PDA

View Full Version : Bush on assault weapons: "I did think we ought to extend the assault weapons ban"


Taco John
10-14-2004, 12:19 AM
Here's an answer so devoid of leadership that it pains me with laughter...


"You said that if congress would vote to extend the ban on assault weapons, you would sign the legislation. but you did nothing to encourage the congress to extend it. Why not?"


<b>Actually, I did make my views clear. I did think that we should extend the assault weapons ban, and was <i>told</i> the fact that the bill wasn't going to move. <u>Because the Republicans and Democrats were against the assault weapon ban.</u> </b>

(and here comes the part where he takes every side of the issue)

<b>I believe law abiding citizens ought to be able to own a gun... I believe in background checks at gun shows or anywhere to make sure guns don't get into the hands of the people that shouldnt have them....</b>

(and now for the "no sh!t" moment)

<b>But the best way to protect our citizens from guns, is to prosecute those who commit crimes with guns...</b>


How many votes just escaped out the back door to the Badnarik camp there?

Ugly Duck
10-14-2004, 12:55 AM
Thats the strong leadership we've been seeing in the commercials. If you really believe in something, just let others decide for you, and then take both sides of the issue when asked about it.

Logical
10-14-2004, 12:55 AM
0



Smart voters are unlikely to waste their vote.:p

KCWolfman
10-14-2004, 01:05 AM
I don't understand the issue.

Can the POTUS now introduce legislation to congress? Or was he supposed to go in and create controversy amongst his own party only 3-5 weeks before election?

Talk about grasping at straws.

Taco John
10-14-2004, 02:07 AM
He was supposed to show leadership in one way or the other...

He didn't...

As far as creating controvery amongst his own party 3 weeks before the election, that's EXACTLY what his answer tonight did... The gun lobby is going to be pulling their hair out for the next three weeks.

BroWhippendiddle
10-14-2004, 06:20 AM
How many votes just escaped out the back door to the Badnarik camp there?

None, Badnarik doesn't have a snowballs chance of getting elected.

What you seem to discount is that the people that wanted assult weapons were able to get them anyway. The ban only kept the weapons away from the people that wanted to own one for no other reason than to have it.

KCTitus
10-14-2004, 07:15 AM
The reason the AWB didnt move was because the Trial Lawyers want to sue gun companies when people get shot.

whoman69
10-14-2004, 07:23 AM
So unlike in the war against terrorism, he calls for there to be victims first before we move?

KCTitus
10-14-2004, 07:35 AM
So unlike in the war against terrorism, he calls for there to be victims first before we move?

Ive been trying to figure out what this means for a few minutes...Surely you are not saying that gun laws prevent gun crime are you?

memyselfI
10-14-2004, 07:58 AM
Here's an answer so devoid of leadership that it pains me with laughter...


"You said that if congress would vote to extend the ban on assault weapons, you would sign the legislation. but you did nothing to encourage the congress to extend it. Why not?"


<b>Actually, I did make my views clear. I did think that we should extend the assault weapons ban, and was <i>told</i> the fact that the bill wasn't going to move. <u>Because the Republicans and Democrats were against the assault weapon ban.</u> </b>

(and here comes the part where he takes every side of the issue)

<b>I believe law abiding citizens ought to be able to own a gun... I believe in background checks at gun shows or anywhere to make sure guns don't get into the hands of the people that shouldnt have them....</b>

(and now for the "no sh!t" moment)

<b>But the best way to protect our citizens from guns, is to prosecute those who commit crimes with guns...</b>

How many votes just escaped out the back door to the Badnarik camp there?


What is funny about DUHbya's answer is that it does NOT protect a damn thing...if you are PROSECUTING a crime committed with a gun you are playing defense. The crime has already been committed and the victim of that crime (and society as a whole) is not 'protected' from either the crime or the gun that was used in the crime.

It's one of those sound bite answers that sounds good on paper but does little to protect people from anything except repeat offenders...which is important but hardly the 'best way to protect our citizens from guns.'

Cochise
10-14-2004, 07:58 AM
If memory serves there was not a whole hell of a lot of initiative on the part of the liberals to extend the ban either.

Could it be that people on both sides of the issue realize it's useless?

memyselfI
10-14-2004, 07:58 AM
So unlike in the war against terrorism, he calls for there to be victims first before we move?

uh, you just said in one sentence what took me many... :thumb:

penchief
10-14-2004, 08:01 AM
Even though Bush's primary goal seemed to be to reinforce his right-wing base I thought Kerry did a clever job of putting Bush on the defensive over issues very important to some of the single issue voters in that conservative base.

Unless the answer, "I don't think the country is ready to overturn Roe v Wade," comes equipped with a wink and a nod to his true believers, I don't think Bush was very reassuring. It also made him look like the one that was waffling. Kerry took a firm position that Roe v Wade should not be overturned and Bush didn't answer the question to the dismay of the pro-life crowd, I'm sure.

Even more so, I wonder how many in the NRA were surpised to hear that he actually does support extending the ban on assault weapons? I'm sure a few were caught off guard with that one. If he really did support it then how does that make him any different than Kerry?

If he doesn't support it, it appears that he is not willing to stand up for his convictions by coming up with the lame excuse that he couldn't get it out of congress. That excuse sure didn't stop them for extending debate so they could get down to the capital and pressure lawmakers over legislation that screws American workers.

You are right, he didn't show leadership. But more importantly I think he showed a lack of conviction and a willingness to be less than truthful about issues that are very important to many single issue voters included in his base. Ultimately that may hurt him because conviction is supposed to be his strong suit.

I don't think it gets any easier for Bush from here on out. I think Kerry defined himself during the debates which makes Bush & Cheney's continuous personal attacks seem much more disingenuous. Kerry appeared stronger and more presidential. Also, the cultural issues that Rove Inc. believes will energize the evangelical and right-wing base are not winners for the right when they are properly framed. In appealing to his base they run the risk of alienating main stream America.

Ultimately I believe that the result of these three debates have answered the questions that America has about Kerry. I believe the attention will now be turned to the president's record. I also believe that the White House's campaign tactics will be ever increasinly under scrutiny.

Well, maybe I just hope.

memyselfI
10-14-2004, 08:01 AM
If memory serves there was not a whole hell of a lot of initiative on the part of the liberals to extend the ban either.

Could it be that people on both sides of the issue realize it's useless?

Senate OKs Assault Weapons Ban Extension
NewsMax Wires
Tuesday, Mar. 2, 2004
WASHINGTON -- The Senate voted Tuesday to extend for another decade a ban on military-style assault weapons and to require background checks on buyers at private gun shows, giving Democrats rare victories on gun legislation that would also deny crime victims the ability to sue gunmakers and dealers.

Democratic presidential contenders John Kerry of Massachusetts and John Edwards of North Carolina broke away from the Super Tuesday campaign trail to cast votes - their first of the year - with the 52-47 majority on the assault weapons ban and the 53-46 majority on the gun show bill.

The White House had preferred both Democratic bills be kept off the legislation immunizing the gun industry from liability suits, the National Rifle Association's top priority this year.

"The semiautomatic ban, the gun show loophole, a variety of other kinds of issues could simply drag this bill down and deny us substantial tort reform," said Republican Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho, the bill's main sponsor who voted against both measures.

House leaders said last year that they did not intend to renew the ban on the manufacture and importation of at least 19 types of common military-style assault weapons. Senate GOP leaders also argued against the ban, saying it was ineffective and unnecessary and could cause the House to kill the gunmaker immunity bill.

But with the help of a few Senate Republicans, including Senate Armed Services Chairman John Warner of Virginia, Democrats were able to get enough votes to approve the ban extension.

A few Republicans also voted with the Democrats to close the "gun show loophole." Under current law, unlicensed gun dealers at private shows are not required to ask for government background checks before selling weapons. Democrats and a few Republicans argued that loopholes allows people who normally wouldn't be able to buy guns get dangerous weapons.

"Criminals and terrorists are exploiting this obvious loophole in our gun safety laws," said Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona.

McCain, along with fellow Republicans Warner, Richard Lugar of Indiana, George Voinovich of Ohio, Charles Hagel of Nebraska, Mike DeWine of Ohio, Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island voted along with the Democrats. Democrats Max Baucus of Montana and Ben Nelson of Nebraska also crossed party lines to vote with the Republicans.

The appearance of Kerry and Edwards in the Senate for their first votes of the year underscored the political overtones of the assault weapons issue. Most Democrats voted for the ban, which had been due to expire Sept. 13, while most Republicans voted against it.

Ten Republicans broke party ranks on the assault weapons vote: Warner, Chafee, Fitzgerald, DeWine, Lugar, Voinovich, Susan Collins of Maine, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, Gordon Smith of Oregon and Olympia Snowe of Maine.
Six Democrats voted against extending the ban: Baucus, Nelson, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Zell Miller of Georgia and Harry Reid of Nevada.

"Once again we're in a political season, and once again we're debating gun ownership," Craig said.

Democrats argued that law enforcement officers and regular citizens all would be safer if the assault weapons covered under the bill continued to be banned. "These are weapons of war. They are designed to kill a lot of people quickly," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who authored the 1994 gun ban while in the House.

Warner, who voted against the gun ban in 1994, said the testimony from law enforcement officials in his state convinced him to vote Tuesday for renewing it.

"Law enforcement has shown that it has reduced the use of these weapons in crime, so my words pale in significance to the law officers of the four corners of the commonwealth of Virginia," Warner said.

President Bush has staked out both sides of the issue, calling for the reauthorization of the assault weapons ban while arguing against the Senate's adding it to the gunmaker immunity bill.

After other amendments, the Senate is expected to easily pass the gunmaker immunity bill. It would bar lawsuits against gun makers stemming from a crime in when a legally sold gun is used to commit the crime.

After Senate action, the measure goes to a House-Senate negotiating committee that will hammer out differences with the version passed by the GOP-controlled House last year.


2004 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

KCTitus
10-14-2004, 08:09 AM
If memory serves there was not a whole hell of a lot of initiative on the part of the liberals to extend the ban either.

Could it be that people on both sides of the issue realize it's useless?

The republican senators attached an ammendment sheilding gun mfgrs from class action lawsuits and the democrats stopped their support of the ban immediately.

Shumer was even quoted after the bill died that the ban 'really didnt do that much to begin with'.

KCWolfman
10-14-2004, 10:04 AM
He was supposed to show leadership in one way or the other...

He didn't...

As far as creating controvery amongst his own party 3 weeks before the election, that's EXACTLY what his answer tonight did... The gun lobby is going to be pulling their hair out for the next three weeks.
His stance on "assault" weapons is stupid, just as Kerry's and Clinton's were.

However, I don't see him gaining any ground from anyone by stirring a pot this close to election day. And to be honest, the gun controllers are not going en masse to an independent - we all know that. Instead he is pandering to the more centrist group to retain their votes.

KCWolfman
10-14-2004, 10:06 AM
The republican senators attached an ammendment sheilding gun mfgrs from class action lawsuits and the democrats stopped their support of the ban immediately.

Shumer was even quoted after the bill died that the ban 'really didnt do that much to begin with'.
Dur....

But it made the PC feel good, and that's what really matters,right?