-=> Quoting Nolan Penney to Guy Putnam on 06-06-96  09:13 <=-
 Re: Re: alert
 GP>Then, exactly why did NRA support passage of the Fascist Terror Bill?
 GP>NRA supported the 1986 machine gun manufacturing ban, but promptly
 GP>promised to get it repealed.  Now, its 1996 . . . . . .
 NP> Pff, how about the anti-machine gun bill long *long* ago.  As I've
 NP> understood it, the NRA backed the near outlawing of machine guns, with
 NP> the same promise.
Don't know whether they took a position on the '34 law at the time. They
did back the '68 law when it came up, but quickly changed their minds on
some of it. The Firearm Owners Protection Act of '86 was the usual
example of a compromise. It had things they liked, and they were willing
to accept the machine gun ban to get the other stuff they wanted. I can't
say whether the current leadership would accept that or not.
At one point - early on - they supported the Anti-Terrorism bill. Once
they found out what was in it, they moved to have parts changed. And
then of course supported the changed bill. They have this idea that
anything which is "tough on crime" without directly affecting guns is
good. I think that's mostly a PR thing, they don't want to be criticized
that since they're opposed to gun control they are soft on crime. Bad
reasoning, IMHO. Either they stick to their one issue or they take a
libertarian view.
But for the time being, I still support them. Any stance they took before
the current leadership took over doesn't really matter, you're not
talking about the current NRA then.
Steve
... There is such a thing as a man being too proud to fight. - W. Wilson
 * Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 *
--- GOMail v1.1 [92-0793]
---------------