• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Who Will Stand Up For Gun Control?

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
Who will stand up for gun control?
By Rose Gordon Sala - Fri Jul 20, 2012 2:43 PM EDT.


Dan Gross, president at the Brady Campaign, said he doubted this incident would be enough to spark substantial reform.

“I don’t think there’s going to be any one moment that’s going to change the national dialogue. I think the national dialogue is going to change when the American people get involved and demand change,” he said during an appearance on MSNBC’s NOW with Alex Wagner Friday. “Otherwise it’s just going to be business as usual. The gun lobby is going to wield far too much power over our politicians.”



http://leanforward.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/20/12859418-who-will-stand-up-for-gun-control?lite

I am relieved after reading this article. I'm kind of surprised at the extent to which Brady is laying down and just accepting the reality thahing is going to change--even with a tailor-made assault rifle massacre in hand due to what happened this morning in Aurora CO. I thought for sure that Brady would be touting Aurora as the final justification for a new AWB.


I shouldn't have worried. The NRA (and GOA, and SAF, etc.) have pretty much whipped the Brady Campaign, I guess.


HankT
 

twoskinsonemanns

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
2,326
Location
WV
I am relieved after reading this article.... I thought for sure that Brady would be touting Aurora as the final justification for a new AWB.

I was getting the impression from this post you might be pro AWB....

And if that prayer doesn't work, then try another Higher Power:

Oh holy NRA,

Please save us from those who would use the legislative process to achieve ANY restrictions on ANYTHING we want to do with our firearms. Protect us from the ideas we don't like and absolve us from ALL responsibility for ANYTHING icky that happens with our firearms.
 

twpetry

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2012
Messages
45
Location
Fredericksburg, VA
Unfortunately I don't see this as the Brady bunch "giving up" this is the same tactic used by the Obama administration to make people scared of Romney raising more money for his campaign. The Brady bunch is simply trying to scare people into thinking that the pro-gun lobby is too powerful. It's the old "we're the underdog root for us trick"
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
Please note, there were no assault rifles used in the tragedy in Colorado early this morning.

Yeah, I generally agree. But that point is very very moot. It's almost not worth making.

They defined "assault weapon" they way they did in the 1994 bill. That's what counted.

I'm guessing, but it's likely that Holmes used an AR this morning that would have been banned by the AWB of 1994.
 

RockyMtnScotsman

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2008
Messages
461
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Yeah, I generally agree. But that point is very very moot. It's almost not worth making.

They defined "assault weapon" they way they did in the 1994 bill. That's what counted.

wholeheartedly disagree - if we concede to them the ability to control the language and redefine items such as these to suit their own agenda, we've already lost the battle.

concede N O T H I N G to the bastards
 
Top