An Open Letter To G.w. From Michael Moore

[KCFlyer]

I believe he co-authored an anti-gun bill that would have banned the shotgun he was waving around yesterday..............

[post="176669"][/post]​

I don't believe who authored any bill that would ban shotguns. The only ban I am aware of was Uzi's and AK47's...and is that much power really necessary when stalking a deer? Sorta takes the sport right out of it, doesn't it?

 

[FredF]

Please people,

Kerry did not author legislation, but he did co-sponser legislation that would have made the shotgut he was given illegal.

http://www.drudgereport.com/dncg.htm

I was trying not to go there, but since it was brought up, I thought I would at least clear up the issue.

 

[KCFlyer]

Please people,

Kerry did not author legislation, but he did co-sponser legislation that would have made the shotgut he was given illegal.

http://www.drudgereport.com/dncg.htm

I was trying not to go there, but since it was brought up, I thought I would at least clear up the issue.

[post="176688"][/post]​

If you dig a little deeper into the drudge report, specifically this link, you'll find this text:

SUMMARY AS OF:
7/17/2003--Introduced.

Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003 - Amends Federal firearms provisions to revise the definition of "semiautomatic assault weapon" to include conversion kits (for converting a firearm to a semiautomatic assault weapon) and any semiautomatic rifle or pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and that has any one of the following characteristics, respectively: (1) a folding or telescoping stock, a threaded barrel, a pistol grip, a forward grip, or a barrel shroud; or (2) a second pistol grip, a threaded barrel, a barrel shroud, or the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at a location outside of the pistol grip.

Yep...I see the pistol grip, but maybe it's a bad angle on the picture, but I don't see where you load the magazine into that shotgun.

 

[FredF]

It is loaded from the bottom, just below the bolt.

 

[KCFlyer]

It is loaded from the bottom, just below the bolt.

[post="176697"][/post]​

Just seems odd that they would show the gun without the detachable magazine attached. Or is there a detachable magazine?

 

[KCFlyer]

I did a little more checking and I found this article on the bill that Kerry co-sponsored. In it I noticed an area labeled "HUNTING GUNS AND OTHER RECREATIONAL
WEAPONS PROTECTED IN LEGISLATION

Among those listed are these:

Browning Auto-5 Light 12 and 20
Browning Auto-5 Stalker
Browning Auto-5 Magnum 20
Browning Auto-5 Magnum 12

Mr. Drudge says that he was given a "Browning Auto-5", and since it has a "pistol grip" would be a banned weapon. But the details show that had he read a bit further, that gun, unless modified, was protected under the propsed legislation. Just wanted to set things straight here...we all know that the Drudge Report beyond reproach.

 

[sentrido]

Please people,

Kerry did not author legislation, but he did co-sponser legislation that would have made the shotgut he was given illegal.

http://www.drudgereport.com/dncg.htm

I was trying not to go there, but since it was brought up, I thought I would at least clear up the issue.

[post="176688"][/post]​

Its a lie, but what do you expect from a tabloid? At least drudge posted the rebuttle:
http://www.drudgereport.com/dncgr.htm

I bet drudge didnt read the bill at all, but he runs a tabloid, Whats your excuse Fred?

 

[NeedForSpeedNFS]

I believe he co-authored an anti-gun bill that would have banned the shotgun he was waving around yesterday..............

[post="176669"][/post]​

 

[NeedForSpeedNFS]

I don't believe who authored any bill that would ban shotguns. The only ban I am aware of was Uzi's and AK47's...and is that much power really necessary when stalking a deer? Sorta takes the sport right out of it, doesn't it?

[post="176682"][/post]​

KC, Gotta call you on this one!!! Gun legislation, whether pro, or anti, has absolutely NOTHING to do with hunting!!! Now, dont start quoting specific bills that MAY RELATE TO HUNTING.....There is a major difference!! You know that, and your being very disingenuous on this point. I'm sure you are well versed on the Constitution, I read many of your posts, and you seem to be knowlegable about our government. For people that DO NOT understand.....One cannot point to the phrase, "State Sponsored Militia" for their argument about being, "anti-gun". There are these silly little group of papers written by our Founders, called the Federalist Papers. I don't have the Paper# in front of me, but if you would like, I will get it to you. To put an end to this rather lengthy post, the 2nd Ammendment was put into the Constitution to allow EVERY able-bodied, and LAW ABIDING citizen access to firearms without obstruction from the government, for the EXPRESS purpose of changing said Government, by force, if neccessary,in the event that a current government STRAYED FROM THE PRINCIPALS AS SET FORTH IN OUR CONSTITUTION!!!! PERIOD!!! Has NOTHING to do with hunting!! GOOD DAY!!!!

 

[NWA/AMT]

I did a little more checking and I found this article on the bill that Kerry co-sponsored. In it I noticed an area labeled "HUNTING GUNS AND OTHER RECREATIONAL
WEAPONS PROTECTED IN LEGISLATION

Among those listed are these:

Browning Auto-5 Light 12 and 20
Browning Auto-5 Stalker
Browning Auto-5 Magnum 20
Browning Auto-5 Magnum 12

Mr. Drudge says that he was given a "Browning Auto-5", and since it has a "pistol grip" would be a banned weapon. But the details show that had he read a bit further, that gun, unless modified, was protected under the propsed legislation. Just wanted to set things straight here...we all know that the Drudge Report beyond reproach.

[post="176774"][/post]​

Excellent job of debunking yet another attempted smear campaign, KCFLYER.

 

[KCFlyer]

KC, Gotta call you on this one!!! Gun legislation, whether pro, or anti, has absolutely NOTHING to do with hunting!!! Now, dont start quoting specific bills that MAY RELATE TO HUNTING.....There is a major difference!! You know that, and your being very disingenuous on this point. I'm sure you are well versed on the Constitution, I read many of your posts, and you seem to be knowlegable about our government. For people that DO NOT understand.....One cannot point to the phrase, "State Sponsored Militia" for their argument about being, "anti-gun". There are these silly little group of papers written by our Founders, called the Federalist Papers. I don't have the Paper# in front of me, but if you would like, I will get it to you. To put an end to this rather lengthy post, the 2nd Ammendment was put into the Constitution to allow EVERY able-bodied, and LAW ABIDING citizen access to firearms without obstruction from the government, for the EXPRESS purpose of changing said Government, by force, if neccessary,in the event that a current government STRAYED FROM THE PRINCIPALS AS SET FORTH IN OUR CONSTITUTION!!!! PERIOD!!! Has NOTHING to do with hunting!! GOOD DAY!!!!

[post="176963"][/post]​

I know they have nothing to do with hunting, but you know, back in the day, they didn't have semi-automatic muskets. The purpose of an AK-47 or UZI is to kill people.

I have no problem with hunting rifles. I don't much care for handguns. But it seems to me that a 308 Winchester, which is a fine hunting rifle, also could be employed as a fine weapon in a revolution. And I shudder when I think of some of those militia members in Idaho are toting AK47's to "protect" us from the federal government.

 

[FredF]

Oh you guys.

First, Sentrido, If you would actually take the time to read what I posted, then you would know that I did not want to even bother with this topic but since someone else did, all I was trying to do was clear up the record about authoring legislation vs co-sponsoring legislation since we all know that kerry did not author legislation. Besides that, if YOU read the bill the is referred to in the article, you would see that this gun would be baned.

Second, I went back and read the actual bill and nowhere in there are certain guns excepted from it so I have no idea where the Fienstein article gets its information so that is up for grabs. Maybe it was protected but not in the bill in question. And since we do not know that exact model, we will not know if it is listed as protected or not.

Lastly, you are correct that the Kerry campaign did try to contradict the report. Like that is worth anything. It is a campaign and they will say anything. They have backpedaled so much, it is hard to know what to believe.

I, personally, did not even think that this event was even worth mentioning. I found it long before someone else posted it here, but I would not post it. My only involvement was is trying to clear up who authored it vs who co-sponsered it.

Besides, everybody know that guns don't kill people.

 

[KCFlyer]

Oh you guys.

First, Sentrido, If you would actually take the time to read what I posted, then you would know that I did not want to even bother with this topic but since someone else did, all I was trying to do was clear up the record about authoring legislation vs co-sponsoring legislation since we all know that kerry did not author legislation. Besides that, if YOU read the bill the is referred to in the article, you would see that this gun would be baned.

Second, I went back and read the actual bill and nowhere in there are certain guns excepted from it so I have no idea where the Fienstein article gets its information so that is up for grabs. Maybe it was protected but not in the bill in question. And since we do not know that exact model, we will not know if it is listed as protected or not.

Lastly, you are correct that the Kerry campaign did try to contradict the report. Like that is worth anything. It is a campaign and they will say anything. They have backpedaled so much, it is hard to know what to believe.

I, personally, did not even think that this event was even worth mentioning. I found it long before someone else posted it here, but I would not post it. My only involvement was is trying to clear up who authored it vs who co-sponsered it.

Besides, everybody know that guns don't kill people.

[post="177027"][/post]​

Fred...read this feinstein.senate.gov It's a long document, but you'll find in the bottom of it that the Browning Auto-5 is protected under this legislation

Heck in the bill itself (which I did read), it says that a gun with an internal magazine of no more than 5 shots is okay. Furthermore, it goes on to state:

... any semiautomatic rifle or pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and that has any one of the following characteristics, respectively: ...

and ...a pistol grip...

Now, the pistol grip is obvious. But....where is the detachable magazine that is required to be present to make the gun "banned"? I will admit I don't know much about guns, but is it possible that the Browning Auto-5 gets it's name in part because it holds 5 shells...perfectly acceptable under the proposed legislation.

That's from the Bill itself. The 16 page document from Feinstein is very explicit about what is and is not protected under the bill. I would imagine that since Feinstein is also a co-sponsor of the bill, she might have some idea of what's in it. Geez...you've got the freaking sponsor of the bill...the source...telling the world what is and isn't protected, yet you "aren't sure" of it's validity. By the same token, Bush said there were weapons of mass destruction and you bought that hook, line, and sinker. At any rate, the Browning Auto-5 is protected...a perfectly legal gun for Kerry or any other American citizen to own.

 

[FredF]

Let me see if I have this correct, you are critizing me for what I said but are saying the same thing?


I said that I did not know where Feinstein got her information but it was not specifically protected in the bill referred to in the article.

Perhaps I should say that again.
I did not know where Feinstein got her information but it was not specifically protected in the bill referred to in the article.

Did you get it that time?

Show me where Feistein got the information in her article. because I want to see that one, but again it does not matter becasue the bill that was referenced in the new report would ban that gun, provided we know what gun it actually is.


I also said that we did not know the model of the gun so that was also up for grabs.

The big loophole here is that if the gun will accept an externam mag, then it will accept a 5 shot mag just as easy as a 20 shot mag. Where and how it them becomes illegal in the bill is anybodys guess.

Go back and read again that I did not even want to start down this road and that all I was trying to do was correct and answer the question of Kerry authoring the bill vs sponsoring the bill. That is a huge distinction.

I really don't care if he received the gun or not, the bill never passed. Lets argue over how much rain Texas would have received if Florence had come ashore there.

 

[NeedForSpeedNFS]

I know they have nothing to do with hunting, but you know, back in the day, they didn't have semi-automatic muskets. The purpose of an AK-47 or UZI is to kill people.

I have no problem with hunting rifles. I don't much care for handguns. But it seems to me that a 308 Winchester, which is a fine hunting rifle, also could be employed as a fine weapon in a revolution. And I shudder when I think of some of those militia members in Idaho are toting AK47's to "protect" us from the federal government.

[post="177017"][/post]​

The "musket" argument is disingenuous as well. Unfortunately, in the case of weapontry, modernization brings with it more "efficient" means of conducting warfare. The bottom line is, those weapons are here, and they are not going away any time soon. You could legislate all you want, but, the more legislation that is passed, the more "criminal" element you will produce!!! IMHO, this is just reality. In the case of "militia" members in Idaho (LOL), don't think you should worry!! The western part of our nation is our last best hope!(As far as HOW our Government should be viewed!! GOOD DAYY!!!!