Missouri Senate Race: Gun Rights Battleground
This is a vitally important senate seat. The question here is ridiculously simple- do we keep a senator with an excellent history of supporting gun rights, or do we replace him with a candidate who has crusaded against firearms rights and the defensive use of firearms? Please forward this to all the Missouri hunters and shooters on your mailing list. Underlining, bold type and italics are mine.-Sarge Claire McCaskill tries to get a lot of ‘political mileage’ by saying that her father was an avid hunter. "My dad was shooting things all the time, and we had to eat them," she said with a chuckle. "I'm not interesting in taking away anyone's guns."
I guess ‘chuckling’ while lying through your teeth makes the lie a little more palatable. McCaskill’s record on gun rights is well documented, regardless of her current, translucent efforts to minimize it. Her opponent, Jim Talent, sees these issues with near-crystal clarity: "I think the evidence shows that, to the extent the law restricts access of law-abiding adults to firearms, it tends to increase violence," he said. That's the same reason why he also supports the right of people to carry concealed weapons, which he said "prevents violent confrontations." Talent emphasized, though, that he "strongly supports strict penalties for the use of firearms in a crime."
Both support a ban on armor-piercing bullets. (I must write Jim about this, and make sure he understands that certain idiot politicians would happily use this issue to ban .30-30 hunting ammo. Suggest you do the same. He probably already knows- but I take nothing for granted when dealing with any new or proposed gun legislation.- Sarge) Talent said he supported instant background checks for gun purchasers but recognized that such checks might be impossible at private gun shows. McCaskill says background checks at gun shows are necessary to prevent "potential terrorists from buying assault weapons. Source: http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/politics/story/D91CCAA6CEFFBD16862571F4001CE755?OpenDocument (I guess in the mind of Claire McCaskill, us dumb old country boys are ALL ‘potential terrorists’. –Sarge)
“McCaskill Opposed Legalizing Concealed Guns.” “Blunt supports Missouri’s law allowing most adults to receive concealed gun permits. McCaskill opposed legalizing concealed guns but adds she will enforce the new law.” (David A. Lieb, “Blunt, McCaskill Close On Some Issues, Apart On Others,” The Associated Press, October 29, 2004) “McCaskill Has Consistently Opposed Allowing Missouri Residents To Have The Same Rights” To “Protect Themselves And Their Families From Dangerous Criminals.” “In spite of evidence from other states that allow citizens to protect themselves and their families from dangerous criminals, McCaskill has consistently opposed allowing Missouri residents to have the same rights.” (Missourians For Matt Blunt, Press Release, “National Rifle Association Endorses Blunt,” October 5, 2004)
McCaskill Does Not Support The Rights Of Missouri Citizens To Carry Concealed Weapons. “It’s startling to realize this concept came within three votes of passing in the Missouri Senate,’ McCaskill said. Imagine the carnage that could have been wrought by ‘would-be Dirty Harrys’ early last Sunday morning, she said, when a man ejected from a Westport bar pulled a 9mm pistol in the middle of a crowd.” (Joe Lambe, “Battle Rages On Concealed Guns,” The Kansas City Star, March 17, 1994)
Following Proposition B’s Defeat, McCaskill Praised Urban Voters For Understanding That “Guns Are Not The Answer For Safety.” “McCaskill, an opponent of concealed weapons, was elated by the outcome. ‘Money can’t overcome common sense,’ she said. "Voters, particularly in urban areas, understand guns are not the answer for safety.” (Kit Wagar, “Firearms Proposition Narrowly Defeated,” The Kansas City Star, April 7, 1999) Source: http://cluelessclaire.com/news/article.aspx?ID=3210
More “McCaskill on Guns”
McCaskill supported the federal assault-weapons ban that expired in 2004, and says there should be some federal regulations governing automatic weapons. Their only use, she said, is "to kill a lot of people in a short period of time." (Keep in mind that liberals use the term "automatic weapons" to describe "semi-automatic weapons- like your XD, 1911, or your Grandpa's .22 rifle. Don't fall for it.-Sarge) As a former prosecutor, McCaskill said, she also saw "the problems that concealed weapons can cause for law enforcement." For that reason, McCaskill said she opposed the 2003 law allowing Missourians to carry concealed weapons, although she noted that she has been pleasantly surprised that its enactment has had little effect on the state's crime rate. Source: http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/politics/story/D91CCAA6CEFFBD16862571F4001CE755?OpenDocument
This is a vitally important senate seat. The question here is ridiculously simple- do we keep a senator with an excellent history of supporting gun rights, or do we replace him with a candidate who has crusaded against firearms rights and the defensive use of firearms? Please forward this to all the Missouri hunters and shooters on your mailing list. Underlining, bold type and italics are mine.-Sarge Claire McCaskill tries to get a lot of ‘political mileage’ by saying that her father was an avid hunter. "My dad was shooting things all the time, and we had to eat them," she said with a chuckle. "I'm not interesting in taking away anyone's guns."
I guess ‘chuckling’ while lying through your teeth makes the lie a little more palatable. McCaskill’s record on gun rights is well documented, regardless of her current, translucent efforts to minimize it. Her opponent, Jim Talent, sees these issues with near-crystal clarity: "I think the evidence shows that, to the extent the law restricts access of law-abiding adults to firearms, it tends to increase violence," he said. That's the same reason why he also supports the right of people to carry concealed weapons, which he said "prevents violent confrontations." Talent emphasized, though, that he "strongly supports strict penalties for the use of firearms in a crime."
Both support a ban on armor-piercing bullets. (I must write Jim about this, and make sure he understands that certain idiot politicians would happily use this issue to ban .30-30 hunting ammo. Suggest you do the same. He probably already knows- but I take nothing for granted when dealing with any new or proposed gun legislation.- Sarge) Talent said he supported instant background checks for gun purchasers but recognized that such checks might be impossible at private gun shows. McCaskill says background checks at gun shows are necessary to prevent "potential terrorists from buying assault weapons. Source: http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/politics/story/D91CCAA6CEFFBD16862571F4001CE755?OpenDocument (I guess in the mind of Claire McCaskill, us dumb old country boys are ALL ‘potential terrorists’. –Sarge)
“McCaskill Opposed Legalizing Concealed Guns.” “Blunt supports Missouri’s law allowing most adults to receive concealed gun permits. McCaskill opposed legalizing concealed guns but adds she will enforce the new law.” (David A. Lieb, “Blunt, McCaskill Close On Some Issues, Apart On Others,” The Associated Press, October 29, 2004) “McCaskill Has Consistently Opposed Allowing Missouri Residents To Have The Same Rights” To “Protect Themselves And Their Families From Dangerous Criminals.” “In spite of evidence from other states that allow citizens to protect themselves and their families from dangerous criminals, McCaskill has consistently opposed allowing Missouri residents to have the same rights.” (Missourians For Matt Blunt, Press Release, “National Rifle Association Endorses Blunt,” October 5, 2004)
McCaskill Does Not Support The Rights Of Missouri Citizens To Carry Concealed Weapons. “It’s startling to realize this concept came within three votes of passing in the Missouri Senate,’ McCaskill said. Imagine the carnage that could have been wrought by ‘would-be Dirty Harrys’ early last Sunday morning, she said, when a man ejected from a Westport bar pulled a 9mm pistol in the middle of a crowd.” (Joe Lambe, “Battle Rages On Concealed Guns,” The Kansas City Star, March 17, 1994)
Following Proposition B’s Defeat, McCaskill Praised Urban Voters For Understanding That “Guns Are Not The Answer For Safety.” “McCaskill, an opponent of concealed weapons, was elated by the outcome. ‘Money can’t overcome common sense,’ she said. "Voters, particularly in urban areas, understand guns are not the answer for safety.” (Kit Wagar, “Firearms Proposition Narrowly Defeated,” The Kansas City Star, April 7, 1999) Source: http://cluelessclaire.com/news/article.aspx?ID=3210
More “McCaskill on Guns”
McCaskill supported the federal assault-weapons ban that expired in 2004, and says there should be some federal regulations governing automatic weapons. Their only use, she said, is "to kill a lot of people in a short period of time." (Keep in mind that liberals use the term "automatic weapons" to describe "semi-automatic weapons- like your XD, 1911, or your Grandpa's .22 rifle. Don't fall for it.-Sarge) As a former prosecutor, McCaskill said, she also saw "the problems that concealed weapons can cause for law enforcement." For that reason, McCaskill said she opposed the 2003 law allowing Missourians to carry concealed weapons, although she noted that she has been pleasantly surprised that its enactment has had little effect on the state's crime rate. Source: http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/politics/story/D91CCAA6CEFFBD16862571F4001CE755?OpenDocument
posted by Sarge | 4:31 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home