Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Srexley who wrote (463103)	9/22/2003 7:55:06 PM
From: MSI	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Bush has supported gun-control since being governor in Texas gunowners.org "May 04, 1999 Dear Pro-Gun Activist, Your immediate grassroots action is required to help us stop Gov. George W. Bush and the high-powered lobbyists from Handgun Control in a scheme to take away yet more of the rights of law-abiding gun owners. Recently, Governor Bush pushed an anti-gun bill sponsored by liberal Texas Rep. Debra Danburg (D-Houston). Rep. Danburg introduced House Bill 1199 to require anyone at a gun show, even those who want to sell a single gun from his or her private collection, to undertake intrusive, big-government background checks. Such a computer system allows the government to spy on and track gun owners. Even though pro-gun legislators killed HB 1199 in committee, insiders are concerned Gov. Bush may make a back-room deal to revive HB 1199 in the closing days of the legislature"

To: Srexley who wrote (463103)	9/22/2003 10:14:00 PM
From: Red Heeler	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

He wants to have a little more leeway to find and apprehend terrorists. Ashcroft's definition of 'terrorist' is ever-changing and open for revision at any time. It's too broad. Suppose a law passes in the U.S. similar to the one Canada just passed that makes it mandatory for every gun owner to register every gun they own. People who refuse could be labeled terrorists. I've heard people who oppose Bush described as terrorists. So, who's a terrorist? Anyone Ashcroft wants to arrest. The thought that Ashcroft (and the Bush administration) just want to strip us of our rights so they can oppress us is extreme paranoia imo. How about those arrested after 9-11 who were refused due process? Was it a proving ground to make sure we (the people) wouldn't get too upset over locking-up a few darkies without giving them a court hearing, letting them call an attorney, or letting them notify their relatives? I don't know, but it happened. Desperate times call for desperate measures so we're going to take away your rights for a while, folks, but don't worry, we'll give them back to you when we deem it safe for you to have them again. The republican party will protect our 2nd amendment right. Really? Remember one of the first acts of the Republican-controlled military in Iraq? "Everyone has two weeks to turn in all their weapons." If the Iraqis had not given the military the finger instead of their guns they would all be disarmed and defenseless right now. Think about how difficult it is to own any type of weapon in Great Britain. It won't happen in my lifetime, but it just may be the Republicans that take your descendants' weapons away from them. The libs think the 1st amendment is to protect people to make computer generated child porn, and they think the 2nd doesn't even give us the right to bear arms. That is scary, and those are facts on the ground RIGHT NOW. Not 3 or 4 generations away. I try to avoid such generalizations and I also try to avoid putting too much trust in any political organization or party. CC