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.
Update to Indiana Gun Confiscation ....
Highball
Member Posts: 15,755
Anybody know anything about this ?
http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2005/02/breaking-news-update-to-indiana-gun.html
http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2005/02/breaking-news-update-to-indiana-gun.html
Comments
Talk about CRAZY......
I have met some police officers that I would deem mentally ill.
Not to mention the population as a whole.
I would like to see the proof that the NRA is supporting this bill.
If they are.............
The gene pool needs chlorine.
from the Armed Females of America site.
http://www.armedfemalesofamerica.com/crosshairs/gun_nuts.htm
Hmmmmmmm.......
The gene pool needs chlorine.
Quote "Somehow government decided that the Constitutional Bill of Rights has become the Bill of "Suggested" Rights and are to be rationed to the citizens as the power elite sees fit"
Sako Fan
Here is my e-mail:
To whom it may concern,
Please respond indicating whether or not the NRA is truly supporting Indiana Rep. Larry Buell's, R-Indianapolis, bill that "would permit law enforcement officers to confiscate firearms from individuals for 45 days when an officer thinks the person is mentally ill and dangerous."
If an officer believes an individual is mentally ill and dangerous to themselves or others the officer should take them to the nearest medical center for "x" number of hours for evaluation as state law allows. If the medical professional releases the patient because they deem the patient competent and no danger, there is no need to confiscate the patient's guns. If they are incompetent and a danger then they should be treated until competent and released, at which time they are not a danger and there is no need to confiscate their guns.
I am beginning to worry about some of the NRA's positions. It seems that there are too many compromises coming from the NRA. We should be a no compromise organization that is determined to roll back anti-gun laws. Every time we compromise with the gun grabbers we give an inch and they take a light-year.
Requesting..respectfully..yet laying out a firm position of strength.
Very nice message.
2-barrel
And why are some so eager to believe the worse about ANY progun organization?
I have have in the past have numerous email and US mail contacts with the writer of the above referenced articl, David Codrea. He lives in Calif with his family is a very sharp person and a strong pro-gun fighter. His personal friend, Angel Shaya (spelling?) who llives in FLA and with his own personal money started a progunn organization KABA (Keep and Bear Arms at www.keepandbearms.com not to be confused with the Citizens committee to Keep and Bear Arms).
But for some reason, and sadly, along with some excellent work, I have also seen a lot of work come out of KABA that is very eager to bash the NRA.
At this point I think the NRA is innocent until proven guilty and isn't that how justice is supposed to work in America?
Quote "Somehow government decided that the Constitutional Bill of Rights has become the Bill of "Suggested" Rights and are to be rationed to the citizens as the power elite sees fit"
2-barrel
tr fox 2-barrel is right. I'm a voting member of the NRA and I deserve an answer to the question. The text of my e-mail did not make an accusation of support for Buell's bill, it asked if they were supporting it. Then I supported my position with why I thought the bill was a bad idea. Finally, it is my right to be concerned for some of the compromises that they have in fact made in the past.
2-barrel I believe that members should not quit the NRA because of this type of problem. We should make our voices heard by sending e-mails, calling, and contacting our grassroots coordinators to let them know we want a no compromise organization. Quitting will only weaken our strongest defense against extreme gun control.
tr fox I copied the Article and sent it to the NRA and asked if they were in support of the article. I basicly asked them if was printed lies or the truth. I would think as a member I have a ligitamate question. I never pointed the finger of guilt at them but I am curious where they stand. I do expect an answer and if I don't get one they will have one less member. I can ignore their request for money just as easy as they can ignore my question. We'll see how it works out.
2-barrel
Logical and reasonable.
Quote "Somehow government decided that the Constitutional Bill of Rights has become the Bill of "Suggested" Rights and are to be rationed to the citizens as the power elite sees fit"
I have e-mailed the NRA-ILA once before to inquire about the Virginia Citizens Defense League www.vcdl.org before I joined VCDL. They responded rather quickly, and with good things to say about VCDL I might add(shameless plug). I still haven't seen a reply to the question so I am going to e-mail them again today.
tr fox 2-barrel is right. I'm a voting member of the NRA and I deserve an answer to the question. The text of my e-mail did not make an accusation of support for Buell's bill, it asked if they were supporting it. Then I supported my position with why I thought the bill was a bad idea. Finally, it is my right to be concerned for some of the compromises that they have in fact made in the past.
2-barrel I believe that members should not quit the NRA because of this type of problem. We should make our voices heard by sending e-mails, calling, and contacting our grassroots coordinators to let them know we want a no compromise organization. Quitting will only weaken our strongest defense against extreme gun control.
Also logical and reasonable. Especially the paragraph addressed to 2-barrell.
Quote "Somehow government decided that the Constitutional Bill of Rights has become the Bill of "Suggested" Rights and are to be rationed to the citizens as the power elite sees fit"
Quote "Somehow government decided that the Constitutional Bill of Rights has become the Bill of "Suggested" Rights and are to be rationed to the citizens as the power elite sees fit"
In the mean time I'm going to see if I can put a couch in my office and hear people ramble for $150.00 an hour! I have my police academy certificate!
Defender
Private investigator licensed in AZ & CA that specializes in self defense cases.
The constitution is the peoples not the government or the NRAs.
It does make you wonder where the NRA stands.
2-barrel
Thank you for contacting NRA-ILA. Regarding Indiana HB 1776, NRA is not
supporting this bill; we are currently neutral. Also, it is important
to know that the current version of HB 1776 hardly resembles the version
that was originally introduced. We would have opposed the original
language.
As it stands now, HB 1776 will be changed to ensure that due process
protections are in place at every step, placing the burden on the state.
For example, if a law enforcement officer believes that somebody is a
danger to himself/herself, or a danger to others, the officer must first
make a request for a warrant, and if the warrant is granted, only then
can law enforcement seize the firearm.
Also, if a warrant is granted, after the seizure of firearms the state
must hold a hearing within 14 days of the warrant being issued, or the
firearm(s) is/are returned to the owner. This 14 day time limit was a
major change from the original language in which the state had 45 days
to hold a hearing.
There are several other protections included in the new language, all
of which ensure due process, and protect the law-abiding. Moreover, the
new language allows for law enforcement officers to do the job they are
tasked with doing, and does not require or encourage them to act as
mental health professionals.
Nonetheless, NRA is not actively supporting this bill, nor are we
working against it. We will continue to monitor this bill as it moves
through the process to ensure that all of the necessary protections remain in
place.
Sincerely,
Legislative Aide
NRA-ILA State & Local Affairs
http://www.in.gov/apps/lsa/session/billwatch/billinfo?year=2005&session=1&request=getBill&docno=1776
Semper Fi
Remember Ruby Ridge.
What if there were no hypothetical questions?
Not a member at the auction? Join Gunbroker at this link!
The only thoght I have is in reguards to the NRA. Are they really helping us? I mean all of the time. Or do they do whats on their agenda. I mean a lot of laws have been passed over the years and I haven't seen or heard anything from the NRA. Hell, when it comes election time how many NRA spots do you see on tv? Whenever these bills are up for the vote, do you see ANYTHING about them? You won't see the liberals advertising their anti-gun bills for fear that it might inform the people of whats happening. But you should see the pro-gun groups putting something out there. There are more of us out there than you know. A lot of people just don't take the steps to deffend their second ammendment right simply because they are uninformed until its too late. All I'm saying is if I have to watch commercial after commercial about the evils of smoking and how we should vote to approve a new cigarette tax, I should also see one for the evils of gun controll and how the people should vote for the constitution and stop any further gun control bills from going into place. I don't see them though. It leaves me to ask where my money went when I joined the NRA.
If you are like me you probably don't contribute a whole lot more money than your yearly NRA dues and some cash donations from time to time. Although my family and I have given our time to work on the yearly Friends of the NRA Banquets to raise some money.
But even at that, there is no way the NRA can consider most (perhaps all) of us here on GB.com as MAJOR contributors. So therefore you can probably be assured that the working management and the major contributors are going to chose the path the NRA takes and it likely will not fit the exact agenda of anyone here. If you want to change that, then start donating thousands of dollars or thousands of hours working to help the NRA and then you will probably have some control over what the NRA does or doesn't do.
In regards to running TV ads, you have got to remember how terrible expensive such ads are. And because only a tiny, tiny percentage of gun owners are NRA members, and because we members are a little tight on money, the NRA is usually running on fumes.
I wish people would not expect so much for so little.
JMHO [:)]
Quote "Somehow government decided that the Constitutional Bill of Rights has become the Bill of "Suggested" Rights and are to be rationed to the citizens as the power elite sees fit"
Anonymous said...
Since you have the paper's word and the Representative's word, is there also a way for you to confirm with the NRA itself? I just don't want to believe that they would support such action.
4:06 PM David Codrea said...
I asked Mr. Lubson for a name of Rep. Buell's NRA contact and he did not have one handy--I was scrambling to get the kids off to school and get to work when he called me back, so I told him I'd try to find out from other sources. Since I don't have contacts with Indiana NRA, any help will be appreciated--and if NRA wants to respond directly and explain why they approve of this bill, I'll be happy to post their undedited response--as long as we know who the person is, he has a real email address we can contact him at, and he agrees to answer comments posted by readers.
Doesn't anyone but me kinda feel that Codrea slanted his article so as to charge, try and convict the NRA of supporting a foolish and draconian anti-gun, gun seizure law WITHOUT HAVING TO OFFER ANY REAL PROOF!
If you read Codrea's article, he describes the gun seizure bill and then quotes several people connected with the introduction/attempted passage of the bill and then uses all that to make it look like the NRA fully supports the bill. But when one of the readers asks Codrea if he has verified this claim directly with the NRA, suddenly Codrea, who had time to research, compose and print his NRA damning article, admits that because of his busy daily schedule he hasn't had time to actually contact the NRA directly.
And then in a dishonest and craven attempt to make his article and charges seem fair and honest, he invites the NRA to contact him and either deny or admit to this charges.
Isn't that as if I claimed any one of the members here on GB collected child pornography because one of the neighors and one co-worker had told me that. And then I went on a published my claim in the local newspaper. But when a friend of the GB member whom I am claiming collects child porn challenges the truthfullness of my charge, I admit I haven't had time to check directly with the GB member, but I encourage that member to contact me and either admit or deny my charge. Regardless of the action taken by the GB member I am accusing, the damage to that member has already been done.
If you read and believe the email directly from the NRA which Armedwith pride (thank you very, very much) posted, you will find that the NRA DOES NOT support this bill and never did.
Folks, if you look at this Codrea/NRA situation carefully you will be observing wicked and dishonest character assassination. I believe that such character assassination against the NRA has been attempted (and sometimes achieved) in the past, in the present and will be in the future. I cannot help but wonder how many of the GB members that dislike the NRA have been, and will be, fooled by such lies.
Quote "Somehow government decided that the Constitutional Bill of Rights has become the Bill of "Suggested" Rights and are to be rationed to the citizens as the power elite sees fit"
I have e-mailed the NRA-ILA once before to inquire about the Virginia Citizens Defense League www.vcdl.org before I joined VCDL. They responded rather quickly, and with good things to say about VCDL I might add(shameless plug). I still haven't seen a reply to the question so I am going to e-mail them again today.
tr fox 2-barrel is right. I'm a voting member of the NRA and I deserve an answer to the question. The text of my e-mail did not make an accusation of support for Buell's bill, it asked if they were supporting it. Then I supported my position with why I thought the bill was a bad idea. Finally, it is my right to be concerned for some of the compromises that they have in fact made in the past.
2-barrel I believe that members should not quit the NRA because of this type of problem. We should make our voices heard by sending e-mails, calling, and contacting our grassroots coordinators to let them know we want a no compromise organization. Quitting will only weaken our strongest defense against extreme gun control.
This is so nice and sweet......It may interest you to know that some of us were members back in the 70's and 80's.......and NEVER got a response to anything from anyone ...I would be interested if anything has changed ,tho I certainly would not wannna be holding my breath......
And I might add that if the management of the NRA, and opposed to PERHAPS one little pipsqueak at NRA Headquarters, knowlingly supports this bill that has been called to our attention I will quite the NRA as will my daughter and toddler grandson.
Quote "Somehow government decided that the Constitutional Bill of Rights has become the Bill of "Suggested" Rights and are to be rationed to the citizens as the power elite sees fit"
And my friend fox THIS is also reasonable....Let me know how all this plays out mt friend........L.H.
quote:
This is so nice and sweet......It may interest you to know that some of us were members back in the 70's and 80's.......and NEVER got a response to anything from anyone ...I would be interested if anything has changed ,tho I certainly would not wannna be holding my breath......
Look up the page a few posts and you'll see that I did get a response from NRA-ILA and had already posted it. Did you miss that or am I missing your point?
Well,after reading on down I see that someone got a response.....I am impressed......I will say however.....How do I know that the resonse is any more legidamate than the accusation...hmmm.....Well I will take it for what it seems.....This friends is WHY folks that have quit in protest have been SO loud over the years.......Perhaps they are listening......keep me posted as I am as well...L.H.
To be fair and honest about such an accusation, if a charge is made about someone/some organization, that charge should have to be completely documented before a fair person would try to accept it; or even before someone would pass any such so far unproven allegation around.
It is not fair or honest for me to make a public claim that longhunter did something bad, just for an example, and that one or two other GB members thinks he did also. Then when questioned about our claim, we say well we invite longhunter to contact us and give us his statement which we will also publish in full.
And then when longhunter DOES issue a statement denying our charge we then say "Well, longhunter, we will not believe you UNTIL YOU PROVE TO US WE ARE WRONG ABOUT YOU.
In a fair and honest situation, the burden of "proof" should have been on us, the ones making the accusations, and SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED WITH OUR ORIGINAL CHARGE.
Codrea DID NOT DO THIS. So please, please people in the future do not easily turn against the NRA. In fact re-examine your position if you are against the NRA now and see if maybe you have been given bad information in the past just as Codrea tried to give you bad information in this present day.
JMHO
Quote "Somehow government decided that the Constitutional Bill of Rights has become the Bill of "Suggested" Rights and are to be rationed to the citizens as the power elite sees fit"
quote:Originally posted by longhunter
Well,after reading on down I see that someone got a response.....I am impressed......I will say however.....How do I know that the resonse is any more legidamate than the accusation...hmmm.....Well I will take it for what it seems.....This friends is WHY folks that have quit in protest have been SO loud over the years.......Perhaps they are listening......keep me posted as I am as well...L.H.
To be fair and honest about such an accusation, if a charge is made about someone/some organization, that charge should have to be completely documented before a fair person would try to accept it; or even before someone would pass any such so far unproven allegation around.
It is not fair or honest for me to make a public claim that longhunter did something bad, just for an example, and that one or two other GB members thinks he did also. Then when questioned about our claim, we say well we invite longhunter to contact us and give us his statement which we will also publish in full.
And then when longhunter DOES issue a statement denying our charge we then say "Well, longhunter, we will not believe you UNTIL YOU PROVE TO US WE ARE WRONG ABOUT YOU.
In a fair and honest situation, the burden of "proof" should have been on us, the ones making the accusations, and SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED WITH OUR ORIGINAL CHARGE.
Codrea DID NOT DO THIS. So please, please people in the future do not easily turn against the NRA. In fact re-examine your position if you are against the NRA now and see if maybe you have been given bad information in the past just as Codrea tried to give you bad information in this present day.
JMHO
Quote "Somehow government decided that the Constitutional Bill of Rights has become the Bill of "Suggested" Rights and are to be rationed to the citizens as the power elite sees fit"
I always listen to you my friend.....always...And truth be known,I've held a grudge with the NRA for YERAS now.I statred with them when I was 11,and became an associate Instructor and the Full Instrutor when age permitted....I had Much going on with them,and The Sportsmans Aliance here as well. Held membership drives and all...When I looked to them for guidance it was not there....That is fact...When I questioned,my questions went inanswered,that also is fact.I am a show me kind a person....and very much an imperfect one...But I still listen....This has at the least perked my interest....as I said...I left when I felt that I may be able to more good from without....and perhaps,just perhaps it actually did help some.I'd like to think so.
And I could not ask any more of you (or anyone) that they at least consider my arguments. [:)]
Quote "Somehow government decided that the Constitutional Bill of Rights has become the Bill of "Suggested" Rights and are to be rationed to the citizens as the power elite sees fit"