Many people have begun to catch on to the idea that the NRA is not protecting
the rights of gun owners ... they merely give that impression to the
uninformed by compromising our gun owning rights. Compromise is what the
fabian socialists want, a little bit of your rights at a time until you have
no rights at all. Let us not forget there are fabian fascists also, they are
both on the same team: the Republicans and the Democrats.
Tito
<< Forwarded Message:
Subj: NRA - Be careful what you ask for (you might get it!)
Date: 6/25/01 8:49:24 PM Mountain Daylight Time
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (GOA-Texas)
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (GOA-Texas)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gun_Owners_Alliance_Alert)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
GUN OWNERS ALLIANCE
!!ALERT!!
Chris W. Stark - Director
P.O. Box 1924
Crosby, Texas 77532-1924
Ph. 1-281-328-3305 Fax 1-810-283-7459
http://www.GOA-Texas.org
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
25 June 2001
++++++++++++++++++
NRA - Be careful what you ask for (you might get it!)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Copyright © 2001 by Gun Owners Alliance (GOA-Texas).
Republication permitted ONLY if this e-mail alert
is left intact in its original state.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
According to Vol. 5, No. 40, NRA-ILA FAX ALERT of 10/9/98:
"On Thursday, Mr. LaPierre, announced the appointment
of James Jay Baker to the position of Executive
Director of NRA-ILA, effective immediately. "Jim
Baker is a staunch defender of Second Amendment
freedoms with a strong NRA background," LaPierre
said. "He has served NRA in the past as an expert
in federal elections law, as Director of our Federal
Affairs Division, and, until 1994, as Executive
Director of the Institute for Legislative Action.
NRA members know Jim Baker, and they know the fight
for their rights is in capable hands." The
appointment marks a return for Baker to the position
he held from 1991 to 1994. "Jim Baker returns to
the NRA with an incredible wealth of experience and
expertise as an aggressive defender of our Second
Amendment freedoms. He has an exemplary reputation
on Capitol Hill and in state legislatures, and Jim
is highly regarded by the nearly three million NRA
members and the nation's firearms owning community.
Jim Baker is a hunter, a firearms expert and a
skilled legislative strategist. Our members have
full confidence that the fight for their rights is
in capable hands."
Jim Baker is not the friend of Gun Owners, THAT IS, if you believe that
the Brady Bill and the Instant Check is the Trojan Horse of the Pro-Gun
Community. Read on:
As the noted writer and attorney David Kopel has written in an Independence
Institute monograph on waiting periods:
Significantly, the instant check is subject to the same
problem of creating a gun and gun-owner registration
system as is a waiting period. As the [1989 Justice
Department] Task Force observes, "Any system that
requires a criminal history record check prior to purchase
of a firearm creates the potential for the automated
tracking of individuals who seek to purchase firearms."
Go to http://www.goa-texas.org/Horse.htm for more on the dangers of the
Instant Check system.
Even now, the FBI illegally maintains a LIST of firearms owner purchasers
for several months, if not indefinite.
But who passed this "Trojan Horse" through?
In part, we can thank Mr. Jim Baker, which now is the NRA-ILA's Executive
Director and Chief Lobbyist. Read on:
Starting in 1989, the NRA, under Warren Cassidy, has chosen to fight gun
control with . . . national computerized gun control. Jim Baker of the NRA
was quoted by USA Today on October 26, 1993 (P. 7A) as saying: " We already
support 65% of the Brady bill, because it moves to an instant check, which
is what we want."
And even before the voting started, Jim Baker was conceding defeat. Readers
of the Tuesday, November 16 issue of USA Today learned this:
"It doesn't make a heck of a lot of difference" whether
the Brady bill is voted on separately or as part of
the crime package, says NRA lobbyist Jim Baker. "Whether
it's before Thanksgiving or when they get back in January
(the Brady bill) is going to happen."
Imagine getting ready for a championship game and your coach tells you your
side is beaten before you've taken the field. Would you give your best
effort?
The NRA through Jim Baker, was publicly conceding defeat even before the
first
vote was taken on the Brady Bill/Instant Check.
You can read the entire story at:
http://www.goa-texas.org/turkey.htm
When politicians vote for the NRA compromise gun control bill, how can the
NRA (or anyone else) justifiably criticize these people for supporting gun
control? A memo released on this matter by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson
(R-TX) illustrates the problem. She said:
[A] complete substitute bill was offered by Senators Dole
and Mitchell. This legislation, which I supported,
differed drastically from the original Brady Bill. It
provided for accelerated implementation of the
national instant-check [sic], which I and other gun
rights supporters have long sought, followed by
elimination of any waiting period. THE NRA DESCRIBED
THE SENATE'S APPROVAL OF THIS SUBSTITUTE BILL
AS A VICTORY. [Emphasis added.]
This is exactly how the NRA described the passage of the first national gun
control law since 1968. On November 20, 1993, the Senate passed a bill that
would certainly impose a minimum of five days waiting period everywhere in
the United States. Yet the Associated Press reported that NRA "spokesman Bill
McIntrye" was saying that the instant background check also in the bill "will
be a victory for gun owners."
The Online Report to the F I R E A R M S C O A L I T I O N back in
January
6, 1993, Release 1.3, states:
"Tanya Metaksa is Wayne LaPierre's choice to
replace James J. Baker.....When the press finds
out about it -- as they're about to through
articles in Gun Week and Fishing and Hunting News
they'll undoubtedly report that Baker has been
ousted because of enactment of the Brady Bill.
It is unclear why Jim Baker left NRA-ILA back in January of 1993. However,
that is not the important point of this quote. What is interesting is that
even the liberal press knew what Mr. Baker accomplished as head of NRA-ILA,
when the Brady Bill passed.
Now you know who IS the "Chief Lobbyist" for NRA-ILA, and now you know,
"The R E S T of the Story." NRA. The "winning" team?
But wait! There's more! Read the story below that made headlines TODAY.
Just a reminder NRA......Be careful what you ask for (you might get it!).....
With Respect,
Gun Owners Alliance
Chris W. Stark - Director
http://www.GOA-Texas.org/webring/no-compromise.htm
*****************************************************
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,28071,00.html
WASHINGTON — The National Rifle Association lost a Supreme Court appeal
Monday over whether the government can retain information about gun buyers
under the landmark Brady gun control law.
The court, without comment, turned aside the NRA's challenge to the way the
FBI handles information gathered from on-the-spot background checks in gun
stores.
The NRA claimed the FBI's practice of keeping identities of legal gun buyers
on file for several months is illegal under the 1993 Brady Act itself, and
is akin to compiling a national registry of gun owners.
"The Brady Act was a historic compromise in which firearm purchasers submit
to background checks in exchange for the assurance that, once cleared as
law-abiding, the government will not compile any record of their
identities," lawyers for the NRA wrote.
So-called instant checks replaced five-day waiting periods under the Brady
Act in 1998. The phone checks are performed through the FBI, while the
would-be gun buyer waits.
In planning for the change to instant checks, the Justice Department, under
then-Attorney General Janet Reno, decided the FBI would keep the records for
up to six months. Keeping the information would help the FBI debug the
system and audit its performance, according to the administrative rule the
Justice Department issued.
Keeping the log would also protect privacy by helping catch dealers or
others who might run unauthorized background checks on people who were not
trying to buy a gun, the department said.
The FBI eventually cut the length of time it would hang on to records to
three months, but the NRA said any record retention should be banned.
The NRA sued Reno in federal court on the day the instant checks took
effect. The court dismissed the NRA's claim, and a federal appeals court
agreed last year.
Two of the three judges on the appeals panel found "nothing in the Brady Act
that unambiguously prohibits temporary retention of information about lawful
transactions." The dissenting judge called the FBI records retention "an
unauthorized power grab" by the Justice Department.
The NRA then appealed to the Supreme Court, setting up a common question for
the justices: How does a law passed by Congress square with government
regulations imposed later on?
The Justice Department urged the high court to let the lower ruling stand.
The appeals court correctly found that the FBI's buyer log was a temporary
list and was not intended to track gun buyers, the department's lawyers
argued.
The case is NRA v. Ashcroft, 00-1332.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Help Support the work of Gun Owners Alliance! Suggested annual dues?
As an opener, the price of a box of ammo ($15-$20). Contribute at:
http://www.goa-texas.org/members.htm
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Copyright © 2001 by Gun Owners Alliance (GOA-Texas). Republication
permitted ONLY if this e-mail alert is left intact in its original
state. The views herein do not necessarily reflect the views of
any other individual or organization, than Gun Owners Alliance
(GOA-Texas). We do not officially represent Gun Owners of America.
Go to http://www.goa-texas.org/TXsig.htm for more information.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ONLY THE E-MAIL ADDRESS USED TO SEND US A SUBSCRIBE REQUEST, CAN BE
SUBSCRIBED. WE DO NOT SHARE, LEND, OR SELL OUR E-MAIL LIST FOR ANY
REASON. YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS REMAINS CONFIDENTIAL WITH GOA-TEXAS.ORG.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
TO SUBSCRIBE TO OUR E-MAIL ALERTS, send an e-mail to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
No subject line or message necessary.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
TO UN-SUBSCRIBE TO OUR E-MAIL ALERTS, send an e-mail to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
No subject line or message necessary.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
Comment: 'None Genuine without this Signature'
iQEVAwUBOzf2M0McuoA7aq7dAQHL1gf+I+NRw9LnDfwDvVvv6ckO0HPI9mRjmSIG
PCvlnsnQWUyyCLJ6+ZsZG9+srQq2hRjdJgoP5WwibZ2SJ7Pr01Lfu+TIOPTK6N1x
YzS0GQLGidWMUcNrzQyCFpwygX0W/PHM0SgcfqSZs+j/OeRRmUIIJJ1E1lhnhc0D
7R/wR+kETAUHvkE57kyc3m9lBduhDbKgtfg8tQPkIJlctmi0Vhb+zScMptaYi4Pm
HA8Q0Jj6o8C+7NTkUAgaKu1WOYZEAFKHfG1DgnliyOuccHXGXqPThhRqpc4O2x+R
TFwE2wAilQJOOMXLTI2AvYa5k4lAmWVCsrgRBgN8qBQeKI4KTmPgOQ==
=BjQ9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
GUN OWNERS ALLIANCE
!!ALERT!!
Chris W. Stark - Director
P.O. Box 1924
Crosby, Texas 77532-1924
Ph. 1-281-328-3305 Fax 1-810-283-7459
http://www.GOA-Texas.org
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
25 June 2001
++++++++++++++++++
NRA - Be careful what you ask for (you might get it!)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Copyright � 2001 by Gun Owners Alliance (GOA-Texas).
Republication permitted ONLY if this e-mail alert
is left intact in its original state.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
According to Vol. 5, No. 40, NRA-ILA FAX ALERT of 10/9/98:
"On Thursday, Mr. LaPierre, announced the appointment
of James Jay Baker to the position of Executive
Director of NRA-ILA, effective immediately. "Jim
Baker is a staunch defender of Second Amendment
freedoms with a strong NRA background," LaPierre
said. "He has served NRA in the past as an expert
in federal elections law, as Director of our Federal
Affairs Division, and, until 1994, as Executive
Director of the Institute for Legislative Action.
NRA members know Jim Baker, and they know the fight
for their rights is in capable hands." The
appointment marks a return for Baker to the position
he held from 1991 to 1994. "Jim Baker returns to
the NRA with an incredible wealth of experience and
expertise as an aggressive defender of our Second
Amendment freedoms. He has an exemplary reputation
on Capitol Hill and in state legislatures, and Jim
is highly regarded by the nearly three million NRA
members and the nation's firearms owning community.
Jim Baker is a hunter, a firearms expert and a
skilled legislative strategist. Our members have
full confidence that the fight for their rights is
in capable hands."
Jim Baker is not the friend of Gun Owners, THAT IS, if you believe that
the Brady Bill and the Instant Check is the Trojan Horse of the Pro-Gun
Community. Read on:
As the noted writer and attorney David Kopel has written in an Independence
Institute monograph on waiting periods:
Significantly, the instant check is subject to the same
problem of creating a gun and gun-owner registration
system as is a waiting period. As the [1989 Justice
Department] Task Force observes, "Any system that
requires a criminal history record check prior to purchase
of a firearm creates the potential for the automated
tracking of individuals who seek to purchase firearms."
Go to http://www.goa-texas.org/Horse.htm for more on the dangers of the
Instant Check system.
Even now, the FBI illegally maintains a LIST of firearms owner purchasers
for several months, if not indefinite.
But who passed this "Trojan Horse" through?
In part, we can thank Mr. Jim Baker, which now is the NRA-ILA's Executive
Director and Chief Lobbyist. Read on:
Starting in 1989, the NRA, under Warren Cassidy, has chosen to fight gun
control with . . . national computerized gun control. Jim Baker of the NRA
was quoted by USA Today on October 26, 1993 (P. 7A) as saying: " We already
support 65% of the Brady bill, because it moves to an instant check, which
is what we want."
And even before the voting started, Jim Baker was conceding defeat. Readers
of the Tuesday, November 16 issue of USA Today learned this:
"It doesn't make a heck of a lot of difference" whether
the Brady bill is voted on separately or as part of
the crime package, says NRA lobbyist Jim Baker. "Whether
it's before Thanksgiving or when they get back in January
(the Brady bill) is going to happen."
Imagine getting ready for a championship game and your coach tells you your
side is beaten before you've taken the field. Would you give your best effort?
The NRA through Jim Baker, was publicly conceding defeat even before the first
vote was taken on the Brady Bill/Instant Check.
You can read the entire story at:
http://www.goa-texas.org/turkey.htm
When politicians vote for the NRA compromise gun control bill, how can the
NRA (or anyone else) justifiably criticize these people for supporting gun
control? A memo released on this matter by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson
(R-TX) illustrates the problem. She said:
[A] complete substitute bill was offered by Senators Dole
and Mitchell. This legislation, which I supported,
differed drastically from the original Brady Bill. It
provided for accelerated implementation of the
national instant-check [sic], which I and other gun
rights supporters have long sought, followed by
elimination of any waiting period. THE NRA DESCRIBED
THE SENATE'S APPROVAL OF THIS SUBSTITUTE BILL
AS A VICTORY. [Emphasis added.]
This is exactly how the NRA described the passage of the first national gun
control law since 1968. On November 20, 1993, the Senate passed a bill that
would certainly impose a minimum of five days waiting period everywhere in
the United States. Yet the Associated Press reported that NRA "spokesman Bill
McIntrye" was saying that the instant background check also in the bill "will
be a victory for gun owners."
The Online Report to the F I R E A R M S C O A L I T I O N back in January
6, 1993, Release 1.3, states:
"Tanya Metaksa is Wayne LaPierre's choice to
replace James J. Baker.....When the press finds
out about it -- as they're about to through
articles in Gun Week and Fishing and Hunting News
they'll undoubtedly report that Baker has been
ousted because of enactment of the Brady Bill.
It is unclear why Jim Baker left NRA-ILA back in January of 1993. However,
that is not the important point of this quote. What is interesting is that
even the liberal press knew what Mr. Baker accomplished as head of NRA-ILA,
when the Brady Bill passed.
Now you know who IS the "Chief Lobbyist" for NRA-ILA, and now you know,
"The R E S T of the Story." NRA. The "winning" team?
But wait! There's more! Read the story below that made headlines TODAY.
Just a reminder NRA......Be careful what you ask for (you might get it!).....
With Respect,
Gun Owners Alliance
Chris W. Stark - Director
http://www.GOA-Texas.org/webring/no-compromise.htm
*****************************************************
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,28071,00.html
WASHINGTON � The National Rifle Association lost a Supreme Court appeal
Monday over whether the government can retain information about gun buyers
under the landmark Brady gun control law.
The court, without comment, turned aside the NRA's challenge to the way the
FBI handles information gathered from on-the-spot background checks in gun
stores.
The NRA claimed the FBI's practice of keeping identities of legal gun buyers
on file for several months is illegal under the 1993 Brady Act itself, and
is akin to compiling a national registry of gun owners.
"The Brady Act was a historic compromise in which firearm purchasers submit
to background checks in exchange for the assurance that, once cleared as
law-abiding, the government will not compile any record of their
identities," lawyers for the NRA wrote.
So-called instant checks replaced five-day waiting periods under the Brady
Act in 1998. The phone checks are performed through the FBI, while the
would-be gun buyer waits.
In planning for the change to instant checks, the Justice Department, under
then-Attorney General Janet Reno, decided the FBI would keep the records for
up to six months. Keeping the information would help the FBI debug the
system and audit its performance, according to the administrative rule the
Justice Department issued.
Keeping the log would also protect privacy by helping catch dealers or
others who might run unauthorized background checks on people who were not
trying to buy a gun, the department said.
The FBI eventually cut the length of time it would hang on to records to
three months, but the NRA said any record retention should be banned.
The NRA sued Reno in federal court on the day the instant checks took
effect. The court dismissed the NRA's claim, and a federal appeals court
agreed last year.
Two of the three judges on the appeals panel found "nothing in the Brady Act
that unambiguously prohibits temporary retention of information about lawful
transactions." The dissenting judge called the FBI records retention "an
unauthorized power grab" by the Justice Department.
The NRA then appealed to the Supreme Court, setting up a common question for
the justices: How does a law passed by Congress square with government
regulations imposed later on?
The Justice Department urged the high court to let the lower ruling stand.
The appeals court correctly found that the FBI's buyer log was a temporary
list and was not intended to track gun buyers, the department's lawyers
argued.
The case is NRA v. Ashcroft, 00-1332.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Help Support the work of Gun Owners Alliance! Suggested annual dues?
As an opener, the price of a box of ammo ($15-$20). Contribute at:
http://www.goa-texas.org/members.htm
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Copyright � 2001 by Gun Owners Alliance (GOA-Texas). Republication
permitted ONLY if this e-mail alert is left intact in its original
state. The views herein do not necessarily reflect the views of
any other individual or organization, than Gun Owners Alliance
(GOA-Texas). We do not officially represent Gun Owners of America.
Go to http://www.goa-texas.org/TXsig.htm for more information.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ONLY THE E-MAIL ADDRESS USED TO SEND US A SUBSCRIBE REQUEST, CAN BE
SUBSCRIBED. WE DO NOT SHARE, LEND, OR SELL OUR E-MAIL LIST FOR ANY
REASON. YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS REMAINS CONFIDENTIAL WITH GOA-TEXAS.ORG.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
TO SUBSCRIBE TO OUR E-MAIL ALERTS, send an e-mail to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
No subject line or message necessary.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
TO UN-SUBSCRIBE TO OUR E-MAIL ALERTS, send an e-mail to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
No subject line or message necessary.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
Comment: 'None Genuine without this Signature'
iQEVAwUBOzf2M0McuoA7aq7dAQHL1gf+I+NRw9LnDfwDvVvv6ckO0HPI9mRjmSIG
PCvlnsnQWUyyCLJ6+ZsZG9+srQq2hRjdJgoP5WwibZ2SJ7Pr01Lfu+TIOPTK6N1x
YzS0GQLGidWMUcNrzQyCFpwygX0W/PHM0SgcfqSZs+j/OeRRmUIIJJ1E1lhnhc0D
7R/wR+kETAUHvkE57kyc3m9lBduhDbKgtfg8tQPkIJlctmi0Vhb+zScMptaYi4Pm
HA8Q0Jj6o8C+7NTkUAgaKu1WOYZEAFKHfG1DgnliyOuccHXGXqPThhRqpc4O2x+R
TFwE2wAilQJOOMXLTI2AvYa5k4lAmWVCsrgRBgN8qBQeKI4KTmPgOQ==
=BjQ9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
