In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Three Major Senate Fights In September
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Aug. 9 Neal Knox Update - We'll be facing three major gun law
fights in the Senate in September (which is the lead story in the
current Hard Corps Report, which will start hitting this coming week).
They are:
-- the House-passed industry protection bill, S. 659, which has 54 co-
sponsors, but faces a certain filibuster that will require 60 votes to
break;
-- preserving the House-approved Tiahrt Amendment to the Department of
Justice Appropriations bill (modifying BATF and FBI regulations to
preserve gunowners' privacy) which Democrats will filibuster if they
can't get enough Republican help to defeat;
-- and preventing the probable Dianne Feinstein Amendment on that same
funding bill to reenact the "assault weapons" ban and enact a new total
ban on over-10-shot magazines, which we need Republicans to filibuster.
Some Senators -- particularly those running for reelection next
year -- will schedule public events to meet with constituents.
This is an ideal time to let them know where you stand.
Call either their state or D.C. office to find out if they'll be in
your neighborhood, let the office know what you want to talk about, so
they'll note your views in the pro and con sheets receptionists keep.
Then take some friends to any events scheduled -- so you can
personally tell him (or her) what you think on all three of these
issues, and various other anti-gun proposals that very well may
offered as amendments.
About the last thing Senate Democrats (all but two) did before
heading out of town was start a filibuster against proven Second
Amendment defender and Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor to the
Atlanta-based 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. He is the third
appellate judge being filibustered in the Senate - which is
absolutely unprecedented.
Before the 53-44 vote to shut off the filibuster (called
"invoking cloture")Sens. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), Charles Schumer
(D-N.Y.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Cal.), and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) had
all bashed General Pryor`s defense of the Second Amendment.
The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, formerly the National Coalition
To Ban Handguns, complained about his "hostility to gun laws;"
putting the State of Alabama on the side of the Second Amendment in the
Emerson case when it was argued before the Fifth Circuit;
support for an Alabama preemption on gun law; efforts to repeal the
state's two-day handgun waiting period and to pass the state's
prohibition against suits against the gun industry for third-party
crimes.
No wonder NRA endorsed him.
With Congress out of town, the latest, hottest
political topic is the recall of California Gov. Gray Davis --
who is almost certainly toast since Arnold Schwarzenneger and Lt.
Gov. Cruz Bustamante got into the race. "Ah-nold" is no friend and Cruz
is an enemy.
With Rep. Issa, who funded the recall petition effort, dropping out
of the race, that leaves just two gun rights defenders: Bill
Simon, who ran against Davis last year (and nearly won despite a
lousy campaign) and Sen.Tom McClintock (who has proved his loyalty many
times over). I hope they flip a coin, or something, to give
us a chance of electing a pro-gunrights governor who will put a
brake on the ridiculous string of gun laws coming out of the Left
Coast.
When I was writing about Sen. Orrin Hatch's bill to repeal the D.C.
handgun ban a couple of weeks back, I pointed out that apologists
for the "Nation's Murder Capital" gun ban claim it doesn't work
because it's "so easy" for D.C. criminals to go into Maryland or
Virginia to get a gun.
"That's true," I wrote, "if the resident and the seller are both
willing to commit Federal felonies. No individual, and no dealer, may
legally sell a gun across any state line."
Gun law book author Alan Korwin and others chided me. I misstated
the Federal gun law; I should have said "handgun."
Believe me, I know better. Since the 1986 passage of what was left
of the McClure-Volkmer law, dealers have been able to sell long
guns - but not handguns - across state lines, but only if the sale is in
accordance with the laws of both states.
What shocked some readers was that they couldn't personally sell or
buy any kind of gun to an individual in another state - regardless of
the laws, if any, of either state.
That is probably the least understood and therefore most violated
section of the expanded Gun Control Act.
After some discussion one reader said: "Let me get this straight.
I can't give my father down in Texas a shotgun?" That is precisely
correct; I can't receive one from my Texas father either, for I'm
now a resident of Virginia.
Violation of that section of GCA [Title 18, Sec. 922(a)(3)] is
punishable by up to five years in prison and/or a $5,000 fine.
A professional poll in Canada, commissioned by gun registration foe
and Member of Parliament Garry Breitkreuz, showed that only 39
percent of Canadians support the law -- and 49 percent want it
scrapped.
Only in mainly-French Quebec did support for the law get over 50
percent.
The latest in the fight against that billion dollar boondoggle is
that aboriginals have by far the lowest compliance rate. Yet the
government acknowledges that it does not intend to enforce the law
against them because of possible violations of native treaties -
although that 3 percent of the population commits about 25 percent of
the nation's crime.
The local press is interviewing - and castigating - gun dealers on
the Brady Campaign's "Bad Apple" list, based on the number of guns from
their stores traced back from crimes.
Many of the articles I've seen don't even mention the fact that
BATFE put out a statement the same day that the Brady list was
released:
"It is misleading to suggest that a gun dealer is corrupt because a
large percentage of the guns sold in his store are subsequently
used in a crime," the ATF said. "Many other factors - including
high volume of sales, the type of inventory carried and whether the gun
[dealer] is located in a high crime area - contribute to the
percentages cited by the Brady campaign."
Grass Roots North Carolina is a hard-charging, highly effective gun
rights outfit. And, as usually the case with such groups, they
have often been cross-ways with NRA-ILA over political grades,
endorsements and legislative issues.
As detailed on www.GRNC.org, GRNC and ILA have often tangled over
gutting GRNC-supported bills, and backing incumbent candidates who GRNC
opposes. I doubt that either side has been totally right all the time,
but I know that GRNC has been right much of the time -
and they're the folks who have to live under the laws that result.
A couple of weeks ago the current ILA liaison and manager (under
Randy Kozuch) of ILA State & Local Division Jennifer Palmer -
sued GRNC and its president, Paul Valone, in Federal court for
$75,000 for defamation of character.
As I understand it, Paul sent out an email to GRNC which made a
crack about Ms. Palmer, for which he reportedly was willing to
apologize. Through her lawyer she demanded such an apology by a
certain date. After GRNC's lawyer, well-known Second Amendment
defender Jim Jeffries III told her lawyer that they could negotiate a
settlement, the suit was immediately filed -- a couple of days
before the deadline.
What's even more disturbing is that the attorney works for NRA, and
is using NRA stationery and support. ILA has told people inquiring
about this that it isn't unusual for NRA attorneys to represent a
member. I've never heard of it except on a gun-related matter -
and that's rare. I don't think NRA attorneys have ever represented
anyone in a personal injury case.
Allowing an NRA attorney, on NRA time, to sue a hard-working
volunteer organization is an outrage. If Ms. Palmer thinks she's
been maligned in a politics-related matter, she has the right to
hire a lawyer. But as a mid-level manager dealing with many grass roots
organizations - which every NRA official says is the heart
and soul of NRA (as we heard repeatedly at the Orlando Grass Roots
Meeting) - she made a horrendous mistake.
This suit and its repercussions is going to have a chilling effect
on all grass roots organizations at a time when NRA needs them.
By having the case sanctioned by her bosses, it looks to me that
she and they are trying to bankrupt GRNC - not by winning damages
from an outfit that couldn't begin to come up with $75,000, but by
forcing them to hire lawyers to fight the case. That's precisely
what the cities and NAACP have been trying to do to the gun
industry.
http://www.nealknox.com/alerts/msg00172.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878<P>
fights in the Senate in September (which is the lead story in the
current Hard Corps Report, which will start hitting this coming week).
They are:
-- the House-passed industry protection bill, S. 659, which has 54 co-
sponsors, but faces a certain filibuster that will require 60 votes to
break;
-- preserving the House-approved Tiahrt Amendment to the Department of
Justice Appropriations bill (modifying BATF and FBI regulations to
preserve gunowners' privacy) which Democrats will filibuster if they
can't get enough Republican help to defeat;
-- and preventing the probable Dianne Feinstein Amendment on that same
funding bill to reenact the "assault weapons" ban and enact a new total
ban on over-10-shot magazines, which we need Republicans to filibuster.
Some Senators -- particularly those running for reelection next
year -- will schedule public events to meet with constituents.
This is an ideal time to let them know where you stand.
Call either their state or D.C. office to find out if they'll be in
your neighborhood, let the office know what you want to talk about, so
they'll note your views in the pro and con sheets receptionists keep.
Then take some friends to any events scheduled -- so you can
personally tell him (or her) what you think on all three of these
issues, and various other anti-gun proposals that very well may
offered as amendments.
About the last thing Senate Democrats (all but two) did before
heading out of town was start a filibuster against proven Second
Amendment defender and Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor to the
Atlanta-based 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. He is the third
appellate judge being filibustered in the Senate - which is
absolutely unprecedented.
Before the 53-44 vote to shut off the filibuster (called
"invoking cloture")Sens. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), Charles Schumer
(D-N.Y.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Cal.), and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) had
all bashed General Pryor`s defense of the Second Amendment.
The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, formerly the National Coalition
To Ban Handguns, complained about his "hostility to gun laws;"
putting the State of Alabama on the side of the Second Amendment in the
Emerson case when it was argued before the Fifth Circuit;
support for an Alabama preemption on gun law; efforts to repeal the
state's two-day handgun waiting period and to pass the state's
prohibition against suits against the gun industry for third-party
crimes.
No wonder NRA endorsed him.
With Congress out of town, the latest, hottest
political topic is the recall of California Gov. Gray Davis --
who is almost certainly toast since Arnold Schwarzenneger and Lt.
Gov. Cruz Bustamante got into the race. "Ah-nold" is no friend and Cruz
is an enemy.
With Rep. Issa, who funded the recall petition effort, dropping out
of the race, that leaves just two gun rights defenders: Bill
Simon, who ran against Davis last year (and nearly won despite a
lousy campaign) and Sen.Tom McClintock (who has proved his loyalty many
times over). I hope they flip a coin, or something, to give
us a chance of electing a pro-gunrights governor who will put a
brake on the ridiculous string of gun laws coming out of the Left
Coast.
When I was writing about Sen. Orrin Hatch's bill to repeal the D.C.
handgun ban a couple of weeks back, I pointed out that apologists
for the "Nation's Murder Capital" gun ban claim it doesn't work
because it's "so easy" for D.C. criminals to go into Maryland or
Virginia to get a gun.
"That's true," I wrote, "if the resident and the seller are both
willing to commit Federal felonies. No individual, and no dealer, may
legally sell a gun across any state line."
Gun law book author Alan Korwin and others chided me. I misstated
the Federal gun law; I should have said "handgun."
Believe me, I know better. Since the 1986 passage of what was left
of the McClure-Volkmer law, dealers have been able to sell long
guns - but not handguns - across state lines, but only if the sale is in
accordance with the laws of both states.
What shocked some readers was that they couldn't personally sell or
buy any kind of gun to an individual in another state - regardless of
the laws, if any, of either state.
That is probably the least understood and therefore most violated
section of the expanded Gun Control Act.
After some discussion one reader said: "Let me get this straight.
I can't give my father down in Texas a shotgun?" That is precisely
correct; I can't receive one from my Texas father either, for I'm
now a resident of Virginia.
Violation of that section of GCA [Title 18, Sec. 922(a)(3)] is
punishable by up to five years in prison and/or a $5,000 fine.
A professional poll in Canada, commissioned by gun registration foe
and Member of Parliament Garry Breitkreuz, showed that only 39
percent of Canadians support the law -- and 49 percent want it
scrapped.
Only in mainly-French Quebec did support for the law get over 50
percent.
The latest in the fight against that billion dollar boondoggle is
that aboriginals have by far the lowest compliance rate. Yet the
government acknowledges that it does not intend to enforce the law
against them because of possible violations of native treaties -
although that 3 percent of the population commits about 25 percent of
the nation's crime.
The local press is interviewing - and castigating - gun dealers on
the Brady Campaign's "Bad Apple" list, based on the number of guns from
their stores traced back from crimes.
Many of the articles I've seen don't even mention the fact that
BATFE put out a statement the same day that the Brady list was
released:
"It is misleading to suggest that a gun dealer is corrupt because a
large percentage of the guns sold in his store are subsequently
used in a crime," the ATF said. "Many other factors - including
high volume of sales, the type of inventory carried and whether the gun
[dealer] is located in a high crime area - contribute to the
percentages cited by the Brady campaign."
Grass Roots North Carolina is a hard-charging, highly effective gun
rights outfit. And, as usually the case with such groups, they
have often been cross-ways with NRA-ILA over political grades,
endorsements and legislative issues.
As detailed on www.GRNC.org, GRNC and ILA have often tangled over
gutting GRNC-supported bills, and backing incumbent candidates who GRNC
opposes. I doubt that either side has been totally right all the time,
but I know that GRNC has been right much of the time -
and they're the folks who have to live under the laws that result.
A couple of weeks ago the current ILA liaison and manager (under
Randy Kozuch) of ILA State & Local Division Jennifer Palmer -
sued GRNC and its president, Paul Valone, in Federal court for
$75,000 for defamation of character.
As I understand it, Paul sent out an email to GRNC which made a
crack about Ms. Palmer, for which he reportedly was willing to
apologize. Through her lawyer she demanded such an apology by a
certain date. After GRNC's lawyer, well-known Second Amendment
defender Jim Jeffries III told her lawyer that they could negotiate a
settlement, the suit was immediately filed -- a couple of days
before the deadline.
What's even more disturbing is that the attorney works for NRA, and
is using NRA stationery and support. ILA has told people inquiring
about this that it isn't unusual for NRA attorneys to represent a
member. I've never heard of it except on a gun-related matter -
and that's rare. I don't think NRA attorneys have ever represented
anyone in a personal injury case.
Allowing an NRA attorney, on NRA time, to sue a hard-working
volunteer organization is an outrage. If Ms. Palmer thinks she's
been maligned in a politics-related matter, she has the right to
hire a lawyer. But as a mid-level manager dealing with many grass roots
organizations - which every NRA official says is the heart
and soul of NRA (as we heard repeatedly at the Orlando Grass Roots
Meeting) - she made a horrendous mistake.
This suit and its repercussions is going to have a chilling effect
on all grass roots organizations at a time when NRA needs them.
By having the case sanctioned by her bosses, it looks to me that
she and they are trying to bankrupt GRNC - not by winning damages
from an outfit that couldn't begin to come up with $75,000, but by
forcing them to hire lawyers to fight the case. That's precisely
what the cities and NAACP have been trying to do to the gun
industry.
http://www.nealknox.com/alerts/msg00172.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878<P>