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.
Options
NRA Offers More Logic For Supporting NICS Improvem
tr fox
Member Posts: 13,856
Got around to this regarding an email I got from the NRA. To me it reads as a reasonable and logical reason for gun people to support the NICS improvement act. Read it and decide for yourself. I realize that some of you here will still pick it apart. Just as you would gripe if the NRA got a federal law passed making it mandatory for each and every household to own a gun. Some people just like to complain. So go ahead.
Email follows:
NRA-ILA Grassroots Alert Vol. 14, No. 25 06/22/07
"NICS IMPROVEMENT AMENDMENTS ACT"
NOT GUN CONTROL!
Last week, when the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed H.R. 2640, "The NICS Improvement Amendments Act," by a voice vote, some gun owners were confused as to the exact scope and effect of this proactive reform bill. Let's look at the facts.
H.R. 2640 provides federal funds to states to update their mental health records, to ensure that those currently prohibited under federal law from owning a gun because of mental health adjudications are included in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). For many years, NRA has supported ensuring that those who have been adjudicated mentally incompetent are screened by the NICS.
In several ways this bill is better for gun owners than current law. Under H.R. 2640, certain types of mental health orders will no longer prohibit a person from possessing or receiving a firearm. Examples are adjudications that have expired or been removed, or commitments from which a person has been completely released with no further supervision required. Also excluded are federal decisions about a person's mental health that consist only of a medical diagnosis, without a specific finding that the person is dangerous or mentally incompetent. The latter provision addresses very real concerns about disability decisions by the Veterans Administration concerning our brave men and women in uniform. Remember that one of the Clinton Administration's last acts was to force the names of almost 90,000 veterans and veterans' family members to be added to a "prohibited" list. H.R. 2640 would help many of these people get their rights restored. H.R. 2640 will also require all participating federal or state agencies to establish "relief from disability" programs that would allow a person to get the mental health prohibition removed, either administratively or in court. This type of relief has not been available at the federal level for the past 15 years.
This legislation will also ensure -- as a permanent part of federal law -- that no fee or tax is associated with a NICS check -- a NRA priority for nearly a decade! While NRA has supported annual appropriations amendments with the same effect, those amendments must be renewed every year. This provision would not expire. H.R. 2640 will also mandate an audit of past spending on NICS projects to determine if funds were misused in any way.
It is also important to note what H.R. 2640 will not do. This bill will not add any new classes of prohibited persons to NICS, and it will not prohibit gun possession by people who have voluntarily sought psychological counseling or checked themselves into a hospital for treatment.
So why the confusion?
First and foremost, the national media elite is irate that NRA has been able to roll back significant portions of the Clinton Administration's anti-gun agenda and pass pro-active legislation in Congress and in many states. They are desperate to put a "gun control" spin on anything they can. The only real question here is -- given the media's long-standing and flagrant bias on the gun issue -- why are some gun owners suddenly swallowing the bait?
Second, some people simply do not like the NICS. In 1993, Congress passed the Brady Act, including a mandatory five-day waiting period, over strong NRA opposition. Due to NRA's insistence, that waiting period was allowed to sunset in 1998, once the NICS was up and running nationwide. Now that the NICS is in place, it makes sense to ensure that this system works as instantly, fairly, and accurately as possible.
Also troubling to many is the fact that Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) is a cosponsor of the bill. Carolyn McCarthy is among the most anti-gun Members of Congress. She has introduced another bill, H.R. 1022, which represents the most sweeping gun ban in history. But Rep. McCarthy is not the only co-sponsor of H.R. 2640. She was joined by some of the most pro-gun members of the House of Representatives in crafting this bill, including John Dingell (D-Mich.), Rick Boucher (D-Va.), and Lamar Smith (R-Tex.). A few years ago, when Congress passed a bill allowing airline pilots to be armed, one of the lead sponsors was anti-gun Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Ca.). Sen. Boxer's support of that legislation did not cause gun owners to oppose it.
Finally, some people have asked why the bill passed on a voice vote. The reality is that there's nothing unusual about passing a widely supported bill by voice vote. Even so, the House rules allow any House member to request a recorded vote on any issue, and in practice, those requests are universally granted. Despite having that option on the floor, no representative asked for a roll call on this bill.
H.R. 2640 is now pending in the Senate. Rest assured that if the anti-gunners use this legislation as a vehicle to advance gun control restrictions, NRA will pull our support for the bill and vigorously oppose its passage!
(For additional information, please click here: http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=219&issue=018.)
Email follows:
NRA-ILA Grassroots Alert Vol. 14, No. 25 06/22/07
"NICS IMPROVEMENT AMENDMENTS ACT"
NOT GUN CONTROL!
Last week, when the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed H.R. 2640, "The NICS Improvement Amendments Act," by a voice vote, some gun owners were confused as to the exact scope and effect of this proactive reform bill. Let's look at the facts.
H.R. 2640 provides federal funds to states to update their mental health records, to ensure that those currently prohibited under federal law from owning a gun because of mental health adjudications are included in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). For many years, NRA has supported ensuring that those who have been adjudicated mentally incompetent are screened by the NICS.
In several ways this bill is better for gun owners than current law. Under H.R. 2640, certain types of mental health orders will no longer prohibit a person from possessing or receiving a firearm. Examples are adjudications that have expired or been removed, or commitments from which a person has been completely released with no further supervision required. Also excluded are federal decisions about a person's mental health that consist only of a medical diagnosis, without a specific finding that the person is dangerous or mentally incompetent. The latter provision addresses very real concerns about disability decisions by the Veterans Administration concerning our brave men and women in uniform. Remember that one of the Clinton Administration's last acts was to force the names of almost 90,000 veterans and veterans' family members to be added to a "prohibited" list. H.R. 2640 would help many of these people get their rights restored. H.R. 2640 will also require all participating federal or state agencies to establish "relief from disability" programs that would allow a person to get the mental health prohibition removed, either administratively or in court. This type of relief has not been available at the federal level for the past 15 years.
This legislation will also ensure -- as a permanent part of federal law -- that no fee or tax is associated with a NICS check -- a NRA priority for nearly a decade! While NRA has supported annual appropriations amendments with the same effect, those amendments must be renewed every year. This provision would not expire. H.R. 2640 will also mandate an audit of past spending on NICS projects to determine if funds were misused in any way.
It is also important to note what H.R. 2640 will not do. This bill will not add any new classes of prohibited persons to NICS, and it will not prohibit gun possession by people who have voluntarily sought psychological counseling or checked themselves into a hospital for treatment.
So why the confusion?
First and foremost, the national media elite is irate that NRA has been able to roll back significant portions of the Clinton Administration's anti-gun agenda and pass pro-active legislation in Congress and in many states. They are desperate to put a "gun control" spin on anything they can. The only real question here is -- given the media's long-standing and flagrant bias on the gun issue -- why are some gun owners suddenly swallowing the bait?
Second, some people simply do not like the NICS. In 1993, Congress passed the Brady Act, including a mandatory five-day waiting period, over strong NRA opposition. Due to NRA's insistence, that waiting period was allowed to sunset in 1998, once the NICS was up and running nationwide. Now that the NICS is in place, it makes sense to ensure that this system works as instantly, fairly, and accurately as possible.
Also troubling to many is the fact that Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) is a cosponsor of the bill. Carolyn McCarthy is among the most anti-gun Members of Congress. She has introduced another bill, H.R. 1022, which represents the most sweeping gun ban in history. But Rep. McCarthy is not the only co-sponsor of H.R. 2640. She was joined by some of the most pro-gun members of the House of Representatives in crafting this bill, including John Dingell (D-Mich.), Rick Boucher (D-Va.), and Lamar Smith (R-Tex.). A few years ago, when Congress passed a bill allowing airline pilots to be armed, one of the lead sponsors was anti-gun Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Ca.). Sen. Boxer's support of that legislation did not cause gun owners to oppose it.
Finally, some people have asked why the bill passed on a voice vote. The reality is that there's nothing unusual about passing a widely supported bill by voice vote. Even so, the House rules allow any House member to request a recorded vote on any issue, and in practice, those requests are universally granted. Despite having that option on the floor, no representative asked for a roll call on this bill.
H.R. 2640 is now pending in the Senate. Rest assured that if the anti-gunners use this legislation as a vehicle to advance gun control restrictions, NRA will pull our support for the bill and vigorously oppose its passage!
(For additional information, please click here: http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=219&issue=018.)
Comments
quote:H.R. 2640 is now pending in the Senate. Rest assured that if the anti-gunners use this legislation as a vehicle to advance gun control restrictions,
You're kidding, right??
lt496:
Sounds like a CYA attempt with the membership so the gullible won't revolt. The logic is totally incomprehensible. With logic like this it's a wonder we still have any rights. But it's just a matter of time. If only everyone realized, or even wanted to know, the facts.
In the interest of fairness I must post.....
trfox:
Thanks for the update. For the benefit of new members on this forum, some of whom have made posts admitting that they are not as well informed as they should be, and Rather Than Create A New Response, Let Me Remind You, and them, Of Past Comments On This. MY OPINION HAS NOT CHANGED and If The NRA Told The WHOLE TRUTH On This Bill, then YOU, and they will see why this is not good legislation for gun owners or any American. PERIOD.
Dang NRA!
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=250524
Posted - 07/03/2007: 09:47:40 AM
How do you justify NRA leadership stooping to the level of backroom, closed deals with the anti-gun crowd to ram H.R. 2640 down our throats??? This wasn't a compromise to salvage anything. It was outright support, without membership support I might add, to promote another infringement on gun owner's rights. And how anyone could believe the "Company Line" that this is not a gun control bill just baffles me!!!!
When the NRA pulls the same deal with H.R. 1022, will you and your NRA supporting ILK consider that a "JUSTIFIABLE COMPROMISE" as well????
Wake up man!!! Had the people stood by silently and accepted the backroom dealing and compromising BS of the Immigration Bill, as NRA membership seems to be prone to do with gun control legislation, that Bill would have passed. And yes, it was full of 1st and 2nd Amendment restrictions on American Citizens.
The question is when will gun owners ban together to send the same type of message to the NRA and Congress; "That this slow bleed of our rights is UNACCEPTABLE"!!!
Email from NRA. RE: NICS Improvement
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=251452
Posted - 06/29/2007: 3:44:11 PM
The Brady law already contains a procedure for cleaning up records. But it hasn't worked for the 83,000 veterans that are currently prohibited from buying guns. Gun Owners of America is aware of many people who have tried to invoke this procedure in the Brady Law, only to get the run around -- and a form letter - from the FBI. The simple truth is that the FBI and the BATFE think the 83,000 veterans, and many other law-abiding Americans, should be in the NICS system.
Not only that, there is a Schumer amendment in federal law which prevents the BATFE from restoring the rights of individuals who are barred from purchasing firearms. If that amendment is not repealed, then it doesn't matter if your state stops sending your name for inclusion in the FBI's NICS system... you are still going to be a disqualified purchaser when you try to buy a gun.
Thursday, June 14, 2007
McCarthy Bill Rammed Through The House:
Why All The Secrecy???
Why was it necessary to pass the bill in such an underhanded fashion? If this is such a victory for the Second Amendment, why all the secrecy? Why was a deal forged with the anti-gun Democrat House leadership, keeping most pro-gun representatives in the dark? Why was the bill rammed through on the Suspension Calendar with no recorded vote with which to identify those who are against us?
For starters, it would be a hard sell indeed for the NRA leadership to explain to its members what they would gain by working with McCarthy. If this legislation had gone before the NRA membership for a vote, it would have been rejected. For that matter, if it went through the House in the regular fashion, with committee hearings and recorded votes, it would have been defeated.
The fight is not over. They still have to run this through the Senate. Already, there is a small cadre of pro-gun senators who are ready to slow this bill down and do everything they can to kill it. To be frank, a bill that has the support of all the anti-gun groups and the NRA will be tough to beat, but we will continue to fight every step of the way.
To Bad H.R. 1096 Didn't Get The Same Consideration From Congress And SUPPORT From The NRA!!!
Like salzo said..... "with friends like these....."
And You should Probably Review this Thread as well.
"Beyond NICS & Brady"- S. 1237
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=245154
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 07:54:29 AM
AND THIS ONE:
Potential NRA petition.
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=247347
The last two posts will tell the Tale, as they are compiled from the jist of and facts included in the previous posts.
Posted - 06/04/2007: 10:55:01 AM
Links to it could make a letter/petition considerably shorter and much more manageable. Merely E-mailing the link to Gun Owners or Posting it on other forums could have a profound effect.
A Plea For Unity: The Brutal Truth.
Posted - 06/04/2007: 10:57:02 AM
Which got started from comments made on:
Carryover of a GD Topic For Further Discussion
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=245795
I could go on and on listing links that dispute the validity of the NRA's position, how this IS Gun control (Despite the NRA Stance that it is not!), and how it does infringe on the 2nd Amendment, but I have come to the conclusion that your mind set cannot be changed. I know you fully comprehend the word compromise but do you fully comprehend the meaning of; I-N-F-R-I-N-G-E, I-N-F-R-I-N-G-E-M-E-N-T, or Shall NOT Be I-N-F-R-I-N-G-E-D UPON?? Unfortunately to many do not, or choose to ignore the meaning if it serves their political agenda!!
And, ONCE AGAIN, for the record, I am not anti-NRA. I am however, anti-infringement and adamant about not compromising away the 2nd Amendment in the name of political correctness or to advance some political agenda at the expense of law-abiding American Citizens!!!
For those of you whom may not receive them or get them later than I do.
Senate Getting Ready To Move McCarthy's Brady Expansion!
-- Plus news on OSHA gun control, DC Gun Ban and more
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org
Thursday, July 19, 2007
The gun issue has been in the news a lot lately, despite the strange silence coming from Capitol Hill on the status of the McCarthy bill (HR 2640). Many Senators on the Judiciary Committee are being kept in the dark as to when the legislation will start moving.
But The New York Times seems to have let the cat out of the bag this week when an editorial indicated there would be Senate hearings on the bill very soon. The Times ability to glean this information is probably related to the close relationship that their editorial writers have, no doubt, with New York's Chuck Schumer, who is the primary backer of the bill in the Senate.
Since the bill will start off in the Senate Judiciary Committee, it is time for gun owners to start targeting Senators there. Committee members who could stand to hear from gun owners include: Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT), Arlen Specter (R-PA), Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT), Charles E. Grassley (R-IA), Jon Kyl (R-AZ), Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), John Cornyn (R-TX), Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Tom Coburn (R-OK).
Of special note is Sen. Sam Brownback. As a candidate for President, who vocalizes support for the Second Amendment, he should be interested to hear from gun owners all over the country. Hence, today's alert is geared specifically for him. More on that below.
IN OTHER NEWS: Last week, Democrats on the House Appropriations committee tried to kill the so-called Tiahrt amendment, which is a pro-gun legislative rider that has been passed every year since 2003. The amendment, which is named after Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-KS), prevents the use of gun trace data except where law-enforcement can show they need it for a specific criminal investigation. Committee Democrats failed to repeal the provision on Thursday when a sufficient number of members from their own party broke ranks and voted pro-gun.
This week, there has been another mini-victory of sorts. You've probably heard about the proposed OSHA regulations that have taken the Internet by storm. Published on April 13, the regs went virtually unnoticed until late last month.
On July 3, GOA issued comments in opposition to the proposed regs, citing fears from the firearms industry that the new requirements would threaten to bring the sale and transportation of ammunition in this country to a halt.
But on Monday, the Labor Department (which oversees OSHA) sent Rep. Dennis Rehberg (R-MT) a letter, notifying him that "OSHA is taking prompt action to revise this NPRM to clarify the purpose of the regulation."
Hence, even though the public comment period was extended to September 10, it now seems that we will have to take a "wait and see" approach, and examine the revised regulations once they become available. Please stay tuned.
In other news, DC Mayor Adrian Fenty, announced yesterday that his city will appeal the Parker decision, which struck down the draconian gun ban in our nation's capital. Gun Owners Foundation will be issuing an amicus brief in that case.
Finally, we twice emailed you to solicit support for GOA Life Member Paul Broun, who was running for Congress in a special election to replace the late Rep. Charlie Norwood in Georgia. Well, after the election on Tuesday, Dr. Broun -- who is a Republican -- won by 373 votes. Since his opponent was a long-time legislator with the support of the mainstream Republican establishment, it is obvious that gun owners helped put Brown over the top. Thanks to all of you who helped elect a staunch pro-gunner by contributing to his campaign!
UPDATE: In our previous alert, we told you about Horatio Miller of Pennsylvania, who lost his gun rights after being involuntarily committed for essentially making an off handed comment (saying that it could be worse than VA Tech if someone broke into his car). He was not charged with a crime, but the local district attorney had him involuntarily committed anyway.
Subsequent news articles indicate that Miller, among other things, may have made inappropriate remarks to his neighbors in the past, as the police had previously been called to his home to investigate. But what's significant is that he was never charged with any crimes (prior to his being involuntarily committed). No charges were ever leveled and his concealed carry permit was never revoked. Nevertheless, if it turns out that Miller is an obnoxious individual (and not a suitable example), one should still understand that this man initially got zapped without due process. That is the key point here. The truth of the information about his other behavior -- if
it's true -- and an assessment of him being a danger, should have been determined in a court of law. Our gun rights should not hang on the whims of an anti-gun district attorney!
The Miller case illustrates the danger presented by the McCarthy legislation. HR 2640 would, for the first time, statutorily make a battle-scarred veteran (suffering from Post Traumatic Stress) or a troubled school kid (who was considered a problem on the playground but later grew up just like everyone else) a "prohibited person" based solely on a diagnosis by a shrink. Again, lose your guns -- forever -- without due process in court. (See more specifics on this legislation by going to http://www.gunowners.org/netb.htm and check out "What Others are Saying about HR 2640.")
ACTION: Senator Sam Brownback is a member of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee. He is also a candidate for President. This is a perfect opportunity for a Senator like Brownback, who wants to solicit gun owners' support from around the country, to stand up for the Second Amendment. Ask him to not only oppose this bill, but to solicit others on the committee to join him as well. You can use the letter below to help direct your comments to Senator Brownback.
CONTACT INFORMATION: There are several ways to contact Sen. Brownback. If you choose to contact him electronically, please note there is no direct e-mail address available. You can copy/paste the letter below into Brownback's webform.
Webform: http://brownback.senate.gov/CMEmailMe.cfm
Fax: 202-228-1265
Phone: 202-224-6521
Pre-written letter
Dear Senator Brownback:
Gun Owners of America tells me that the New York Times has let the cat out of the bag. The paper is acknowledging that gun control will be heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee soon.
The specific gun control bill is the Brady enhancement bill that was passed in the House (HR 2640). I hope you will do everything in your power to OPPOSE this bill when it comes to a vote in committee.
As a presidential contender who advocates support for the Second Amendment, you have a wonderful opportunity to show Americans that you will fight for the rights of gun owners. You can't go wrong opposing a bill that is being supported or sponsored by gun control fanatics like Rep. Carolyn McCarthy and Senator Chuck Shumer.
I should add that the Military Order of the Purple Heart is also OPPOSING this bill, stating that for the first time in history, HR 2640 "would statutorily impose a lifetime gun ban on battle-scarred veterans."
Despite what you may have heard elsewhere, this bill THREATENS gun owners' rights and represents one of the biggest gun bans in history. For more information on this -- and for a point-by-point analysis of HR 2640 -- please go to http://www.gunowners.org/netb.htm on the website of Gun Owners of America.
Again, I hope you will do everything in your power to defeat the McCarthy gun control bill (HR 2640) or any comparable Senate bill.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
****************************
Defend The 2nd Amendment Through Creative Giving...
As we confront the challenges of the future, we know that the generosity of those who assist us will make all the difference in our success. That's why GOA seeks your long-term support.
Please call 703-321-8585 during regular business hours or e-mail goamail@gunowners.org to request information on how to keep control of your assets and make a gift at the same time through:
* a bequest
* a retirement plan
* a will, living trust, or insurance policy
Requests for information are confidential and do not represent an
obligation.
****************************
To subscribe to free, low-volume GOA alerts, go to http://www.gunowners.org/ean.htm on the web. Change of e-mail address may also be made at that location.
NRA Offers More Logic For Supporting NICS Improvement Act: LOL
lt496:
Sounds like a CYA attempt with the membership so the gullible won't revolt. The logic is totally incomprehensible. With logic like this it's a wonder we still have any rights. But it's just a matter of time. If only everyone realized, or even wanted to know, the facts.
In the interest of fairness I must post.....
trfox:
Thanks for the update. For the benefit of new members on this forum, some of whom have made posts admitting that they are not as well informed as they should be, and Rather Than Create A New Response, Let Me Remind You, and them, Of Past Comments On This. MY OPINION HAS NOT CHANGED and If The NRA Told The WHOLE TRUTH On This Bill, then YOU, and they will see why this is not good legislation for gun owners or any American. PERIOD.
Dang NRA!
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=250524
Posted - 07/03/2007: 09:47:40 AM
How do you justify NRA leadership stooping to the level of backroom, closed deals with the anti-gun crowd to ram H.R. 2640 down our throats??? This wasn't a compromise to salvage anything. It was outright support, without membership support I might add, to promote another infringement on gun owner's rights. And how anyone could believe the "Company Line" that this is not a gun control bill just baffles me!!!!
When the NRA pulls the same deal with H.R. 1022, will you and your NRA supporting ILK consider that a "JUSTIFIABLE COMPROMISE" as well????
Wake up man!!! Had the people stood by silently and accepted the backroom dealing and compromising BS of the Immigration Bill, as NRA membership seems to be prone to do with gun control legislation, that Bill would have passed. And yes, it was full of 1st and 2nd Amendment restrictions on American Citizens.
The question is when will gun owners ban together to send the same type of message to the NRA and Congress; "That this slow bleed of our rights is UNACCEPTABLE"!!!
Email from NRA. RE: NICS Improvement
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=251452
Posted - 06/29/2007: 3:44:11 PM
The Brady law already contains a procedure for cleaning up records. But it hasn't worked for the 83,000 veterans that are currently prohibited from buying guns. Gun Owners of America is aware of many people who have tried to invoke this procedure in the Brady Law, only to get the run around -- and a form letter - from the FBI. The simple truth is that the FBI and the BATFE think the 83,000 veterans, and many other law-abiding Americans, should be in the NICS system.
Not only that, there is a Schumer amendment in federal law which prevents the BATFE from restoring the rights of individuals who are barred from purchasing firearms. If that amendment is not repealed, then it doesn't matter if your state stops sending your name for inclusion in the FBI's NICS system... you are still going to be a disqualified purchaser when you try to buy a gun.
Thursday, June 14, 2007
McCarthy Bill Rammed Through The House:
Why All The Secrecy???
Why was it necessary to pass the bill in such an underhanded fashion? If this is such a victory for the Second Amendment, why all the secrecy? Why was a deal forged with the anti-gun Democrat House leadership, keeping most pro-gun representatives in the dark? Why was the bill rammed through on the Suspension Calendar with no recorded vote with which to identify those who are against us?
For starters, it would be a hard sell indeed for the NRA leadership to explain to its members what they would gain by working with McCarthy. If this legislation had gone before the NRA membership for a vote, it would have been rejected. For that matter, if it went through the House in the regular fashion, with committee hearings and recorded votes, it would have been defeated.
The fight is not over. They still have to run this through the Senate. Already, there is a small cadre of pro-gun senators who are ready to slow this bill down and do everything they can to kill it. To be frank, a bill that has the support of all the anti-gun groups and the NRA will be tough to beat, but we will continue to fight every step of the way.
To Bad H.R. 1096 Didn't Get The Same Consideration From Congress And SUPPORT From The NRA!!!
Like salzo said..... "with friends like these....."
And You should Probably Review this Thread as well.
"Beyond NICS & Brady"- S. 1237
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=245154
Posted - 05/02/2007 : 07:54:29 AM
AND THIS ONE:
Potential NRA petition.
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=247347
The last two posts will tell the Tale, as they are compiled from the jist of and facts included in the previous posts.
Posted - 06/04/2007: 10:55:01 AM
Links to it could make a letter/petition considerably shorter and much more manageable. Merely E-mailing the link to Gun Owners or Posting it on other forums could have a profound effect.
A Plea For Unity: The Brutal Truth.
Posted - 06/04/2007: 10:57:02 AM
Which got started from comments made on:
Carryover of a GD Topic For Further Discussion
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=245795
I could go on and on listing links that dispute the validity of the NRA's position, how this IS Gun control (Despite the NRA Stance that it is not!), and how it does infringe on the 2nd Amendment, but I have come to the conclusion that your mind set cannot be changed. I know you fully comprehend the word compromise but do you fully comprehend the meaning of; I-N-F-R-I-N-G-E, I-N-F-R-I-N-G-E-M-E-N-T, or Shall NOT Be I-N-F-R-I-N-G-E-D UPON?? Unfortunately to many do not, or choose to ignore the meaning if it serves their political agenda!!
And, ONCE AGAIN, for the record, I am not anti-NRA. I am however, anti-infringement and adamant about not compromising away the 2nd Amendment in the name of political correctness or to advance some political agenda at the expense of law-abiding American Citizens!!!
You are on point again Wagon Wheel. Good to see you fighting the good fight. In the case of TR, the good, but futile, fight.[;)]
I can't change his mind but I can keep it Fair and Balanced.
Judiciary Committee Members:
Since the bill will start off in the Senate Judiciary Committee, it is time for gun owners to start targeting Senators there. Committee members who could stand to hear from gun owners include:
Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT), Webform: http://leahy.senate.gov/contact.html
To send an email message without using a form, address it to:
senator_leahy@leahy.senate.gov (I didn't try this to see if it works)
Arlen Specter (R-PA), Webform: http://specter.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactInfo.Home
I can only respond if you're a resident of Pennsylvania. If you need to find out who your U.S Senator is please go to www.senate.gov. "H IMMEDIATE ACTION ITEMS: To respond to your time sensitive concerns, please contact the Washington office or the state office in your area. "H Scheduling Matters: Please contact our Washington office by faxing your request to our fax line (202) 228-1229.
Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT), Webform: http://hatch.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Offices.Contact
Charles E. Grassley (R-IA), Webform: http://grassley.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Home
Jon Kyl (R-AZ), Webform: http://kyl.senate.gov/contact.cfm
Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Webform: http://sessions.senate.gov/email/contact.cfm
Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Webform: http://lgraham.senate.gov/index.cfm?mode=contactform
Fax your request to (202) 224-3808.
John Cornyn (R-TX), Webform: (Scroll down the page for the form)
http://cornyn.senate.gov/index.asp?f=contact&lid=1
Good Luck With This One. I tried SEVERAL Times and got this each time:
Active Server Pages error 'ASP 0113'
Script timed out
/index.asp
The maximum amount of time for a script to execute was exceeded. You can change this limit by specifying a new value for the property Server.ScriptTimeOut or by changing the value in the ASP administration tools.
And I have High DSL!!!
Sam Brownback (R-KS), Webform: http://brownback.senate.gov/CMEmailMe.cfm
Fax: 202-228-1265
Phone: 202-224-6521
Tom Coburn (R-OK), Webform: http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenatorCoburn.Home
And For later use, if required, E-mail their staffers:
http://www.outsourcecongress.org/outsource/congress/schstaffers.html
You can copy/paste the letter below into each Senator's webform.
Pre-written letter
(From GOA Alert In Above Post)
Dear Senator:
Gun Owners of America tells me that the New York Times has let the cat out of the bag. The paper is acknowledging that gun control will be heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee soon.
The specific gun control bill is the Brady enhancement bill that was passed in the House (HR 2640). I hope you will do everything in your power to OPPOSE this bill when it comes to a vote in committee.
As a presidential contender who advocates support for the Second Amendment, you have a wonderful opportunity to show Americans that you will fight for the rights of gun owners. You can't go wrong opposing a bill that is being supported or sponsored by gun control fanatics like Rep. Carolyn McCarthy and Senator Chuck Shumer.
I should add that the Military Order of the Purple Heart is also OPPOSING this bill, stating that for the first time in history, HR 2640 "would statutorily impose a lifetime gun ban on battle-scarred veterans."
Despite what you may have heard elsewhere, this bill THREATENS gun owners' rights and represents one of the biggest gun bans in history. For more information on this -- and for a point-by-point analysis of HR 2640 -- please go to http://www.gunowners.org/netb.htm on the website of Gun Owners of America.
Again, I hope you will do everything in your power to defeat the McCarthy gun control bill (HR 2640) or any comparable Senate bill.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Your Name
Your City, State
Bill of goods for sale! Who's interested??? NRA SUCKS!!!
quote:H.R. 2640 is now pending in the Senate. Rest assured that if the anti-gunners use this legislation as a vehicle to advance gun control restrictions,
You're kidding, right??
idiots
Senate Panel Sends Brady Expansion Bill To The Floor:
-- Once again, measure is passed by an unrecorded voice vote!
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org/ordergoamem.htm
"[The NRA's] blessing is required for any bill that enforces or creates gun laws." -- Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, July 27, 2007
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
It's truly amazing. You wouldn't think that something as controversial as gun control could fly through the House of Representatives, and then through a Senate committee without facing at least one recorded vote.
But on Thursday of last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed the Senate version of the McCarthy bill by an unrecorded voice vote.
The draft bill -- which is still unnumbered -- is being sponsored by the chairman of the committee, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT). The Brady expansion provisions in this bill are identical to the ones in the McCarthy bill and would easily deny thousands (if not millions) of law-abiding citizens their right to own firearms.
As mentioned in earlier alerts, the NRA and the Brady Campaign are both in favor of this legislation. In fact, the author of the House bill, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), has stated there is no way this bill could pass without the NRA's support: "The National Rife Association still wields tremendous influence in the halls of Congress," McCarthy said, "and their blessing is required for any bill that enforces or creates gun laws."
The reason why some gun owners support the Leahy-McCarthy measure is they think the bill will make it easier for many Americans to regain their rights -- such as military veterans who have been illegitimately denied a firearm. What they don't realize is that this is a pie-in-the-sky promise.
Veterans will have to find a pro-gun shrink that will certify that said veteran is not a danger to himself or others. (Question: Would you ever certify that someone you don't know could NEVER be a danger to himself or others?) They will then have to hire a good attorney, take the government to court and hope they can force the FBI to delete their names from the NICS system.
It must be stressed that thousands of veterans have already been illegally banned from owning guns without being convicted of anything. Not only that, thousands more will have their names placed on the Brady list of banned buyers if this legislation passes. It is beside the point that they might be able to get their rights
restored. They never should have lost them in the first place. Further, they will be forced to spend a lot of money to regain their gun rights -- rights which were unconstitutionally stripped by the Leahy-McCarthy bill.
We've already seen that at the state level, getting your guns back -- after being decreed a supposed danger to society -- is easier said than done. Consider what is ALREADY happening in California. University of San Francisco professor W. Michael Becker -- a licensed psychologist and attorney -- points out how in the Golden State, a gun owner can easily lose his guns if he's deemed to be a danger to himself and others. And while state law allows the gun owner to get his guns back (after he's no longer considered a danger), the retrieval process is by NO MEANS automatic.
Becker says:
It might be argued, that because there is the option of a hearing, the [California] law provides a reasoned avenue for that person to regain possession.... But there is a problem with the hearing itself. In order for the seized weapons to be returned, it is not the government which must show that the person is a danger to himself or others, but rather a judge (yes, only a judge, no jury) must be convinced by a preponderance of the evidence that the person will NOT be a danger to himself or others. What has happened to the "presumed" innocent (or in this case competent) until proven otherwise?... This is a dire reversal of our typical constitutional rights.
The Leahy bill next goes to the entire Senate, but due to the fact that Congress is now in recess, don't expect to see any action on the bill until September.
UPCOMING ACTION: During the month of August, GOA members will be receiving postcards addressed to their two U.S. Senators, and one to Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).
It is IMPERATIVE that you mail those postcards in. We want to increase the heat on these legislators by deluging them with thousands upon thousands of postcards. If you are not currently receiving GOA's mailings and postcards, you can -- for a nominal donation of only $20/year -- go to
http://www.gunowners.org/ordergoamem.htm to become a member and start receiving these useful action items.
So keep up the pressure on your Senators. And please stay tuned.
****************************
Special Combo Deal On JPFO DVDs -- 2 For The Price Of 1
The Gang:
Subtitled "How A Government Agency Uses The Law To Destroy Your Rights And Freedoms," this DVD documents how the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) has grown from a tiny cell to a cancer that sucks a billion dollars a year from taxpayers for the harassment of gun owners. BATFE - The Gang -- has no constitutional authority. It has no rules nor congressional oversight to hold it accountable.
The Gang is a highly professional production from Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership that has outraged viewers who were not sympathetic to gun ownership and convinced them that BATFE has to go. Finally, America can see what this increasingly rogue agency is doing. The Gang will end up ending the BATFE if enough Americans see it.
Innocents Betrayed:
170,000,000. That's the number of civilians that have been murdered by their own governments in the 20th century alone. This DVD was shown by a Philadelphia social studies teacher to all of his classes. It turned the students completely around, even though they were being taught gun control in many of their other classes.
You have never seen anything like Innocents Betrayed, also by JPFO. This story -- how every 20th century genocide was preceded by gun registration and confiscation -- has never been told in a documentary film.
Please stop by http://www.gunowners.com/videos1304.htm to get both stunning DVDs for only $29.95 (the retail price of one) plus shipping.
****************************
To subscribe to free, low-volume GOA alerts, go to
http://www.gunowners.org/ean.htm on the web. Change of e-mail address may also be made at that location.
Now I'm even more glad that I don't give a single penny to this ANTI-gun organization.
NICS doesn't need to be expanded. It needs to be repealed. They are making arbitrary judgements on peoples' criminal potential. This needs to stop. I am willing to bet that there are many, many psychologists who would state that somebody is slightly more dangerous if it means that they could disarm them. Truly sad that they are attacking points over what people MIGHT do.
"Gun Owners of America" <Gun_Owners_of_America@capwiz.mailmanager.net>
Friday, August 17, 2007 1:28 PM
Update: GOA Life Member Now In Congress
Help Needed Once Again For GOA Life Member Congressman
Gun Owners of America Political Victory Fund E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Pl Suite 102
Springfield VA 22151
(703) 321-8585
http://www.gunowners.org
August 17, 2007
Dear GOA Member,
You did it!
We have a GOA Life Member in Congress.
Dr. Paul Broun is now the newest member of the U.S. House ofRepresentatives.
He comes to Washington with a message that the media in his district acknowledge was: "no more business as usual."
Broun won a hard-fought, come-from-behind race to win the runoff election in Georgia's tenth congressional district.
Broun has told GOA that without the support of GOA members from around the country contributing so generously, he would probably not been able to make it. After all, his margin of victory was 394 votes out of over 46,000 cast.
Broun mortgaged his home and took out other loans in order to scrape together the funds needed for his campaign. He was substantially outspent by the establishment-backed candidate.
Dr. Broun has put it all on the line, and now it is time for us to step up to the plate for him.
So, I am asking you to join me in supporting Paul Broun one more time. He needs to get his debts paid off by the end of the year in order to be able to show the establishment that he is ready for next year's primary. If not, the establishment is sure to find another opponent to run against him in 2008.
Please, go to Broun's web site at http://www.paulbroun.com/111.html to donate online. If you wish, you can send your check to Paul Broun Committee, P.O. Box 7165, Athens, GA 30604.
Sincerely,
Tim Macy
Vice-Chairman
****************************
Paid for by Gun Owners of America Political Victory Fund. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. Gun Owners of America Political Victory Fund is a Project of Gun Owners of America.
****************************
To subscribe to free, low-volume GOA alerts, go to
http://www.gunowners.org/ean.htm on the web. Change of e-mail address may also be made at that location.
Problems, questions or comments? The main GOA e-mail address
goamail@gunowners.org is at your disposal. Please do not add that address to distribution lists sending more than ten messages per week or lists associated with issues other than gun rights.