In the wake of the tragic shooting massacre in Virginia this
week gun control advocates have once again come crawling out
of the woodwork to capitalize on the ill informed and automated
response of blaming the destructiveness of a mentally ill person's
rampage on the second amendment.
The problem is that the gun control advocates
are preaching to the converted when they clamor and claw at
the government to restrict gun ownership in America.
Gun control advocates should applaud Bush for
what he has done for their cause, instead they reveal the enormity
of the false left/right paradigm that exists in US politics
by berating him and his ilk as right wing gun nuts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let us help you reach a huge audience of potential customers.
Help support the website and take advantage of low advertising
rates. Click
here for more info.
Find out the true story behind government sponsored terror, 7/7,
Gladio and 9/11, get
Terror Storm!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many point to the fact that Bush allowed the assault
weapons ban to expire in 2004 as an indication that he caved
in to the NRA. John Kerry even accused Bush of conspiring to
"chose his powerful friends in the gun lobby over the police
officers and families that he promised to protect."
In Reality Bush wanted
to renew the assault weapons ban but was forced to let it
expire when it became clear that he may not retain office in
2004 should he alienate core Republican voters.
At the time Bush was
applauded by Democratic Senators Dianne Feinstein and Chuck
Schumer for his stance.
The assault weapons ban is just one of the numerous
anti-gun positions taken by the Bush Administration. Additional
examples include disarming airline pilots, forfeiting gun rights
for misdemeanors, and arguing that the total DC gun ban is a
reasonable restriction on the 2nd Amendment.
Speaking in late 2005 on the topic of the second
amendment, former Republican Congressman, CIA official and board
member on the NRA Bob
Barr said that his position had enabled him to judge the
difference between how the Clinton and Bush administration's
approached the issue of gun control. Barr echoed the sentiments
of many other prominent conservatives in expressing his frustration
about how the Bush administration was even more anti-second
amendment than the Clinton office.
"it's my impression to be honest with you,
and this is confirmed by a lot of folks who are involved very
heavily in regulatory matters involving firearms, that it is
more difficult dealing with this administration than it was
dealing with the prior administration."
In the past another Republican Congressman, and
now Presidential candidate, Ron
Paul has accused the Bush administration of attempting to
set in motion a militarized police state in America by enacting
gun confiscation martial law provisions in the event of emergencies
such as an avian flu pandemic or natural disasters.
"I think they're concerned about the remnant, the remnant
of those individuals who don't buy into stuff and think that
they should take care of themselves on their own, that they
should have their own guns and their own provisions and they
don't want to depend on the government at all and I think that
is a threat to those who want to hold power. They don't want
any resistance to their authoritarian rule."
Paul, a staunch gun-rights supporter, has previously blasted
the administration's position on so-called "assault weapons"
while claiming it is gun-rights oriented as hypocritical.
In making his point, Paul quoted Georgetown University professor
Robert Levy, who recently offered this comparison: "Suppose
the Second Amendment said, 'A well-educated electorate being
necessary for self-governance in a free state, the right of
the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed.' Is
there anyone who would suggest that means only registered voters
have a right to read?"
"Tortured interpretations of the Second Amendment cannot
change the fact that both the letter of the amendment itself
and the legislative history conclusively show that the Founders
intended ordinary citizens to be armed," said Paul.
