CS: Pol-NRA support
June 16, 2000 Join Together Online Poll Shows Strong Support for NRA 06/15/2000 A new poll found that a majority of Americans support positions held by the National Rifle Association (NRA), Reuters reported June 12. According to a recent Zogby International poll, 56.7 percent of the 1,002 adults surveyed nationwide said they support positions held by the NRA when they head to the polls. On the other hand, 41 percent of voters said they never support NRA positions. The survey showed that views differed based on political preference. According to the poll, 75 percent of Republicans and 53 percent of independents support NRA positions on Election Day, while 54 percent of Democrats are against the NRA's positions. Geographically, the poll found that most of the support for the NRA on Election Day comes from the South, at 62 percent, followed by the West at 59 percent, the Central Great Lakes region at 58 percent, and the East at 48 percent. Furthermore, 67 percent of residents of rural areas say they support the NRA's positions. ---[Cybershooters contacts] Editor: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website subscription info: www.cybershooters.org
CS: Pol-NRA-ILA FAX ALERT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] NRA-ILA FAX ALERT Vol. 7, No. 23 6/9/00 U.S. v. EMERSON ORAL ARGUMENTS BEGIN NEXT WEEK The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans will begin to hear oral arguments next Tuesday, June 13, in the federal government's appeal of U.S. v. Emerson. The original decision -- handed down on April 7, 1999, by U.S. District Court Judge Sam Cummings of the U. S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas -- dismissed an indictment against Dr. Timothy Joe Emerson based on the judge's opinion that the federal law he was accused of violating (an obscure provision prohibiting the possession of a firearm by anyone under a certain type of court restraining order) represented an unconstitutional exercise of congressional power that violated his individual rights protected by the Second Amendment (see FAX Alert Vol. 6, Nos. 12 33). NRA filed a brief in support of Judge Cummings' ruling on December 20, 1999. Also filing briefs in support of the April ruling were the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and attorney Stephen Halbrook, who successfully argued before the U.S. Supreme Court that certain aspects of the Brady Act were unconstitutional. Rest assured that we will continue to follow this case very closely, and we will report any updates. You can find a copy of NRA's brief on-line, along with our Fact Sheet on U.S. v. Emerson, by going to www.NRAILA.org, and selecting Research Information. VPC CONTINUES ATTACKS ON PROMOTING FIREARMS SAFETY The Violence Policy Center (VPC), bent on furthering its extremist gun-ban agenda, has shown yet again that it is virulently opposed to the promotion of firearms safety practices. After it was announced that the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and Fairfax (Va.) County Sheriff Stan Barry (D) had agreed to distribute 5,000 free gun locks at the Fairfax County Fair this weekend, the VPC issued a release condemning NSSF's "Project HomeSafe" -- a program that hopes to distribute 500,000 gun locks this year. NRA, of course, supports the use of these devices for securing firearms as one option responsible gun owners can use to safely store their firearms based on their own personal circumstances. In the release attacking NSSF, VPC Executive Director Josh Sugarmann, stated, "The only way to keep children safe is to keep handguns out of homes." Remember also that VPC gained national notoriety in 1997, when it shamelessly attacked NRA's award-winning Eddie Eagle GunSafe Program« -- an attack that was met with firm rebukes from a variety of sources, including members of the media who are anti-gun. Unfortunately, the VPC is so blinded by its apparent hatred of law-abiding gun owners and lawful gun manufacturers that it reflexively argues against even educational efforts to promote the safe, responsible ownership of firearms. Local proponents of strict "gun control," such as Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Chairman Kate Hanley (D), support the program, which shows just how out of step VPC is even with more "mainstream" advocates of "gun control." Fairfax County becomes the 92nd locality to take part in "Project HomeSafe." ---[Cybershooters contacts] Editor: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website subscription info: www.cybershooters.org
CS: Pol-NRA election ballot papers.
From: "Peter Sarony", [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribers to this site may recall last year's "problems" with a number of individual NRA members, qualified to vote, not receiving their ballot papers which should have been included with their Summer Journal. I had the temerity to warn the CS Editor, who posted my letter on the site. I suggested that if indeed people had not received their ballot papers, the NRA election would have been compromised. As a result, an unfortunate and factually incorrect letter was sent out by the NRA, enclosing a copy of my CS posting, and his letter was read out by the NRA Chairman at the Umbrella Tent AGM. He suggested that such omissions were insignificant, but that as a result of the concern at the omissions, a new ballot would be held at a cost of several thousand pounds to the NRA! Imagine my surprise then this year to discover that my Journal had been sent to my old home address, despite having formally notified the change of address in writing to the NRA last December, and again subsequently. Fortunately this was one letter that the post office did pick up (unopened) and forward to my current address. Rather more disturbing to me, and the others who witnessed its unveiling, was the discovery that this time I had received no ballot papers, only an insert advertising flier! As I and others have previously and repeatedly requested, I believe it would be far more satisfactory for independant professionals such as the Electoral Reform Society to carry out all ballots on behalf of the NRA since the latter have proved themselves apparently incapable of handling the task without such errors or omissions. In case I am not the only NRA member not to have received the ballot forms for this election in their journal, may I suggest that all CS subscribers check with as many NRA members as they may be in contact with, to ensure that they have received their papers, without which they may be denied the opportunity to vote for whom they wish to represent their interests on NRA Council and its Committees. Peter Sarony. ---[Cybershooters contacts] Editor: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website subscription info: www.cybershooters.org
CS: Pol-NRA/Baker
NRA's Baker sees year as pivotal for gun lobby By Joanne Kenen WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Every now and then, when James Baker tells someone what he does for a living, they walk away. That can happen in Washington, at least, the chief lobbyist of the National Rifle Association said. But out in places like Pocatello, Idaho, ``They're ready to bronze your baby shoes.'' Baker, 46 -- no relation to the former Secretary of State by the same name -- joined up with the NRA about 20 years ago and, except for a five-year stint in his own lobbying shop, he has spent most of his working life there. In those years, he has seen gun control wax and wane as a political issue. It never goes away completely, but it seldom has as high a profile as it has in the year since the Columbine High School massacre in Littleton, Colorado -- or as it is likely to have in the months leading up to the November elections, when control of the White House and the House of Representatives are at stake. ``The course of this issue over the next 5, 10, 20 years will in large part be determined by this election,'' he told Reuters in an interview. Though a staunch defender of gun ownership and a formidable foe of government attempts to control guns, Baker is considered smoother and less likely to raise hackles than his predecessor as the NRA's face in Washington, Tanya Metaksa. Metaksa left in 1998 after power struggles within the NRA, and amid controversy over her often strident tone. ELECTION SEEN AS PIVOTAL Baker will not talk about his predecessor, saying only that he came back to the NRA in October 1998 with a commitment to stay through the elections because they asked him to and because he thought this election was pivotal for gun owners. ``I thought this was an important time for law-abiding gun owners,'' said Baker, who grew up hunting with his father on vacations in Maryland's Eastern Shore. The NRA did not start out as a lobby. It was founded shortly after the Civil War by Union soldiers who wanted to promote better marksmanship. It took on a more political cast in the 1960s as rising crime and political assassinations brought attention to gun control and gun ownership. The group now has between 3.5 and 3.6 million members and it is one of the most powerful lobbies in Washington. Not only can it influence lawmakers, it has an often-proven ability to mobilize its members and get them to the polls in November. NRA opposition to the 1994 assault weapon ban and the Brady bill requiring background checks was one factor in the Republican takeover of the House in 1994. Gun control groups, in contrast, have broad public support but it does not run as deep and they have not proven as effective at the grass-roots or in the voting booth. It is possible that will change this year with the impetus from last month's Million Mom March for gun control and heightened public awareness and alarm about gun violence and young people. But in the past, whenever gun owners felt politically threatened, the NRA has been able to ratchet up its own support and activism and grow even stronger. TURNING OUT PRO-GUN VOTERS ``We're going to keep our eye on the ball this year,'' Baker said. ``We're registering people and turning out as many people at the polls as we can in November.'' Gun owners are fighting a political war on the campaign trail and in Congress, where gun control sentiment has risen, particularly in the Senate. Many state legislatures have also been wrestling with the issue. At the moment, Baker and the NRA are winning in Congress, where legislation that passed the Senate a year ago failed in the House and where subsequent efforts to revive the issue have ended in stalemate or defeat for gun control proponents. The elections are not so easy to predict, partly because many different issues are still in the mix and it is not clear which will motivate swing voters. Guns have already emerged in the presidential contest between Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore, but it is not yet clear whether they are changing votes or simply reinforcing natural constituencies for Bush, viewed as an ally of the NRA, and Gore, a foe. In the states, it is a bit different. NRA officials said they expect gun control to be a big factor in House races in some 19 or 20 states, and it will also play a role in several Senate races, among them Missouri and Pennsylvania. In a close race, the gun vote could be key, Baker said. ''When the margin is 2 or 3 percent -- or sometimes even 4 or 5 -- that's where we can make a difference.'' ---[Cybershooters contacts] Editor: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website subscription info: www.cybershooters.org
CS: Pol-nra vote
From: nick royall, [EMAIL PROTECTED] People should only vote for those they know will support the views they hold themselves, never use your vote just to make up the numbers because you will dilute the vote for those you are really keen on. Whoever your choice is VOTE so they are mandated by the largest number of people possible. Nick ---[Cybershooters contacts] Editor: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website subscription info: www.cybershooters.org
CS: Pol-NRA-ILA FAX ALERT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] NRA-ILA FAX ALERT Vol. 7, No. 22 6/2/00 "ROSIE THE HYPOCRITE" OR "ROSIE THE PARANOID"? Rosie O'Donnell, fast becoming the nation's most outspoken anti-gun extremist, has been having a tough time with the media lately. Last week, it was revealed in the press that one of the beleaguered talk-show host's bodyguards has applied for a permit to carry a concealed firearm in Connecticut (see FAX Alert Vol. 7, No. 22). In light of her past statements that only the police should be allowed to own firearms, and that gun owners should be jailed, this latest revelation had many in the media calling O'Donnell a hypocrite. Now Rosie is trying to defend her anti-gun, and thus anti-personal protection, views while also defending her employment of bodyguards most Americans simply cannot afford. She started with her on-line newsletter, where she claimed to speak for all "gun control advocates," stating "[o]ur mission is NOT to prevent law abiding citizens...from owning a licensed and registered gun We are not trying to take away your gun" Her newsletter then went on to criticize the newspaper that reported the story, and then claimed that the local police were "politically motivated" when they investigated whether or not the bodyguard O'Donnell had stationed outside her son's school was illegally carrying a firearm. Either Rosie does not believe that the police should investigate possible criminal acts when they involve celebrities, or she has simply convinced herself that she is the target of some conspiracy. She also doesn't seem to want people to think that she is responsible in any way for her having professionals hired to protect her and her family, as her newsletter closes by stating her bodyguard "works for a security firm" (a rather pointless assertion, as most bodyguards do), and that the firm was hired by Warner Bros., which employs O'Donnell. However, she earlier stated "I chose to have a æbodyguard' for my children." So is it her decision or Warner Bros.? Rosie's next attempt to defend her hypocrisy and paranoia came on Thursday, when she appeared on NBC's Today with Katie Couric. O'Donnell reiterated her claim that a local Connecticut police department has targeted her for political reasons, and implied that the media has treated her unfairly by reporting her "do as I say, not as I do" attitude. Rosie did reveal to Couric, however, that she has had armed security protecting her home from time to time while at the same time she continues to promote restrictions on Americans who wish to provide for their own protection. O'Donnell even made the outrageous implication that NRA has somehow attempted to scare and threaten her. But some efforts to further her gun control agenda actually made some of our points. She complained that the article about her security guard exposed the fact that he was currently unarmed, and that she felt the illusion that he might be armed added to his effectiveness as a deterrent to violent, criminal attacks. Of course, advocates of Right to Carry laws have been saying for years that if criminals don't know who is armed, but know that virtually any of their potential victims might be armed, then they will be less likely to attack anybody. This view is supported by extensive research, including that done by Yale senior research scholar John R. Lott, Jr., which evolved into the 1998 book More Guns, Less Crime, the seminal work on the benefits of fair, non-discretionary Right to Carry laws. As stated last week, though, we doubt Rosie is about to support the Right to Carry movement and help lobby for the passage of laws establishing such systems -- especially considering rumors circulating that the talk-show host is being groomed as the new spokesperson for HCI. With O'Donnell's television future in question (there are rumors that her TV show will not be back next year because of sagging ratings), and Sarah Brady apparently looking to step down from HCI's helm, Rosie would appear to be ready to step into a role for which she has been rehearsing. ---[Cybershooters contacts] Editor: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website subscription info: www.cybershooters.org
CS: Pol-NRA
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Right, then. Seems like I will have to join the NRA, (having said I never would, due to the morons in charge) just so I can vote for Steve. The idea of having the NRA doing something is incredible, to have them doing something as useful and pro-active as taking the fight to the enemy, and letting shooters have fun, is quite unheard of. The biggest plus, of course, is that we all know that after years of running CS, Steve has a bit more interest in the various "factions" of shooters, and isn't one to be blindsided or fobbed off, unlike the majority of NRA old-school. He gets my vote, once I join! Nigel -- Unfortunately I think you had to be paid up by the end of March to vote in this election. Steve. ---[Cybershooters contacts] Editor: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website subscription info: www.cybershooters.org
CS: Pol-NRA and women
Join Together Online Women Boost NRA Membership 5/24/00 While the Million Mom March brought together hundreds of thousands of gun-control supporters, the National Rifle Association's (NRA) annual convention also drew record attendance, Fox News reported May 19. The NRA says many of the attendees, and many of its new members, are women. Although the NRA was the target of criticism at the Million Mom March, NRA officials said convention attendance was proof that the pro-gun group is bigger, stronger and richer than ever before. "I felt my voice needs to be heard," said Diane Fox, who joined the NRA a few weeks ago. Her father was shot and killed 23 years ago. "I feel very sorry for the mothers in that march that suffered tragedy but I too have had tragedy in my life, and it was not the fault of a gun -- it was the fault of the ignorant person who picked up the gun and committed a crime." According to NRA figures, membership in the group has increased by more than 200,000 members, generating more than $10 million in donations, over the past six weeks. "These are just good American families who like to enjoy the shooting sports and want to have this freedom and want to be left alone to do that in a peaceful way," said Bill Powers, NRA public affairs director. Like those who took part in the Million Mom March, NRA leaders said gun owners are mainstream Americans who are interested in fighting crime and keeping children safe. The only difference, they say, is the NRA believes those things can be accomplished without new gun legislation. ---[Cybershooters contacts] Editor: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website subscription info: www.cybershooters.org
CS: Pol-NRA and Bush: articles
Democrats Point to NRA Role in GOP Fund-Raiser By Mike Allen Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, April 26, 2000; 1:02 PM Democrats are seizing on the involvement of the National Rifle Association in tonight's Republican gala in an effort to rain on the biggest political fund-raiser in history. The Republicans' black-tie gala, which is to raise more than $15 million and feature remarks by Texas Gov. George W. Bush, will be held in the D.C. Armory, next to Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium. Wayne R. LaPierre Jr., executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, is one of 45 gala co-chairmen Çô a group of individuals, couples and companies who donated or raised at least $250,000 for the event. The Democratic National Committee issued a statement today noting that the Republican gala will be adjacent to "the stadium named for another revered victim of gun violence." Robert F. Kennedy, attorney general and brother of former President John Kennedy, was fatally shot in 1968 after winning the California Democratic presidential primary. This afternoon, Democrats planned to hold a news conference in front of RFK, featuring gun violence victims, ministers, labor executives and District of Columbia officials. Joe Andrew, the DNC's national chair, extended the criticism from the party to Bush, the Republicans' presumptive presidential nominee. "Bush stood literally shoulder to shoulder with the NRA as he signed the concealed weapons bill," Andrew said in prepared remarks. "Two years later, Bush signed another law allowing people to carry their hidden handguns into churches and synagogues, amusement parks and nursing homes." "I think most Americans agree that you should not be packing heat when you enter a pew. And there's not room for six-shooters at Six Flags," Andrew added. Chris Paulitz, a Republican National Committee spokesman, called the Democratic criticism "a blatant, disgusting attempt to politicize a tragedy." "This is the Democrats' and Al Gore's way of covering up their reluctance to prosecute any criminal, either adults or children, who use guns during crimes," Paulitz said. At the gala, Republicans will dine on creamy goat cheese medallion, grilled tenderloin medallion, horseradish crusted filet of red snapper, roasted garlic broccolini, glazed root vegetables, orange meringue mirror, orange segments and fresh berries, demitasse, and micro chocolates and tiny biscotti. KC and the Sunshine Band will perform, and attendees will receive gift bags that include souvenir T-shirts. Democrats will hold their own fund-raising extravaganza on May 24 at MCI Center and hope to break the Republicans' record tally. Republicans' optimistic projections call for an $18 million haul, and top Democrats privately hope to raise $20 million. In his remarks tonight, at what amounts to his coming-out party in the nation's capital, Bush plans to focus on changing the tone in Washington, according to a campaign official. "He is going to underscore the need for Republicans and Democrats to work together to achieve results, as opposed to the constant bickering that we see so much in Washington," the official said. To set the bipartisan tone for tonight, Bush met privately at a Washington hotel this morning with Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.) to discuss Social Security. Vice President Gore's campaign issued a statement today headlined, "NRA Tightens Its Embrace of George W. Bush." "So much for George W. Bush's moderate makeover," said Chris Lehane, the campaign press secretary. "He has rushed from the warm embrace of Bob Jones and straight into the arms of the NRA." (Emphasis added) è 2000 The Washington Post Company _ April 26, 2000 The New York Times N.R.A. Tightens Its Embrace of Republicans With Donations By JAMES DAO WASHINGTON, April 25 -- Under sharp attack in the courts and in Congress, the National Rifle Association is embracing the Republican Party more firmly, and openly, than ever through campaign contributions, speeches and its direct-mail operation. On Wednesday night, Wayne LaPierre, the N.R.A.'s executive vice president, will serve as a co-chairman for a black-tie event in Washington saluting Gov. George W. Bush of Texas, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. The gala is expected to collect more than $18 million for the party, a record amount, with Mr. LaPierre pledging to raise at least $250,000 of that. "There is no question that the Republican Party respects the rights of Americans under the Second Amendment more than the Democratic Party does," said Mike Collins, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee. But the event is just the most recent example of the powerful gun group's efforts to promote the Republican Party and Mr. Bush in ways that have often gone beyond its support for Republicans in the past. Since last fall, for instance, the
CS: Pol-NRA analyses Peters
From: SSAA, [EMAIL PROTECTED] NRA-ILA website http://www.nraila.org/show.cgi?page=/research/2420-AntiGunGroups-001.shtml Research Analysis The Open Society's Closed Mind on Guns In March, The Open Society, part of the Soros Foundation Network, released "Gun Control in the United States," a strikingly simplistic evaluation of gun laws in the 50 states. Directed by Rebecca Peters, an Australian gun prohibitionist, this claptrap posing as analysis arbitrarily awards various point values to each state that has imposed gun control restrictions favored by the group. Such restrictions include, for example, compact handgun prohibitions, gun registration and gun owner licensing, various gun sale regulations and gun storage requirements. States that do not allow local jurisdictions to impose gun laws more restrictive than state law are penalized in the Society's point system. States that prohibit the filing of junk lawsuits against the firearm industry are also penalized, as are states that do not duplicate the federal age requirement for possessing a handgun. Out of a maximum of 100 points possible in the Society's point system, only seven states received scores above 30%. The other 43 states, the Society claims, "lack even æbasic gun control laws' [and therefore] fall below minimum standards for public safety." Twenty-three of the supposedly sub-standard states got scores of zero or below. You would never know this is a country with more than 20,000 gun laws. The only real value in the Society's evaluation is that it tells us the extent to which this particular anti-gun activist group favors different types of gun control laws. The Society makes no attempt to correlate the laws it favors to any effect on crime, hoping that its acknowledgment that "the relationship between particular regulatory measures and violence lies outside the scope of this survey," will pacify the average reader. The simple truth, of course, is that the "particular regulatory measures" we know as "gun control" are absolute failures in the war on crime. Case in point: the average violent crime rate of the seven states whose gun laws the Society believes best is 21% higher than the average rate for the 43 states the Society believes are "below minimum standards for public safety." Of the 10 states that have the lowest violent crime rates in America, eight received scores of zero or below, and the Society's favorite state, Massachusetts, has a violent crime rate five times higher than its least favorite state, Maine. In truth, Texas has achieved its lowest homicide rate since the 1950s, but under the Society's cock-eyed, politically-driven grading system, the Lone Star state gets a 47th ranking. The other two of the three largest states, California and New York, were ranked 3rd and 8th best by the Society, though their violent crime rates are 41% higher and 13% higher, respectively, than that of Texas. In the final analysis, The Open Society's only measuring rod is its own hatred of gunsùthe more objectionable a law is to a law-abiding gun owner . . . the harder a law makes it for a law-abiding citizen to acquire or possess a gun . . . the closer a law moves toward a total prohibition on gun ownership, the better the Society likes it. Fine, that's their right in our free and open society, just don't lecture us about "standards for public safety." Posted: 2000-04-20 ---[Cybershooters contacts] Editor: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Website subscription info: www.cybershooters.org
