🚀 go-pugleaf

Sam A. Kersh <sam.a.kersh@us.army.mil> wrote in message
news:b3cleu40hvfsj22jajgo18vtufbdltj08c@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 21 May 2002 13:14:52 -0700, "Jim Cammarano"
> <hmcinc@compuserve.com> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> 'Course OTOH, we could still otherwise be stuck with a five day
> >> waiting period. Would that be better than the NICS?
> >
> >HOW ABOUT NO WAITING PERIOD! What good is NICS?  They just computerized
the
> >records they said were only 50% accurate.  So now they can be just as
> >inaccurate only faster.  The point of the system supposedly is to prevent
> >criminals from getting firearms. Apparently, it is NOT being used for
that
> >purpose.  Since the Brady Bill went into effect less than 12 people have
> >been convicted and the point for this infringement on our Consitutional
> >right is............?
>
> Sigh.....  When the Brady Bill was being argued, the NRA counted noses
> and knew we were going to lose on that one.  How bad was the question.
> Brady, at that time was purely a waiting period, no back ground checks.
> We had several states to point to which had honest-to-god instant check
> systems like the credit card companies use.   The NRA began to push
> another bill which was an instant check system modeled after the ones
> already used in some states.  No waiting period.  We began to make
> headway and the Brady backers panicked, changed the bill to eventually
> change to an instant check system but with a 5 day wait unless you were
> cleared or found wanting in a shorter time.  The bill was enacted and
> signed into law.   The wait was to sunset after Sept 1, 1999 and become
> a true instant check system.   The antis quickly began work on Brady II
> which would delay or kill the instant check system and default to a
> California delay.   Brady II never made it out the door.  AG Reno got
> caught unprepared when time ran out and had the FBI cobble together the
> current NICS system.  A system Clinton and Company never intended to
> work properly and it doesn't, by design.  But that isn't the NRA's
> fault.  We did the best we could with a bad situation and found, that
> once again, we were dealing with people without principles.   But the
> NRA is still being blamed, even by some of its members...
>
>
> Sam A. Kersh
> NRA Patron Member
> L.E.A.A. Life Member
> TSRA Life Member
> GOA, JPFO, SAF
> http://www.flash.net/~csmkersh/

Sam --

My Dad used to say the road to Hell was paved with good intentions.  The NRA
thought it would take heat off of us saying we supported background checks.
In theory it may sound good.  WACO Reno, HCI and their ilk are a bad bunch
to do business with.  They want to take our guns away and we "trust" them to
be honest???  The instant check system should have had it's records composed
strictly with bad guys.  If you are not a bad guy, walk out with your gun.
Another provision should have been that the records be at least 95% accurate
at some point in the future.  This is still not done. I know we were up
against it but we should NEVER make deals that get us nothing.  It's our job
to get the word out, that these so called background checks result in a
handfull of convictions per year, so why do we do them at all?  The damage
done is far greater than the good they supposedly do anyone. I'd rather go
down fighting for the real deal than to cave in to a bunch of fascists.

Jim