Carter's last stand

Kinda surprised this hasn’t been posted already so I’ll apologize ahead of time if I just missed it.

What Happened to the Ban on Assault Weapons?

By JIMMY CARTER
Published: April 26, 2009, New York Times

THE evolution in public policy concerning the manufacture, sale and possession of semiautomatic assault weapons like AK-47s, AR-15s and Uzis has been very disturbing. Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and I all supported a ban on these formidable firearms, and one was finally passed in 1994.

When the 10-year ban was set to expire, many police organizations — including 1,100 police chiefs and sheriffs from around the nation — called on Congress and President George W. Bush to renew and strengthen it. But with a wink from the White House, the gun lobby prevailed and the ban expired.

I have used weapons since I was big enough to carry one, and now own two handguns, four shotguns and three rifles, two with scopes. I use them carefully, for hunting game from our family woods and fields, and occasionally for hunting with my family and friends in other places. We cherish the right to own a gun and some of my hunting companions like to collect rare weapons. One of them is a superb craftsman who makes muzzle-loading rifles, one of which I displayed for four years in my private White House office.

But none of us wants to own an assault weapon, because we have no desire to kill policemen or go to a school or workplace to see how many victims we can accumulate before we are finally shot or take our own lives. That’s why the White House and Congress must not give up on trying to reinstate a ban on assault weapons, even if it may be politically difficult.

An overwhelming majority of Americans, including me and my hunting companions, believe in the right to own weapons, but surveys show that they also support modest restraints like background checks, mandatory registration and brief waiting periods before purchase.

A majority of Americans also support banning assault weapons. Many of us who hunt are dismayed by some of the more extreme policies of the National Rifle Association, the most prominent voice in opposition to a ban, and by the timidity of public officials who yield to the group’s unreasonable demands.

Heavily influenced and supported by the firearms industry, N.R.A. leaders have misled many gullible people into believing that our weapons are going to be taken away from us, and that homeowners will be deprived of the right to protect ourselves and our families. The N.R.A. would be justified in its efforts if there was a real threat to our constitutional right to bear arms. But that is not the case.

Instead, the N.R.A. is defending criminals’ access to assault weapons and use of ammunition that can penetrate protective clothing worn by police officers on duty. In addition, while the N.R.A. seems to have reluctantly accepted current law restricting sales by licensed gun dealers to convicted felons, it claims that only “law-abiding people” obey such restrictions — and it opposes applying them to private gun dealers or those who sell all kinds of weapons from the back of a van or pickup truck at gun shows.

What are the results of this profligate ownership and use of guns designed to kill people? In 2006, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported more than 30,000 people died from firearms, accounting for nearly 20 percent of all injury deaths. In 2005, every nine hours a child or teenager in the United States was killed in a firearm-related accident or suicide.

Across our border, Mexican drug cartels are being armed with advanced weaponry imported from the United States — a reality only the N.R.A. seems to dispute.

The gun lobby and the firearms industry should reassess their policies concerning safety and accountability — at least on assault weapons — and ease their pressure on acquiescent politicians who fear N.R.A. disapproval at election time. We can’t let the N.R.A.’s political blackmail prevent the banning of assault weapons — designed only to kill police officers and the people they defend.

Jimmy Carter, the 39th president, is the winner of the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize.

So apparently assault weapons are “designed only to kill police officers and the people they defend”? I might not be the most rabid proponent of unlimited 2nd amendment rights, but this is total bullshit.

I think ol’ peanut boy is jealous he’s going to lose his title as one of the worst Presidents the U.S. has seen. If he were smart, he’d just fade into obscurity. Guess that would take too much sense on his part though. :rolleyes:

Or maybe he should have said, “Guns are bad, you shouldn’t own guns. Now go eat some peanut butter.”

I didn’t think I could possibly dislike Jimmy Carter any more than I already do, but I just found out I could.

I agree 100%.

That is the truth!! Why does anyone still listen to that babbling fool?

He did some things right. Seemed to be fairly well respected around Columbus , Ga. back when he was in office.

No wait—Got a link , a source or two to prove that the letter is even real?

Every time that idiot pops up in the news my disdain for the man increases exponentially.

Big +1

I am waiting for a link too. Seems poorly written.

Buckaroo

Seems to be legit - here it is:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/27/opinion/27Carter.html

I don’t have much use for Jimmy Carter, nor do I think the country was better off for having him as president. I do applaud him for legalizing home brew(thanks hefe thread.)

I do however think he was one of the few genuinely honest presidents we’ve had in the past fifty years. I think that he tried to do what he thought was right in the face of powerful lobbies…despite the fact that he applied ideologically wrong methods, and hence couldn’t achieve anything, at least very little that was good for freedom.

He has my respect for being a decent(if wrong) man in an office that has known few decent men.

I didn’t say that he did not do some things that were good or that he wasn’t popular with some people. As a whole, however, I think he was not really presidential material. I suppose he would be considered an honest, peaceful man . . . which, to me, does not necessarily translate to great “presidential timber.” FWIW shrugs

http://www.thoseshirts.com/wbc.html

Seems he forgot to mention that handguns, 2 of which he boasts of owning, are responsible for far, far more deaths each year than “assault weapons”.

And please…one more reference that we are responsible for the mess in Mexico…:rolleyes:

Idiot.

Well, I am astounded with the poor logic and fear mongering in the article. It is laughable that he is accusing the NRA of

…defending criminals’ access to assault weapons and use of ammunition that can penetrate protective clothing worn by police officers on duty.

He really needs to stay in his rocker and enjoy his retirement. Obviously, critical thinking is beyond his reach these days. I never was a fan but being as my family is from GA I tried to give him a chance. Sad to see what I believe to be a fine human being use such faulty logic.

Buckaroo

I assume that when he says three rifles, one of which is a muzzleloader and the other two are scoped. Not sure about a muzzleloader, but I bet the two scoped rifles will defeat IIIa body armor. Carter is a cop killer.

“But none of us wants to own an assault weapon, because we have no desire to kill policemen or go to a school or workplace to see how many victims we can accumulate before we are finally shot or take our own lives.”

If an assualt weapon makes you want to shoot a school up, it would happen far more often. Sounds like Carter has bad case of blackrifle prejudice.

So we send some rifles south, and they send us drugs and a killer flu, just build the fricken wall already.

Carter is loosing it. Although, have you noticed that Obama is really adept at using the “Straw Man” in arguements? Begala tried to use it recently and here Carter tries to say that black rifle owners want to shoot up schools.

Gee, if black rifles have such a powerful mind-bending influence on people, how come cops and soldiers don’t shoot up schools and other public places? Do they get some kind of secret government training to keep the evil voices at bay? :confused: :rolleyes:

HEY!!!
You guys be nice to Jimmy.
I mean, I voted for the guy in '76.
Of course, I was in kindergarten and it was a Weekly Reader ballot.
Since then I’ve decided that he’s a pus-headed nut-sucker, but…
There is one aspect of him that I will always respect.
After the failed rescue attempt in Iran, he did go on TV to announce it and he accepted complete responsibility for what happened.
Other than that though…, eh.

Going thru Yahoo search did bring up the article. Found nothing concerning the letter/editorial in a few minute of search on another site.

I plan to bow out of this topic for a day or two. This story has no legs , IMO.
Mr. Carter is an older gentleman who served his nation well . He is not in a elected position at this time.

He is an idiot. I live about 25 minutes from Plains GA (his home) in the opposite direction of Columbus, and I can honestly say that there are very few people here that even likes him and he is considered a “hometown boy”. Most of the time there are a lot of expletives that are used in the same sentence as his name.

As far as his hunting companions go, I would be more than willing to guess that they are not from SOWEGA (South West Georgia) as nearly all of the people that I know or meet are staunch 2A supporters regardless of the type of firearm. This area is well known for it’s exceptional quail hunting and regularly brings in politicians, musicians, actors/actresses and the like. Dick Cheney was a regular for the past several years and I once even worked on the EMS detail that stoodby for him (and only him, not anyone that got in his way :wink: ). A lot of these celebrities you would never expect to pick up a firearm and is probably where his “companions” comes in.

Oh yeah… did I mention he is an assclown.

I bet my 30.06 will punch right through most any police body armor. Does that make it an assault weapon ?? What a pile of crap!!

s.m.