slugshooter

Re: Get the vote out for Bush!!!!! Sorry if I offended, I just have a real problem with someone suggesting that to want to vote for someone other than he may agree with they need to stay home. The unfortunate thing is that in this day and age people do suffer from voter suppression and intimidation based on their race, nationality or political party. Anyone here heard about all those registration forms found in Nevada that were torn up and in the trash, and they all were people registering Democratic. I firmly believe that noone has the right to tell you that what you believe or think is wrong, thats why I don't tell anyone on here that they are wrong on their beliefs. I may not agree with them and try to debate with them about it, but I will never tell someone how to think, what right is that of mine.

Re: Most wins in NCAA history Yeah I remember him, whatever happened to him. I'm a Florida fan myself, Wuerrfel didn't last, neither did Shane Mathews. Hopefully Grossman will do well for the Bears but I saw he injured himself earlier in the season.

Re: Buckshot question I don't doubt Buckshot works, I have seen Deer taken down with Buckshot, I guess what it all comes down to is the area you hunt, how it works in your gun and personal preference. I have a buddy who used Buckshot once at the same land we are still hunting. I don't think the shot was very far, anyhoo, he shot at a Buck and hit him but when it came time to tracking him he couldn't find any blood or anything, well, the next week that same Buck came into the same area but was real wary and was even conscious of where he got hit the first time, kinda checking it out to make sure he didn't get "stung" again, this time he had a slug and took him down, he swore off Buckshot after that incident. Me, I like hitting a deer with a slug and knowing that he is either going to drop right there or not go far, oddly enough, the bucks I've hit with a slug have dropped right there, but the Doe I shot ran about 50 yards before dropping.

Re: Get the vote out for Bush!!!!! [ QUOTE ] If you find a Kerry fan, tell them to stay home. [/ QUOTE ] Very American right there. And you guys try to call me unamerican. People like that are probably all for suppressing certain voters based on their nationality or skin color.

Re: How Do You Vote? We have a broken arrow pointing towards the particular candidate, you draw a line conecting the arrow, sometimes I feel like I am playing connect the dots.

Re: Dang! That was crusty! I don't think it hurts, whether or not it helps is in the eye of the shooter.

Re: Using Scents I've used BuckSnort corn scent this year, no reaction, the only time I have seen any possible reaction to an estrous scent, last year I ran a drag of Knight and Hale Estrous to my tree and had Tink #69 Doe in Heat gel on scent wicks in 4 spots around me, plus a Doe Estrous scent wafer at my level in the tree. I had a Buck come in from roughly the same line as the scent drag, was he following that, or was he just passing through that area, not sure, he didn't pay attention to the Tinks when he walked right past one. Sometimes I think scents are just a waste of money. The Doe I shot a week and a half ago didn't pay any attention to the Corn scent I had out, heck, she wouldn't even respond to a fawn bleat, doe grunt, buck grunt nothing, she would look, but as far as coming any closer, nope, I had to trust that rifled Brenneke slug to be accurate to 50 yards, not too mention aiming with a bead sight. But, I'm the man when the pressures on.

Re: Dang! That was crusty! As far as the choke tubes, good luck, I can get the barrel shining bright after a good cleaning and buttering, but even I haven't figured out the secret to getting the choke tubes that way.

Re: Dang! That was crusty! The best thing to do when you first clean that Nova, is use a brass brush, I used to clean that gun and couldn't figure out why the barrel never looked clean, after I used the brass brush it got everything out and was much easier to clean. As far as the bore butter, you can buy the stuff in the tube or buy the presoaked patches, what I do is just coat a patch liberally with the butter and run it through the bore several times making sure I coat the whole barrel then look inside the barrel and you can see if you've got it all covered, then take a clean patch/patches and run it through to get out the excess. Thats all I use for my shotguns, I use that to lube my shotguns and I fire slugs out of it and everything, the barrel doesn't seem to get as fouled up as normal and cleaning seems easier. You can also buy the T/C #13 Bore cleaner, it's supposed to remove the powder residue and such without ruining the seasoning in the barrel.

Re: Buckshot question I use slugs and I wouldn't use anything else in a shotgun for deer hunting. Brenneke works best for me and I feel that they have a stopping power that is unequaled, but, shoot what works best for you and your gun, I use rifled slugs, the brenneks are pretty accurate, I took a doe last week from 50 yards with a rifled slug and just a bead sight, no rifled barrel, no open sights. If your hunting area affords you 100 yard shots with your shotgun then I would get a rifled barrel and a scope, but for me, a 50 yard shot is about the max I'll be getting, most of the time the shots are right under me for the most part, 10-15 yards.

Re: Dang! That was crusty! Benelli packs their guns in some type of grease before they ship them so they don't rust just in case they sit in the box or on the shelf for awhile, you definitely need to get all that grease out of there before you shoot( 20/20 hindsight huh ), anyhoo, after a good cleaning I season it with the T/C Bore Butter, once that grease is gone then cleaning isn't any different from any other type of shotgun and seasoning it with the bore butter will only make it easier.

Re: so long suckers Good post Aaron, you said a lot of things I have thought of but never said. Just think, in 20 or so years, we'll be running things and there will be a host of middle 20's early 30's voters complaining about the decisions we are making. I'll be 28 later this month so I have what, 7 more years til I can legally run for President. Slugshooter in 2012.

Re: Misleading intelligence ad on Kerry. [ QUOTE ] I just believe that Kerry's wrong on almost all of the issues: The Iraq War, taxes, the economy, education, social security, health care, gun rights, and abortion. [/ QUOTE ] The only difference between me and you marky is who we choose to best represent our values. You and I both have differing opinions on things and the way we feel about things, just as you disagree on those above issues as Kerry stands on them, I disagree with Bush's stance on things. This election to me is so much more than one single issue. I am a democrat, so people would say I should vote for Kerry, but, I am a hunter and gun owner so people say I should vote for Bush. This election is bigger than any one issue, Kerry may not be looked on as a "friend" to the gun or hunting industry, but I do not believe he is as anti-gun as the NRA or the RNC makes him out to be, there is a big difference between anti-gun and pro- gun control. I didn't post those 2 stories from factcheck.org to try and change anyone's mind on here, I realize that most minds are made up and have been for awhile, I posted them to show what either party will do to gain that edge and yes both sides are guilty of it. Like I said before, this election is bigger than any one issue to me.

Re: Would you still vote for Bush.... [ QUOTE ] yes i would........ i don't need an assault weapon to hunt........ it's amazing how little effect the original bann had on murders ..... bush for another term!!!!!!!!! [/ QUOTE ] Hasn't the violent crime rate been going down the last 10 or 15 years. It may or may not have anything to do with the AWB, for every report that says it is there is one that says it isn't.

Re: Misleading intelligence ad on Kerry. [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] The Bush ad released Oct. 22 is called “wolves,” and is a direct appeal to fear. [/ QUOTE ] Kerry has been trying to make Americans afraid of Bush from the very start of his campaign and now he's whining about a little wolf ad ...Geesh. ...Look whose calling the kettle black. [/ QUOTE ] That statement isn't from Kerry, it's from factcheck.org

You'll find that the biggest answer you will see on here regarding that subject is shoot what worls best out of your gun. The advantage of Powerbelts is that you don't need a sabot around the bullet to create the gas seal needed to propel the bullet, some guys on here swear by them and some swear at them, shoot what works best for you. I use Powerbelts cause they came with my CVA package I have.

I'll never understand why people fret over 2 inch groups at 50 yards or even 100 yards when the kill zone of a deer is much bigger, it doesn't have to go straight through the heart to kill it, I have shot a deer in the neck, to the right of the shoulder blade and most recently right through the shoulder blade and heart and that was the only deer I have actually had to track, the other 2 dropped right where they were. I mean, if someone wants to stay at the range for hours on end and won't leave until they have every shot within a half inch group at 100 yards, more power to ya, I just don't see the need.

Re: Unreal Tell me about it, finish 2nd to last and guys behind you have a chance to make up some ground and what happens, they finish bad also, I tell ya, it's gonna be real interesting when I get to Darlington in a couple weeks.

Re: Question on smoking mom died I smoke, too much it seems. I don't smoke in the woods, we don't smoke in the house but I still don't keep my camo in the house, I smoke to and from hunting but keep the window all the way down, when I get home I usually keep my camo hanging outside for the week in the woods behind the house to air out, then I put them in a plastic bag when I go to hunt. I also spray liberally with the autumn scent killer and use a cover scent of some sort. When I am up in the tree sometimes I get the urge, sometimes not, when I do I pull out the trusty bag of sunflower seeds, those help more than any nicotine patch.

Would Kerry Throw Us To The Wolves? A misleading Bush ad criticizes Kerry for proposing to cut intelligence spending -- a decade ago, by 4%, when some Republicans also proposed cuts. October 23, 2004 A new Bush ad claims Kerry supported cuts in intelligence “so deep they would have weakened America ’s defenses” against terrorists, and shows a pack of hungry-looking wolves preparing to attack. Actually, the cut Kerry proposed in 1994 amounted to less than 4 percent, as part of a proposal to cut many programs to reduce the deficit. And in 1995 Porter Goss, who is now Bush’s CIA Director, co-sponsored an even stronger deficit-elimination measure that would have cut CIA personnel by 20 percent over five years. When asked about that at his confirmation hearings he didn't disavow it. The Bush ad released Oct. 22 is called “wolves,” and is a direct appeal to fear. Speak Softly But Use Scary Words and Pictures Using a soft-spoken female announcer to deliver the harsh message, the ad shows blurry images of a dark forest and a pack of hungry-looking wolves eying the camera and apparently contemplating an attack. The announcer says that “after the first terrorist attack on America ” Kerry “voted to slash America ’s intelligence operations.” The ad is misleading in several ways, some of which we went over last March when President Bush first accused Kerry of trying to “gut” the intelligence budget. Here are the ways this ad misleads voters: •Old news: The “first terrorist attack” the ad refers to didn't happen September 11, 2001, as some listeners assume. It actually was more than a decade ago, in 1993, when a truck bomb went off in the parking garage under one of the World Trade Center towers. In fact, Kerry was supporting regular increases in intelligence spending for several years prior to the attacks of September 11, 2001. •Exaggerated Wording: Kerry never proposed a single $6-billion cut in intelligence spending. He did propose S.1826 (see "supporting documents" at right) which included a $1-billion cut in 1994. That measure also would have frozen intelligence spending at that reduced level through 1998, allowing it to rise only by the rate of inflation. That could fairly be called a $5-billion cut spread over five years. Total intelligence spending is a classified figure, but was estimated at the time to be $27 billion per year. So, the cut Kerry proposed amounted to an estimated 3.7 percent -- hardly a proposal to "slash" expenditures. That measure was debated on the Senate floor and on Feb 10,1994 it was defeated 75-20 with 38 Democratic Senators voting against it. The following year Kerry introduced another deficit-reduction package, S.1290 (see "supporting documents" at right). This one would have lowered the ceiling for intelligence spending by $300 million for five years starting in 1996. That would have amounted to a reduction of just over 1 percent of estimated intelligence spending. Not only was this proposed reduction a small one, it came at a time when it had just become known that one intelligence agency had been hoarding $1 billion in unspent funds from its secret appropriations. Kerry's proposal died without a hearing, but a similar Republican-sponsored measure eventually became law (see below). Saying that either of these proposals would “slash” spending is an exaggeration. Saying that a 4 percent or 1 percent cut would have “weakened America ’s defenses” is an opinion which the Bush campaign has a perfect right to state, but it is not a fact. •Missing Context: The ad doesn’t tell the whole story. Some Republicans also supported similar cuts in intelligence spending at the time, including Bush’s current CIA Director Porter Goss. Goss co-sponsored a draconian, deficit-elimination bill in 1995 (see "supporting documents" at right) that would have cut the number of CIA employees by 20 percent or more over five years. Goss wasn't the main author -- he signed onto an 1,188-page bill authored by Gerald Solomon, the chairman of the House Rules Committee, of which Goss was a member. The measure died without a hearing and had no prospect of passage, as it called for elimination of the Departments of Education, Energy and Commerce among other things. When questioned about his co-sponsorship of the bill during his confirmation hearings in September Goss said only, "the record speaks for the record." Another Republican-sponsored cut similar to Kerry's proposed 1995 measure actually became law. On the same day Kerry proposed his $1.5-billion cut spread over five years, the Senate passed by voice vote an amendment to eliminate $1 billion in intelligence funds for fiscal year 1996. That measure was proposed by Republican Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, and a companion measure was co-sponsored by Kerry and Republican Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama. The cut eventually became law as part of a House-Senate package endorsed by the Republican leadership. Specter explained at the time that the $1-billion cut was intended to recapture funds that had been appropriated for spy satellites, but which had gone unspent by the National Reconnaissance Office. Sources Dana Milbank, “Goss Backed '95 Bill to Slash Intelligence; Plan Would Have Cut Personnel 20%,” Washington Post, 24 Aug 2004 : A3. "Hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee: Nomination of Rep. Porter J. Goss to be Director of the Central Intelligence Agency," transcript, The Federal News Service, Inc., 14 Sep 2004. 103d Congress, 2d Session, S. 1826, "To reduce the deficit for fiscal years 1994 through 1998," 3 Feb. 1994. 104th Congress, 1st Session, S.1290, "To reduce the deficit," 25 Sep 1995. 104th Congress, 1st Session H.R. 1923, "To balance the budget of the United States Government by restructuring Government, reducing Federal spending, eliminating the deficit, limiting bureaucracy, and restoring federalism," 25 Jun 2004.

If he had sought the repassage of the Assault Weapons Ban that he himself supported and said that he himself would sign if it came across his desk but did not do so because of the votes it would have cost him. I will bet money, that if George W Bush wins reelection and has 4 years of not having to worry about losing votes, within that 4 years there will be another Assault Weapons Ban, it may or may not be under the guise of a USA PATRIOT act.

Re: FDR\'s grandson on Bush. [ QUOTE ] We have only been attack in America on American soil three times, the American Revolution, The War of 1812, and 9/11. The attacks of Pearl Harbor don't count because Hawaii wasn't a state till after it happened (either late 40's or early 50's). [/ QUOTE ] Go ahead and tell those survivors of Pearl Harbor that what the Japanese did to them didn't count. The Japanese didn't attack Hawaii, they attacked the US Naval Fleet stationed there. I think you need to take a history class and apologize to everyone who lived through that day and those families who lost someone in the attack. And, we didn't start out in Europe, we started in the South Pacific, fighting the Japanese and when it came apparent that England, Russia and France couldn't stop Germany, we went there also.

I live near Fayetteville in Stedman. It's true that a lot of deer here in the eastern part of the state aren't the biggest, your best bet for bigger deer here in eastern nc is on private land. Fort Bragg has some decent deer, never hunted there but seen pictures, the public land I hunt at Bladen Lakes State Forest aren't the biggest, but there are some good deer there, one guy took an 11 pointer out there opening day. Check for my post in this room titled Score.....Got me a doe. I took her out there, not the biggest, but decent, I've taken a couple spikes out there also. If you are from a state that has monster deer then yes, this will be a little culture shock, I will tell you what I think is the main reason deer are smaller here....dog running...the deer over here don't live as long as in western NC cause they can't run dogs out there, also, the buck limit over here is 4 where western NC is 2.

Not really surprised that the NRA might have an ad that is misleading. Since they all do. NRA Ad Falsely Accuses Kerry It says he's sponsoring a proposal to ban "every pump shotgun" and voted "to ban deer-hunting ammunition." Don't believe either claim. October 28, 2004 Modified: October 28, 2004 The National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund began airing a TV ad Oct. 26 falsely accusing Kerry of voting to ban deer-hunting ammunition. In fact, what Kerry voted for was a proposal to outlaw rifle ammunition "designed or marketed as having armor piercing capability." The NRA ad also claims Kerry is co-sponsoring a bill to "that would ban every semiautomatic shotgun and every pump shotgun." That's false. Kerry co-sponsored extension of the now-expired assault-weapon ban, a measure that would have expanded the ban to cover military-style shotguns but specifically exempts pump-action shotguns. This ad began airing in Wisconsin Oct. 26, and may also be running in other battleground states. Some of the claims are false, others merely misleading or exaggerated. Announcer: John Kerry says he’s a sportsman, so why did he vote to ban deer hunting ammunition and vote 9 times to ban guns? Why is Kerry sponsoring a bill in the Senate that would ban every semiautomatic shotgun and every pump shotgun? If John Kerry is really a sportsman, why is he endorsed by groups that want to restrict your gun rights and outlaw hunting? Kerry: I think you ought to tax all ammunition. I think you ought to tax guns. Announcer: Kerry a sportsman? That dog don’t hunt. NRA-PVF is responsible for the content of this advertising. Kerry and Gun Control There's a clear division between Kerry and Bush on the issue of guns. Kerry co-sponsored an legislation that would not only have extended the old assault-weapon ban that expired Oct. 1, but would also have expanded it to cover more weapons. Bush said he would have signed an extension of the expired ban, but didn't lobby Congress or push publicly for such legislation. The NRA has endorsed Bush, while the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence (formerly Handgun Control, Inc.) has endorsed Kerry. Kerry nevertheless describes himself as a "life-long hunter and fisherman" and made a point of going goose hunting in Ohio on Oct. 21. One picture of that hunt appears on Kerry's website, and others got front-page display in many newspapers the following day. It is that image of Kerry -- a gun-toting sportsman -- that the NRA seeks to undermine with this ad. But to make its point, the ad falsely characterizes Kerry's record. Armored Deer? The ad starts off saying, "John Kerry says he’s a sportsman, so why did he vote to ban deer hunting ammunition . . .?" In fact, what Kerry voted for was an amendment sponsored by Sen. Ted Kennedy that would have covered rifle bullets capable of piercing soft body armor and also marketed as "armor-piercing," and wasn't aimed at hunting ammunition. Kennedy described the intent of his amendment during Senate debate March 2, 2004: Sen. Kennedy: 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. That is it--designed or marketed as having armor-piercing capability, such as armor-piercing ammunition that is now advertised on the Hi-Vel Web site. Kennedy's Amendment SEC. 5. ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION. (a) EXPANSION OF DEFINITION OF ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.--Section 921(a)(17)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is amended-- (1) in clause (i), by striking ``or'' at the end; (2) in clause (ii), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and (3) by adding at the end the following: ``(iii) a projectile that may be used in a handgun and that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be capable of penetrating body armor; or ``(iv) a projectile for a centerfire rifle, designed or marketed as having armor piercing capability , that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be more likely to penetrate body armor than standard ammunition of the same caliber.'' -0- (The term "body armor" is later defined to mean "body armor that the Attorney General determines meets minimum standards for the protection of law enforcement officers.") The NRA attacked Kennedy's amendment, claiming it would outlaw most rounds now used for deer hunting. The amendment did propose to expand a ban on armor-piercing ammunition for handguns to cover rifle ammunition as well, and it would have introduced a performance-based standard applying to rounds that "the Attorney General determines . . . to be more likely to penetrate body armor than standard ammunition of the same caliber." (See box at left for full text of relevant portion of Kennedy's amendment.) Sen. Larry Craig, an Idaho Republican, outlined the argument against a performance-based standard during Senate debate: Sen Craig: The amendment's actual aim and effect would be to expand the definition of ``armor-piercing'' to include ammunition based, not on any threat to law enforcement officers, but on a manufacturer's marketing strategy. . . . The standards he establishes in his legislation, performance-based standards, ban what is currently on-the-shelf hunting ammunition. Does the hunting ammunition in a high-powered rifle have the ability to penetrate soft body armor? Yes, it does. . . .He says not. . . .The fact is, virtually all hunting and target rifle ammunition is capable of penetrating soft body armor. That is a reality. So by his definition does that go off the market? I believe it does. That is why I think it is unnecessary. Ignored both by Craig and the NRA, however, is the plain language of the amendment itself, which referred to ammunition that could penetrate body armor and is designed or sold as "armor piercing." Both conditions would have had to apply for the ammunition to fall under the proposed ban. The Kennedy amendment was rejected 34-63, with only one Republican in favor of the measure and 13 Democrats against it. Nine Votes to Ban Guns? The ad states that Kerry voted "nine times to ban guns." In fact, Kerry did vote repeatedly to ban some guns, but by no means all guns. Six of the nine votes cited by the NRA were in favor of the 1994 assault-weapons ban. Three were on its passage in 1994 and two others were in 1993 when the Senate initially considered its version of the ban. The sixth vote was in March of this year to extend the ban for another ten years without any changes. That proposed extension passed 52-47 but later died when the bill to which it was attached as an amendment was defeated. The three other votes came in 1990 during consideration of an omnibus crime bill, and included an unsuccessful, early attempt to ban 12 specific assault weapons. The ban that later became law covered 19 specific weapons. Ban Shotguns? The NRA ad falsely claims Kerry is sponsoring a bill "that would ban every semiautomatic shotgun and every pump shotgun." That's just the opposite of Kerry's stated position, and falsely characterizes what's actually in the bill that Kerry co-sponsored (S.1431, authored by Sen. Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey. See "supporting documents" at right.) Kerry's Stated Position:In a campaign document on his website called a "Sportsmans Bill of Rights " Kerry vows to support "The Right to Own Firearms," and adds: Kerry Campaign: John Kerry and John Edwards will always support the Second Amendment right of law-abiding American citizens to keep and bear arms, such as rifles and shotguns, including semi-automatic firearms used by hunters and sportsmen across this country. Gun rights are fundamental for the sport of hunting, and they will vigorously support those rights as president. What the Bill Really Says: The Lautenberg bill that Kerry co-sponsored actually stopped well short of any blanket ban on semiautomatic shotguns or pump-action shotguns, two types of weapons commonly used for hunting. Pump-action shotguns: These guns can fire more than one round without reloading. After firing one shot, the shooter ejects the spent cartridge and chambers a new round by pulling back on a slide or pump located under the barrel. Far from banning all such weapons, the bill Kerry co-sponsored specifically exempted them. It said the ban "shall not apply to any firearm that-- (A) is manually operated by bolt, pump, level, or slide action ; (B) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or © is an antique firearm."(We have underlined the word "or" to show that the exemption for pump or slide-action weapons applies independently of the other two exemptions for antique or inoperable weapons.) Semiautomatic shotguns: These weapons can also fire more than one round without reloading, but the spent cartridge is ejected and a fresh round chambered automatically. The recoil action from the first round powers the mechanism that loads the next one. Kerry's bill would have banned any semi-automatic shotgun that had any one of the following features: "a folding or telescoping stock . . . a pistol grip . . . the ability to accept a detachable magazine, or . . . a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds." But semiautomatic shotguns sold for hunting or target shooting typically don't have detachable clips, and hold no more than five rounds, so few if any sporting weapons would have been affected. The Shotguns Kerry Really Would Have Banned: `(L) A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.'. The NRA's Claim When we asked the NRA to explain, a spokesman pointed to a provision of the Lautenberg bill that would have added a ban on military style shotguns. But read the provision for yourself (see box at left). The provision would ban a "shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use" that is also "not particularly suitable for sporting purposes." Shotguns designed for military or law-enforcement use are generally quite distinct from those commonly used by hunters or target shooters. For examples of military shotguns that would have been covered by Kerry's proposal, see the Benelli M4 Super 90, the Mossberg 590, the military and law-enforcement versions of the Remington 870, or the more exotic Jackhammer shotgun, which is not the sort of thing normally found in a duck blind or on the skeet range. Tax Bullets and Guns? The NRA ad also shows an edited portion from a decade-old TV interview in which Kerry is shown saying he favors taxing ammunition and guns. On Nov. 7, 1993 Kerry appeared on CNN's "Late Edition" program to discuss a crime bill then making its way through Congress. Kerry said he favored a punitive tax on what the interviewer described as "cop-killer" bullets designed to mushroom on impact. And he also said he favored "more" tax on ordinary ammunition as well. Here is the full exchange: Q: Now, Senator Moynihan has a very novel idea, and his idea is to put a very hefty tax on these mushrooming bullets, these bullets that are like cop-killer bullets, maybe a 10,000-fold tax on these bullets. . . . Senator Kerry, how about a big tax on guns if you're not going to go along with a big tax on bullets? Kerry: Well, personally I would support a tax on bullets. There is no reason in the world for these particular- these dum-dum bullets to be sold . They're people-killers, and there is absolutely- they're not duck-killers, they're not deer-killers, they're not used in hunting. They're there to stop a human being. Absolutely- Q: How about regular bullets ? Kerry: I think you ought to tax all ammunition more, personally. I think you ought to tax guns. Kerry's offhand response failed to make clear exactly what kind of tax, or how large, Kerry had in mind. So his words are open to differing interpretations. The NRA ad edited out the word "more," though its not clear that would have changed the sense of Kerry's remarks. Kerry isn't currently proposing any new taxes on guns or ammunition. Sources U.S. Senate, 108th Congress, 1st Session, S. 1431, Proposed 17 July 2003. S. Amdt. 2637 to S. 1805, Proposed 2 March 2004. U.S. House, 103rd Congress, 2nd Session, H.R. 3355, Proposed 26 Oct 1993. S. Amdt. 1152 to S. Amdt. 1151 to S. 1607, Proposed 9 Nov 1993. S. Amdt. 1151 to S. 1607, Proposed 9 Nov 1993. S. Amdt. 2085 to S. 1970, Proposed 28 June 1990. S. Amdt. 1681 to S. 1970, Proposed 22 May 1990. S. Amdt. 1676 to S. 1970, Proposed 22 May 1990. Congressional Roll Call 1993, 103rd Congress - 1st Session, Vote #103, Congressional Quarterly: 47S. Congressional Roll Call 1990, 101st Congress - 2nd Session, Vote #365, Congressional Quarterly: 31S. CNN Late Edition, "The View From Capitol Hill," 7 Nov 1993.

Re: Medicare Increase What I don't understand, is why in this day and age, that any candidate would place an ad that is misleading or outright lies, and they all do it, Republican and Democrat, but why with all our technology and the ability to get information in seconds and able to dispel rumors or false ads, why do they even bother putting them out. I guess they figure most people wouldn't even bother checking the info out.