Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Police Chiefs Band Together Against the NRA

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
donsu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 12:03 PM
Original message
Police Chiefs Band Together Against the NRA

http://www.gunguys.com/?p=1607


A group of police chiefs from around the country has banded together and spoken out against the NRAs latest legislative push: a bill that would make it illegal for police departments to share information about where firearms come from.

Backed by Gil Kerlikowske of Seattle and police chiefs from other large cities, a gun-control group urged Congress and the White House Thursday to reject legislation backed by the National Rifle Association that would hamper federal firearm investigations.

The plea by Kerlikowske and chiefs from Atlanta and Philadelphia and beyond came during a news conference in which the Brady Center to Prevent Handgun Violence unveiled a study charging that the NRA has actively worked to weaken gun laws and undermine the authority of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

This report reveals the NRAs true colors as the criminals best friend, said Daniel Vice, a staff lawyer for the Brady Center and author of the report.

The NRAs tireless efforts to undermine enforcement of our gun laws has helped criminals and gun traffickers obtain illegal firearms and fueled the recent surge in gun violence.

-very interesting snip-

And what Kerlikowske misses is that, right along with the rise in gun crime, the NRA has been working tirelessly to make it easier and easier for guns to find their way out to criminals.

This issue has nothing to do with gun rights this is a criminal matter. Its about closing up loopholes and shutting down the small percentage of gun dealers (thats right, only a small percentage of gun dealers are involved in this behavior) who sell their guns to criminals. Police officers like Kerlikowske need this information to do their jobs. The NRA shouldnt be able to tell Congress to keep them from this important task.
-------------------------

thank you Chiefs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. What possible reason could the NRA have of pushing for enactment
of a bill that would make it illegal for police departments to share information about where firearms come from?

That just makes no sense. None at all. Why not just fire all the police officers in the country? That's another way of making sure no crimes committed with firearms never get solved. Same results for both actions.

Sometimes I wonder about some of these stories. Is this true?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tandalayo_Scheisskopf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. One possible explanation:
The radical right movements that are full-auto gun fetishists, as well as other heavy duty armaments, seem to be well-represented in today's NRA. In some cases, where people don't have or cannot get or afford the federal license that allows them to possess full-auto firearms, a law like this would go far towards hamstringing law enforcement when they get their asses in a sling.

They often get their asses in a sling.

To be fair, there is always a concern regarding misuse of this information by law enforcement agencies. It's a fair concern, in these times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Thank you. (I personally believe that it's a combination of both.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #3
35. If They're radical right full-auto fetishists...
Why are there so many of them here? I find it amusing that so many of us, who are against smoking in public places because it's dangerous, see nothing wrong with carrying a concealed weapon to church.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bperci108 Donating Member (969 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. I wouldn't be a bit surprised.
Paranoia reigns supreme with the Gun Fetishists, and this sounds like their handiwork, without a doubt.

Way back when I was a righty, I was a member of the NRA.

I get calls to this day trying to get me to rejoin. I tell them that since they have become just another Radical Right fringe group that spends all it's time trying to keep the religious nuts and economic royalists in power, regardless of what it does to the Constitution and the nation, I will never again give them one dime of support.

Nay, I tell them that I will actively campaign against them and their single-issue idiocy.

They worry so much about their precious guns (and I say this as an owner of a lot of firearms...) that they are letting the rest of the Bill Of Rights get eviscerated by their own side.

There's no more awesome sight in the world as ignorance in action: They enable the destruction of the very Liberty they claim to hold so dear.

The NRA can FOAD, as far as I'm concerned. :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
michreject Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #5
24. To clear something up
They worry so much about their precious guns (and I say this as an owner of a lot of firearms...) that they are letting the rest of the Bill Of Rights get eviscerated by their own side.

The NRA ONLY concerns themself with the 2nd. They're not in the business of protecting any of the other amendments. It's not in their charter. That's what the ACLU is for. I belong to the NRA and the ACLU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. Good POint! Rabid dogs about
their damn guns(and I say this as never having owned a gun but wouldn't rule it out in this era of fascist takeover) and the hell with the rest of our Bill Of Rights.

Wait until that hits the masses over the head.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bperci108 Donating Member (969 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #24
29. I understand, but THAT is the problem....
...the point still stands that because of their single-issue campaign to elect virtually nothing but GOP candidates they, in fact, enable the destruction of the Constitutional rule of law.

By giving the Radical Right a lock on all governmental power, they are destroying Liberty, while giving lip-service to "protecting" it.

When the time comes, you may have only your guns.

When the illusion of freedom (that we perceive as real freedom) is no longer useful to those in power, they will do away with it.

Don't kid yourself; Yes - Including your guns.


Given the unflagging support of any and all Repukes by the NRA, I can't see how anyone leaning even slightly Left could support them in any way shape or form.

It's like giving "aid and comfort to the enemy", to use a really bad BushCo. analogy.

Something to think about next time they want you to re-up. :dilemma:


A much better strategy would be to take the "gun issue" away from them and all of the single-issue voters that brings to the Party. That may be starting to happen as we speak...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
michreject Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #29
33. I look at it this way
The NRA does support Democrat politicans who are pro gun. Problem is that their is not a lot of por gun Democrats. Maybe more Democrat pols should voice strong support for gun rights and then see who gets the NRA support. That's a real easy solution.

Elections are hard for me. I can't vote for a Republican. But what about a Democrat who wants to take away my guns?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bperci108 Donating Member (969 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #33
36. We agree.
I think the Democratic brass have figured out the "Gun Issue" is political suicide (i.e. handing the congress over after the passage of Clinton's crime bill.), but there are many, many loyal Democrats that are terrified of/have no use for/ hate firearms of any kind.


I really don't know how to answer those folks; some may come to the side of Responsible Gun Ownership, some never will. We ALL have to stand together, nonetheless...

:shrug:


I guess this may work: Always support the Left and work to change hearts and minds within the Party.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LostinVA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 07:57 AM
Response to Reply #24
38. The NRA has mouthed off about gays and other things
The last few years they have went from a hunting/gun enthusiasts organization to a RW organization.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
michreject Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #38
39. Please provide a link
to where the NRA has "mouthed off about gays".

It's not that I don't believe you. I just need to see it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #1
25. Nor to me..all I think of is..
More "1984".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hpot Donating Member (359 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
2. My bias meter going off the scale - Must be gun grabbers
"He said that if police agencies can exchange data about criminals buying guns, their jobs would be made much easier."

"Thats right, the gun industry would rather sell guns to criminals (guns which are then used to commit gun violence) then lose sales."

"And theyd rather fight to protect those criminals rather than lose their income source."



Very one sided web site.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #2
28. (Insert mandatory mention to Egyptian river here)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mediacenter Donating Member (44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. Interesting article
...but misleading.

That shooter, Kerlikowske said, used loopholes in gun laws to make himself more lethal. "He purchased two handguns, semiautomatics at two different gun stores, thereby evading a requirement that he file the multiple purchase forms with ATF."

Filing an ATF Form 3310.4 for the purchase of two handguns would not have mattered, the transfer of the firearms would still have taken place unless the state had a limit on how many guns could be purchased at one time, which I do not believe Washington state has.

A second, more troublesome bill, according to Kerlikowske, would prevent the ATF from releasing data to local police departments that would trace guns back to previous owners, sellers and dealers. The bill is awaiting a vote by the full House.

How can the ATF or any Law Enforcement agency trace a weapon back when Federal law prohibits maintaining a gun owner data base? What if the gun were purchased from a newspaper ad?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
7. Good... Fuck the NRA
Nothing but a front for the gun industry filling folks heads with bullshit propaganda.

"People are gonna take my guns away."

Buuuuulllllssssshhhhiiiiit!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
8. K&R #3 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generic Other Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 12:43 PM
Response to Original message
9. This would mean the DC snipers wouldn't have been identified
Their trail led from the capital to a gun shop in Washington state. That's when the FBI showed up in town to dig bullets out of a stump the snipers had used for target practice before beginning their killing spree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mediacenter Donating Member (44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. What if
The rifles they used were purchased out of state or through a newspaper ad?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generic Other Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. I don't know anything about guns...
I don't think the snipers' guns were purchased legally. The gunshop went out of business because of the way the paperwork was or wasn't filled out.

BTW, welcome to DU. I think there's a place around here where people get into serious debate about the subject. I'm not really one of those people.

I only pay attention when Cheney shoots someone in the face or something... :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mediacenter Donating Member (44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Thanks
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #12
40. The "snipers" stole the rifle they used.
The gun shop got into a heap of trouble because they (1) negligently allowed the gun to be stolen, and (2) their inventory control was so bad (contrary to Federal regs) that they didn't immediately notice the theft.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solo_in_MD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
10. Reads like more Brady Bunch Horse Poop
Need to see the actual legistation and both the other side (NRA) and even something approaching independent analysis.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greeby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
13. My opinion on the NRA is
They seem to have little interest in supporting the second amendment as the Framers intended, and more interest in acting as the paramilitary wing of the Republican Party. After all, didn't they support Bush/Cheney, the very tyranny the Founding Fathers warned about? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mediacenter Donating Member (44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. My question
for what it's worth is what did the Founding Fathers intend as far a the 2nd Amendment in concerned?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bperci108 Donating Member (969 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #15
30. It really doesn't matter.
"Original intent" is the watchword of the Right.

(Until it goes against their ideology, that is.) ;)

The Constitution means exactly what the Court says it means, nothing more - nothing less...



BTW- welcome to DU.


:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
16. Love that GOP. Willing to subject Americans to illegal searches and seizures,
detentions and torture, but, hey, don't touch the white man's guns!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mediacenter Donating Member (44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. When
Did gun ownership become a "white" issue. I find your comment disturbing.Having spent many years in the South I can say that there are many African Americans that own guns...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Oh, really, and what percentage of the membership in the NRA
would you say, is constituted by white Americans vs. minority members?

This isn't about who owns a gun. This is about groups of gun owners who are politically organizing to influence public policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mediacenter Donating Member (44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. You said
"White mans guns" Membership in the NRA isn't restricted to whites. How many African Americans belong to the NRA? I don't think the information is avialable,it doesn't matter anyway.The NRA is not a racist organization. They are a very powerful lobby in Washington, it has nothing to do with race.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. I'm afraid that doesn't wash.
I've met NRA members, and as a matter of fact, I was a junior member back in my yute. In addition, there have been plenty of news media with NRA members expressing their opinions, and you know what? All of them were of the Anglo-American persuasion. Not to say that there wouldn't be some minorities interspersed in their groups, but I would say the NRA is primarily composed of Anglo-Americans from my personal observations.

I think the time has come, by the way, for this organization to let us know what their racial make-up is BECAUSE it is having such an impact on public policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bperci108 Donating Member (969 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #20
31. Indeed.
"They are a very powerful lobby in Washington"

Far, far too powerful.


They need to be brought down a notch or three. :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #19
34. Yep. And you can't argue with them.
They have guns. It gives them the illusion of power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow2u3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
18. The NRA's twisted interpretation of the 2nd Amendment
Edited on Sat Oct-28-06 02:42 PM by StopThePendulum
Gangs of unregulated paramilitary thugs, being necessary for the intimidation of law-abiding citizens, the right of criminals and terrorists to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, just so long as they're white.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mediacenter Donating Member (44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. You lost me
Gangs of unregulated paramilitary thugs

Could you be more specific?

I haven't seen anyting like you describe.Perhaps your description is emotional rather than factual...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bperci108 Donating Member (969 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #21
32. I could introduce you to quite a few Militia-types....
...that I used to run around with.

Several are bona-fide "loose cannons" and have no business owning any sort of arms.

ALL were rabid NRA, JPFO, GOA, etc. members.

All were serious fucking idiots, too.

(Still are, AFAIK. Since I went over to The Dark Side, most won't even speak to me any more.)

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow2u3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #21
37. This description lampoons the NRA's position on guns
I should have written, "Gangs of right-wing paranoids"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
22. I am a strong believer in gun rights...
.. but the NRA is wrong again on this one. Gun rights are about LAW-ABIDING citizens owning firearms. A LAW-ABIDING citizen should not feel threatened by this sort of thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 04:04 PM
Response to Original message
27. I'm with the NRA on this one
Maybe if I had any confidence in police departments to do their jobs, and do them fairly, I could back this legislation. As it is I don't want local law enforcement to have any further powers of any kind. It's an issue of democracy and privacy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
T Town Jake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
41. All the hatred of pro-RKBA Democrats is disheartening.
(n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-30-06 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
42. Gee, a press release from a ban-more-guns-lobby website...
Which should be taken about as seriously as a press release from the NRA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Sep 21st 2014, 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC