Lace up those working boots and don't forget your gloves America, because Uncle Sam wants you to volunteer in your community. Earlier today while speaking at the community service forum, President Obama stated, "While there's plenty that government can and must do ... there's a lot that government can't and shouldn't do and that's where active, engaged citizens come in." Now I'm not proclaiming community service isn't a righteous deed to partake in, my issue is that of the government. President Obama should be relaying to Congress and his administration, that upholding the law and serving the people is the essence of liberty. Obama should record, then playback his own messages, and realize that there are numerous things the government can???t fulfill, such as running a successful health care operation. Or the ability to promote democracy to individuals that don't want anything to do with western civilization. Helping your neighbor and your community, promote peace and prosperity throughout the country. The one issue that keeps this country divided, is the importance placed on political party affiliation. We are all one, and a donkey and an elephant shouldn't keep us apart. Staying righteous to your country and its people is of the upmost importance of our political leaders. (www.politicalpluralism.com)
NRA Targets Obama
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
Announcer: On November 4th, defend freedom, defeat Obama. Get the facts at GunBanObama.com.
The amendment applied only to handgun ammunition "capable of penetrating body armor" and to rifle ammunition that is "designed or marketed as having armor piercing capability," however.
It's true that common high-powered rifle bullets are capable of penetrating the vests worn by police, which are a defense chiefly against lower-velocity handgun rounds. But does that mean hunting ammunition is "designed or marketed as having armor piercing capability"? Or that a rifle round that some handguns might accept would be banned? That's the NRA's argument, and it was repeated on the floor of the Senate by Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. He said flatly that the measure "would ban nearly all hunting rifle ammunition," without any elaboration. However, the measure's sponsor, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, said his amendment was not intended to cover hunting ammunition:
Sen. Kennedy (July 29, 2005): This is not about hunting. We know duck and geese and deer do not wear armor vests; police officers do.
Kennedy's measure failed by a vote of 64 - 31.
By the way, the NRA has used this ploy before. It ran ads in 2004 claiming Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry had voted "to ban deer-hunting ammunition" when he had actually voted on an earlier occasion for this same Kennedy amendment on armor-piercing rounds. Kennedy said then:
Sen. Kennedy (March 2, 2004): My amendment will not apply to ammunition that is now routinely used in hunting rifles or other centerfire rifles. To the contrary, it only covers ammunition that is designed or marketed as having armor-piercing capability.
Clarification, Sept. 29: We originally misstated the NRA's argument. The group rests its case on the amendment's language regarding handgun ammunition, not rifle ammunition. The NRA argument goes this way: The Kennedy amendment would have covered ammunition that "may" be used in a handgun and is "capable" of piercing police body armor. A few uncommon handguns can accept rifle rounds, such as the Weatherby Mark V CFP or the Thompson Contender.
Weatherby Mark V CFP
Thompson Contender
Therefore, the NRA says, Kennedy's language could be interpreted as banning high-velocity rifle rounds used for hunting, which can penetrate police body armor.
We grant that it is a theoretical possibility that some future administration could interpret Kennedy's language as banning common hunting ammunition, despite Kennedy's clear statement of intent to the contrary. But we judge the likelihood of that to be vanishingly small, given the outcry that would surely follow.
Discuss