4um: 'Hunters & Shooters' endorse Obama, group says he supports gun rights

Title: 'Hunters & Shooters' endorse Obama, group says he supports gun rights
Source: Raw Story
URL Source: http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Hunte ... dorses_Obama_says_he_0416.html
Published: Apr 16, 2008
Author: Nick Juliano
Post Date: 2008-04-16 13:59:52 by robin
Keywords: None
Views: 893
Comments: 63

Less than a week after coming under fire for saying small-town Pennsylvanians "cling to" gun rights, Barack Obama picked up the endorsement of a pro-gun association that has backed Democratic candidates in the past.

The American Hunters & Shooters Association said Obama's views of the 2nd Amendment have been unfairly criticized and its endorsement comes as Obama's opponents are characterizing him as an "elitist" and condescending towards gun-owners.

The group sets itself apart from the "more extreme" elements of the pro-gun lobby like the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America. Unlike them, AHSA favors some gun-control measures like background checks and required safety courses for concealed weapons permits. (The NRA has accused the group of being a front for the anti-gun lobby.)

Ray Schoenke, the hunters association's president, cited Obama's support of an amendment to a Department of Homeland Security funding bill that would prevent the government from confiscating citizens' guns during an emergency. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Obama's opponent in the Democratic primary, and 16 other senators voted against the amendment.

"She turned her back on America's gun owners," Schoenke said during a conference call organized by the Obama campaign Wednesday.

Schoenke said the group reached out to the Obama campaign several weeks ago, before the recent controversy surrounding his comments about small-town voters. In announcing their support in the midst of the controversy, though, the group hoped to "set the record straight," about Obama's support of an individual's right to gun ownership, he said.

"We understand that the gun issue is going to be very important in this election," said Bob Ricker, the group's executive director, citing an ongoing Supreme Court case regarding a handgun ban in Washington, DC. "Up until this time, the candidates haven't really been willing to talk about guns." (1 image)

At least if Novak is to be believed, Hillary has never taken Obama's position that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms.

To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.

I think they are. At best, they are just another bloated bureaucracy. At worst, traitors. Neither one is good.

I was a member. My dues went to pay postage begging me for more money. I told them to get bent.

------They may look intimidating, that's by design; but they aren't bulletproof. -------

I am a former member too. They have angered and disapointed me for the last time, and are more guilty of hurting the cause at times then helping it.

If they really want to help the fight to protect the 2nd Amendment they at times pick some strange ways of doing it.

They dug themselves in like blood sucking ticks when they offered ranges insurance. Like a lot of things they do, it was good for them, bad for us.

------They may look intimidating, that's by design; but they aren't bulletproof. -------

He doesn't believe in an individual right to keep and bear arms. Obama believes in local "common sense" restrictions on guns (whatever that means). Novak hasn't received an answer on his position regarding the current DC Supreme Court case that is pending, or what he specifically means by local "common sense" restrictions.

Like 6 year olds should not own guns? I call that common sense. It might be worth pursuing what Obama thinks is common sense about guns, if you have concerns.

'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz

Your 6 y/o example is silly, and we're all (save the Os) trying to figure out what he means since he refuses to make himself clear.

Whoa, back up young lady. Who determines that "6" is too young?? Parents, that's who. I got my first rifle when I was 10, and I felt left behind because a few of my friends got their first rifle before they were 10.

It's up to PARENTS to determine when a child is responsible enough to have their very own gun. Some younger, some older, but the GOVERNMENT has NO RIGHT to interfere with that PARENTAL DECISION.

I think ALL children should be instructed in safe firearm handling and given a gun if and when they exhibit the proper level of responsiblity.

"What we do claim is that the northern European, and particularly Anglo-Saxons made this country. Oh, yes; the others helped. But that is the full statement of the case. They came to this country because it was already made as an Anglo-Saxon commonwealth. They added to it, they often enriched it, but they did not make it, and they have not yet greatly changed it. We are determined that they shall not. And what we assert is that we are not going to surrender it to somebody else or allow other people, no matter what their merits, to make it something different. If there is any changing to be done, we will do it ourselves." Rep. William Vaile, Colorado, 1924

suppose a "common sense" restriction were applied to the 1st amendment or any other? whose "common sense?" the fact is Obama's position on the 2nd amendment is a bastardization of its meaning and purpose.

Our regional upbringing and family tradition (or lack thereof) of firearms ownership influences us to varying degrees. I can only hope that EVERY person who visits 4um and other websites gains a better understanding of our Second Amendment RIGHT to keep and bear arms, down to the last child capable of responsibly wielding a firearm. This tradition/heritage makes our nation, along with Switzerland, unique on this planet.

X, you are preaching to the choir here brother. My neighbor allowed his Liberal fucked up dumb ass ignoramus of a wife to drive all firearms out of their house.

Isn't the legal recourse of pursuing someone for slander or libel a "common sense" restriction to the 1st Amendment?

And people are not allowed to shout through bullhorns where ever they like. That's what I would call an example of a common sense restriction to the 1st Amendment.

Nixon once described our liberties as the ability to swing our arms as much as we like so long as we don't hit anyone else.

agree. the same could be said on attitudes regarding multiculturalism/race issues. most everyone forms opinions based on personal experience.

Make sure you take him to the rifle/pistol range occasionally, maybe the smell of burnt gunpowder will prod him to take his balls back under his own roof.

Seriously robin, I'm not prone to hate, but I loathe your sorry, pathetic, numb and dumb ass more and more with each passing day...if ONLY because you turned out to be a lying traitor and Constitutional ass wiper.

I love him too much to tell him what a sorry sack of s**t he's become, however, apparently the trade off (his manhood) is worth it to him.

Oww, you got me there. Yes, my experiences/dilemmas have colored my views of other people. I've actually regressed since high school, even my mother tells me "we didn't raise you to be like that!". Being confronted with savagery on a street will change a persons outlook on such matters :-(

Gee robin, maybe it's me but, but when is too much central government enough for you?

I'm just guessing here, but if a 6-year old walked into a gun store and tossed his piggy bank on the counter and asked to see a gun, I bet the owner would call his mother and send Johnny home empty handed. The owner wouldn't need a law for this.

The bullhorn incident would violate a noise ordinance rather than a speech code, but that said, the evil most see coming down the pike regarding the 1st A are Hate laws, which criminalize words. And worse, these laws are applied unequally to whites as opposed to blacks. It's an example of the double standard of "justice' liberals are unable to concede exists.

New group gunning to be alternative to NRA.

Byline: Lew Freedman

The membership of the National Rifle Association is 4 million and it is rare to hear a hunter or competitive shooter make strong statements against the organization.

That's because the NRA is viewed as the uncompromising, stalwart, shooters' rights defender.

So when Ray Schoenke, former Washington Redskins football player, a life-long gun owner and an avid hunter says, "They don't speak for me," it is an attention-getter.

Schoenke and his partners appeared at a national outdoor writers convention in Lake Charles, La., recently to muster awareness and support for the new American Hunters & Shooters Association, billed as an alternative to the NRA.

The association, said Schoenke, president of the new group, is more middle-of-the-road politically than the NRA.

"We think for most hunters and shooters, that's where they are," he said. "There's a middle ground."

The NRA's position on gun control is best epitomized by former group president Charlton Heston's legendary stance indicating the only way he would give up his gun is if someone pried it from his cold, dead hands.

For the Hunters & Shooters Association, the issues do not have to be black and white.

"No one needs an assault weapon," Schoenke said.

Robert Ricker, the Frederick, Md.-based group's executive director, said there are millions of Americans who are neutral, or who don't have informed opinions about gun ownership, hunting and the shooting sports, and they must be reached by an organization that doesn't seem extremist.

"We want to change the impression of hunting and shooting in the minds of the general public," Ricker said. "The heritage, the fathers and sons, gets forgotten. Instead, `It's all bad.' What we have to do is teach all these people in the middle."

Not surprisingly, the NRA is attuned to such challenges from competing gun rights groups, hinting that the Hunters & Shooters Association might be a fifth column on the side of gun-possession foes. Though it sounds far- fetched in this case, the NRA says beware of enemy "antis" in sheep's clothing.

The Hunters & Shooters Association might be "trying to market itself as a hunting group," said NRA director of public affairs Andrew Arulanandam. "I would say they do support the (President) Clinton gun ban which encompasses semi-automatic weapons. We have no gray area in our support for hunting."

The NRA is the 800-pound gorilla. The organization has many friends who trust the NRA to head off threats to gun ownership and count on its lobbying muscle.

"We have a presence in Congress," Arulanandam said. "We have a presence in all 50 states. Politicians at all levels pay attention to us. We are the largest hunting organization in the country."

The Hunters & Shooters Association believes there is room for compromise in areas such as assault weapons. But the NRA has an all-or-nothing outlook and that approach has worked for it.

The NRA is well- funded, established, has a powerful voice and is a well-known brand name that resonates even with people who are not hunters and shooters.

The organization isn't welcoming because it doesn't see a need for assistance, certainly not from a group that might water down the NRA's hard-core message.

"If you are a law-abiding American, we don't think your (gun ownership) rights ought to be restricted," Arulanandam said. "We're interested in getting guns out of the hands of criminals. Go after the criminal. Leave the ownership of firearms to those people who aren't a problem."

The Hunters & Shooters Association has no illusions.

The NRA has millions of members and the new association has hundreds. Schoenke and Ricker are convinced that making believers out of the vast numbers of Americans who have no strong opinion about hunting or shooting sports can benefit activities.

Logic says they are right, that there are always many undecideds. But we live in a time when politics is dominated by sound bites, not well-thought-out views. The modern political world is characterized by absolute positions, not middle ground stands. The NRA is right at home with that.

The Hunters & Shooters Association is banking on a willingness to listen that may overestimate its intended audience.

"Part of our job is to bring back the view that hunting is our heritage," Schoenke said. "We don't want the soccer moms out there to be frightened of us. It takes time and it's hard."

___

Like Walter Williams says, I want whatever the government has to use against me.

Robin, some kids are capable of handling firearms at 6, or younger. I did, and I am not alone. But that does not mean that I had unrestricted access to firearms. Some kids, otoh, aren't ready and have to wait.

"Common sense restrictions" are also buzzwords used by anti-gunners to try and justify new laws, when new laws are not needed. It is incredibly common to see them use these buzz words. It's as if they are somehow trying to apologize for what they are trying to do, to soften the impact, to make it more palatable.

------They may look intimidating, that's by design; but they aren't bulletproof. -------

Uh-huh. It's amazing how interested people are in defining new criminals but have NOTHING to say about illegal alien criminal acts.

As a country, the USA has deeply injured the world and it's a national obligation to right that wrong as much as possible. For us to try to safeguard our 2nd Amendment rights at the expense of lives of innocents worldwide doesn't fly in my book. -- Pinguinite http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=78060&Disp=44#C44

I've never heard of small children being allowed to handle firearms. That doesn't sound like good horse sense to me at all. My grandmother, who was born in Oregon Territory, thought it was just terrible that her grandsons could not walk into their own backyard in San Gabriel and do some target practicing. Well, the backyards in California are not big enough for that, our neighbors live much closer than they did when Daniel Boone was trailblazing.

We are a nation of laws. Some laws are really stupid, others are really bad, but many are very good. Not everyone is endowed with good horse sense, and they could be your neighbors.

Now this sounds like someone with good horse sense trying to pass reasonable legislation. Legislation that really should never have been necessary in the first place.

So, like so many things they do, they create the problem themselves, then they can blow the trumpets and regally announce that they are working on the solution and we are supposed to swoon with gratitude. Not me.

------They may look intimidating, that's by design; but they aren't bulletproof. -------

But note that not everyone is behind removing this unlawful govt control. Hillary likes the law the way it is, along with a dozen others.

I do have a tendency to lump them all together, because imo they are all in it together.

------They may look intimidating, that's by design; but they aren't bulletproof. -------

robin, back to the original article. With all that we learned about The American Hunters & Shooters Association would you agree that it appears to be a hollow vessel for legislators to hide behind?

I'll have to go back and read what it says, but I'll take your word for it. Honestly I've never been much of a "joiner" to any organization beyond church.

Would you agree that Obama shows more interest in personal liberties than Hillary or McCain? Such as here:

Actually, it is. The Supreme Court has held that it is proper to punish, among other things, shouting "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater.

Obama, on a personal level, is a winner. He has the entire package afa looks, youth and the ability to connect. My wife was momentarily enamored w/him when he was here at PSU (22,000) kids showed up. She bailed after she learned about his position on abortion. That's her only issue.

I can't think who could be worse than Hillary/McCain, Obama might be better, might not, I'm still learning about him. His gun position is wicked bad.

About that Katrina vote, he voted correctly, but consider this. When the numbers are that lopsided 84 for, 16 against? those 16 antis are what is known as as a "safe" vote. IOW, their vote has no impact on the outcome of the bill and many (most?) times they're used by the politician as red meat to show a segment of his/her constituency. In Obama's case he can point to it a evidence he has a moderate view on the 2nd.

I've said Obama is a gamble. And I think we all know what lies ahead with Hillary & McCain. Just remember, Hillary voted not to allow Americans to keep their firearms in the event of a disaster, while Obama voted for Americans to keep their firearms.