Thursday, March 22, 2007

Gun Control a Dead Issue?

Yesterday while on the way home from work, I heard Sean Hannity mention something that made my jaw drop. It was during his daily apologetics for Rudy Giuliani. A caller had mentioned something about Rudy and gun control, and in Sean's answer he stated "Gun control is a dead issue" and continued with something along the lines of "The Liberals know better than to bring it up".

Well Sean, if gun control is such a dead issue why does HR 1022 (To reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes) have 30 cosponsors? If gun control is such a dead issue for the Liberals, why did Representative Castle introduce HR 96 (A Bill to Close Gun Shows)?

Add to this list HR 203, HR 256, HR 297, HR 354, HR 428, HR 880, and the various Senate bills (The GOA has a short summery of these and other bills here).

It does not appear to me that the anti's see gun control as a "dead issue".

One more point - Why do the "conservative" talking heads and pundits consider the Second Amendment to be a "social" issue? They place gun rights on the same level as gay rights and welfare. Do they really not understand that the Second Amendment is the bedrock of our liberty, that it is the guarantee that the .gov will not significantly overstep it's bounds without our permission? Don't they know that it is the Second Amendment that makes us free men and women, and not servants? Even the old school liberals understand that fact.

I am just sometimes amazed by what I read and hear by the "Conservative" front men that are supposedly uniting the conservative base.


Fits said...

The big-name bloggers and pundits don't get it. At all. They didn't back when the Clintons rang in the Assault Weapons Ban, and I remember many a commentary concerning how a hunter didn't really need such weapons, so what did we lose but the favorite toys of a few gun nuts. Zumbo was not a rarity. None of the ones who've not shared the trenches with us have a clue as to what the liberals have been trying to do.

Vannity isn't alone. Limbaugh says nary a word about the 2nd, Boortz is so afraid of guns it's pitiful, and Ingraham? Please now. At least Malkin was shamed into giving lip service the other day but don't look for her to stay onboard for long. Wealthy people can hire others to protect them. No matter what their political affiliation.

Unknown said...

I wonder why the GOA list stops at HR 1022 which was introduced on 2/13. HR 1096 was introudced on 2/15.

Why is everyone ignoring HR 1096? (Click "See Bill Full Text")

Hyunchback said...

It is time that we started demanding more.

Why is it that the front-runner for 2008 on the Republican side has positions closer to Bill Clinton than Ronald Reagan? Because the base is being taken for granted and a ride.

When the 2008 race comes down to a race between someone who pledges he won't ban guns but will and someone who pledges to ban guns and will we don't have a candidate in the race.

Trust Giuliani? You mean like the women he's screwed and dumped?

John R said...

"Trust Giuliani? You mean like the women he's screwed and dumped?"

Now that would make a great 15 second campaign ad.

Notar, send me your take on HR 1096 via email.

Anonymous said...

JR, they may be right, but for the wrong reasons. I'm working on an email that I'll send you when I'm done. I get so depressed writing it it takes me a while. It's another one of my "I don't want this in the public, searchable by the Brady Bunch" letters like my last one.

Anonymous said...

Hey guys what about HR 45? Anyone out there worried? I am