Real sportsmen don't vote Bush

Worried there won't be any wilderness left to hunt or fish in, increasing numbers of American sportsmen are tuning out the NRA and turning to Kerry.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Kevin Berger



Oct. 31, 2004 | New Mexico native Alan Lackey is disgusted at how "George Bush's energy policies are running amok" and degrading the natural splendor of his state and its bounty of elk and deer. A former hunting guide, Lackey, 46, and his family have been Republicans for generations. An industrious, middle-class businessman -- he, his father and brother now own a car dealership in Raton, N.M. -- Lackey has always identified with the socially conservative GOP.

In 2000, Lackey voted for George Bush and Dick Cheney, who were endorsed by the National Rifle Association, as they are this year. At the time, like many hunters, Lackey was swayed by the NRA's party line that gun owners' Second Amendment rights were going to be stolen from them in the middle of the night by liberals in black ski masks. Which Lackey now realizes is a crock. Indeed, Sen. Kerry supported the Brady Bill, which placed some common-sense new restrictions on gun registrations; and like President Bush, he backed a ban on assault weapons. But Kerry has stated countless times that he supports the right to bear arms and has no intention of undermining it.

"I'm a life member of the NRA but now I'm ashamed to admit it," Lackey says. "They say they're trying to protect hunters' rights. But there are two things that go along with hunting: the firearm and the game. And the NRA is so focused on the Second Amendment that everything else is undermined. I guess I let their propaganda get to me last time. But it turns out we were duped. Because President Bush, right after he was elected, promised an energy plan that would be environmentally sensitive and would protect our resources. That wasn't true at all. They had no intention of doing that."


There are 40 million sportsmen of voting age in the United States -- nearly a third of the entire vote -- and they heavily populate swing states New Mexico, Wisconsin, Ohio and Florida. Most voted for Bush and Cheney in 2000 but an unprecedented number of them would rather sell their pickups than do so again. They feel betrayed by how the duo has sold out the American wilderness to their compatriots in the oil and gas industry, whose derricks and wells now taint the countrysides and streams where they hunted and fished since they were kids.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/10/31/sportsmen/index.html

...sportsman will not, I repeat NOT notice anything really different if the Brady Bill is reinstated.

Any sportsman who supports Bush due to Second Amendment issues should weigh this: Would they rather have the ability to hunt using semi-automatic weapons and sawed-off shotguns, or actually have a pristine environment so they actually may have the chance to SEE wild game?

Anyone who votes for Bush over the guns issue is an idiot.

1. The Brady Act is still in effect. Your comment about it being reinstated makes no sense.

2. The Brady Act is about background checks for gun buyers. It has nothing to do with any type of firearm.

3. So-called "assault weapons" do have legitimate sporting uses. For example, depending on how it is configured an AR-15 type rifle could have been an assault weapon (or not) during the 10-year "ban". That is the most popular type of rifle used in competitive rifle target shooting. People like me who own them and use them for lawful purposes have a legitimate beef with a law that restricted our choices but had no measurable beneficial impact on public safety.

4. Sawed-off shotguns, i.e. shotguns with barrels less than 18 inches long, are still regulated under the National Firearms Act of 1934. The "assault weapons" ban had nothing to do with short-barrelled shotguns.

5. Thoughtful hunters are strongly in favor of maintaining a pristine environment. Otherwise, there would be no place for them to hunt. Suggesting that one must sacrifice the right to own one kind of weapon or another in exchange for a pristine environment is a false dichotomy. Why not respect the rights of gun owners and do the right things for the environment so that we can enjoy both?

I do agree with your final sentence:

Anyone who votes for Bush over the guns issue is an idiot.

:toast: