XPost: alt.politics.bush, talk.politics.guns, alt.guns   
   XPost: alt.rec.guns   
   From: No_email_for_you@wahoo.com   
      
   Bob Eld  wrote in news:jv3k6i$8rd$1@dont-email.me:   
      
   > On 7/29/2012 7:35 AM, A ROMNEY FRIEND wrote:   
   >> "There are, today, few who hunt   
   >> with handguns or assault rifles   
   >> equipped with 100-clip magazines."   
   >>   
   >> ==================   
   >> "Why killing is a profitable enterprise"   
   >>   
   >> Op-Ed   
   >> By Michael F. McNulty   
   >> July 27,  2012   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> IT IS EASY TO IGNORE the issue of gun control, given the perfect   
   >> leaderlessness it enjoys in Congress. Then again, it becomes harder to   
   >> ignore when your relatives or friends are murdered in the company of   
   >> someone you idolize, which describes thousands of us in Tucson.   
   >>   
   >> I have owned guns, continuously, since I was 6. I still own my   
   >> grandfather’s pump-action Winchester, carried for decades in a   
   >> scabbard behind his saddle as he rode the range where he ranched, in   
   >> Wikieup, Ariz. All the guns I’ve owned have been what are quaintly   
   >> called long guns. I began my brief assault on local fauna at age 12,   
   >> and I had “taken” four white-tailed deer, a couple of javelina and   
   >> innumerable quail and dove by the time I got my driver’s license at   
   >> 16. A driver’s license is a far greater liberator than a hunting   
   >> license, and thereafter, trekking around in the wilderness killing   
   >> things lost its luster. It has been decades since I engaged in those   
   >> adventures.   
   >>   
   >> There are, today, few who hunt with handguns or assault rifles   
   >> equipped with 100-clip magazines. There are even fewer reasons to do   
   >> so. But the National Rifle Association’s principal focus has evolved   
   >> mostly to those. It is news to no one that the NRA has abandoned the   
   >> sportsman in every practical sense; if the group were honest, it would   
   >> change its name. Speaking as a rifleman, I think it’s an   
   >> embarrassment.   
   >>   
   >> The NRA not only dependably opposes limits on assault-rifle sales but   
   >> even opposes reporting bulk sales of assault rifles. Last year, the   
   >> NRA went to the mat to prevent anyone from cross-checking the names of   
   >> those on the terrorist watch list against the names of those buying   
   >> guns. These two actions clarify beyond argument that the safety and   
   >> welfare of you and yours have simply dropped from the NRA’s list of   
   >> priorities. The NRA represents gun manufacturers, end of story.   
   >>   
   >> Now, handguns excel at certain things. They are unequaled at killing   
   >> people at close range: quite useful for law enforcement officers and   
   >> drug dealers. They’re genuine security in a drawer for those who have   
   >> received unambiguous threats, like my friend Gabby Giffords. They’re   
   >> even a useful, if dubious, tool to defend yourself from murderers and   
   >> rapists breaking in at 2 a.m. That hasn’t happened to me in the past   
   >> 60 years, but maybe your experience is different. NRA President Wayne   
   >> LaPierre thinks it may happen to you tonight: If you search YouTube   
   >> for “The NRA’s Circus of Fear,” you’ll find a collection of   
   >> LaPierre’s reasons why he lives in fear, and his arguments as to why   
   >> you should, too. Personally, I think that “living in fear” is   
   >> inconsistent with being an American, and I’m not going to play.   
   >>   
   >> But how else are the gun manufacturers going to “grow the market,”   
   >> to sell more than the 3 million handguns they already do per year?   
   >> Fear is a great motivator; mass murder is great for the gun business.   
   >>   
   >> Just days ago a dozen citizens were murdered and about five dozen   
   >> plugged with slugs from a trinity of firearms. Setting aside the   
   >> shotgun, it bears mentioning that the Glock and assault rifle James   
   >> Holmes is suspected of firing in an Aurora, Colo., movie theater were   
   >> being used for the purpose for which they were designed, manufactured   
   >> and sold. But the gun makers have no product-liability litigation to   
   >> worry about, because in 2005 Congress approved and President George W.   
   >> Bush signed into law legislation providing immunity for gun   
   >> manufacturers from the foreseeable consequence of building instruments   
   >> of murder. Every year three times as many people are murdered with   
   >> guns in the United States as were murdered on Sept. 11, 2001. But   
   >> blessed be the gun makers, for they are pardoned in advance.   
   >>   
   >> It strikes me that the NRA is pretty comfortable when debates over   
   >> mass murder devolve into intellectual discussions relating to civility   
   >> vs. demagoguery, insanity vs. impressionability, and freedom vs. the   
   >> tyranny of gun zealots. The more abstract, the better. In the end,   
   >> however, it’s simple: The NRA shills for gun makers who profit from   
   >> the murder of American citizens. If you think the country’s policies   
   >> are shaped by Judeo-Christian values, you’re not paying attention.   
   >>   
   >> (Michael McNulty is an attorney in Tucson.  He was chairman of the   
   >> Giffords for Congress campaign in 2006, 2008 and 2010.)   
   >>   
   >   
   >   
   > The NRA has one motive and one motive only, To protect the rights of gun   
   > and ammo manufacturers to produce and sell as many arms, cartridges and   
   > magazines as possible and make as much money as possible.   
   >   
   > They don't give crap about who hunts with what or about what guns are   
   > used for or their killing power.  Their motive is strictly monetary.   
   >   
      
   And your large pile of verifiable evidence to prove that is....?   
      
   --   
   Refusenik #1   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)