Gun-control groups fear top activist was NRA spy

[picklesuit]

I largely don't agree with PETA's tactics either, but they are often exposing illegal activities. What is the anti-gun lobby doing that is illegal?

And you ought bone up on some facts. All domestic surveillance has to be legally justified and approved by the government and/or the courts. The government has a legal basis in what they do and is supervised closely, defending our country. If there is no threat, then it is illegal. The same applies to the CIA and other governnent agencies operating overseas, operating under rules and regulations that govern their conduct and their targets. And just in case you were wondering, they are defending this country from threats, not a rival lobbying group.

Industrial espionage, where one company attepts to obtain privileged information from another, is illegal. If the 'mole' obtained privileged information from the groups she was a part and passed that on, she could have possibly broken the law. But as some group members have noted, most of the activities she took part in were public and therefore were probably not illegal.

And it gets back to the whole basis of using this tactic, why do it in the first place? I think it shows a lot on the character of the people involved, and reflects very poorly on them.

Okay, I will try to argue this more logically...

PETA sends their spies to auctions, slaughterhouses, farms, shoots hours and hours of film of good, ethical, legal practices, and shows the 10 seconds they have of one dumbass kicking a cow (I have worked at auctions/slaughterhouses/farms, I can speak from experience on this one) I have also seen PETA standing outside the National Veterinary Services Lab protesting our government trying to protect our food sources and economy.
http://media.www.iowastatedaily.com...ws/Students.Protest.Peta.At.Lab-1063278.shtml
When they were in town we had to have guards posted at our test facilities at Iowa State because they tried to get in and screw with the lab. PETA is the breeding ground for splinter organizations like the ELF http://earth-liberation-front.org/

The anti-gun lobby group helped to enact the handgun ban in Washington D.C. that the SUPREME COURT found unconstitutional...sounds illegal to me. They uses twisted facts, appeals to the public pathos, and blatant ignorance of legal vs. illegal gun use to support their cause.

And I am sure the FBI following John Lennon http://www.lennonfbifiles.com/
and Martin Luther King Jr.
http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/churchfinalreportIIIb.htm

was really justified and neccesary. I agree wholeheartedly in the monitoring of terrorist/criminal organizations, but please don't expect me to believe the government hasn't used the FBI/CIA for corrupt/illicit activities.

I do not condone industrial espionage, I am simply stating that it happens, and on many levels, from comparitive shopping to copyright/patent infringement.

I am not defending the ethics behind the NRA's decision to place a "mole" in the heirarchy of their political nemesis (makes it sound really dark, doesn't it) I am saying it was a smart move. If I had someone hellbent on keeping me from doing what I enjoy, I would do what it takes to stop them (kind of why I joined the military)

 

[scoober78]

What is the anti-gun lobby doing that is illegal?

You mean other than violating the second amendment??

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

 

[Mumbles]

It was REAL ethical of Michael Moore, to ambush Chuck Heston during Bowling for Columbine.....

 

[Flash]

So you think HUMINT is unethical?

By a private advocacy group against a rival? Yeah, it is crossing a line.

And lest anyone misunderstand -- at the end of the day it's got nothing to do w/ "gun guys" or the NRA, truth be told.

Huh? I thought the issue was all about the NRA doing something unethical. But, I guess it is okay as long as you agree with the group. Sure, why not? :sleep_125

This IS a war. We are at WAR w/ these people and it's a war being fought on many fronts, i.e. gun rights/gun control/2nd Amendment is just one of many "fronts" of the culture war that's been raging in the U.S. for decades -- all being fought for the very heart & soul of our country.

Don't agree?? Who cares??

Yeah, thats great. I am glad you see many of your fellow citizens as 'enemies' on the wrong side of this supposed 'war' we are in. Knowing that you are on the 'right' side of things must be comforting as you cast a wary eye towards those that scheme to steal your rights.

Gimme a break. :icon_roll

You mean other than violating the second amendment??

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

And please explain how they are breaking the law, merely by advocating? Since when did free speech become illegal? And why haven't they been arrested or charged? Maybe you should make a citizens arrest.

Easily one of the most absurd assertions I have seen on this board.

 

[Flash]

It was REAL ethical of Michael Moore, to ambush Chuck Heston during Bowling for Columbine.....

And I mentioned this when? Plus, he was let in.........

 

[feddoc]

You couldn't answer mine either, so I guess we are even.



In this case, the spy is the mich greater sin in this case. It was done with malice forethought over a great period of time. Lying is not justifiable either, but at least they are even there.

No, I wouldn't answer yours. Lying to further an agenda.....not quite right.

 

[Flash]

Okay, I will try to argue this more logically...

PETA [stuff]......ELF.....

You know, I love using strawman arguments too. Oh, let me think of one!!

As I already said, I think much of what PETA does is unethical too. As for the ELF, what they do is mostly illegal.

So how does that justify what the NRA did?

The anti-gun lobby group helped to enact the handgun ban in Washington D.C. that the Supreme Court found unconstitutional...sounds illegal to me.

Laws are passed all of the time, legally of course. Sometimes they are overturned. That does not make the entire exercise illegal. A very flawed argument.

The logic part of you arguments so far are not there.

And I am sure the FBI following John Lennon http://www.lennonfbifiles.com/
and Martin Luther King Jr.
http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/churchfinalreportIIIb.htm

was really justified and neccesary. I agree wholeheartedly in the monitoring of terrorist/criminal organizations, but please don't expect me to believe the government hasn't used the FBI/CIA for corrupt/illicit activities.

They have been used illicitly and illegally to monitor people and groups that they should not have been. But that has been and continues to be illegal and stopped/punished when discovered.

I do not condone industrial espionage, I am simply stating that it happens, and on many levels, from comparitive shopping to copyright/patent infringement.

I am not defending the ethics behind the NRA's decision to place a "mole" in the heirarchy of their political nemesis (makes it sound really dark, doesn't it) I am saying it was a smart move. If I had someone hellbent on keeping me from doing what I enjoy, I would do what it takes to stop them (kind of why I joined the military)

I agree with what you are saying on this part. Except for the 'smart' part. This may cost them support from people who find their actions inappropriate, which may people who are in a position to help them advance their goals.

 

[Flash]

No, I wouldn't answer yours. Lying to further an agenda.....not quite right.

Then why does the NRA do it too?

 

[Mumbles]

ELF is a straight up domestic terrorism group.

 

[mmx1]

AND nobody seems to get too bent out of shape that the government (FBI/CIA) gets involved in countergovernment groups so they have an idea what is coming at them.

Really, so you've never heard about COINTELPRO? Liberals are really bent out of shape about that, not without justification.

I don't see this as much of a coup as the two organizations she duped don't seem like big players and she never made it to the Brady organization's board. Should send them into a fun tizzy of mistrust and chaos for a while, though.

And while we're comparing degrees of honesty, I frankly think it's more serious for one group to mislead the public than an individual to mislead a select few.

 

[feddoc]

Then why does the NRA do it too?

At leaset you acknowledge the other side does it.

I can't speak for the NRA. Perhaps you can show me where they have lied.

 

[Flash]

ELF is a straight up domestic terrorism group.

No argument here on that one.

 

[mmx1]

The anti-gun lobby group helped to enact the handgun ban in Washington D.C. that the SUPREME COURT found unconstitutional...sounds illegal to me. They uses twisted facts, appeals to the public pathos, and blatant ignorance of legal vs. illegal gun use to support their cause.

You mean other than violating the second amendment??

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

So simply to campaign for policies in contradiction to the Constitution is illegal?

In this case, the spy is the mich greater sin in this case. It was done with malice forethought over a great period of time. Lying is not justifiable either, but at least they are even there.

So the Brady Campaign's lies are not malicious and had no forethought?

 

[squeeze]

Why is it so hard for some of you to grasp that Flash is not saying because one side does it, it's OK for the other side? A bunch of y'all sound like little kids - "They do it, why can't we?" Jesus.

 

[raptor10]

I think what the Pro-NRA side is saying is that they believe that although the anti-gun rights groups are using mostly legal means to achieve their goals, that those on the pro-bill of rights side believe that their goal is so horrendous, despicable, and damaging to the country that they cannot afford to lose, and will operate in a gray area to protect the constitution from what they see as a clear and present danger to freedom and human rights.