vote AND my gun to defend until my death.

    NAVYBLUE
    Looks like we will have to disagree on this issue. I have absolutely no confidence that Romney will appoint the kind of judges we need. After all one of the most left wing liberal judges on the Supreme Court was appointed by a conservative president. I have little faith in SCOTUS in the choosing or not choosing to hear certain cases, nor in reaching the correct outcome.

    As far as Congress goes, they have already acquiesed power to the Executive Branch.

    I too spend hours poring over the events of the day and researching history. Obama or Romney will still answer to the same people. In order to understand what is going on today, you have to go back and look at history. Look at why things are happening and who is behind them and why.

    As I said before, I think Romney will be the next president. My instincts tell me that’s not a good thing, but I truly & sincerely hope to hell you're right. Supporting the lesser of two evils again is like the old definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome.

    The answer to everything that has happened up to now and is happening today, or is planned for the future is about two things, power and control.

    TBG
    Last edited by The Big Guy; 06-25-2012 at 12:57 AM.
    Life member GOA and NRA. Member of SAF, NAGR, TXGR and Cast Bullet Assoc.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Peoples Republic of North Las Vegas
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by The Big Guy View Post
    Looks like we will have to disagree on this issue. I have absolutely no confidence that Romney will appoint the kind of judges we need. After all one of the most left wing liberal judges on the Supreme Court was appointed by a conservative president. I have little faith in SCOTUS in the choosing or not choosing to hear certain cases, nor in reaching the correct outcome.

    As far as Congress goes, they have already acquiesed power to the Executive Branch.

    I too spend hours poring over the events of the day and researching history. Obama or Romney will still answer to the same people. In order to understand what is going on today, you have to go back and look at history. Look at why things are happening and who is behind them and why.

    As I said before, I think Romney will be the next president. My instincts tell me that’s not a good thing, but I truly & sincerely hope to hell you're right. Supporting the lesser of two evils again is like the old definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome.

    The answer to everything that has happened up to now and is happening today, or is planned for the future is about two things, power and control.

    TBG
    Your quote "After all one of the most left wing liberal judges on the Supreme Court was appointed by a conservative president. I have little faith in SCOTUS in the choosing or not choosing to hear certain cases, nor in reaching the correct outcome.

    I assume you are talking about Justice Kennedy. Reagan's mistake was listening to John Sununu, former governor of Maine. Justice Kennedy WAS a conservative judge UNTIL he got appointed by President Ford at the urging of GOVERNOR Reagan, to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals probably one of the most liberal in the country. He got turned to the dark side and became more of a LIBERTARIAN on social issues. Reagan attempted to appoint Bork but the Democrat controlled House and Senate killed that as well as Justice Ginsburg so we got Kenenedy with 97-0 vote. The below site offers a retrospective on Kennedy. He does vote more with the conservatives thatn the liberals, that why they consider him the swing vote.

    http://reason.com/blog/2012/06/18/ju...dy-libertarian

    I don't consider it the the lesser of two evils. I consider it choosing between an anti American, anti capitalism Socialist and a socially moderate/fiscally conservative Republican. In the words of one of my heroes,




    "It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace--but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death"! --Patrick Henry March 23,1775

    I don't get that with Barack Hussein Obama


    NAVYBLUE

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,196
    Quote Originally Posted by The Big Guy View Post
    Looks like we will have to disagree on this issue. I have absolutely no confidence that Romney will appoint the kind of judges we need.
    However, Obama has a RECORD of appointing the kind of judges that we DON'T need.

    And that was when he needed to run for re-election.

    Consider the kind of mayhem which he can do if he is in power with no need ever to answer to the voters.

    You're worrying that Romney isn't as good as you want, but we KNOW that Obama is worse.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by NAVYBLUE View Post
    Grapeshot, I couldn't of said it better. Big Guy, I know how you feel. I'm 63 and have been around the block more than once. It took us about (25) years to go from guns, liberty, freedom and God(Reagan 1988) to Obama.
    While Reagan was not all anti, his administration I would say was no better than the Clinton administration as far as guns go. I do beleive that he "marketed himself better to the gun folks than Clinton however.
    [I]
    Three years later, Congress had passed the Brady Bill and was working on another piece of gun control legislation, a ban on assault weapons. Reagan joined former Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter in a letter published in the Boston Globe that called on Congress to pass a ban on assault weapons. Later, in a letter to Rep. Scott Klug, a Wisconsin Republican, Reagan said the limitations proposed by the Assault Weapon Ban “are absolutely necessary” and that it “must be passed.” Klug voted in favor of the ban.[/
    I]

    Before Reagan left office in January 1989, efforts were afoot in Congress to pass legislation creating a national background check and mandatory waiting period for handgun purchases. The Brady Bill, as the legislation was named, had the backing of Sarah Brady, the wife of former Reagan press secretary Jim Brady, who was wounded in a 1981 assassination attempt on the president
    .


    The lone piece of significant legislation related to gun rights during the Reagan administration was the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986. Signed into law by Reagan on May 19, 1986, the legislation amended the Gun Control Act of 1968 by repealing parts of the original act that were deemed by studies to be unconstitutional.

    The National Rifle Association and other pro gun groups lobbied for passage of the legislation, and it was generally considered favorable for gun owners. Among other things, the act made it easier to transport long rifles across the United States, ended federal records-keeping on ammunition sales and prohibited the prosecution of someone passing through areas with strict gun control with firearms in their vehicle, so long as the gun were properly stored.

    However, the act also contained a provision banning the ownership of any fully automatic firearms not registered by May 19, 1986. That provision was slipped into the legislation as an 11th hour amendment by Rep. William J. Hughes, a New Jersey Democrat. Reagan has been criticized by some gun owners for signing legislation containing the Hughes amendment
    .
    Citing statistics suggesting 9,200 murders are committed each year in the United States using handguns, Reagan said, “This level of violence must be stopped. Sarah and Jim Brady are working hard to do that, and I say more power to them.” It was a 180 degree turn from Reagan’s 1975 piece in Guns & Ammo magazine, when he said that gun control is pointless because murder cannot be prevented
    .


    A more lasting impact of Reagan’s policy on guns was the nomination of several Supreme Court justices. Of the four justices nominated by Reagan — Sandra Day O’Connor, William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy — the latter two were still on the bench for a pair of important Supreme Court rulings on gun rights in the 2000s: District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 and McDonald v. Chicago in 2010. Both sided with a narrow, 4-3 majority in striking down gun bans in Washington D.C. and Chicago while ruling that the Second Amendment applies to individuals and the states.
    The Clinton administration’s only lasting impact on gun rights are the lack of certain imports of foreign semiautomatic rifles and background checks for handgun purchases. Ironically, it was those early victories that had lost much of their effectiveness within 10 years that prevented Clinton from pushing through what might have been longer-lasting gun control measures during his second term. The Brady Bill and Assault Weapons Ban were blamed for the defeat of several Democrats who voted for them as Republicans took control of the House in 1994. As a result, Clinton’s gun control priorities in the latter years of his presidency were never able to meet the muster of Republican opposition. Among them were requirements for child trigger locks, a three-day waiting period for gun show purchases and high capacity magazine bans
    .


    It was Governor Ronald Reagan of California who signed the Mulford Act in 1967, "prohibiting the carrying of firearms on one's person or in a vehicle, in any public place or on any public street." The law was aimed at stopping the Black Panthers, but affected all gun owners “Twenty-four years later, Reagan was still pushing gun control. ‘I support the Brady Bill,’ he said in a March 28, 1991 speech, ‘and I urge the Congress to enact it without further delay.’"
    .


    From Sarah Brady:
    It’s hard to believe that despite this success, some conservatives who claim to revere Ronald Reagan still reject the common-sense gun reforms he backed. Reagan, a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association, believed in the Brady bill and the 1994 assault weapons ban, which helped stem the flow of those weapons of war to American streets. After the ban was allowed to expire in 2004, law enforcement reported a dramatic increase in seizures of guns using large-capacity assault magazines. It’s hard to believe that people who worship Reagan’s legacy would oppose policies he rightly understood would help save lives and dreams from the death and destruction of gun violence
    .
    Cite:http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...EyB_story.html

    Ten years ago, as Ronald Reagan recovered from near fatal gunshot wounds, he declared that he still opposed gun control. Last week the former President announced that he had changed his mind. In a speech at George Washington University, where he was treated after being shot by John W. Hinckley, Reagan called on Congress to enact a law requiring a seven-day waiting period for the purchase of handguns
    .


    Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...#ixzz1yp9I8cMZ

    And a good straightforward article: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsa...sp?cmd=SHOWTOP


    As far as obama goes BS aside we are now open carrying in National parks. and Transporting firearms on Amtrack, not steller, but worthwhile.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Peoples Republic of North Las Vegas
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by DON`T TREAD ON ME View Post
    While Reagan was not all anti, his administration I would say was no better than the Clinton administration as far as guns go. I do beleive that he "marketed himself better to the gun folks than Clinton however.
    [I]
    I]

    .



    .



    .

    .


    From Sarah Brady:
    .Cite:http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...EyB_story.html

    .

    Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...#ixzz1yp9I8cMZ

    And a good straightforward article: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsa...sp?cmd=SHOWTOP


    As far as obama goes BS aside we are now open carrying in National parks. and Transporting firearms on Amtrack, not steller, but worthwhile.
    Very balanced expression of Reagan's background, but if you are looking for a "perfect" President on gun control you are not going to find it in the 20th and 21st centuries. Even many of the founding fathers we revere were slave owners. I like to look at the "whole" of a man's presidency and I feel a lot more comfortable with Reagan style presidency than I do a Bush the 1st, Clinton or Obama.

    I have NEVER found a President that I disagree with on 100% of everything he has done except Obama. I know in the eyes of MSNBC I am a racist yet it doesn't hold water as I am a big fan of Congressman(Colonel, US Army) West, Condoleezza Rice(my VP chocie), Justice Thomas, Walter Williams and other conservative blacks or as the liberals like to call them "house African Americanes".

    As far as open carrying in National Parks and transporting weapons on AMTRAK, whoopee doo. That keeps guns away so they we can't shoot any of his "constituency" You know the gov't supported trash in and about the cities who think what is ours is theirs. What he allowed me to do is shoot a bear/mountain lion while I am hiking in the wilderness and watch while people get shot on AMTRAK or at the station.

    No thank you. Give me CONSTITUTIONAL open/conceal carry which would allow me to open/conceal carry on ALL federal land which is OUR land. Allow me to open carry on AMTRAK. Anything less is a sop to the squishy "independents" and pretend Republicans.

    "The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government."
    Patrick Henry


    "The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun."
    "Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"
    PATRICK HENRY


    March 23, 1775:
    Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
    PATRICK HENRY







    NAVYBLUE
    Last edited by NAVYBLUE; 06-25-2012 at 04:16 PM.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    1,251
    Sory If I got you wound up NAVYBLUE, I agree with you and would rather be dealing with a Reagan type than what we have. I still beleive it is worth looking backwards sometimes and I would also argue that at the time with the crime rate where it was, I can see a lot more pressure on the politicians than from where it is today. So at the end, my point is, we have to be vigilant citizens with our government no matter who it is.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Peoples Republic of North Las Vegas
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by DON`T TREAD ON ME View Post
    Sory If I got you wound up NAVYBLUE, I agree with you and would rather be dealing with a Reagan type than what we have. I still beleive it is worth looking backwards sometimes and I would also argue that at the time with the crime rate where it was, I can see a lot more pressure on the politicians than from where it is today. So at the end, my point is, we have to be vigilant citizens with our government no matter who it is.
    I'm on side your bro'. As I said previously said, I'm so right wing I make a John Bircher look like a liberal. I try to do everything by the law. I am not wound up. I am passionate just like you. I love this country. I spent many years overseas while in the NAVY and 95% of Americans have no idea how lucky they are. How passionate am I ? After what I have seen overseas in foreign countries, I cry during our national anthem. I cry when I hear God Bless the USA by Lee Greenwood. I cry when I see my (4) grandchildren and wonder if there will be a "shining city on the hill" for them. I cry when I see vets coming back from Irag and 'Stan and realize a welfare queen will eat better and get better, quicker medical service than them.

    The career "poor" in this country live better than most of Africa, Latin America, Asia and southern and eastern Europe. I see hope in not the politicians but in the people on this forum and forums like this. Decent, hardworking, Christians, constitutionalists whether they be black or white, male or female, rich or poor. I believe in our individual exceptionalism and our ability to make things better.

    Keep your chin up my friend as a new day is coming and his name is freedom



    NAVYBLUE

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •