Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: Brady Bunch email shows their concern for Parker decision

  1. #1
    Regular Member IanB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    1,896

    Post imported post

    .

  2. #2
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Interesting, that you should be getting Brady Campaign e-mails, nakedshoplifter...:quirky

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    93

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    Interesting, that you should be getting Brady Campaign e-mails, nakedshoplifter...:quirky

    Know your enemy...



    EDIT: Whytrouble oneself to find out... if you can sign up for the enemy's regular bulletin?


    :celebrate

  4. #4
    Regular Member IanB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    1,896

    Post imported post

    Yup, that's me Hank... you figured me out. I'm the OCDO Brady mole. Drats, my cover is blown. I hope the embassy doesn't recall me.

  5. #5
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    I just donated $25 dollars for myself, and $25 dollars on your behalf HankT

  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ocean Shores, WA
    Posts
    593

    Post imported post

    I carry a gun to defend myself and those I'm with. That group is about defending Gun Laws.

    It's not about protecting children, women, elderly or minorities (all of whom are targets of violence), instead their concerns are with protecting laws!



    LoveMyCountry

  7. #7
    Regular Member GreatWhiteLlama's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bothell, Washington, USA
    Posts
    287

    Post imported post

    Twisted views of the Second Amendment?!

    60 years of precedent?!!

    I was about to go a rant but, man, where do you start...
    "...our media are palace eunuchs gazing avidly at the harem of power and stroking their impotent pens in time to the rape of our liberties."
    -Sarah Hoyt

    "America is at that awkward stage; it's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
    -Claire Wolfe

  8. #8
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    T-RaV wrote:
    Twisted views of the Second Amendment?!

    60 years of precedent?!!

    I was about to go a rant but, man, where do you start...
    I think a logical place to start would be "_____ you Brady Campaign!"

  9. #9
    Regular Member AtackDuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    King George, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    214

    Post imported post

    Yep, 60 years of precedent and they blow off the +200 years of precedent in support of our rights. Twits.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    CPL_in_WA wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    Interesting, that you should be getting Brady Campaign e-mails, nakedshoplifter...:quirky

    Know your enemy...

    *

    EDIT: Why*trouble oneself to find out*... if you can sign up for the enemy's regular bulletin?


    :celebrate
    And what's more fun is, I'm also on a few leftists' mailing lists, and EVERYONE demands repeatedly. "Donate now! Click here to now!"

    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Hilliard, OH, , USA
    Posts
    91

    Post imported post

    I bet their tune would change if they were ever held at gunpoint.

    Retards.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    openryan wrote:
    T-RaV wrote:
    Twisted views of the Second Amendment?!

    60 years of precedent?!!

    I was about to go a rant but, man, where do you start...
    I think a logical place to start would be "_____ you Brady Campaign!"
    The guarantee to be able to own and carry firearms came even BEFORE the U.S. Constitution and the constitutions of all 50 states. Framers of the U.S. Constitution knew that this natural right was the simple ability to defend themselves, and ironically, the more dangerous was the government, not the bad guys! The arguments put forth by the D.C. group were weak and they still do not have their act together, filing for, and getting, a second delay at the Supreme Court. People like Bloomberg and cities of Chicago and many others will be looking and helping as much as they can. Because this is a weak case, THIS might be the best one to settle the 2nd amendment question in the eyes of anti-gun zealots. My sense is that if you are among the folks ticked off for one reason or another at the NRA, you might consider getting over it. They will need all the help they can get, and from wherever they can. The Feinsteins of this republic are hell-bent on taking up all handguns, and the rifles and shotguns if they can get them. The fundamental arguments are NOT gun control, they are the registration, confiscation and destruction of every firearm they can get, any way they can get them. (By act of Congress, back-door politics, or by the more liberal Supreme Court members). Remember this anti-gun crowd has already tried to sue gunmakers into oblivion, do straw sales and control legal gun sales in Georgia, Virginia, etc. They are trying to stamp cases with I.D. numbers using the firearm to do it. Pretty soon, you will have to have every shotgun pellet labeled at the rate they are going. Please do not sit this one out, help in any way you can to preserve the 2nd amendment and the individual ownership of firearms. Many of these anti-gun folks are hypocrites, they have carry permits, government and/or personal protection and they want to take away YOUR firearms? So they are not QUITE stupid, they know that firearms can be used to protect themselves and their families, but not yours. Also, we don't need any firearms to hunt, fish, do sport and competition shooting, etc. They will see to that. Please get off your gluteus maximus and get involved, NOW.

  13. #13
    Founder's Club Member Hawkflyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,315

    Post imported post

    NSL -

    You know better than to open a thread like this without a "duct tape" warning. There are heads exploding everywhere.

    But at least they have a new cause. I have never seen anyone take donations to "save" a law Usually donations are taken for monuments, and/or saving lives.

    Regards
    "Research has shown that a 230 grain lead pellet placed just behind the ear at 850 FPS results in a permanent cure for violent criminal behavior."
    "If you are not getting Flak, you are not over the target"
    "186,000 Miles per second! ... Not just a good idea ... It's the law!"

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Rupert, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    67

    Post imported post

    The Brady Bunch is rightfully scared!

    They know that if Parker is upheld, that section 922(o) is the next federal target. The two types of bans are essentially the same. Parker being upheld re-opens the D.C. registry. 922(o) being swept away would re-open the NFA registry. Both are bans of a class of guns. Both imposed a time limit when no more registrations would be allowed. Miller strongly implies that machine guns are the specific class of firearms that are covered by the 2A.

    It will take time, but if Parker is upheld, the '86 Machine gun ban is toast.

    That scares the Brady Bunch to heck and back.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Hilliard, OH, , USA
    Posts
    91

    Post imported post

    Allen wrote:
    The Brady Bunch is rightfully scared!

    It will take time, but if Parker is upheld, the '86 Machine gun ban is toast.

    That scares the Brady Bunch to heck and back.
    There is hope! I have another good reason to keep fighting the good fight.:celebrate

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    206

    Post imported post

    Warrenton NO CCW wrote:
    The fundamental arguments are NOT gun control, they are the registration, confiscation and destruction of every firearm they can get, any way they can get them. (By act of Congress, back-door politics, or by the more liberal Supreme Court members).
    I totally agree with this statement. The gun control groups' more accurate descriptor would be "gun revocation advates." These purportedly "minor" gun ownership and carrying restrictions will continue to snowball until we have complete registration, and ultimately, confiscation.

    I, for one, will not get over the NRA's acts this year. They have effectively bolstered gun control, and this year, they have done more to further the anti gun movement than even the Brady Campaign. I will continue to write my legislators and teach those whom I come into contact the merits of gun ownership, but I will not support an organization that claims to help gun owners, yet supports the disarming of lawful citizens simply because of heat-of-the-moment controversy.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Rupert, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    67

    Post imported post

    ParaWarthog, The NRA have nothing to do with the Parker case. While they may file an amicus brief, they are involved in no other way.

    As to the bill you are referencing, I've read it in its entirety. I don't agree that it will do what the GOA and the JPFO says it will do.

    I do believe that after the VT massacre, something was gonna get passed and that the NRA did the best they could to make a bad thing less bad than it could have been. Discussing the merits (or not) of that bill, is not what this thread is about, however.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    206

    Post imported post

    Allen wrote:
    Discussing the merits (or not) of that bill, is not what this thread is about, however.
    My post was made to answer this point Warrenton made:


    Warrenton NO CCW wrote:
    My sense is that if you are among the folks ticked off for one reason or another at the NRA, you might consider getting over it.

    I've seen threads go MUCH more off topic than this, but if the posters would like me to create a thread that indicates a few members' feelings of utter betrayal on behalf of the NRA, I will.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    4

    Post imported post

    I had no intent to drag up feelings about the NRA. What I did was recognize that some open carry and other organization members may have some issues with the NRA. The fact is the NRA will be a major player in any defense of the 2nd amendment and is in the process of gathering a lot more information and statistics to use, should the Supreme Court agree to hear the Parker/D.C. case. The case is a major assault on the 2nd amendment and seems a relatively weak case on the part of D.C. So, if we all have to go all out, THIS is as good a case as we will get and I was reminding folks that the NRA has a large role of support in this case. I do not even think you should kiss and make up with the NRA if you are one offended by their performance on particular issues. Just don't cut your nose off to spite your face. I would expect virtually every pro-gun organization in the U.S. to make contributions of information, a few bucks and whatever they can do to protect the 2nd amendment, the individual right to have and bear arms. Moreover, I would like it to be much harder for anti-gun zealots to chip away at our rights. If you or I did straw sales, we would be subject to arrest, but apparently Bloomberg and reporters can get away with it. Feinstein can have her concealed carry permit, but she has the brass to try to take our rights away. Coward AND a hypocrite. Did you ever wonder why she feels the need to carry? Same as everyone else. I would suggest that people support the NRA and other organizations on the D.C. case should the Supreme Court take the case. And we should all pray that Justice Kennedy is well during that case, for he will likely be the swing vote once again. I sincerely hope we have more good news later for Washington, D.C., Chicago, Detroit and so forth. Also, it would be nice to give Mayor Bloomberg the finger on this issue. Please remember that the real evil understood by the framers of the U.S. Constitution was the oppression of the citizens by the government. NOT just the bad guys. Some of these framers were REALLY smart, weren't they? The Supreme Court can just confirm the decision of the lower court, or they can take the case. I would predict that if the Court refuses to take the case, Ginsburg, Souter and Breyer will have voted to refuse the case and accept the lower court decision. NOT taking the case means that the 2nd amendment question was NOT answered and states and cities can continue to hamper firearm possession for law-abiding citizens and continue to pass local legislation, despite many state preemptions. My sense is that it is better to get the case to the Supreme Court and on record at this time, and for the D.C. case.


  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Kirkland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    425

    Post imported post

    BIG SHAFE wrote:
    I bet their tune would change if they were ever held at gunpoint.
    They most certainly do! http://www.washingtonceasefire.net/content/view/60/35/

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    206

    Post imported post

    Okay, Warrenton, I understand that you wish to maintain a discussion about the newest Brady Bunch craziness, and I'll leave the NRA rant for another thread and invite Doug Huffman (outspoken NRA opponent on this forum) to join the discussion at that point.

    I agree that the Brady Campaign is FULL OF HYPOCRITES. Those who support the anti - gun campaign are very, very . . . thinking of a word that's not to harsh . . . misled. The very fact that many of the most outspoken anti gunners HOLD CARRY PERMITS is testament to the fact that the entire organization is very shaky. If the leaders are this hypocritical, how can the organization be upstanding? Heck, myself and many others have regurgitated any allegiance to a certain pro gun organization because of just a few hypocritical moves (in our opinion; not trying to stir up anything [right now]). If the anti gun establishment realizes that their leaders are two faced liars, how can they continue to support these organizations and claim any merit!!?!?

    And somebody please tell me why the Brady Bunch contributions are tax deductible and my donations to the GOA aren't.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Kirkland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    425

    Post imported post

    ParaWarthog wrote:
    I agree that the Brady Campaign is FULL OF HYPOCRITES. Those who support the anti - gun campaign are very, very . . . thinking of a word that's not to harsh . . . misled. The very fact that many of the most outspoken anti gunners HOLD CARRY PERMITS is testament to the fact that the entire organization is very shaky.
    Can anyone cite individual members (better yet, higher-ups) who hold carry permits, and show proof? This would be perfect fodder against their cause.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    206

    Post imported post

    OH yea.

    - Senator John D. Rockefeller, IV, who voted for the original assault weapons ban, owned a Colt AR-15, which was banned (though not retroactively) by the bill he voted for.

    - Actress and zealous anti – gun advocate Jennifer O’Neil kept an UNREGISTERED (in NY) gun for “personal protection.” She accidentally shot herself while handling the gun that she supposedly hated. Her husband, a convicted felon, was charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm. All charges were dropped against both.

    - Anti – gun columnist Carl Rowan fired a shot at a trespasser with an ILLEGAL gun in Washington DC.

    - Diane Feinstein, who voted to ban handguns in San Francisco when she was mayor received the ONLY concealed carry permit the year she became mayor.

    - Chief Justice Warren Burger, who sponsored stricter regulation of gun owners in order to “put a stop to mindless homicidal carnage” is remembered best for using a pistol to confront a newspaper reporter who wanted to get a comment from him at his home one night.

    - Jane Fonda, anti – gun activist took shooting lessons with her husband in northern Florida.

    - New York City rug merchant, Fernando Mateo spearheaded a “Toys for Guns campaign.” His anti – gun stance is a little hypocritical, given the fact that he refused to turn in his OWN gun in exchange for prizes. He even claims to have had the gun for 10 years and has used it to scare off thugs in his store.

    - Anti – gun newspaper columnist and card carrying Handgun Control, Inc. member, Jodine Mayberry writes about a trip to the shooting range where she “enjoyed” shooting her gun, and encouraged her friend, who was a domestic abuse victim, to procure a gun and learn how to shoot it.

    - Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris promoted a large gun give back program in Chicago. He encouraged people to turn in their guns, but it was discovered that he conveniently decided to keep his! His excuse? “It’s a little small thing . . . I just have it [at home] for safety.”

    The above information comes from “Politically Correct Guns” by Alan Gottlieb. It is a very entertaining read.


  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Cool. So let's all become antis, then we get to keep our guns. And we'll all live happily ever after.

Posting Permissions

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