Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
After Election Carnival Cruise
We at Carnival Cruise Lines are not forgetting that a lot of entertainers promised to leave the country if George W.Bush were to be reelected President.
With that in mind, we have a Special Offer for those who still want to keep their promise!
Attention: Alec Baldwin, Rosie O'Donnell and her "wife", Ed Asner, Janneane Garafalo, Whoopi Goldberg, Al Franken, Michael Moore, Cher, Phil Donahue, Rob Reiner(apparently still a "meathead"), Barbara Streisand, Jane Fonda, and the entire staffs of the LA and NY Times and anyone else who made that promise, please dispose of all US assets and report to Florida for the sailing of the Funship Cruise, "Elation," which has been commissioned to take you to your new vacation homes in Afghanistan.
You may opt to be dropped off in Somalia or Iraq or some similar sunny location.
The Florida Supreme Court will sponsor a Farewell Parade in your honor through Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami-Dade counties prior to your cruise.
Please pack for an extended stay... at least FOUR MORE YEARS.
Note: Since you advocate strict gun control, you may not bring any.
Staffing your voyage is Bill Clinton as captain, John Edwards as cruise director, and Gray Davis, as Purser (the guy in charge of managing the money). "Teh-RAY-sah" Heinz Kerry hopefully will be shoved somewhere below decks away from the media.
Monica Lewinsky will be the "Cigar and Cigarette Girl". Entertainment will be provided by the Dixie Chicks and Bruce Springsteen, and movies will be shown each evening by Michael Moore.
John Kerry will be our Life Guard based on his past experience of pulling people out of the water. He is also in charge of games and has eliminated "shuffleboard" in favor of his new game he calls "waffleboard". Be sure to pack your flip flops as you will need them while playing.
Ted Kennedy will double as Bartender and back-up Life Guard. He only qualifies as back-up Life Guard since his experience in rescuing people from drowning has not been too successful.
Revs. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson will provide inspirational services, and Al Franken will give inspirational talks each afternoon.
If you have any questions about making arrangements for your homes, friends and loved ones, please contact Senator Hillary Clinton. Her "village" can raise your children while you're gone, and she can watch over all your money and your furnishings until you return.
"Bon Voyage!"
Is this a great country or what? It's called Freedom of Speech.
After Election Carnival Cruise
We at Carnival Cruise Lines are not forgetting that a lot of entertainers promised to leave the country if George W.Bush were to be reelected President.
With that in mind, we have a Special Offer for those who still want to keep their promise!
Attention: Alec Baldwin, Rosie O'Donnell and her "wife", Ed Asner, Janneane Garafalo, Whoopi Goldberg, Al Franken, Michael Moore, Cher, Phil Donahue, Rob Reiner(apparently still a "meathead"), Barbara Streisand, Jane Fonda, and the entire staffs of the LA and NY Times and anyone else who made that promise, please dispose of all US assets and report to Florida for the sailing of the Funship Cruise, "Elation," which has been commissioned to take you to your new vacation homes in Afghanistan.
You may opt to be dropped off in Somalia or Iraq or some similar sunny location.
The Florida Supreme Court will sponsor a Farewell Parade in your honor through Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami-Dade counties prior to your cruise.
Please pack for an extended stay... at least FOUR MORE YEARS.
Note: Since you advocate strict gun control, you may not bring any.
Staffing your voyage is Bill Clinton as captain, John Edwards as cruise director, and Gray Davis, as Purser (the guy in charge of managing the money). "Teh-RAY-sah" Heinz Kerry hopefully will be shoved somewhere below decks away from the media.
Monica Lewinsky will be the "Cigar and Cigarette Girl". Entertainment will be provided by the Dixie Chicks and Bruce Springsteen, and movies will be shown each evening by Michael Moore.
John Kerry will be our Life Guard based on his past experience of pulling people out of the water. He is also in charge of games and has eliminated "shuffleboard" in favor of his new game he calls "waffleboard". Be sure to pack your flip flops as you will need them while playing.
Ted Kennedy will double as Bartender and back-up Life Guard. He only qualifies as back-up Life Guard since his experience in rescuing people from drowning has not been too successful.
Revs. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson will provide inspirational services, and Al Franken will give inspirational talks each afternoon.
If you have any questions about making arrangements for your homes, friends and loved ones, please contact Senator Hillary Clinton. Her "village" can raise your children while you're gone, and she can watch over all your money and your furnishings until you return.
"Bon Voyage!"
Is this a great country or what? It's called Freedom of Speech.
NRA shows its might in drawing voters to polls
October 14, 2004
WASHINGTON -- Billboards now seen in at least 10 key states show a prancing French poodle, its fur fancily clipped for show, wearing a pink ribbon and a blue Kerry-for-president sweater. The text says: "That dog don't hunt." And: "For 20 years John Kerry has voted against sportsmen's rights." As Election Day approaches, the National Rifle Association is clearing its throat, ready to roar.
By now, most of the persuading has been done and attention is turning to mobilization -- getting intense constituencies to the polls. Few are more intense than the NRA. The American Association of Retired Persons, with nearly 36 million members, is the nation's third largest organization (behind the Catholic Church and the American Automobile Association). The NRA has "only" 4 million adult members. Thirty states and the District of Columbia have smaller voting-age populations. And whereas just slightly more than 50 percent of age-eligible Americans have voted in recent elections (51 percent voted in 2000), about 95 percent of NRA members vote. Liberals who lament voter apathy should be careful what they wish for.
Each of the 4 million pays $35 in annual dues. Polls indicate that another 14 million Americans think they are NRA members and an additional 28 million think they are affiliated in some way with the NRA because of their membership in one or more of the 35,000 shooting and hunting clubs.
In the swing state of Wisconsin, which George W. Bush lost by 5,708 in 2000, but where this year he seems to be slightly ahead, there are, according to a Census Bureau survey, 591,000 hunters -- more than one-tenth of the population of approximately 5.5 million. In hotly contested Pennsylvania, there are 1.3 million hunters, about a million of whom take to the woods on opening day of deer season, when some schools and factories close.
Bill Clinton believes that advocating gun control cost Democrats 20 of the 52 House seats they lost in the 1994 elections that ended 40 years of Democratic control of the House. And appearing June 23 on "The Charlie Rose Show," he said this about the defeat of Al Gore in 2000:
"The NRA beat him in Arkansas. The NRA and Ralph Nader stand right behind the Supreme Court in their ability to claim that they put George Bush in the White House. . . . If I had known how big the NRA problem was, could I have gone down there and spent three days calling people on the phone and hollering people in and talking to them and turned it? Probably. . . . I think the NRA had enough votes in New Hampshire, in Arkansas, maybe in Tennessee and in Missouri to beat us. And they nearly whipped us in two or three other places."
Labor unions have awakened to the NRA's power. For example, a flier published in Marseilles, Ill., by Local 393 of the Laborers' International Union lists three Kerry virtues. The third is that he will "fix NAFTA" (the North American Free Trade Agreement). The second is that he "will continue to fight to protect overtime pay." But at the top of the list is: "Supports protecting our right to own a gun."
Nationwide in 2000, gun ownership was a countervailing pull against union membership as a determinant of political sympathies: Union households with guns split 48 percent for Bush and 48 percent for Gore. In 2000, 80 percent of Tennessee union households had at least one firearm. In West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Michigan the percentages were 61, 60 and 55. Gore lost the first two states and might have lost the other two if he had not prudently stopped talking about gun control.
Some liberals who are no more respectful of the First Amendment than they are of the Second saw campaign finance reform as a way to inhibit the NRA from talking against gun control. Advocates of the McCain-Feingold bill for extending government regulation of political speech repeatedly mentioned the NRA as a group whose speech could be curtailed by complicating the process of financing political advocacy.
There are 170,000 precincts in America and the NRA says it has election volunteer coordinators in every one. Even on Manhattan's Upper West Side? In West Hollywood? Yes.
By Election Day the NRA will have sent out 15 million pieces of mail to susceptible men. And women. One in three women owns at least one gun. Hear them roar, in numbers too big to ignore.
Will is an ABC commentator and Washington Post columnist. Contact him at georgewill@washpost.com
NRA Network Pays Off in Political Clout (audio report on NPR)
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4112753
The National Rifle Association's intense and highly effective grassroots lobbying efforts are an effective tool for gun owners -- and a threat to Sen. John Kerry and others who favor a ban on assault weapons.
NRA paid for Burr ad
http://newsobserver.com/news/story/1789800p-8083739c.html
They often show ads for products or grand openings. But on Monday, the plastic bags that help keep home-delivered copies of The News & Observer dry for readers revealed the smiling face of Republican U.S. Senate candidate Richard Burr. //The bag ad was not an editorial endorsement, as at least one baffled subscriber concluded. Instead, it was paid for by the National Rifle Association -- part of a $1 million nationwide campaign to secure votes for politicians enmeshed in tight campaigns. //"We feel that it's a good way and an efficient way to communicate with undecided voters," said Andrew Arulanandam, an NRA spokesman. //The ad backing Burr has appeared in newspapers throughout North Carolina, including The N&O and The Charlotte Observer. Polls have shown Burr and his rival, Democrat Erskine Bowles, in a dead heat.
//The NRA's red, white and blue ad says: "Freedom First. Richard Burr for Senate." //In smaller type it reads: "Paid for by the NRA Political Victory Fund."
Result on Election Day Rallies Sportsmen
http://www.nypost.com/sports/20217.htm
THE presidential election has changed forever the way politicians will look at hunters, anglers and shooters.// The NRA also continued to show its clout. Of the 18 candidates for the U.S. Senate endorsed by the National Rifle Association, 14 won while 241 of the 251 NRA-endorsed House of Representatives candidates won. Those are amazing numbers when you consider that many in this country felt the NRA was losing some of it lobbying power on Capitol Hill.
Outdoor view: Sportsmen voice prevails on Election Day
http://www.milforddailynews.com/sportsColumnists/view.bg?articleid=59366
The election is over and the word is out ... don't mess with the sportsman. //Senator John Kerry had the endorsement of every major animal rights group in the country. What he didn't have was the support of the sportsman. // President Bush has been endorsed by pro-hunting and pro-gun groups, such as The National Rifle Association (NRA) Political Victory Fund; the Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trade Political Action Committee; and The Safari Club International Political Action Committee.
Gun control WINS another election!
Kerry worships the UN:
""If you mean dying in the course of the United Nations effort, yes, it is worth that. If you mean dying American troops unilaterally going in with some false presumption that we can affect the outcome, the answer is unequivocally no."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46225-2004Oct19.html
Subj: Can you name this country! :)
709,000 REGULAR (ACTIVE DUTY) PERSONNEL.
293,000 RESERVE TROOPS. EIGHT STANDING ARMY DIVISIONS.
20 AIR FORCE AND NAVY AIR WINGS WITH 2,000 COMBAT AIRCRAFT
232 STRATEGIC BOMBERS.
19 STRATEGIC BALLISTIC MISSILE SUBMARINES WITH 3,114 NUCLEAR WARHEADS ON 232 MISSILES.
500 ICBMs WITH 1,950 WARHEADS. FOUR AIRCRAFT CARRIERS AND 121 SURFACE COMBAT SHIPS AND SUBMARINES PLUS ALL THE SUPPORT BASES, SHIPYARDS, AND LOGISTICAL ASSETS NEEDED TO SUSTAIN SUCH A NAVAL FORCE.
IS THIS COUNTRY-
RUSSIA ? NO CHINA ? NO GREAT BRITAIN ? NO FRANCE ? WRONG AGAIN ( What a Laugh!!!!!) MUST BE USA ? STILL WRONG (SORT OF)
GIVE UP ?
THESE ARE THE AMERICAN MILITARY FORCES THAT WERE ELIMINATED DURING THE ADMINISTRATION OF BILL CLINTON AND AL GORE. AND [their elimination] was 100% SUPPORTED BY JOHN KERRY
(THESE HE DID VOTE ON)
SLEEP WELL!
This is not a new message, but a reminder of why we now have over-deployed our National Guard and Reserve Units.
HE SAID CHECK THE RECORD
Sen. John Kerry, Democrat from Massachusetts says he is the strongest Presidential Candidate on National Defense ! He said Check the Record
...
We Did !
Firearms course proves popular among women
By KEN HEDLER
The Daily Courier
PAULDEN – Tired of living in fear and of being harassed, more women are taking firearms classes so that they can learn how to defend themselves.
Women also have become more conscious of the need to protect themselves following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, according to Jane Anne Hulen, director of marketing at Gunsite here.
“We don’t want to be victims,” said Gina Peacock, an administrative assistant at Gunsite. She was among 14 women who took a Women Only Pistol Training Class that Hulen conducted this past weekend at Gunsite.
Gunsite, a private academy that provides firearms training for law enforcement agencies, members of the military and civilians, began offering the class for women in 2001. Since then, more than 200 women have completed the course.
The class involves spending 16 hours of training on a shooting range and two to three hours in the classroom, Hulen said. The women spend half of the second day engaged in simulation exercises, both indoors and outdoors.
The class on Saturday and Sunday drew women with an average age of 50 from Arizona and other states, Hulen said. Some of the women had been around guns while others have had less exposure. They used revolvers, 1911s, Glocks and other pistols.
At least two of the women said they took the class because they are concerned about their safety. Few of the women agreed to have their full names appear in print.
“I had a couple of incidents that potentially could escalate,” said a 66-year-old Chino Valley resident who lives alone and is deaf. She described an incident nine months ago in which a man drove through her gate, claimed that he had called her in advance of his visit and became angry when she questioned him. The man left after she threatened to call police.
Margarette 55, of Prescott said she took the class because she becomes potentially vulnerable when she shows property as a real estate agent. She added that she received mail at her office from a jail inmate who faces felony charges of menacing with a deadly weapon.
A need to learn more about gun safety attracted Margo, 49, of Shell Beach, Calif., and Martha, 46, of St. Louis, Mo.
“You can just call us ‘Dirty Harriet’,” Margo, a flight attendant, quipped, alluding to a movie starring Clint Eastwood.
In a more serious vein, Margo said, “This isn’t a hobby by any means, but it is a challenge. It is kind of empowering.”
Nicole Sanders, a 29-year-old crime scene photographer from Mesa, concurred in part. She is married to a detective.
“It’s scary but exhilarating at the same time,” Sanders said. “It’s just nice to know you have the power in your hands.”
Armed with that sense of empowerment, Sanders and the other women headed to the range, seven women at a time, to shoot at 12 camouflage targets.
“Two rounds, ready, fire,” said a firearms coach who requested that he not be identified.
The women fired, their bullets passed through the targets and kicked up dust on a berm behind the targets. After they finished their rounds, the women taped over the bullet holes.
The women shoot from a distance of three, five and 10 yards, and fire eight to 10 rounds on each trip to the line, Hulen said.
Contact the reporter at khedler@prescottaz.com
Academy requires background checks
PAULDEN– Women who try to enroll in the Women Only Pistol Training Class at Gunsite have to undergo a background check by a law enforcement agency, said Jane Anne Hulen, director of marketing and class instructor.
“If you don’t pass the background check, you don’t come to Gunsite,” she said, adding a felony conviction disqualifies potential students.
Hulen said the women also must submit a letter of good character from a minister, banker or other person in a position of responsibility in the communities in which the women live.
When they complete the two-day class, they receive a certificate of training for 16 hours, she said.
“Firearms still are like playing the piano,” she said. “If you don’t use it, you lose it.”
Gunsite scheduled its next class for women for Feb. 19 and 20.
For more information, log on to www.gunsite.com.
Baby is the latest victim of surge in gun crimes
But WAIT! This can't BE! This is "gun-free" jolly old England!
By John Steele and Philip Johnston
(Filed: 13/10/2004)
An 18-month-old girl has become the latest victim of gun crime after she was hit in the leg when a man fired up to 15 shots into a car.
A four-year-old girl sitting beside her in the back seat narrowly escaped injury.
Scotland Yard said the baby was one of the youngest victims of a gun attack in Britain.
Officers are appalled by the recklessness of the attack in Hackney, east London, on Monday evening.
Two men, one of them the baby's father, were injured as they sat in the front of the Citroen. The baby was yesterday being treated in hospital, where doctors described her condition as "stable". The men were said to be in a serious but stable condition.
Police suspect the attacker, who escaped on foot, knew the car was due to stop in the Chatsworth Road area of east Hackney, a busy shopping street, possibly to drop off or pick up children, and took the opportunity for an ambush.
One line of inquiry is that the shooting may have been connected to a personal feud. There is thought to be no evidence linking the adult victims in the car to drugs. The victims are of Jamaican background.
Scotland Yard said last night: "At this early stage, we are keeping an open mind regarding the motive. There have been no arrests."
The carrying and use of guns among young criminals and drugs gang members - particularly linked to the crack cocaine trade in black communities in London, Birmingham, Nottingham and elsewhere - has driven up firearms offences in the past eight years.
Police say a lawless new generation carries guns as "fashion accessories" and uses them to resolve disputes which are often over alleged "disrespect".
In the year to April 2004, there were 10,340 non-air weapon firearms offences in England and Wales - a small annual rise. However, there was a 34 per cent surge between 2001 and 2002 and gun crime is double the level when Labour took power.
The Hackney attack comes days after Danielle Beccan, 14, was shot dead as she walked home from a fairground in Nottingham.
It carries echoes of the murder last year of seven-year-old Toni-Ann Byfield, who was killed alongside her father, a drug dealer, at his bedsit in north-west London. Also last year, teenage friends Letisha Shakespeare and Charlene Ellis were shot dead outside a party in Birmingham.
Yesterday the American police chief brought to Britain by David Blunkett to help cut crime warned that firearms use must be tackled to stop it "snowballing out of control".
Paul Evans, who heads the Home Office's Police Standards Unit, told the Commons home affairs select committee that gun crime was "very, very small" compared to what he experienced in America.
"But we must make sure it doesn't snowball out of control. You need to nip it in the bud and make sure that there are consequences for individuals who carry firearms."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/10/13/nshot13.xml
John Kerry Wants to Ban Guns in America
Friday, September 10, 2004
John Kerry`s two-decade long U.S. Senate record of opposing Second Amendment rights makes him the most anti-gun presidential nominee in history! Here’s the proof.
FACT: Kerry co-sponsors a bill that would ban all semi-automatic shotguns and detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles, a gigantic step toward bringing Australian-style gun control to the U.S.1
FACT: Kerry says, "I think you ought to tax all ammunition, personally, I think you ought to tax guns."2
FACT: Kerry has voted nine times in favor of banning semi-auto firearms.3
FACT: Kerry has voted for a Ted Kennedy amendment to ban most center-fire rifle ammunition, including the most common rounds used by hunters and target shooters.4
FACT: Kerry has voted to close off hundreds of thousands of acres of the California Mojave Desert to hunting.5
FACT:Kerry has voted to hold the highly regulated American firearms industry legally responsible for the illegal acts of violent criminals.6
FACT: Kerry was one of only 18 Senators to oppose the Firearms Owners` Protection Act, which ended alarming abuses being committed under the 1968 Gun Control Act.7
FACT:Kerry was one of only 29 Senators to vote to prohibit gun manufacturers from discharging debts created by the reckless lawsuits filed by municipalities.8
FACT:Kerry has voted to allow BATF to conduct unlimited warrantless inspections of FFL holders.9
FACT: Kerry has voted to criminalize legal sales between private individuals at gun shows.10
FACT: Kerry has voted to impose penalties of a year in prison and a $10,000 fine on an adult if a juvenile steals a firearm from him, and then merely displays it in a public place.11
FACT: Kerry has voted to force many small firearms dealers out of business, which would have impacted both the availability and price of guns, particularly in rural areas.12
FACT: Kerry has voted 11 times to force law-abiding citizens to wait to exercise their Second Amendment rights. He voted to keep the federal waiting period after the National Instant Check System was in place.13
FACT: Kerry voted twice to eliminate the Civilian Marksmanship Program.14
FACT: Kerry wants to silence gun owners` voices. When NRA sought the same exemption from campaign finance rules that news organizations have, Kerry called that effort "hijacking America`s airwaves."15
FACT: Kerry commended the Million Mom March for their march on Washington that included calls for gun owner licensing, gun registration and other restrictions on law-abiding gun owners.16
If elected president, Kerry will pack the U.S. Supreme Court with Dianne Feinstein/Chuck Schumer/Ted Kennedy-selected anti-gun activists who believe you have no right to own any firearm.
Defend Firearms. Defeat Kerry.
Vote November 2.
1. Signed on as co-sponsor of S. 1431 on Nov. 21, 2003.
2. CNN "Late Edition," Nov. 7, 1993.
3. Vote No. 24, March 2, 2004; Vote No. 295, Aug. 25, 1994; Vote No. 294, Aug. 25, 1994; Vote No. 293, Aug. 25, 1994; Vote No. 375, Nov. 17, 1993; Vote No. 365, Nov. 9, 1993; Vote No. 133, June 28, 1990; Vote No. 103, May 23, 1990; Vote No. 102, May 23, 1990.
4. Vote No. 28, March 2, 2004.
5. Vote No. 87, April 12, 1994.
6. Vote No. 24, March 2, 2004; Vote No. 25, March 2, 2004 ("poison pill" amendments).
7. Vote No. 142, July 9, 1985.
8. Vote No. 4, Feb. 2, 2000.
9. Vote No. 140, July 9, 1985.
10. Vote No. 134, May 20, 1999; Vote No. 25, March 2, 2004.
11. Vote No. 118, May 14, 1999; Vote No. 224, July 22, 1998.
12. Vote No. 227, July 30, 1993.
13. Vote No. 141, July 9, 1985; Vote No. 115, June 28, 1991; Vote No. 113, June 28, 1991; Vote No. 278, Nov. 27, 1991; Vote No. 53, Mar. 19, 1992; Vote No. 262, Oct. 2, 1992; Vote No. 385, Nov. 19, 1993; Vote No. 386, Nov. 19, 1993; Vote No. 387, Nov. 19, 1993; Vote No. 390, Nov. 19, 1993; Vote No. 394, Nov. 20, 1993.
14. Vote No. 325 Oct. 12, 1993; Vote No. 178, June 27, 1996.
15. Vote No. 64, April 2, 2001; "Kerry asks FEC to Block NRA Channel," AP, Dec. 9, 2003.
16. Vote No. 104, May 17, 2000.
http://www.nrapvf.org/kerry/default.aspx
When President Bush appoints..
Constitution-respecting federal and SC judges in his next term, there won't be enough unAmericans to obstruct him.
Sacramento: 09/20/04 -- 5:00 P.M.
Governor Schwarzenegger has vetoed SB1140 (criminal storage enhancement)
and SB1152 (ammo sales registration).
The Governor has also signed AB2431 (clarify/improves methods for
law-enforcement to return confiscated/stolen firearms to rightful owners).
Confiscation of Registered Guns Begins in Illinois
Chicago Anti Gun Enforcement (CAGE) unit. This elite squad, operated
jointly by the Illinois State Police, the Chicago Police Department,
and the Cook County State's Attorney's Office, supposedly exists to
identify illegal gunrunners. However, information gained by the ISRA
makes it clear that the CAGE unit is targeting law-abiding citizens,
not criminal gunrunners.
The Chicago Police Department and the Illinois State Police have
teamed up to make good on Mayor Daley's pledge that, if it were up to
him, nobody would have a gun. Daley and his elite "CAGE" unit are
apparently taking advantage of gun privacy loopholes to pinpoint
certain individuals for inclusion in the confiscation program.
The ISRA is following up on leads in one case that has disturbing
implications. An elderly first-generation Chicago resident was
recently paid a visit by an Illinois State Police trooper. After
asking to come inside the man's home, the trooper asked if the man
owned a gun - to which he replied yes. The trooper then directed the
individual to surrender the firearm. The man complied with the
officer's demand and the trooper left with the gun. And the story
gets better...
The gun in question was purchased legally by the man in the 1970s
shortly after he became a U.S. citizen. When Chicago's infamous gun
registration scheme went into effect in the early 1980s, the man
registered the firearm as per the requirement. However, over the
years, the fellow apparently forgot to re-register the firearm, and
forgot to renew his Illinois FOID Card.
So...what does this all mean?
In the last edition of The Illinois Shooter, we reported on the
activities of a shady taskforce known as the Chicago Anti Gun
Enforcement (CAGE) unit. This elite squad, operated jointly by the
Illinois State Police, the Chicago Police Department, and the Cook
County State's Attorney's Office, supposedly exists to identify
illegal gunrunners. However, information gained by the ISRA makes it
clear that the CAGE unit is targeting law-abiding citizens, not
criminal gunrunners.
Thanks to a ruling by a liberal federal judge, the CAGE unit now has
the name of every single person in the United States who, since 1992,
lawfully purchased more than one handgun in the period of a week. The
CAGE unit also has all the makes, models and serial numbers of those
guns. In essence, the Chicago Police Department is now registering
guns and gun owners nationwide.
The ISRA has also learned that the CAGE unit has compiled a list of
families where more than one person in that family holds a FOID card.
Acting on that information, the CAGE unit is now contacting gun shops
where those families have shopped, and is illegally registering all
guns purchased by those families.
Now, it appears that the CAGE unit is scrubbing Chicago's gun
registration list against the list of FOID card holders. Indications
are that folks who have let their registrations and FOIDs lapse will
have their guns confiscated. We have to wonder how long it will be
until state troopers show up at the doors to confiscate the guns of
non-Chicago residents who have let their FOIDs expire.
More later as this story develops.
Source: Illinois State Rifle Association
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
-Thomas Jefferson
http://www.kc3.com/news/chicago_confiscation.htm
WORKING PEOPLE FREQUENTLY ASK RETIRED PEOPLE WHAT THEY DO TO MAKE THEIR DAYS INTERESTING.
I WENT TO THE STORE THE OTHER DAY. I WAS ONLY IN THERE FOR ABOUT 5 MINUTES. WHEN I CAME OUT THERE WAS A CITY COP WRITING OUT A PARKING TICKET. I WENT UP TO HIM AND SAID, "COME ON, BUDDY, HOW ABOUT GIVING A SENIOR A BREAK?"
HE IGNORED ME AND CONTINUED WRITING THE TICKET.
I CALLED HIM A NAME. HE GLARED AT ME AND STARTED WRITING ANOTHER TICKET FOR
HAVING WORN TIRES. SO I CALLED HIM A WORSE NAME. HE FINISHED THE SECOND
TICKET AND PUT IT ON THE WINDSHIELD WITH THE FIRST.
THEN HE STARTED WRITING A THIRD TICKET. THIS WENT ON FOR ABOUT 20 MINUTES. THE MORE I ABUSED HIM THE MORE TICKETS HE WROTE.
I DIDN'T CARE. MY CAR WAS PARKED AROUND THE CORNER AND THIS ONE HAD A
"ELECT JOHN KERRY" BUMPER STICKER ON IT
I TRY TO HAVE A LITTLE FUN EACH DAY NOW THAT I'M RETIRED. IT'S IMPORTANT AT
OUR AGE.
Kerry "safe" gun:
http://www.cnsnews.com/cartoon/nowak.asp
There's Kerry again...
trying to appeal to citizens who believe in the 2nd Amendment, unsafely firing a gun WITHOUT eye and ear protection!
Wanna see those "toy airplanes" I fly?
This one is about $50,000 at least.
http://www.mcgirt.net/RC/VIDEOS/Giant_B52/
and this is how quick it can be all gone.
http://balsabusters2.warp0.com/B52.html
Banning Guns In the U.K. Has Backfired
Published Friday, September 3, 2004, in Wall Street Journal Europe
Banning Guns In the U.K. Has Backfired
By John R. Lott, Jr.
Worried that even showing a starting pistol in a car ad might encourage
gun crime in Britain, the British communications regulator has banned
a Ford Motor Co. television spot because in it a woman is pictured
holding such a "weapon." According to a report by Bloomberg News, the
ad was said by regulators to "normalize" the use of guns and "must
not be shown again."
What's next? Toy guns? Actually, the British government this year has
been debating whether to ban toy guns. As a middle course, some
unspecified number of imitation guns will be banned, and it will be
illegal to take imitation guns into public places.
And in July a new debate erupted over whether those who own shotguns
must now justify their continued ownership to the government before
they will get a license.
The irony is that after gun laws are passed and crime rises, no one
asks whether the original laws actually accomplished their purpose.
Instead, it is automatically assumed that the only "problem" with
past laws was they didn't go far enough. But now what is there left
to do? Perhaps the country can follow Australia's recent lead and ban
ceremonial swords.
Despite the attention that imitation weapons are getting, they account
for a miniscule fraction of all violent crime (0.02%) and in recent
years only about 6% of firearms offenses. But with crime so serious,
Labor needs to be seen as doing something. The government recently
reported that gun crime in England and Wales nearly doubled in the four
years from 1998-99 to 2002-03.
Crime was not supposed to rise after handguns were banned in 1997.
Yet, since 1996 the serious violent crime rate has soared by 69%:
robbery is up by 45% and murders up by 54%. Before the law, armed
robberies had fallen by 50% from 1993 to 1997, but as soon as handguns
were banned the robbery rate shot back up, almost back to their 1993
levels.
The 2000 International Crime Victimization Survey, the last survey
done, shows the violent-crime rate in England and Wales was twice
the rate in the U.S. When the new survey for 2004 comes out, that
gap will undoubtedly have widened even further as crimes reported to
British police have since soared by 35%, while declining 6% in the
U.S.
The high crime rates have so strained resources that 29% of the
time in London it takes police longer than 12 minutes to arrive at
the scene. No wonder police nearly always arrive on the crime scene
after the crime has been committed.
As understandable as the desire to "do something" is, Britain seems
to have already banned most weapons that can help commit a crime.
Yet, it is hard to see how the latest proposals will accomplish anything.
• Banning guns that fire blanks and some imitation guns. Even if guns
that fire blanks are converted to fire bullets, they would be lucky
to fire one or two bullets and most likely pose more danger to the
shooter than the victim. Rather than replace the barrel and the breach,
it probably makes more sense to simply build a new gun.
• Making it very difficult to get a license for a shotgun and banning
those under 18 from using shotguns also adds little. Ignoring the fact
that shotguns make excellent self-defense weapons, they are so rarely
used in crime, that the Home Office's report doesn't even provide a
breakdown of crimes committed with shotguns.
Britain is not alone in its experience with banning guns. Australia
has also seen its violent crime rates soar to rates similar to Britain's
after its 1996 Port Arthur gun control measures. Violent crime rates
averaged 32% higher in the six years after the law was passed (from
1997 to 2002) than they did the year before the law in 1995. The same
comparisons for armed robbery rates showed increases of 74%.
During the 1990s, just as Britain and Australia were more severely
regulating guns, the U.S. was greatly liberalizing individuals' abilities
to carry guns. Thirty-seven of the 50 states now have so-called
right-to-carry laws that let law-abiding adults carry concealed handguns
once they pass a criminal background check and pay a fee. Only half
the states require some training, usually around three to five hours'
worth. Yet crime has fallen even faster in these states than the national
average. Overall, the states in the U.S. that have experienced the fastest
growth rates in gun ownership during the 1990s have experienced the
biggest drops in murder rates and other violent crimes.
Many things affect crime; the rise of drug-gang violence in Britain is
an important part of the story, just as it has long been important in
explaining the U.S.'s rates. Drug gangs also help explain one of the many
reasons it is so difficult to stop the flow of guns into a country. Drug
gangs can't simply call up the police when another gang encroaches on
their turf, so they end up essentially setting up their own armies. And
just as they can smuggle drugs into the country, they can smuggle in
weapons to defend their turf.
Everyone wants to take guns away from criminals. The problem is that
if the law-abiding citizens obey the law and the criminals don't, the
rules create sitting ducks who cannot defend themselves. This is
especially true for those who are physically weaker, women and the elderly.
Mr. Lott, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, is the
author of "More Guns, Less Crime" (University of Chicago Presss, 2000)
and "The Bias Against Guns" (Regnery 2003).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The information in this message is distributed under Fair Use without
profit or payment, to those expressing an interest in receiving
the included information for research and educational purposes only.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://johnrlott.tripod.com/op-eds/BritainToyGunsWSJE.html
Outside what you are seeing at RB is..
an almost hysterical response by the liberal left-wing as they see the last opportunity for their agenda to be advanced disolve away. When Bush and a new, stronger Senate appoint rational and Constitutional judges to federal benches and the Supreme Court over the next 4 years, the left-wing knows their ability to legislate away our rights through the judicial branch will be over till apathy once again rules the people. Then the cycle will start all over again, but it may be decades. After all, it's already been 10 years since the democrats owned an elected majority in the House and Senate
This is a good forum to preach to the choir, but even with the left-wing personal attacks and spamming at RB, they do read the factual information posted. Why else would they be operating in the panic mode? To kill the hornets, you must enter their nest.
Have a good one.
US shooting!
Kim Rhodes gets gold in double trap (Her dad instructs at Coyote
Valley Sporting Clays and she also started there, in Morgan Hill, CA.)
OLYMPIC COMPETITION ENDS. . . The shooting competitions are over at
Athens and three U.S. shooters are taking home precious medals. Michael
Anti, a major in the U.S. Army's Marksmanship Unit, won silver at the
three-position 50-meter rifle competition. His teammate, 23-year old
Matt Emmons, likely would have received a medal in the same competition
were it not for a mistake on his final shot of the day. That round was
fired on a neighbor's target. Earlier, Emmons took home a gold in the
prone rifle match, and Kim Rhode won a gold medal for women's doubles
trap. Get all the news about the U.S. shooting team at
www.usashooting.org.
Remember libs, Fonda Kerry said we should...
..."immediately adopt ALL of the 9/11 commission's recommendations". It is the Nationalist Socialists "papers please" all over again!
National ID seen in 9/11 panel plan
By Shaun Waterman
UNITED PRESS INTERNATIONAL
The September 11 commission's recommendation for federal standards of identification documents such as driver's licenses and birth certificates is tantamount to the introduction of a national ID card system "through the back door," some lawmakers believe.
The commission stopped short of actually recommending the introduction of national ID cards but did say that the fight against terrorism required greater consistency and security of state-issued identification documents.
"There needs to be consistent standards to ensure the integrity of both the document and the issuance process," said commission member Jamie S. Gorelick, a former Clinton administration Justice Department official.
The commission also recommended a radical transformation of the way government data are stored, to facilitate the free flow of information among federal agencies and between them and state and local governments.
Commissioners testified Friday before the House subcommittee on the Constitution and will go before the entire House Judiciary Committee tomorrow.
"If you have federal standards [for driver's licenses] and a free-flow information system between states and the federal government [about the holders of licenses] ... what's the difference between [that] and a national ID?" asked Rep. Christopher B. Cannon, Utah Republican
Commissioner Slade Gorton, a former Republican senator from Washington, said the difference is that driver's licenses are already widely accepted and used as a de facto ID card but are issued according to different state standards and are too easy to obtain without proper identification.
"We're simply saying take something that everyone accepts now and have it standardized in a way that it really identifies the people who are holding onto it," he told Mr. Cannon.
"What I hear you saying, Senator Gorton, is that you want a national ID," Mr. Cannon replied, but "you want to get through the back door by using something that everybody already accepts."
Mr. Gorton responded that there is an important difference between a compulsory ID document and one like a driver's license that "you voluntarily go out and get."
Rep. Melvin Watt, North Carolina Democrat, pointed out that there is nothing voluntary about a birth certificate. Mr. Gorton replied that both documents are accepted as proof of identity, even though neither is secure.
"You've already got a national ID in one or the other;" he told the congressman. "You just don't know whether it's any good."
Rep. Jeff Flake, Arizona Republican, raised the issue of the so-called "legal presence requirement," now part of the law in 11 states, which requires applicants to prove they are U.S. citizens or have a right to reside in the country before they can be issued a driver's license. Without such a requirement, he said, state licenses were not secure, which, he said, "affects all of us."
But the legal presence requirement has proved controversial.
"Our initials are D-M-V, not I-N-S," said American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators spokesman Jason King, referring to the acronym of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which was absorbed into the Homeland Security Department last year. "We are the experts in driver licensing, not immigration."
Moreover, immigrants' rights advocates argue that by excluding illegal migrants or temporary workers from the vehicle and driver licensing system, legal presence makes the roads less safe even as they make the identity system more secure.
Jerry Humble, homeland security adviser to Gov. Phil Bredesen, Tennessee Democrat, said his state has found a way to square that circle.
Since July 1, the state has issued so-called driver certificates to anyone unable to prove legal presence, provided they can show they live in the state and can pass the driving test. The documents resemble driver's licenses but are stamped "Not for identification" at the top.
"You can't use it to get on a plane or buy a gun," Mr. Humble said. "It says we know you can drive, but we can't guarantee we know exactly who you are."
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040821-115527-1621r.htm
One sunny day in 2005, an old man approached the White House from across Pennsylvania Avenue, where he'd been sitting on a park bench. He spoke to the Marine standing guard and said, "I would like to go in and meet with President Kerry."
The Marine replied, "Sir, Mr. Kerry is not President and doesn't reside here."The old man said, "Okay," and walked away.
The following day, the same man approached the White House and said to the same Marine, "I would like to go in and meet with President Kerry"
The Marine again told the man, "Sir, as I said yesterday, Mr. Kerry is not President and doesn't reside here.
The man thanked him and again walked away.
The third day, the same man approached the White House and spoke to the very same Marine, saying "I would like to go in and meet with President Kerry."
The Marine, understandably agitated at this point, looked at the man and said, "Sir, this is the third day in a row you have been here asking to speak to Mr. Kerry. I've told you already that Mr. Kerry is not the President and doesn't reside here. Don't you understand?"
The old man answered, "Oh, I understand. I just love hearing it."
The Marine snapped to attention, saluted, and said, "See you tomorrow!"
~
One sunny day in 2005, an old man approached the White House from across Pennsylvania Avenue, where he'd been sitting on a park bench. He spoke to the Marine standing guard and said, "I would like to go in and meet with President Kerry."
The Marine replied, "Sir, Mr. Kerry is not President and doesn't reside here."The old man said, "Okay," and walked away.
The following day, the same man approached the White House and said to the same Marine, "I would like to go in and meet with President Kerry"
The Marine again told the man, "Sir, as I said yesterday, Mr. Kerry is not President and doesn't reside here.
The man thanked him and again walked away.
The third day, the same man approached the White House and spoke to the very same Marine, saying "I would like to go in and meet with President Kerry."
The Marine, understandably agitated at this point, looked at the man and said, "Sir, this is the third day in a row you have been here asking to speak to Mr. Kerry. I've told you already that Mr. Kerry is not the President and doesn't reside here. Don't you understand?"
The old man answered, "Oh, I understand. I just love hearing it."
The Marine snapped to attention, saluted, and said, "See you tomorrow!"
~
Maker of pistol cleared in death of teenager
Jury finds design of weapon didn't cause accident
Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 4, 2004
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a third trial of a case that drew national attention, an Oakland jury has cleared a gun manufacturer of liability in the death of a 15-year-old Berkeley boy accidentally shot by his best friend.
The seven-woman, five-man jury deliberated just five hours after a two- week trial before ruling Monday in favor of Beretta U.S.A. Corp., finding the pistol's design had not caused the accident.
On May 29, 1994, Kenzo Dix was fatally shot at the Berkeley home of 14- year-old Michael Soe. Michael believed his father's Beretta 92 Compact L pistol was empty, but there was a round in the chamber.
Griffin Dix, 60, of Kensington, said Tuesday that it was too early to say whether he would appeal. He said he spoke with a number of jurors after the verdict was read in the courtroom of Superior Court Judge Henry Needham.
"A lot of them concentrated so much on the mistakes that the father made and the mistakes that the son made," Dix said. "Many didn't also see that the design of the gun was a factor in my son's death."
Elliot Peters, an attorney for the Dix family, said Beretta had failed to incorporate adequate safety features in the 9mm semiautomatic handgun that killed the boy. According to Peters, the gun's loaded-chamber indicator, a red dot on the barrel that rises 1 millimeter when a round is chambered, was too subtle for unintended users such as Michael.
But Craig Livingston, a Walnut Creek attorney representing Beretta, blamed the 14-year-old shooter and his father for ignoring safety warnings outlined in the handgun owners manual.
A jury in 1998 found that Beretta was not liable in Kenzo Dix's death. But Kenzo's parents, Griffin and Lynn Dix, won a new trial on the grounds that an original juror defended the gunmaker from the beginning and angrily lashed out at fellow jurors who did not agree with him.
A second trial ended last year in a mistrial when jurors deadlocked.
The Dix case was backed by the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in Washington, D.C.
"The Brady Center has struck out," Lawrence Keane, general counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the firearm industry's trade association, said in a statement Tuesday. "This jury -- as two others before it -- listened carefully to all the evidence and again refused to blame the product manufacturer for reckless misuse of its product."
E-mail Henry K. Lee at hlee@sfchronicle.com.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/08/04/BAGN38278M1.DTL
Saw that nyc...
you're not going to claim that it is my RED dog, are you?
Matey
Democrats Still Hate Your Guns
by Doug Hagin
30 July 2004
Why have the Democrats stopped talking about gun control?
Ah, remember the good old days when Democrats put their true agenda right up front where guns were concerned? They did not pull any punches or fudge their opinions at all. They did not believe in the right of Americans to own guns and they gladly said it. A Democrat seeking public office was sure to put their Liberal views on guns and the Second Amendment front and center. The Democratic Party was all too happy to put their anti-gun ideology at the very front of all their campaigns.
Nowadays though all that has changed. Today finding any Democrat who will even touch the subject of gun ownership with a hint of their true feelings is tougher than finding honesty in a Michael Moore film.
So why have Democrats largely stopped talking about gun control? Could it be they have changed their former views of guns? Perhaps they have actually read the writings of the Founders and finally realized that yes, yes, yes, the Founders did intend to protect the right of Americans to own and carry guns? Don’t bet on it my friends.
The fact is the Democratic Party and its supporters are still the anti-gun rights party. They still loathe gun owners and yes they still look down their noses at gun owners. They still think the Second Amendment is an unnecessary obstacle to their views of America as a semi-Socialist State.
The only thing that has changed is the strategy of the Democratic Party. They are still out to get your gun, make no mistake. They just intend to get them by earning your trust, then sneaking in your back door, instead of kicking down your front door.
The Democratic Party has seen very clearly that being up front about their true ideology on guns is not the way to win elections. So they have learned from their mistakes. Their new strategy on guns is to avoid the topic if possible, and to play fast and loose with their true feelings when questioned about their ideals.
Take John Kerry, for example. He is a decidedly anti-gun rights politician. His record shows it. Yet he has been seen on the campaign trail posing with a shotgun and talking about what a hunting enthusiast he is. So which Kerry is the real Kerry? Put your money on the anti-gun Kerry, my friend. The rhetoric might have indeed changed but the goal is the same for Liberals in America.
The Democratic Party began moving away from their traditional talking points about guns after the 2000 elections. Gun control groups started changing their names to appear less threatening to gun owners. Names like Handgun Control morphed into the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.
Sounds reasonable, doesn’t it? After all, don’t we all want to curb crime? But the name change is only a face lift. The end goal of Sarah Brady and her Liberal followers is still to criminalize private gun ownership in America. And the political party that backs that agenda is the Democratic Party.
They can stop talking about gun control. They can pretend they respect gun owners and their Constitutional rights to own guns. They can stop their rhetoric about guns being a plague on America, and they can separate themselves from the Million Mom March, but their true ideals remain.
They are still a liberal party with liberal goals and ideologies. They still would erase the Second Amendment if they could. All the photo-ops with Kerry and a shotgun are not going to change his heart or the aims of his party. All the sound bites of Democrats espousing their love of hunting and their promises to protect gun owners' rights are not worthy of our trust.
This new show of support for gun owners is no more than a façade. Democrats have learned this lesson well; they can not be honest about who they are and get elected in this country.
So watch and listen to the Democratic Convention and hear what these people tell you. Look carefully at the bill of goods they will attempt to sell you. Then compare their speeches there with the rhetoric and hyperbole Al Gore and Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy and Charles Schumer have been spewing about your guns and their designs on them.
The truth is they have not changed, they have just finally come to grips with America’s overwhelming rejection of their far-left leaning views on firearms. The truth is still there and very easy to see. The Democrats still oppose concealed carry despite the benefits these laws have yielded. They still wish to limit the number of guns you can buy per month. They still want to create a database and register your guns. They still want to allow frivolous law suits against gun manufacturers. They still are taking aim at you and your right to self-defense.
If they win in November you will lose, freedom will lose and the Constitution will lose.
trkyhntr,
The agenda remains the same but because they now know that it isn't the American people's agenda, they've had to take it out of the spotlight.
Shame on us should they ever regain the majority again. They've push their agenda on the citizen even when the citizen has loudly protested and they used the liberal courts to do what they were afraid to legislate.
This is NOT my Fathers' Democrat Party! (I never was a Democrat!)
Appeals court throws out gun maker suit
BY WILLIAM LHOTKA
Of the Post-Dispatch
07/27/2004
The Missouri Court of Appeals threw out St. Louis' five-year old lawsuit that tried to sue gun makers for the social costs of gun violence.
In their six-page opinion, Judges Gary Gaertner, Mary Rhodes Russell and Sherri Sullivan concluded that the Missouri General Assembly prohibited the type of suit that St. Louis had filed in a new law it passed last year.
The city had sought millions in compensatory and punitive damages from gun manufacturers, dealers and distributors on the grounds that the defendants didn't do enough to prevent guns from getting into the hands of those who used the weapons to commit crimes.
Filed in 1999, the suit was dismissed Oct. 15 by St. Louis County Circuit Judge Emmett M. O'Brien on different grounds. O'Brien ruled that such complaints against gun makers could open courthouse doors to limitless suits against a vast array of industries.
The appellate panel didn't get into O'Brien's reasoning. The judges said they had the authority to affirm or dismiss a case if it can be "supported by the motion, even if the trial court did not rely on that ground.''
Missouri's new law prohibits such suits by cities and towns and keeps jurisdiction over gun regulation with the state alone, the court found.
Get more on this story on STLtoday.com later or in tomorrow's Post-Dispatch.
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/News/St.+Louis+City+/+County/03E66816611ACFBD86256...
EXCERPTS FROM "MY LIFE" BY BILL CLINTON:
"Just before the House vote (on the crime bill), Speaker Tom Foley and majority leader Dick Gephardt had made a last-ditch appeal to me to remove the assault weapons ban from the bill. They argued that many Democrats who represented closely divided districts had already . . . defied the NRA once on the Brady bill vote. They said that if we made them walk the plank again on the assault weapons ban, the overall bill might not pass, and that if it did, many Democrats who voted for it would not survive the election in November. Jack Brooks, the House Judiciary Committee chairman from Texas, told me the same thing. . . . Jack was convinced that if we didn’t drop the ban, the NRA would beat a lot of Democrats by terrifying gun owners. . . . Foley, Gephardt, and Brooks were right and I was wrong. The price . . . would be heavy casualties among its defenders." (Pages 611-612)
"On November 8, we got the living daylights beat out of us, losing eight Senate races and fifty-four House seats, the largest defeat for our party since 1946. . . . The NRA had a great night. They beat both Speaker Tom Foley and Jack Brooks, two of the ablest members of Congress, who had warned me this would happen. Foley was the first Speaker to be defeated in more than a century. Jack Brooks had supported the NRA for years and had led the fight against the assault weapons ban in the House, but as chairman of the Judiciary Committee he had voted for the overall crime bill even after the ban was put into it. The NRA was an unforgiving master: one strike and you’re out. The gun lobby claimed to have defeated nineteen of the twenty-four members on its hit list. They did at least that much damage . . ." (Pages 629-630)
"After the election I had to face the fact that . . . supporters of responsible gun legislation . . . simply could not protect their friends in Congress from the NRA. The gun lobby outspent, outorganized, outfought, and outdemagogued them." (Page 630)
"One Saturday morning, I went to a diner in Manchester full of men who were deer hunters and NRA members. In impromptu remarks, I told them that I knew they had defeated their Democratic congressmen, Dick Swett, in 1994 because he voted for the Brady bill and the assault weapons ban. Several of them nodded in agreement." (Page 699)
"I had grown up in the hunting culture in which its influence was greatest and had seen the devastating impact the NRA had had on the ‘94 congressional elections." (Page 898)
Thank you Viv...
I can now legally cash in on those "senior" discounts!
Matey
Canada Firearms: Armed Robbery
By Mel Duvall
July 1, 2004
On Dec. 6, 1989, Marc Lepine walked into the University of Montreal's engineering school and fired a semi-automatic military rifle at every woman he saw. Before turning the rifle on himself, Lepine shot 27 women. Fourteen died.
Public outrage to the massacre, the worst in Canadian history, set off a series of events, leading to the passage of a new firearms act in 1995. The measure stiffened Canada's penalties for firearms offenses and called for the creation of a national computerized firearm registry. Under the law, every gun owner would be required to have a license and undergo a background check, and every gun in the owner's possession, no matter how old, would need to be registered. All of that information would be kept in a database that could be accessed by police.
The country's gun lobby strongly opposed the registry, arguing that the cost of developing and running the system would be better spent fighting crime. The government, in turn, argued that the registry could be developed for $119 million Canadian ($88 million U.S.), a cost that would be offset by licensing and registration fees of $117 million. Projected net cost to taxpayers: $2 million.
Instead, the firearm registry turned into a huge embarrassment. "They were warned by their own people this thing wasn't doable. Now they're stuck with a system that's riddled with errors and just doesn't work," says Garry Breitkreuz, a Saskatchewan member of Parliament and a leading opponent of the program.
ADVERTISEMENT
What was supposed to be a relatively modest information technology project ballooned into a massive undertaking. At last count, the program had amassed more than $1 billion in costs, and the system had become so cumbersome that an independent review board recommended that it be scrapped.
The Canadian gun registry project offers multiple lessons for government and corporate project leaders alike on the difficulties involved in undertaking a controversial project:
Define what you want. From the start, the government failed to develop a clear understanding of the project's scope and the level of inter-government and inter-agency cooperation that would be required.
Put someone experienced in charge. The Department of Justice managed this project, but had never undertaken a technology initiative of this size or scope.
Freeze specifications. Constant changes were made to licensing and gun registration forms and approval processes as the computer system was being developed. By 2002 more than 2,000 orders for changes had been made, each requiring additional programming.
Don't expect users to comply on their own. The government thought it would have five years, until Jan. 1, 2003, to gradually register the country's estimated 7 million firearms. Instead, firearm owners delayed filing their registrations, leading to a backlog that overwhelmed the system.
The bottom line, says Raymond Hession, a former federal employee hired to review the project and its future, is that the billion-dollar price tag was likely inevitable. "This is a large, complex electronic database, with very large networks and a lot of people accessing it. It costs money," he says. "The problem is the original forecast was based on flawed assumptions."
Prior to 1995, Canada had a limited system of federal and provincial agencies in place to handle the licensing of new guns. However, that system only accounted for guns at the time of purchase—the government did not keep track of the estimated 7 million guns already in circulation. Initially, the federal government believed it could use the same agencies that issued firearm acquisition certificates to handle the registration. However, that plan had to be abandoned when several provinces, primarily those with strong hunting lobbies, refused to cooperate.
The federal government was forced to assume responsibility for the project. It created a new agency, the Canadian Firearms Centre, to act as a single point to manage and control the program, operating under the federal Justice Department.
One other factor dramatically altered the project's scope. A shooting spree in 1996 in British Columbia highlighted an obvious flaw in the planned licensing and registry system. In that instance, the killer applied for a license to purchase a gun and was approved, even though his estranged wife had complained to police several times that he had threatened to kill her. Because the man had not been convicted, the incidents were not recorded in the national police database, the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC).
The government then decided to include all violent incidents reported to police, whether they resulted in a criminal conviction or not, as grounds for further reviewing a license application. This involved tapping into the computer records of every police agency in the country and having information on any reported threats, domestic violence or related incidents pushed out to a new central database, the Firearm Interest Police System (FIPS). This database in turn would be integrated with CPIC and the new firearm registry in Ottawa.
Instead of a simple database where citizens registered their firearms, the scope of the initiative had been expanded to that of a large computer networking project.
In June 1997, Electronic Data Systems of Plano, Texas, and U.K.-based SHL Systemhouse were awarded a $30 million contract to build the system. EDS headed up development of the main registry database and application. SHL took on responsibility for the interfaces with other government and police agency systems and databases. At the heart of the system: an Oracle 7 database to collect licensing and registration information, such as the make, model, caliber, and serial number of firearms. An application to input information from mailed-in registration forms, and perform the electronic checks with other systems such as the national police computer database, was created using Sybase's PowerBuilder software.
Dwayne King, the lead developer of the Oracle database, says even with the project's expanded scope, the computerized registry was well within the technical capabilities of the development team. He and others such as Hession attributed ensuing problems to the circus-like atmosphere surrounding the gun registry.
Political wrangling and pressure from the gun lobby and government officials prompted numerous changes to license and registry forms, rules and processes. By 1999, the development team had dealt with more than 1,000 orders for changes to the system, which created headaches for programmers.
Changes to the software required dealing with close to 50 different department or agency computer systems, from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) to each provincial ministry of transportation for driver's license checks, says King. Sometimes requests were completed right away; other times they took a week or longer.
"A project of this size is like turning around the Titanic," King says. "Up until a week before we were due to go live, they were still changing the forms that were going to be filled out."
The changes were not part of the original contract, requiring the government to pay for additional work at contractor's rates.
Other unexpected labor costs emerged. When the project was conceived, it was forecast that only 10% of applications would require follow-up by an employee involved in the registry. Instead, nine out of 10 applications required follow-up, either from a call center agent or a local police department, to correct information on a form. Some errors were deliberate—the gun lobby had encouraged people to fill out forms incorrectly to protest the system—but the department admitted that many of the errors were unintentional.
The system went live on schedule in late 1998. Gun owners had until Jan. 1, 2001, to obtain a valid license and until Jan. 1, 2003, to register all guns in their possession.
But ongoing maintenance, development and support costs rocketed out of control. Between 1996 and 2001, about $688 million was spent on the program. Of that amount, $250 million went to the computer systems. Support, such as call centers, accounted for $300 million. The remaining $138 million went to advertising and public outreach programs to encourage compliance.
By 2001, annual maintenance costs had risen to about $75 million, or 55% of the $135 million in operating costs for that year. This figure is significantly higher than the industry norm of 10% to 20%, according to a review by Strategic Relationships Sourcing. Project managers blamed the system's complexities for that cost.
Meanwhile, anticipated revenue from the program nearly evaporated. The government initially believed it could recoup $117 million of the development costs through registration fees, but it decided to wave or eliminate most of the fees to encourage gun owners to comply.
The Canadian government has capped annual spending on the registry at $25 million, down from operating costs of $48 million in 2002 and $33 million in 2003.
In all, Canada's auditor general Sheila Fraser estimates that at least $1 billion has been spent on the program to date—including an unanticipated request from provinces and the mounted police for $135 million to reimburse costs to upgrade their computer systems.
Is the program working? Debate on that topic is also highly charged.
As of May, the Canadian Firearms Centre said 2 million people had filed and received licenses to own firearms. More than 12,000 license applications were revoked due to public safety concerns. In addition, 7 million guns had been registered out of the estimated 7.9 million firearms in circulation.
"It's not the be-all and end-all, but it was never designed to solve all of our gun problems," says Edgar MacLeod, president of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police. He says the cost of the registry has become an embarrassment and a nuisance to all involved, but the program works and provides a valuable service.
In a typical domestic violence situation, he says, investigating police officers rely on the registry to determine if guns are present. Onboard computers in police cruisers, or a call to central dispatch, alerts officers to any firearms registered to occupants of the house. The Canadian Firearms Centre says police make more than 13,000 queries to the system each week.
Since 1989, when Lepine committed the Montreal massacre, annual firearm deaths (including accidents and suicides) in the country have fallen from 1,367 to 1,006 in 2002 (the latest figures available), a drop of 26%. Murders committed with firearms have fallen 32%, from 218 in 1989 to 149 in 2002.
Still, critics like Breitkreuz call the registry a "billion-dollar boondoggle" and are pushing hard to have it scrapped. Fellow opponents contend that the $25 million in annual operating costs—if that level can be achieved—would be better spent putting police on the streets.
Proponents of the registry like Wendy Cukier, president of the Coalition for Gun Control and an information technology professor at Ryerson University in Toronto, are digging in to protect a technology initiative they agree is flawed but necessary. "It's not unusual for government computer projects to go over budget, but all the attention this one has received has blown things way out of proportion," she says. "'Billion-dollar boondoggle' is now part of the lexicon."
Canadian Firearm Registry: A Shot in the Dark
High price for safety: When the Canadian government proposed building a computerized database to track the estimated 7 million firearms in the country, it said the project would cost about $119 million Canadian ($88 million U.S.) to implement. Those costs were to be offset by $117 million in gun-owner registration fees, leaving taxpayers with a bill for $2 million. Instead, costs have soared to more than $1 billion.
1998
New Firearms Act requires all gun owners to be licensed and all guns registered.
Of estimated 7.9 million guns, 20,000 are registered.
1999
Errors in processing raise cost of each registration to $16.28 from original $4.60 estimate.
Annual owner fees total $300,000, up from $100,000.
2000
Every gun owner required to have valid license by Dec. 31.
Fee for firearm license reduced to $10 from $45.
2001
Government extends amnesty program to Dec. 31, 2002, to turn in newly restricted weapons such as .25 and .32 caliber handguns.
1.5 million guns registered.
2002
Canadian auditor general says registry costs will exceed $1 billion.
Fees received from owners reach $4.3 million, up from $1.5 million.
2003
Despite controversy, majority of Canadians meet registration deadline.
7 million guns registered, representing 88% of total firearms believed to exist in Canada.
Sources: Office of the Auditor General of Canada, HLB Decision Economics Review, Hession Report, Baseline Research
Canada Firearms Base Case
Headquarters:
284 Wellington St.,
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0H8
Phone:
(800) 731-4000
Business:
Government agency responsible for issuing firearms licenses and registering firearms.
Commissioner of Firearms:
William Baker
Financials:
$16 million Canadian ($11.8 million U.S.) in revenue from user fees in 2003; $33 million in operating costs.
Program implementation forecast:
$119 million
Actual cost:
$1 billion
Challenges:
To bring the program's annual operating expenses in line with revenues and overcome public hostility to the program's runaway implementation costs.
Baseline Goals
Reduce annual operating expenses to $25 million per year, from $135 million in 2001.
Cut waiting times for registration approvals to 30 days, from six months.
Lower cost of processing licenses to $5.50, from $23.75, and registration forms to $4.60, from $16.28.
Reduce follow-up inquiries to fewer than 20% of registrations, from 90%.
Tell us what you think: baseline@ziffdavis.com
http://www.baselinemag.com/article2/0,1397,1620245,00.asp
More Now Carry Guns
(even in the People's Republic of Kalifornistan!)
As security fears increase, police and sheriffs have issued 28% more permits for concealed weapons statewide since 2000.
By Daryl Kelley, Times Staff Writer
The number of California residents who can legally carry a gun has surged 28% since 2000, reaching the highest level in decades following a spike in applications after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, new state figures show.
California sheriffs and police chiefs had issued more than 45,000 concealed weapon permits by the end of 2003, up about 10,000 in three years, including steep increases in Los Angeles, Orange and Ventura counties, according to the state Department of Justice.
Of California's 58 counties, only Yolo had a decline in weapon permits after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon near Washington.
"There was a big spike after 9/11, where people felt they should protect themselves better," said San Bernardino County Sheriff Gary Penrod, who granted nearly 500 new permits in 2001 and 2002. "And if a responsible citizen feels they need a gun and can demonstrate that need, I don't have any problem in giving it to them."
California law allows police agencies to grant concealed weapon permits for "good cause" if residents have clean criminal and mental health records and pass a basic firearms course. "Good cause" is determined by the police agencies.
Of the state's nine counties with more than 1 million people, San Bernardino had the highest rate of concealed weapon permits last year. Its 2,575 licenses equate to nearly 1.4 permits per 1,000 residents compared with a statewide norm of 1.25.
Rural Modoc County in the northeast corner had the state's highest rate of licensees: 35 per 1,000. Kern County issued the most permits, more than 4,300. San Francisco County had the lowest number, with 10 permits.
Indeed, the rate of people who legally carry weapons on their bodies, in their purses or in their cars was generally lower in big cities, where police chiefs want the streets free of firearms. But it was high in the state's rural north and east, where the closest law enforcement officer is often many miles away. "People here feel it's their right to carry weapons, and I support them," said Sheriff Jim Pope of Shasta County, which last year had 3,361 permits, second highest in the state. "As sheriffs, we're kind of the mop-up behind people."
The comments of Pope and Penrod reflect one side of a nationwide debate about whether properly trained, law-abiding residents should have the right to carry weapons. In an increasing trend, 35 states have passed "shall carry" or "right-to-carry" laws that allow most residents to get weapon permits, although only a fraction of those who qualify apply.
Since 1996, academic studies have reached contradictory findings on whether violent crime falls when more people are allowed to carry weapons. Some concluded it did, others said it didn't. Law enforcement officials in California split along the same lines.
In Los Angeles County, the number of concealed weapon permits increased from 874 to 1,391 in three years, despite strict policies by the sheriff and Los Angeles police. The increase is attributed to higher rates in jurisdictions such as Culver City, El Monte, Palos Verdes Estates and San Fernando.
"With 10 million people and our demographics, the population is not one that would lend itself to all our citizens being armed and feeling safe about it," said Los Angeles County Undersheriff William Stonich.
That is why Sheriff Lee Baca has approved only 377 permits, in addition to nearly 500 for the county's reserve deputies, Stonich said. Of those 377, about three-fourths are held by judges, prosecutors, public defenders and retired federal agents. Only about 100 licensees are residents without law enforcement credentials, he said.
Baca and Los Angeles Police Chief William J. Bratton require applicants to prove a severe danger to themselves or their families that police cannot adequately address and that would be lessened by carrying a gun.
Sheriff's licensees include public officials, corporate executives, doctors, clergy, a USC professor, a garbage company boss, a casino operator, a Palmdale homemaker and a rabbi who heads a prominent Jewish organization.
Veteran Hollywood producer Jerry Weintraub has a license, as do "Lethal Weapon" director Richard Donner, action movie actor Steven Seagal and entertainer James Darren. Seagal testified against New York organized crime members in 2003.
Three Lancaster officials — Mayor Frank Roberts, recently retired City Manager James Gilley and Assistant City Manager Dennis Davenport — held permits, the sheriff reported. They did not return calls to discuss why they need to carry guns.
Former Long Beach City Manager James Hankla, whose permit expired last month, said he no longer needed to carry a gun. "While I was still a city manager, there were situations where I felt I had to be prepared to defend myself," he said. "You can go through a [city] agenda on a weekly basis and find enough topics that could cause folks to be unhappy."
Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael Antonovich, a longtime reserve police officer and a lieutenant colonel in the National Guard, also felt directly threatened and was granted a weapons permit, spokesman Tony Bell said.
Bratton has continued the restrictive policies of previous chiefs since his appointment in 2002, and only 22 permits are now outstanding, the department reports.
"Anything that puts guns on the street is not something he would support," police spokesman Lt. Art Miller said.
Los Angeles' policy was so restrictive in the early 1990s that a group of residents sued and gained a settlement that led to a couple of hundred permits, said plaintiff David Yochelson, an attorney.
Yochelson, chairman of a committee set up to screen applicants, holds one of the city's few gun permits, as do three others involved in the old lawsuit. But he said the city has since reverted to past ways and has been sued again.
"We're still fighting and still very disappointed that law-abiding citizens can't protect themselves lawfully," he said.
Yochelson cites a Hollywood Hills defense attorney, whose throat was cut, as a classic example of a resident who was threatened but could not get a gun permit until he survived an attack.
But some officials who favor tight weapon policies cite the case of actor Robert Blake, who is charged with using a handgun to kill his wife, Bonny Lee Bakley. At the time of the slaying in 2001, Blake held a concealed weapon permit from Culver City, where then-Chief Ted Cooke was known for issuing permits to celebrities and out-of-town applicants.
"I've never had a problem with someone misusing a gun," Cooke said when he retired last year. Culver City had 210 permits in 2003, and its per capita rate exceeded all other cities in Los Angeles County.
"We've tightened up this year; each chief establishes what is good cause," said Police Lt. Ed Baughan, who estimated that Culver City now has 170 permits. "But we wouldn't hesitate to issue one to someone who has a stalker issue, even though the stalker hadn't made a death threat."
State law changed in 1999, allowing police chiefs to issue permits only to residents in their jurisdictions. Permits dropped by more than 5,000 that year, but quickly rebounded and have risen sharply since then, even in counties with reputations for strict weapon policies.
New sheriffs in Orange and Ventura counties, for example, have issued far more permits in recent years.
During his campaign for office in 1998, Orange County Sheriff Michael S. Carona called for issuing more weapon permits to people who transport large sums of money or other valuables. By the end of his first year, Carona had signed off on 482 permits, compared with 308 the previous year by his predecessor, Brad Gates.
The numbers have continued to rise. State figures show weapon permits for all Orange County jurisdictions increased from 571 in 2000 to 1,225 last year, with the Sheriff's Department accounting for the bulk of the licenses.
In Ventura County, which had 348 permits when Sheriff Bob Brooks took office in 1998, licenses had climbed to 715 by last year, the state reported.
Brooks believes extra permits make his county — already the safest urban area in the West — even safer, because only upstanding residents receive permits. He cited Texas, Florida and Arizona where, he said, liberalized gun-carrying policies have led to less violent crime.
"We've never had a problem with misuse, and we have had cases where someone would have been victimized if they had not been able to defend themselves," Brooks said. "Just the appearance of the sidearm was enough to stop the attacks."
He didn't set out to increase the number of permits, Brooks said, but when people with good character and a need for a weapon applied, he was happy to comply.
"The trend that was really noticeable was after Sept. 11," he said. "People were really more concerned about their safety."
If you want other stories on this topic, search the Archives at latimes.com/archives.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-concealed19jul19,1,553148.story?coll=la-headlines-california
Notice the pictures of ol "gun owner" Kerry
supposedly shooting a gun at the range WITHOUT apparent hearing and eye protection and looking at the camera WITH his finger on the trigger. Not a staged photo op, no, huh-uh, and certainly not someone who uses firearms on a regular basis.
JOHN FORBES KERRY, "MAN OF THE PEOPLE"
CAREER OBJECTIVE
President of the United States, Renter of the Lincoln bedroom, Intern Supervisor, Commander and Chief and Defender of the Working Man, I mean Person
EDUCATION
Educated at Swiss Boarding Schools -- because my parents did not like me that much
Attended elite private schools like Fessenden School in West Newton, Massachusetts and St. Paul's in New Hampshire -- just like your kids
Graduated Yale University, 1966 (I am much smarter than that Bush guy -- oh, wait, he also went to Yale.)
Graduated Boston College Law School in 1976 (I am much smarter than that Bush guy -- oh, wait, he got an MBA from Harvard.)
VIETNAM MILITARY SERVICE
Served as an officer on a swiftboat in the Mekong Delta in VIETNAM for three long months -- tried my best to come home a hero like JFK after his service on PT-109. I was in VIETNAM -- VIETNAM was a place where I was for a while. Did I mention that VIETNAM veterans love me?
I collected three Purple Hearts in my three months (had to get three in order to come home and run for Congress as a hero like JFK) and the last one for that scratch on my finger -- it REALLY did hurt! It was important to have the right connections so I could get home and run for Congress on my hero status like JFK -- he was not in VIETNAM, but I was.
Brought my own motion camera to make sure images of me in VIETNAM becoming a hero made it back home to the states. Got a free trip home after three months on my swiftboat where I suffered severe injuries and collected three Purple Hearts (did I mention that), a Bronze and Silver Star for heroism -- ensuring my destiny as a hero and man of the people like JFK.
Got home and found out they were not bestowing hero status on war heroes like me, so I threw my medals, or was it my ribbons, over the White House fence. Maybe it was someone else's medals.
Co-founder of the VIETNAM Veterans of America and spokesperson for the VIETNAM Veterans Against the War and worked closely with Jane Fonda to make sure everyone knew that all the guys in VIETNAM were war criminals -- I was too, and even testified before the Senate about my own war crimes.
"Represented" my cadre of anti-American misfits in a Paris meeting to discuss how we could better provide "aid and comfort" for the North Vietnamese and to discuss the unconditional surrender of the U.S. In doing so, I knowingly, directly violated UCMJ Article 104 part 904, and U.S. Code 18 U.S.C. 953.
Did I mention that this meeting, and my other anti-American activities, also put me in violation of the Constitution's Article three, Section three, which defines treason as "giving aid and comfort" to the enemy in time of warfare.
Consequently, I stand subject to the Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3, which states, "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President...having previously taken an oath...to support the Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."
But I don't have to resign -- I am understudy to Teddy Kennedy, now the patriarch of JFK's family.
I topped off my coddling of Commies by authoring a book called The New Soldier -- but since military heroes are back in vogue, I now sue anyone who reproduces the cover of that book on any website, especially a website like http://kerry-04.com. (The cover picture is a mockery of the Iwo Jima flag raising -- you can see it at http://kerry-04.com until my lawyers get them to take it down.)
NOTE: Please join fellow Patriots and sign the petition demanding John Kerry's resignation. Link to -- http://PatriotPetitions.US/Kerry
CONGRESSIONAL "SERVICE"
Volunteered as a campaign worker for my mentor, Teddy Kennedy in 1962. I just love that big lug!
My first campaign for Congress was in 1972 -- I was a war hero like JFK but nobody noticed so I ran on my anti-American platform. I won the primary with a little help from my campaign manager (brother Cameron) who broke into my opponents campaign headquarters. Unfortunately, because of that Watergate thing, I lost the general election to a Republican even after spending more than any other Congressional campaign in the nation.
In 1982, with the help of Uncle Teddy, I got elected as lieutenant governor for governor Michael Dukakis -- then got elected to the Senate in 1984 -- it has been smooth sailing ever since. I have dedicated the last 20 years, between wives and vacation homes, promoting big government spending (except in defense and intelligence, which I vote against every chance I get), class warfare, the welfare state and general wealth redistribution, any kind of abortion on demand (without parental consent for minors), and obstructionist tactics in the judicial nominee process.
According to Americans for Democratic [sic] Action, a far-left watchdog group, I have a higher lifetime liberal voting record at 93% than Ted Kennedy with 88%
I am the ranking Democrat member of the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. My current millionaire wife is heiress of the Heinz Ketchup fortune -- a "small" business
Ranking member of the Hispanic Task Force, even though I "borked" Miguel Estrada
Chaired the Senate Democratic Leadership Steering and Coordination Committee
In 1987, teemed up with Teddy to get an override of presidential veto of Boston's Big Dig Boondoggle -- one of the most larded distributions of taxpayer largess in U.S. history.
In 1991 the Senate created the Select Senate Committee on POW/MIA Affairs to investigate the possibility that U.S. prisoners of war and soldiers designated missing in action were still alive in Vietnam. Acting as chairman, I helped persuade the group to vote unanimously that no American servicemen still remained in Vietnam. In doing so, I helped begin the process of normalizing U.S.-Vietnamese relations.
Wealthiest senator ("man of the people"), with an estimated net worth of nearly $200 million (that's $800 million if you combine it with my current wife's assets)
POLITICAL POSTURING AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS:
ABORTION
Voted to federally fund abortions
Voted against parental consent for minors
Voted against ban on Partial Birth Abortion (3 times)
Voted against ban on sending money to UN population fund -- the money was sent to pay for China's forced abortion and sterilization policy
Have been warned by Catholic clergy that I will not be served communion due to my stance on this issue
NARAL lifetime rating of 100%; National Right to Life Committee lifetime rating of 0%
DEATH PENALTY
Oppose federal and/or state death penalty (except for innocent unborn children -- see above)
Voted against death penalty for terrorists
Voted against death penalty for drug-related murders
TAXES & ECONOMICS
I like high taxes and want to raise them
Voted against all three Bush tax cuts & want to repeal them
Voted for 1993 Clinton tax hike (largest in history)
Voted against major tax relief packages at least 10 times
Support re-raising taxes on the wealthy to redistribute money for healthcare and education -- i.e., Socialism
Claim I can stop outsourcing and create 10 million new jobs in four years, despite the fact that there are only about 8 million unemployed people in the U.S.
Want to raise the minimum wage, which will result in outsourcing and the loss of jobs
Voted at least 5 times against balanced budget amendments
Voted at least 5 times to raid the Social Security Trust Fund
Believe Washington manages your money better than you could
Lifetime rating of 26% from Citizens Against Government Waste
MILITARY & NATIONAL SECURITY
We don't need a military, per se
Favor UN control of remaining U.S. Troops
Voted for 7 major reductions in military funding
Voted against Gulf War I (1991)
Voted for Gulf War II -- but then criticized and voted against military appropriation for troops
Voted against MX missile, Trident Submarine, SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative -- Star Wars), and the B-1 and B-2 Stealth Bomber/Fighter
Supported slashing $2.6 billion from intelligence funding while serving as a member of Senate Intelligence Committee
SECOND AMENDMENT
Against
Have earned a lifetime rating of 0% from the National Rifle Association
FAITH & VALUES
Against/Don't have any
Voted Against Defense of Marriage Act
Favor civil unions for homosexuals until marriage is popular enough to support
Voted to extend hate crimes protections to homosexuals
Voted against voluntary school prayer
Voted against ban on human cloning and support embryonic stem-cell research
EDUCATION
Voted against voucher pilot program
Voted against approving a school-choice pilot program
Support racial profiling and preference for admission to universities, known as "affirmative action"
JUDGES, COURTS & LAW
Against racial profiling and preference when dealing with terrorism
Voted against confirmation William Rehnquist as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
Voted against confirmation of Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court
Only support activist judges who will support abortion, persecute Christians and rewrite the Constitution
Voted against confirmation John Ashcroft as U.S. Attorney General
Voted against punitive damage limits in products liability cases
As Michael Dukakis' Lt. Governor from 1983-1985, supported granting prison furloughs to hundreds of Massachusetts inmates
FOREIGN POLICY
Against linking Most Favored Nation status to China's human rights record
Voted for Kyoto Protocol on Environment that exempted major Third World polluters, while creating an unfair burden on American taxpayers
Supported Iraq regime change as late as January 2003, but not anymore
Support unilateral nuclear freeze
Support submitting completely to the UN, as well as the International Criminal Court, taking all sovereignty away from the U.S. and its citizens
Don't know what the Geneva Conventions say, mean or who they apply to
OTHER QUALIFICATIONS
Five multi-million dollar mansions
A large multi-million dollar yacht
Many "American" cars, including several gas-guzzling SUVs, which I am opposed to politically
Personal 757 campaign jet
Access to unlimited condiments -- did I mention my current millionaire wife is heiress to the Heinz fortune
Have dual citizenship in France
REFERENCES
General Vo Nguyen Giap -- most celebrated military hero of NORTH VIETNAM, where I served
"Hanoi Jane" Fonda
Teddy Kennedy
John F. Kennedy -- we have the same initials
Howard Dean -- (Albert Gore by proxy)
Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings
"Foreign Leaders" who I am unable to name at this time
FAVORITE WEBSITE
Kerry-04.com sponsored by The Federalist
NOTE: Please join fellow Patriots and sign the petition demanding John Kerry's resignation. Link to -- http://PatriotPetitions.US/Kerry
JOHN FORBES KERRY, "MAN OF THE PEOPLE"
CAREER OBJECTIVE
President of the United States, Renter of the Lincoln bedroom, Intern Supervisor, Commander and Chief and Defender of the Working Man, I mean Person
EDUCATION
Educated at Swiss Boarding Schools -- because my parents did not like me that much
Attended elite private schools like Fessenden School in West Newton, Massachusetts and St. Paul's in New Hampshire -- just like your kids
Graduated Yale University, 1966 (I am much smarter than that Bush guy -- oh, wait, he also went to Yale.)
Graduated Boston College Law School in 1976 (I am much smarter than that Bush guy -- oh, wait, he got an MBA from Harvard.)
VIETNAM MILITARY SERVICE
Served as an officer on a swiftboat in the Mekong Delta in VIETNAM for three long months -- tried my best to come home a hero like JFK after his service on PT-109. I was in VIETNAM -- VIETNAM was a place where I was for a while. Did I mention that VIETNAM veterans love me?
I collected three Purple Hearts in my three months (had to get three in order to come home and run for Congress as a hero like JFK) and the last one for that scratch on my finger -- it REALLY did hurt! It was important to have the right connections so I could get home and run for Congress on my hero status like JFK -- he was not in VIETNAM, but I was.
Brought my own motion camera to make sure images of me in VIETNAM becoming a hero made it back home to the states. Got a free trip home after three months on my swiftboat where I suffered severe injuries and collected three Purple Hearts (did I mention that), a Bronze and Silver Star for heroism -- ensuring my destiny as a hero and man of the people like JFK.
Got home and found out they were not bestowing hero status on war heroes like me, so I threw my medals, or was it my ribbons, over the White House fence. Maybe it was someone else's medals.
Co-founder of the VIETNAM Veterans of America and spokesperson for the VIETNAM Veterans Against the War and worked closely with Jane Fonda to make sure everyone knew that all the guys in VIETNAM were war criminals -- I was too, and even testified before the Senate about my own war crimes.
"Represented" my cadre of anti-American misfits in a Paris meeting to discuss how we could better provide "aid and comfort" for the North Vietnamese and to discuss the unconditional surrender of the U.S. In doing so, I knowingly, directly violated UCMJ Article 104 part 904, and U.S. Code 18 U.S.C. 953.
Did I mention that this meeting, and my other anti-American activities, also put me in violation of the Constitution's Article three, Section three, which defines treason as "giving aid and comfort" to the enemy in time of warfare.
Consequently, I stand subject to the Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3, which states, "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President...having previously taken an oath...to support the Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."
But I don't have to resign -- I am understudy to Teddy Kennedy, now the patriarch of JFK's family.
I topped off my coddling of Commies by authoring a book called The New Soldier -- but since military heroes are back in vogue, I now sue anyone who reproduces the cover of that book on any website, especially a website like http://kerry-04.com. (The cover picture is a mockery of the Iwo Jima flag raising -- you can see it at http://kerry-04.com until my lawyers get them to take it down.)
NOTE: Please join fellow Patriots and sign the petition demanding John Kerry's resignation. Link to -- http://PatriotPetitions.US/Kerry
CONGRESSIONAL "SERVICE"
Volunteered as a campaign worker for my mentor, Teddy Kennedy in 1962. I just love that big lug!
My first campaign for Congress was in 1972 -- I was a war hero like JFK but nobody noticed so I ran on my anti-American platform. I won the primary with a little help from my campaign manager (brother Cameron) who broke into my opponents campaign headquarters. Unfortunately, because of that Watergate thing, I lost the general election to a Republican even after spending more than any other Congressional campaign in the nation.
In 1982, with the help of Uncle Teddy, I got elected as lieutenant governor for governor Michael Dukakis -- then got elected to the Senate in 1984 -- it has been smooth sailing ever since. I have dedicated the last 20 years, between wives and vacation homes, promoting big government spending (except in defense and intelligence, which I vote against every chance I get), class warfare, the welfare state and general wealth redistribution, any kind of abortion on demand (without parental consent for minors), and obstructionist tactics in the judicial nominee process.
According to Americans for Democratic [sic] Action, a far-left watchdog group, I have a higher lifetime liberal voting record at 93% than Ted Kennedy with 88%
I am the ranking Democrat member of the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. My current millionaire wife is heiress of the Heinz Ketchup fortune -- a "small" business
Ranking member of the Hispanic Task Force, even though I "borked" Miguel Estrada
Chaired the Senate Democratic Leadership Steering and Coordination Committee
In 1987, teemed up with Teddy to get an override of presidential veto of Boston's Big Dig Boondoggle -- one of the most larded distributions of taxpayer largess in U.S. history.
In 1991 the Senate created the Select Senate Committee on POW/MIA Affairs to investigate the possibility that U.S. prisoners of war and soldiers designated missing in action were still alive in Vietnam. Acting as chairman, I helped persuade the group to vote unanimously that no American servicemen still remained in Vietnam. In doing so, I helped begin the process of normalizing U.S.-Vietnamese relations.
Wealthiest senator ("man of the people"), with an estimated net worth of nearly $200 million (that's $800 million if you combine it with my current wife's assets)
POLITICAL POSTURING AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS:
ABORTION
Voted to federally fund abortions
Voted against parental consent for minors
Voted against ban on Partial Birth Abortion (3 times)
Voted against ban on sending money to UN population fund -- the money was sent to pay for China's forced abortion and sterilization policy
Have been warned by Catholic clergy that I will not be served communion due to my stance on this issue
NARAL lifetime rating of 100%; National Right to Life Committee lifetime rating of 0%
DEATH PENALTY
Oppose federal and/or state death penalty (except for innocent unborn children -- see above)
Voted against death penalty for terrorists
Voted against death penalty for drug-related murders
TAXES & ECONOMICS
I like high taxes and want to raise them
Voted against all three Bush tax cuts & want to repeal them
Voted for 1993 Clinton tax hike (largest in history)
Voted against major tax relief packages at least 10 times
Support re-raising taxes on the wealthy to redistribute money for healthcare and education -- i.e., Socialism
Claim I can stop outsourcing and create 10 million new jobs in four years, despite the fact that there are only about 8 million unemployed people in the U.S.
Want to raise the minimum wage, which will result in outsourcing and the loss of jobs
Voted at least 5 times against balanced budget amendments
Voted at least 5 times to raid the Social Security Trust Fund
Believe Washington manages your money better than you could
Lifetime rating of 26% from Citizens Against Government Waste
MILITARY & NATIONAL SECURITY
We don't need a military, per se
Favor UN control of remaining U.S. Troops
Voted for 7 major reductions in military funding
Voted against Gulf War I (1991)
Voted for Gulf War II -- but then criticized and voted against military appropriation for troops
Voted against MX missile, Trident Submarine, SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative -- Star Wars), and the B-1 and B-2 Stealth Bomber/Fighter
Supported slashing $2.6 billion from intelligence funding while serving as a member of Senate Intelligence Committee
SECOND AMENDMENT
Against
Have earned a lifetime rating of 0% from the National Rifle Association
FAITH & VALUES
Against/Don't have any
Voted Against Defense of Marriage Act
Favor civil unions for homosexuals until marriage is popular enough to support
Voted to extend hate crimes protections to homosexuals
Voted against voluntary school prayer
Voted against ban on human cloning and support embryonic stem-cell research
EDUCATION
Voted against voucher pilot program
Voted against approving a school-choice pilot program
Support racial profiling and preference for admission to universities, known as "affirmative action"
JUDGES, COURTS & LAW
Against racial profiling and preference when dealing with terrorism
Voted against confirmation William Rehnquist as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
Voted against confirmation of Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court
Only support activist judges who will support abortion, persecute Christians and rewrite the Constitution
Voted against confirmation John Ashcroft as U.S. Attorney General
Voted against punitive damage limits in products liability cases
As Michael Dukakis' Lt. Governor from 1983-1985, supported granting prison furloughs to hundreds of Massachusetts inmates
FOREIGN POLICY
Against linking Most Favored Nation status to China's human rights record
Voted for Kyoto Protocol on Environment that exempted major Third World polluters, while creating an unfair burden on American taxpayers
Supported Iraq regime change as late as January 2003, but not anymore
Support unilateral nuclear freeze
Support submitting completely to the UN, as well as the International Criminal Court, taking all sovereignty away from the U.S. and its citizens
Don't know what the Geneva Conventions say, mean or who they apply to
OTHER QUALIFICATIONS
Five multi-million dollar mansions
A large multi-million dollar yacht
Many "American" cars, including several gas-guzzling SUVs, which I am opposed to politically
Personal 757 campaign jet
Access to unlimited condiments -- did I mention my current millionaire wife is heiress to the Heinz fortune
Have dual citizenship in France
REFERENCES
General Vo Nguyen Giap -- most celebrated military hero of NORTH VIETNAM, where I served
"Hanoi Jane" Fonda
Teddy Kennedy
John F. Kennedy -- we have the same initials
Howard Dean -- (Albert Gore by proxy)
Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings
"Foreign Leaders" who I am unable to name at this time
FAVORITE WEBSITE
Kerry-04.com sponsored by The Federalist
NOTE: Please join fellow Patriots and sign the petition demanding John Kerry's resignation. Link to -- http://PatriotPetitions.US/Kerry
I KNEW it!
Folks still own it?
Matey
Nope, but kinda resembles pictures..
you once posted at MF. Am I correct?
Matey