SkyPiggie 0 #1 May 22, 2008 "Today, as President of the American Hunters and Shooters Association (AHSA), I announced our endorsement of Senator Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States... "As a gun rights organization we have not come to this decision lightly. We were formed two years ago because our research shows that millions of gun owners wanted a change... "Senator Obama has clearly demonstrated his commitment to the 2nd Amendment..." http://www.huntersandshooters.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=224&Itemid=71 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #2 May 22, 2008 Too bad Senator Obama hasn't demonstrated any OTHER support for the Second Amendment....Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 898 #3 May 22, 2008 agreed! I'd have to fully disagree. Bang! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #4 May 22, 2008 the rest of the public release makes it clear that this is a Democratic based gun rights org, choosing between Clinton and Obama. No doubt who they would pick on that choice. It looks like they waited, however, until it was clear he would win rather then stick their neck out. From the headline, I wondered if it could be one of the long standing organizations that lost their trust for McCain after his involvement with the faux gun rights org, AGS. But this org seems very similar to the AGS. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #5 May 22, 2008 Never heard of these guys, but it seems they're clearly a Democratic group. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #6 May 22, 2008 Quotethe rest of the public release makes it clear that this is a Democratic based gun rights org, choosing between Clinton and Obama. Perhaps. Looking through their site they seem to be a group of sportsmen who became disenchanted with the NRA. Lots of complaints about NRA positions, which may include political choices. If it is a Democratic based gun rights organization -- yeah! VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #7 May 22, 2008 QuoteIf it is a Democratic based gun rights organization -- yeah! Hey dont you know.. that you cant possibly be pro 2nd amendment rights... or a hunter... or a shooter.. and be a democrat... or a moderate. You HAVE to be firmly in the right wing to be able to tolerate a LOT of the crap that the NRA puts out the last few years. That is why I told them to stick their fundraising mail where the sun dont shine a few years ago and dropped my membership. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #8 May 22, 2008 Quote You HAVE to be firmly in the right wing to be able to tolerate a LOT of the crap that the NRA puts out the last few years. That is why I told them to stick their fundraising mail where the sun dont shine a few years ago and dropped my membership. Or really bad at math. I tried calculating the postage costs of all the stuff sent to me during the 2000 campaign and determined that the vast majority of anything I give them would be spent asking me for more. So I dropped the membership as well. I did get a cool 'signed' autograph from my friend, Charles, that is now hanging on the wall. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #9 May 22, 2008 "I see our issues as complementary to theirs," Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign, says about Schoenke's association (AHSA). "They're a positive group." AHSA was started in 2006. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Hunters_and_Shooters_Association "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #10 May 23, 2008 Given that statement alone, I would consider the group to be anti second amendment. Similar to other groups that think the second was about hunting. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piper17 1 #11 May 23, 2008 An anti-Second Amendment rights group in sheep's clothing. Read up on the background of the founder; no doubt on which side of the fence this guy really is."A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #12 May 23, 2008 Yeah, it's a total scam. AHSA was co-founded by John Rosenthal in 2005. Rosenthal founded a group called "Stop Handgun Violence" in the mid 90's: http://www.stophandgunviolence.com/index.asp He was also on the Board of Directors for Handgun Control, Inc. HCI later became the Brady Bunch. Mr. Rosenthal resigned his position on the AHSA BOD in 2007. ------- Some of the stuff below was found on a couple websites, but I did all the searches myself to verify the info: Search of Guidestar non-profit database for AHSA returns: AMERICAN RIFLE ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION INC 2214 WEST GREENLEAF DRIVE FREDERICK, MD 02172 301-631-2950 Google search for 2214 West Greenleaf Dr, Frederick, MD returns: Crime Gun Solutions LLC (CGS) 2214 West Greenleaf Drive Frederick Maryland 21702 http://www.crimegunsolutions.com/home.htm? Many of the people who run AHSA are involved with this company. Crime Gun Solutions is also listed as a member of IANSA: "IANSA seeks to make people safer from gun violence by securing stronger regulation on guns in society..." [urlhttp://www.iansa.org/about.htm[/url] 2214 W. Greenleaf appears to be the residence of Joseph J. Vince Jr. based on a reverse phone number lookup for 301-631-2960: Satellite view of 2214 West Greenleaf Dr: http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=39.453152&lon=-77.454858&z=19.2&r=0&src=msl (click on center of screen) AHSA is run out of someone's house. Thre's tons more info available. "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyPiggie 0 #13 May 23, 2008 Obama on guns, from Reason Magazine: http://www.reason.com/news/show/125180.html He does the usual namby-pamby liberal politician double-talk: First he says he supports the 2nd Amendment constitutional right. Then he says he approves of local jurisdictions banning guns if they want to. You can't have it both ways. If local jurisdictions can ban them from law-abiding citizens, then it's not a constitutional right, and the 2nd Amendment means nothing. So I guess, according to Obama, you have the right to own a gun, as long as somebody doesn't object to it, then you don't have the right to own a gun. Okay, have you got it now? Oh, by the way, he's also supported a ban on all handguns, and also on all semi-auto long guns. Yeah, just like England has done. And this is who this gun organization supports? These guys are wolves in sheep's clothing. They're just pretending to be pro-gun, when in fact, they're about as anti-gun as you can get. And anybody that thinks that Obama is the best candidate to protect your gun rights is an idiot. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #14 May 23, 2008 QuoteAnd anybody that thinks that Obama is the best candidate to protect your gun rights is an idiot. None of the candidates are good in this regard. However, the state of affairs is not like 2000 - all of them fear the consequences of fucking with us. The Democratic Party is give gun control the same sort of lip service that the GOP gives abortion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #15 May 23, 2008 QuoteThe Democratic Party is give gun control the same sort of lip service that the GOP gives abortion. Disagree - the Reps aren't constantly submitting bills limiting access to, or attempting to remove abortion entirely.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #16 May 23, 2008 QuoteQuoteThe Democratic Party is give gun control the same sort of lip service that the GOP gives abortion. Disagree - the Reps aren't constantly submitting bills limiting access to, or attempting to remove abortion entirely. Sure they are. What country do you live in? In fact, under Bush the party has stepped up from the constant submitting of bills to actually trying to get things done. FYI - submitting bills is lip service. Enacting bills is actual action. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #17 May 23, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteThe Democratic Party is give gun control the same sort of lip service that the GOP gives abortion. Disagree - the Reps aren't constantly submitting bills limiting access to, or attempting to remove abortion entirely. Sure they are. What country do you live in? In fact, under Bush the party has stepped up from the constant submitting of bills to actually trying to get things done. FYI - submitting bills is lip service. Enacting bills is actual action. Make me a list with bills submitted to overturn Roe v. Wade in comparison to bills attempting to limit the 2nd Amendment. Re: submittal vs. enactment - both show the intent of the politicianMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #18 May 23, 2008 QuoteRe: submittal vs. enactment - both show the intent of the politician No, they don't. Quite a few bills are submitted by legislators for the benefit of their constituites with no intent of the bill ever making it out of committee. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #19 May 23, 2008 QuoteQuoteRe: submittal vs. enactment - both show the intent of the politician No, they don't. Quite a few bills are submitted by legislators for the benefit of their constituites with no intent of the bill ever making it out of committee. I see your point - agree to disagree on that one, I suppose.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #20 May 23, 2008 > the Reps aren't constantly submitting bills limiting access to, or attempting to remove abortion entirely. Are you kidding? How many times has the "partial birth abortion ban" resurfaced in the past decade? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #21 May 23, 2008 Quote> the Reps aren't constantly submitting bills limiting access to, or attempting to remove abortion entirely. Are you kidding? How many times has the "partial birth abortion ban" resurfaced in the past decade? I hadn't thought of that - thanks for bringing it up. Let's see... attempted to pass bills in 1995 and 1997, vetoed by Clinton. Signed into law by Bush in 2003. That's 3, presumably from the Rep's side. Looks like most of the other action (at least until confirmed by the Supremes in 2007) was from attempts to repeal it. Care to answer the other side of the question now?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
