Well Mom it is just because you have missed Doug Feith all over the airwaves!
He knew what was best, it was everyone else who was wrong! Rumsfield was a great military leader and the world had not seen his like since Alexander the Great.
Colin Powell was the one whom put a monkey wrench in the whole thing and if the State department had kept their fat nose out of it. Everything would have gone fine, oh yeah its Paul Brimers fault too, he was given clear instructions and went his own way!
(Yet funny is the case that no one above Brimer called him on it when it might have made a difference?)
Yeah Feith is a Neo-con and pride of it under the lavender sky in his world.
It s a catch 22, I want to hear what they have to say. Their explaining their actions and logic. But within about ten minutes I shake my head and want to go back to bed!
This could have ramification in the future on other types of legislation including abortion. If the legislature is allowed to stop future legislatures from governing where does it stop?
Lobbyists create a bill that prohibits government oversight.
Attorney general says lawmakers can’t touch state-run gaming.
The eagerness of the Kansas Legislature and Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to embrace gambling as a way of paying for growing government expenditures drove legislators to pass an expanded lottery bill in apparent violation of the Kansas Constitution.
The passage of the bill required lawmakers to do a lot of fancy footwork, including rushing through a vote on a gutted bill created by the gaming industry without debate. Now all of that may have come back to trip them up.
Rep. John Faber, a Brewster Republican and member of the House Rules and Regulations Committee, said Assistant Attorney General Mary Feighny informed committee members this week that they could face misdemeanor charges if they attempt in any way to influence the Gaming Commission or the Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission.
The commission would, in effect, become an autonomous government agency not subject to conventional checks and balances, including, Faber said, legislative oversight.
Faber said committee members were discussing the possibility of sending a letter to the Gaming Commission when Feighny alerted them that such correspondence could put them in jeopardy under Section 31 of the expanded lottery act.
That section makes it a Class A misdemeanor for members of the Kansas Legislature and other specified parties to attempt to influence the state’s gaming regulators.
“Basically with this we can’t even visit with them about the lottery without facing a misdemeanor charge,” Faber said.
Faber, who opposed SB 66, said the current predicament reflected the haste with which legislators rammed through the expanded lottery act last year.
“The original bill was written by the Kansas gaming industry and the legislators who carried it didn’t know what was in it. There were no committee hearings, and they just basically did a gut-and-go on the House floor to get the thing through,” he said.
If, when or how the situation will be resolved is anybody’s guess.
Faber said he expected the attorney general to issue a formal opinion on the impact of Section 31 within a month or so. Until such an opinion is forthcoming, he said a strict interpretation of the bill as written will force the Rules and Regs Committee to take a hands-off approach to the gaming industry.
If that opinion concludes that legislators in fact are in jeopardy of misdemeanor charges if they engage in their oversight responsibility, Faber said it was possible the expanded lottery act could be revisited.
He believes that scenario is highly unlikely, however.
“If they opened up that bill again, it might pass the House but it would never get through the Senate,” Faber said.
In the meantime, the Kansas Supreme Court is expected to review the constitutionality of the expanded lottery act that allowed state-owned gambling facilities.
Faber said he was eagerly awaiting the Supreme Court’s decision.
“I think they’ll say it’s constitutional, but I want to see if they can say it with a straight face,” Faber said. Faber pointed to Article 15, Section 3 of the Kansas Constitution, which states, “Lotteries and the sale of lottery tickets are forever prohibited.”
The Supreme Court is under no deadline to hear the case, although then-Attorney General Paul Morrison asked when he filed the action that the high court act expeditiously.
Thoughts too consider::…
1. Bush will give out departure/exit Pardons when he leaves office.
2. Some in Congress “need” these.
3. Clinton, Obama, and McCain are in the current Congress.
4. Petraeus is in line for a departure/exit Pardon for Tortue/Waterboarding.
5. Cheney needs a Pardon.
6. He can be Impeached, they just wont because they want their Pardons.
7. How much oil has Saudi Arabia pumped from the Iraqi, Saudi, and Iran crude oil underground shelf?? Is this amount within NATO/UN Treaty guidlines or is Bush and Saudi allowed do too us being at WAR??
8. Saddam was found justified by the UN when he attacked Kuwait and proved Saudi was pumping more barrels per day than the treaty allowed.
9. We hung him.
10. We are stealing the Iraqi Oil and we are stealing the Iran Oil.
11. We have lost American lives for oil.
12. We have allowed Congress and BUSH to destroy our country because we are spoiled and lazy.
13. For the People bt the People is a catch phrase.
14. We need to be taught how to be American, yet we demand to be allowed to tell others how to be American when again, we dont know how.
15. We wipe eachother out at all levels and let Congress and Bush win.
16. Why???
17. Where are we United in Statehood if we dont exercise our Rights?
18. Look at our history, Hung/Burned Blacks, Hung Indians, Japanese in concentration camps, Mexicans looked at because they have darker skin, how dare women have the right to vote, babies being raped, people being shot for stealing food, our enviroment is shot, zoo animals in cages, greyhounds slaughtered because they run slow, babies aborted because people change their minds, zero offical sy so in our politics, illegal human research, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, abused soldiers/vets, denied healthcare, overgrounded nursinghomes, abused elderly, starving Americans, people with $Billions. 1000 $Million in a Billion. Go figure, lets stop living blind when we have the ability too see. Thanks as allways, Herbert West III, opinionist.
Too sunflower5, you are correct. The State is notorious for setting up Legistation and selling it out after the fact. “INSIDER TRADING IS INSIDER TRADING”". KPERS was set up as the, Kansas Public Employees Retirement System. It was regulated directly by the States Legislature. It was under Insurance Commissioner Sebelius. It was a State Office. It is know private with “”ZERO”" Legislative Control, Regs or Jurisdiction. The State Treasurer advises to use it for Vision Quest for Public School 401K’s.They then pull accredidation from schools and “re-appropriate” the schools sources to include diverting the 401k”s. Bussinesses force us to use KPERS or we cannot work therre. They buy in and abuse their staff with these lies. Again, the State tells me “they have ZERO Regs, Jurisdiction or say so over this Private Company, KPERS, they are self Regulated”. In this, I cannot get a proper State Disability Check. I have “ZERO” State Representation to fix this problem. I agree, nothing should be privatized, after the State fattens it up thru Extortion/Racketereeing. These are forms of “Racketeering and Etortion”. Herbert West III, opinionist. west.herb@yahoo.com
I’m still not convinced that “Pee Public Pee Public Pissing” isn’t “Regular.” Or “Sex With Dogs Dog Sex Have Sex With My Dogs And I’ll Shoot you” isn’t really “Nathan.” “Gay Teen Sex with Gay Teen Dogs,” of course, is Parkay.
MH, I’m thinking it’s got to be a registered user to be so effective. Someone with a grudge against the WE or the editors or the blog?
Naw, KFG, just the latest salvo in the Spam Wars. Wordpress blogs are frequently targeted. The spammers use scripts to register the names automatically. In fact,
“Many of them use special blog spamming tools like Trackback Submitter to bypass comment spam protection on popular blogging systems like Movable Type, Wordpress and others.”
Not sure how they’re getting around the captcha in the registration process–either through random chance (thrown 10,000 registration attempts at it and see which one guesses the word), or simply thru optical character reading software. Probably the latter.
“…on obama’s comments regarding those rural penn people. Could this be a turning point? Could the honeymoon be over?”
Who knows? Political campaigns have turned on sillier stuff.
I was surprised that “Meet the Press” aired the whole comment, in context, which would have been altogether different had Obama said “…embraced religion and guns…” rather than “cling to.”
Hardly sounds like a Jerry Ford “Poland isn’t ‘oppressed’” moment. Now that was a screw-up; and positively prescient considering that a few years later the Polish people were in the vanguard of bringing down the Soviet Union.
Whose definition is it? “A ‘gaffe’ is when a politician inadvertantly tells the truth.” Something like that.
We see the small-town lower-to-middle-middle-class frustration Barak talks about every day in this forum. Obama’s “bitter” comments are a metaphor for his candidacy. He was raising money from Silicon Valley millionaires and trying to explain how not all of us are shopping for hot and cold Maseratis. It’s odd that the Clintons — who’ve earned $109 Million since Bill left office — can accuse Obama of “elitism.”
The poster previously known as “J R” represents the frustration Obama speaks to. Like Richard Farinia, he’s “…been down so long it looks like up.”
I understand and respect your objection to Obama based on the McClurkin thing. It’s stinky. But I suspect there’s a sisterhood thing behind your support for Senator Clinton. I understand that, too.
Thing is, I’m such a goddamned moderate I’m perfectly willing to do everything in my power to get a Democrat elected in November. As always, I think Senator Clinton is best fit as a leader in the Senate. I think Obama is the better candidate for lots of reasons. But we’ll see.
We’ll see if the voters of rural Pennsylvania have heard from a candidate who gets it or not.
I know why she’s doing it but have a problem with Senator Clinton trying to convince people she’s an avid duck-hunter. Puh-leeeeeze.
Shame on Obama, why the next thing he may point out is the White American’s are from European descent!
He may even sink so low as saying that the sun is shining at 10 O’clock in the morning. The ruckus that is being raised by his opponents and the MSM indicates they must think that people are shallow and superficial. That we can be easily swayed but the stupid things and not under real differences and issues.
Watch if this works then the Mc Cain camp will release the information that Hillary is a woman!
Of course that would force the Clinton camp to notify the public that Mc Cain is old! Then both will be damned for saying something that is true.
#
Monkeyhawk
Posted April 13, 2008 at 9:24 am | Permalink
“ksfarmgrrl” –
I’m still not convinced that “Pee Public Pee Public Pissing” isn’t “Regular.” Or “Sex With Dogs Dog Sex Have Sex With My Dogs And I’ll Shoot you” isn’t really “Nathan.” “Gay Teen Sex with Gay Teen Dogs,” of course, is Parkay.
————————
What a lovely sentiment.
Actually, you dumbkopft Libs, it’s the trackback messages that are spamming the blog. Disable trackbacks and the problem is solved.
Look at the “latest comments” section on the left side of the screen. The spammers routinely target old posts. Don’t click on the names or you’ll end up in Spamland.
#
Chas
Posted April 13, 2008 at 12:14 pm | Permalink
But.. but… MH is speaking to an issue, not flaming and trolling a poster…
——————————-
Okay, let’s change up the names then, since it’s just speaking to an issue
—————————–
I’m still not convinced that “Pee Public Pee Public Pissing” isn’t “Chas.” Or “Sex With Dogs Dog Sex Have Sex With My Dogs And I’ll Shoot you” isn’t really “Rage.” “Gay Teen Sex with Gay Teen Dogs,” of course, is CapnAmerica.
———————————
There, no one flamed or troll, just speaking to an issue according to Chas…
Rage, I havve noticed that my level of spam porno email has gone down since the Blog went to Sign-in/Registration… IF somebody had managed to hack the Blog for email adfdresses, maybe that has stopped — at least for now…
Clinton Library Builder’s CFO Disappears Amid Audit
Sunday, March 16, 2008
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — John Glasgow had a healthy salary, with an opportunity to pick up stock in the construction company where he worked. He was the kind of guy who paid back a $500 bonus he got for completing an anti-smoking program because he started to light up again.
But now Glasgow has been missing since Jan. 28, with his car found abandoned the next day, and family and police say it’s impossible to tell whether he killed himself, was abducted or left to start a new life elsewhere.
I got a great laugh out of this story in today’s newspaper:
Former A.G. Gonzales still hasn’t found work
“What makes Gonzales’ case extraordinary is that former attorneys generals, the government’s chief lawyer, are typically highly sought.”
“Lawyers say perjury allegations concerning testimony about eavesdropping and his role in the politically motivated firing of federal prosecutors are the biggest problems with Gonzales’ resume.”
I’m hoping everyone from this most corrupt administration gets to experience all of life’s difficulties (or worse). It’s the least they all deserve!
The WE today had an interesting article (it is an AP article):
“Salmonella found in recalled cereal”
In the article we find:
1. People are getting sick after eating the cereal.
2. Malt-O-Meal is doing a voluntary recall after finding contamination during routine testing.
People are getting sick and this was found during routine testing. Wow.
Then if you look at the “best if used by” dates being recalled you wonder about these “routine test”.
“best if used by” dates being recalled: April 8, 2008 to March 18, 2009.
It appears the “best if used by” date is 12 months after processing, so this stuff has been on the market for 12 months and they are just now doing “routine test”. Or maybe they have known about this for a while and were hoping it would just go away; along with a few dead people.
“You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. …
“And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are going to regenerate and they have not,” he said.
“And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations,” he also said.
Tucker Bounds — spokesman for McCain, the senator from Arizona — also said that the reverence for faith and the Second Amendment in the United States are “cornerstone customs” and that Obama’s “dismissal of those values is revealing.”
“Barack Obama’s elitism allows him to believe that the American traditions that have contributed to the identity and greatness of this country are actually just frustrations and bitterness.”
Sen. Barack Obama on Saturday tried to clarify what he meant when he said some small-town Pennsylvanians are “bitter” people who “cling to guns and religion.”
Sen. Barack Obama told a newspaper if he offended anyone, he deeply regrets it.
“I didn’t say it as well as I should have,” Obama admitted in Muncie, Indiana, on Saturday, the day after he first defended his comments, “because the truth is that these traditions that are passed on from generation to generation — those are important.”
The Illinois senator made the controversial comments at a California event that was closed to the media last Sunday.
Obama defended his point of view amid intensified criticism from Democratic rival Hillary Clinton and presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain that’s he’s elitist and out of touch.
“Obviously, if I worded things in a way that made people offended, I deeply regret that,” Obama said Saturday in an interview with the Winston-Salem Journal
Here’s a parable on how best to handle the “dirt” Max loves to dish out:
One day a farmer’s donkey fell down into a well. The animal cried piteously for hours as the farmer tried to figure out what to do. Finally he decided the animal was old, that the well needed to be covered anyway and that it just wasn’t worth retrieving the donkey. So he invited all his neighbors to come over and help him. They all grabbed a shovel and began to shovel dirt into the well. At first, the donkey realized what was happening and cried horribly. Then, to everyone’s amazement, he quietened down. A few shovel loads later, the farmer finally looked down the well and was astonished at what he saw. With every shovel of dirt that hit his back, the donkey was doing something amazing. He would shake it off and take a step up. As the farmer’s neighbors continued to shovel dirt on top of the animal, he would shake it off and take a step up. Pretty soon, everyone was amazed as the donkey stepped up over the edge of the well and trotted off! Life is going to shovel dirt on you, all kinds of dirt. The trick to getting out of the well is to shake it off and take a step up.
FT. WORTH, Tex. _American taxpayers have unwittingly helped finance a polygamist sect that is now the focus of a massive child abuse investigation in West Texas, with a business tied to the group receiving a nearly $1 million loan from the federal government and $1.2 million in military contracts.
The ability of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, or FLDS, to operate and grow is largely dependent on huge contributions from its members and revenue from the businesses they control, according to a former accountant for the church, and government officials in Utah and Arizona, where the sect is primarily based.
One of those businesses, NewEra Manufacturing in Las Vegas, has been awarded more than $1.2 million in federal government contracts, with most of the money coming in recent years from the Defense Department for wheel and brake components for military aircraft.
A large portion of the awards were preferential no-bid or “sole source” contracts because of the company’s classification as a small business, according to online databases that track federal government appropriations.
Has anyone ever had a gun confiscated? Am I missing the let’s take everyone’s guns away movement? Could someone point me to a link showing door to door searches of suspected gun owners? So what gives with max?
Why did it take 10 years to stop the rape and kidnapping of 400 plus children on 1700 acres in “W”s backyard?? “No Child Left Behind my Ass”!!! Herbert West III, opinionist. west.herb@yahoo.com
Most are familiar with the pending US Supreme Court case DC vs. Heller. This is perhaps the biggest Supreme Court challenge to the 2nd Amendment in the history of the USA.
Did you know that Clinton and Obama BOTH failed to support the Individual Right to Bear Arms in this case?
Here is the Summary from the Amicus Brief (friend of the court opinion) signed by 55 Senators and 250 House members who do support the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution.
For some reason, this wasn’t important enough for Clinton or Obama to sign.
The Second Amendment provides: “A well
regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Congress adopted that wording and proposed it to the States in 1789. It became part of the Bill of Rights which the States ratified in 1791. As the text and the drafting history demonstrate, the Amendment was intended to guarantee the right of individuals to possess and keep ordinary firearms.
IF you believe in the Individual Right to Bear Arms as described in the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution, then you would certainly support the Amicus Brief signed by 305 members of the US Congress.
Any Presidential candidate who does NOT agree with the 2nd Amendment or any other part of the US Constitution, should not run for President.
For it is the job of the President of the United States to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”.
If Clinton and Obama are not willing to do that, then neither one should accept the job of President.
But don’t worry, I’m sure neither Clinton nor Obama, will be asked to provide specific reasons why they did not sign-off on the brief supporting the Individual Right to Bear Arms, which WAS signed by 55 other Senators and 250 House members. The Liberal Press is on their side.
Freedom is not an issue for Clinton and Obama. How many times do you hear them talk about Individual Freedom? You see, under their Socialist approach to buy votes through Social programs, there cannot be Individual Freedom. Why?
Because forcing one group of people to support another group of people is robbing the freedom from one group, to enslave the other. If America remains Free, it cannot become Socialist.
Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.
Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms.
Require manufacturers to provide child-safety locks with firearms.
2. Firearms Manufacturers Protection bill. Obama voted against this Bill, which passed and became law. Obama supports lawsuits against gun manufacturers.
S 397: A bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others.
Project Vote Smart’s Synopsis:
Vote to pass a bill that provides liability protection for manufacturers, dealers or importers of firearms or ammunition products, as well as their trade associations, for harm caused by criminal or unlawful misuse.
Max, you are living in fantasy land.. You WANT to have a ban on guns, so you can fight off the government… You WANT to take on the Feds, Max. THAT’s why you and your kind are dangerous…
Show us some link that wants to take your guns… All I have ever supported are controls on gun owners… you know, like cars, and motorcycles, and other items that can kill people… even accidentally…
I hope an opportunity arises where Clinton and Obama are asked these questions:
Let’s hear about Obama and Clinton’s positions on Gun Control.
1. Will they ban hand-guns?
2. Will they ban high-capacity guns, and if so, what is high-capacity?
3. Will they ban semi-automatic guns?
4. Will they sign another Brady Gun Ban Bill?
5. Will they sign bans on ammunition like hollow-points?
6. Will they restrict sales in any way?
7. Will they support nationwide concealed carry?
8. Will they work to ban concealed carry in all states?
There are many in our current US Congress that have a gun-ban agenda. If Clinton or Obama becomes our next President, you can bet that they will support and sign any Gun Control bill passed by Congress.
Here’s a link to a few Gun-Ban proposals just from the current Congress:
HR 1022. Sponsored by Democrats.
See also S1237 introduced and sponsored by Democrats.
For more Gun-Ban bills introduced by the Current Congress see:
Backed off a national licensing registration plan on guns
I believe in the Second Amendment. People have a right to bear arms. But I also believe that we can common-sensically approach this, and backed off a national licensing registration plan.
Source: 2008 Democratic debate in Las Vegas Jan 15, 2008
License and register all handgun sales
Hillary Rodham Clinton offered her support for a legislative proposal to license hand guns. The legislation, sponsored by Sen. Charles Schumer, would require anyone who wants to purchase a gun to obtain a state-issued photo gun license. “I stand in support of this common sense legislation to license everyone who wishes to purchase a gun,” Clinton said. “I also believe that every new handgun sale or transfer should be registered in a national registry, such as Chuck is proposing.”
HILLARY CLINTON’S VOTES AGAINST GUN OWNERS
Year Link Senate Bill / Amendment Clinton Stand
2006
SA4615 Prohibition On Confiscation Of Firearms Vote against gun owners.
2005
S.397 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act Vote against gun owners.
S.527 Protect Law Enforcement Armor Act Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.578 Terrorist Apprehension and Record Retention Act of 2005 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.620 Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2005 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.645 Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2005 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.935 Fifty Caliber Sniper Weapons Regulation Act of 2005 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
SA1615 Cop Killer Bullet Ban Vote against gun dealers and manufacturers.
SA1617 Five-seveN and Armor Piercing Ammunition Ban Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
SA1618 FN Five-SeveN, APA and Risk of Injury Openings Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
SA1619 S.397 Exemption for Police Cosponsor against gun owners. Failed on a voice vote.
SA1620 S.397 Exemption for Children Cosponsor against gun owners. Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA1621 Fifty-Caliber Sniper Weapons Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
SA1623 Gross Negligence Amendment Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA1626 Child Safety Lock Act of 2005 Vote against gun manufacturers.
2004
S.1805 Gun Manufacturer Lawsuit Protection Vote against gun owners.
S.2498 Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization of 2004 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
SA2619 The ‘Cop Killer Bullet Ban’ Vote against gun owners.
SA2620 Trigger Lock Requirement Vote against gun owners.
SA2623 National Concealed Carry for Police For police.
SA2627 SB1805 Exemption for Victims of DC Snipers Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA2628 SB1805 Exemption for Victims of DC Snipers Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA2629 SB1805 Exemption for Police Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA2630 SB1805 Exemption for Police Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA2631 Gross Negligence Amendment to SB1805 Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA2635 To modify the definition of ‘reasonably foreseeable’. Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA2636 Close ‘Gun Show Loophole’ - restrict private sale of firearms Vote against gun owners.
SA2637 Extend the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban Vote against gun owners.
2003
S.22 Justice Enhancement and Domestic Security Act of 2003 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.1034 Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2003 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.1431 Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.1774 Terrorist Firearms Detection Act of 2003 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.1807 Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2003 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
2001
S.16 21st Century Law Enforcement, Crime Prevention, and Victims Assistance Act Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.890 McCain / Lieberman Gun Show Loophole Bill Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
SA1231 Kill a HUD Gun Buyback Program Vote against gun owners.
Hillary and Barrack are Gun-shy of the gun issue. Funny, they aren’t shy about anything else.
They are afraid of alienating the 100 million gun-owners in America. If their true colors are shown by the mass media, they cannot win the election in November.
But so far, the Democratic presidential hopefuls have offered no solutions or preventive measures to combat this problem. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., offered his sympathies, but specified no new ideas to enforce gun control in his home state of Illinois. “I’ve said before, and continue to believe, that we need to do a more effective job of enforcing our gun laws,” he said, speaking in Milwaukee, Wis., on Friday.
Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., offered similarly vague statements. “We just have to figure out how we are going to get smart about protecting our kids,” she said.
Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Organization, a grassroots effort to prevent gun violence, says we need leadership from both Clinton and Obama on this issue.
But the candidates are quick to remember what happened to Al Gore in 2000. Gore lost West Virginia, in large part, because of negative ads paid for by the NRA. “I think a lot of candidates and politicians are afraid of getting the gun lobby upset,” said Helmke. “They fear that talking about guns, it’s gonna lose them elections.”
HillaryClinton.com is noticeably gun shy; she lists her views on plenty of issues, but not gun control. However, she’s spoken out about protecting the Second Amendment — the right to bear arms.
February 19, 2008
BARACK OBAMA offers hope and Hillary Clinton offers solutions, but they offer little of either on gun control.
“As a former constitutional law professor, Barack Obama understands and believes in the constitutional right of Americans to bear arms. He will protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport, and use guns for the purposes of hunting and target shooting.”
Clinton said this year in a Nevada debate, “Illegal guns are the cause of so much death and injury in our country. I am also a political realist and I understand that the political winds are very powerful against doing enough to try to get guns off the street, get them out of the hands of young people.”
McCarthy Bill Bans Millions More Guns Than The Infamous Clinton Gun Ban
On Feb. 14, 2007, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) introduced H.R. 1022, a bill with the stated purpose, “to reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes.” McCarthy`s choice of words warrants explanation.
Obviously, what she means by “assault weapons ban” is the now-discredited Clinton Gun Ban of 1994. Congress allowed the ban to expire in 2004 for multiple reasons, including the fact that studies by the Congressional Research Service, congressionally-mandated studies, and studies by state and local law enforcement agencies showed that guns affected by the ban had been used in only a small percentage of crime, before and after the ban was imposed.
Reauthorizing the Clinton ban would be bad enough. The guns that it temporarily banned–very widely used for target shooting, hunting and home protection–are still used in only a small percentage of crime. But McCarthy`s “other purposes” would make matters even worse. H.R. 1022 would ban every gun banned by the Clinton ban, plus millions more guns, including:
Every gun made to comply with the Clinton ban. (The Clinton ban dictated the kinds of grips, stocks and attachments new guns could have.
Manufacturers modified new guns to the Clinton requirements. H.R. 1022 would ban the modified guns too.
Guns exempted by the Clinton ban. (Ruger Mini-14s and -30s, and Ranch Rifles; .30 cal. carbines; and fixed-magazine, semi-automatic, center-fire rifles that hold more than 10 rounds.)
All semi-automatic shotguns. (E.g., Remington, Winchester, Beretta and Benelli, used for hunting, sport shooting and self-defense. H.R. 1022 would ban them because they have “any characteristic that can function as a grip,” and would also ban their main component, called the “receiver.”)
All detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles-including, for example, the ubiquitous Ruger 10/22 .22 rimfire-because they have “any characteristic that can function as a grip.
Target shooting rifles. (E.g., the three centerfire rifles most popular for marksmanship competitions: the Colt AR-15, the Springfield M1A and the M1 “Garand.”)
Any semi-automatic shotgun or rifle an Attorney General one day claims isn`t “sporting,” even though the constitutions of the U.S. and 44 states, and the laws of all 50 states, recognize the right to use guns for defense.
“SA1615 Cop Killer Bullet Ban Vote against gun owners.
SA1620 S.397 Exemption for Children Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA1623 Gross Negligence Amendment Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA1626 Child Safety Lock Act of 2005 Vote against gun owners.”
Those look like GOOD votes Max… You gun owners are fanatics… Anybody with an ounce of brains would vote against cop killer bullets… and vote for mandatory child safety locks… And votes against certain gun manufacturer proposals…
Good grief, BAR OWNERS have to live with, and work around “cram shop laws” — They can be a nuisance… but they are there for the SAFETY of the general public, as well as the drinker at the Bar!!
After all, the 2nd Amendment DOES use the words “well-regulated” Without regulation, there would be sheer chaos!!
Chas, you have already stated you want the Feds to control the people.
You want that Chas. Not me.
I want to be left alone, to have my Constitutional Rights and God given rights of Freedom maintained.
Chas you would have guns banned to ensure that your beloved Government has complete control over the people. That’s the only way you can ensure that Socialism is enacted across all of America. You want to steal from the rich and give to the poor. And you know the people will not allow that to happen, if they maintain their right to bear arms.
The 2nd Amendment is in place Chas, to protect freedom-loving Americans from people like you.
S. 77, The Firearms Dealer Harassment Act
Sen. Charles Schumer, (D-N.Y.) has introduced S. 77, the “Anti-Gun Trafficking Penalties Enhancement Act of 2007.” A more accurate title would be the “Firearms Dealer Harassment Act.”
Here`s why:
First, S.77 would require that confidential Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) records on firearms traces be turned over–on demand–to any government entity, for any purpose. (Currently, information from firearms traces can only be used in bona fide criminal investigations by law enforcement agencies.)
S. 77 would require that these records be made available to any government agency for any reason, or for no stated reason whatsoever, without any justification or respect for the privacy rights of law-abiding gun owners.
S. 77 would also unleash the federal government to harass FFL holders at will, for any reason, as often as it chooses.
Finally–and perhaps most ominously–S. 77 would define certain firearm violations as “racketeering activity” under the “Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act” (RICO), allowing massive criminal penalties and civil suits.
FIREARMS LEGISLATION IN THE 110th CONGRESS
Analysis by Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102
Springfield, VA 22151
(703)321-8585, fax: 321-8408
House Bills
H.R. 73 (Bartlett): This bill would affirm the right of Americans to keep and bear arms for defense of themselves, their families, and their homes.
H.R. 96 (Castle, Shays, Kirk): This bill would require Instantchecks for private transactions at gun shows. If the sponsor “knowingly” fails to notify every attendee of his responsibilities under the Brady Law (new 18 U.S.C. 932(a)(2)(D) and new 18 U.S.C. 924(a)(8)(B)), every board member of the sponsor could be fined $250,000 for every person not notified and sent to prison for five years per violation. And, while the “knowing” requirement is an improvement over earlier versions, it is far from certain that a Brady-Law-pamphlet-distributing guard who intentionally leaves his post during a busy time for a bathroom break would not (1) be interpreted as “knowingly” failing to notify attendees, and (2) be interpreted as violating the law vicariously as an agent of every board member of the sponsoring organization. Obviously, at the hands of an anti-gun administration, this has the potential of permanently putting an end to all gun shows.
H.R. 171 (Lee and 16 others): This bill, which would authorize additional funds for school mental health counselors, makes a finding about the need to reduce the number of weapons in schools. Such a finding would demonize Utah teachers and administrators — who are allowed, by law, to possess firearms in schools — as well as, other heroes (such as Joel Myrick of Pearl, Mississippi) who have used firearms to stop school massacres and, thus, save the lives of students.
H.R. 203 (Rothman): This bill would interfere with the discretion of states by requiring that police seize firearms of persons suspected of domestic violence, based on “probable cause,” even though no court has heard the case. In addition, it allows a court to permanently bar an individual slapped with a “protective order” from possessing a firearm and to order a search of his home, even though, unlike current federal law, the order was an “ex parte” order with respect to which the individual had no notice, no right to be present, no right to be heard, and no right to an attorney.
H.R. 226 (Stearns): This is the NRA-backed reciprocity bill, which would set a “national standard” allowing persons who have obtained concealed carry licenses to be granted reciprocity in other states. Residents of Vermont, which does not require a license for concealed carry, would not be granted relief under this legislation.
H.R. 254 (Jackson-Lee): This bill would amend the hate crimes law — which prohibits using a firearm to cause bodily injury to any person on account of race or religion — to also include sexual orientation.
H.R. 256 (Jackson-Lee): This bill would:
extend current provisions of 18 U.S.C. 922(x) (making it virtually impossible to legally teach your children the safe and responsible use of firearms) by (1) raising the across-the-board age to 21, (2) covering semiautos, and (3) increasing the penalties;
require FFL’s (including small FFL’s) to keep guns in a government-approved storage facility;
require you to lock up all firearms (making them unavailable for self-defense) — or face a three-year prison sentence if a child gets hold of the firearm and causes bodily injury;
prohibit unaccompanied minors at guns shows; and
spend more money on anti-gun “education” programs.
H.R. 297 (McCarthy): This bill provides, in the form of grants, about $1 billion to the states to “provide the National Instant Criminal Background Check System [NICS] with all records concerning persons who are prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm under subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code, regardless of the elapsed time since the disqualifying event.”
Covered under this bill are records pertaining to the Lautenberg misdemeanor gun ban, lists of persons under indictment, mental health records, records relevant to the identification of illegal aliens and other records.
NICS is the system used by the FBI to conduct a background check prior to a firearm sale by a federally licensed gun dealer. Most people are aware that NICS records include a list of convicted felons, but there are many other categories of persons who are prohibited from possessing firearms for which computerized lists may not be available. It is these categories that are targeted by this bill.
For instance, the bill expands upon the unconstitutional Lautenberg misdemeanor gun ban [18 USC 922 (g)(9)]. This gun ban, passed as an amendment to a 1996 omnibus spending bill and signed into law by President Clinton, was originally introduced by leading anti-gun Senators Frank Lautenberg, Dianne Feinstein, and Edward Kennedy.
Under the Lautenberg ban, people who have committed very minor offenses that include pushing, shoving or, in some cases, merely yelling at a family member can no longer own a firearm for self-defense. The Lautenberg gun ban should be repealed, not expanded.
The bill also seeks to computerize records of persons “under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.” Such persons, though not even convicted of the crime in question, are prohibited from possessing a firearm.
The gun grabbers are seeking to force the states to provide the federal government all of these indictment records, updated quarterly. Given the maxim among those in the legal profession that prosecutors can get a grand jury to “indict a ham sandwich,” this, too, is a gun prohibition that should be repealed, not expanded.
Mental health records are also covered under the McCarthy bill. This could have a significant impact on American servicemen, especially those returning from combat situations and who seek some type of psychiatric care. Often, veterans who have suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder have been deemed as mentally “incompetent” and are prohibited from owning guns under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(4). Records of those instances certainly exist, and, in 1999, the Department of Veterans Administration turned over 90,000 names of veterans to the FBI for inclusion into the NICS background check system.
Mental health records can also have a future impact on young people, as this country trends closer to mandatory mental health screening for students. In a 2003 report by a subcommittee of the President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, the author states that “The problem of emotional disorders in children is large — 20% of all children are affected — and it seems to be growing.” It is unknown how these people will be categorized in the future.
The fact that metal health ‘experts,’ a notoriously anti-gun community, would have a say in who is allowed to possess a firearm is, quite frankly, frightening. Many in the profession would just as soon consider anyone who owns a gun as ‘mentally incompetent.’
Another sobering thought is how computerized data are often mishandled. Consider the disturbing news reports that 25 million Social Security number records of veterans were hacked. The more that our private data gets added into government computers, the more likely we are to have our identity compromised.
Perhaps the provision that would lead to the greatest number of ‘fishing expeditions’ is that related to illegal aliens.
Federal law prohibits illegal aliens from owning guns. The bill requires all relevant data related to who is in this country illegally. But what records pertaining to illegal aliens from the states would be relevant? Perhaps a better question would be, what records are not relevant?
In order to identify illegal aliens, “relevant” records could allow the FBI to demand state tax returns of all citizens, employment records, library records (we’ve already seen how these have been deemed relevant to terrorism investigations), DMV and hospital records — all in the name of making sure that you’re not an illegal.
The sponsor of the bill, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, is one of the most virulent anti-gunners in the entire Congress. Of the 32 cosponsors of the bill in 2006, 31 were GOA “F” rated, one was rated “D.”
H.R. 354 (McCarthy): This bill would spend $965 million a year on trying to figure out why and remedy the fact that schools that ban guns are not safe from “gun violence.”
H.R. 428 (Towns): This bill would require the Consumer Product Safety Commission to ban realistic toy handguns.
H.R. 623 (Rangel): This bill would allow a “nonviolent offender” to have his record expunged if he has complied with a variety of conditions, including obtaining a GED, performing a year of community service, staying free of substance abuse for a year, and not committing any other state or federal offense in the future. A “nonviolent offense” is one which does not involve “the use of a weapon or violence.”
H.R. 660 (Conyers): This bill would dramatically expand federal funding for law enforcement resources to guard federal and state judges, prosecutors, jurors, and other persons involved in the judicial process — and would expand criminal penalties for certain related offenses, including, for instance, placing a false lien on a judge’s home.
H.R. 861 (Stearns): This is the NRA-backed version of national concealed carry reciprocity. It would set “national standards” for recognition of concealed carry permits, but would provide no relief in cases of states like Vermont that don’t require permits as a condition of concealed carry.
H.R. 880 (Forbes, Wolf, Chabot, Coble, Franks, Gallegly, Goodlatte, Pence, Smith): This bill would subject guns to the same sort of mandatory minimum sentencing currently applied to organized crime. You would be sentenced to at least 10 years in prison if “a formal or informal group or association of 3 or more individuals” (such as your family), in relation to the group (e.g., protecting them), commit two or more “gang crimes,” one of which constitutes a “crime of violence” (which could include brandishing a firearm in order to protect your family from a robber). “Gang crimes” include driving within 1000 feet of a school with a firearm and training your kid how to use a handgun without first writing a letter of permission for him to keep on his person while you are training him. Other anti-gun provisions in this bill are section 109 (making it harder for a person charged with a “firearms offense” — including paperwork violations — to be released), section 114 (upping the mandatory penalties for simply owning a gun if you are convicted of a crime of violence — including trying to defend yourself when state law mandates that you retreat), and section 115 (allowing your kid to be prosecuted as an adult if you train him to use a handgun, but he fails to possess a written letter of permission while you are doing so).
H.R. 1022 (McCarthy): This bill would reauthorize the ban on semi-automatic firearms more or less verbatim. It would change the list of explicitly banned firearms to include:
a much broader list of named firearms which are banned;
a semi-auto rifle with detachable magazine capacity that has any one of the following: folding stock, threaded barrel, pistol grip, forward grip, or barrel shroud (the previous ban requires two of these features);
most semi-autos with fixed magazines with more than 10 rounds;
a semi-auto pistol with detachable magazine capacity that has any one of the following: second pistol grip, threaded barrel, barrel shroud, or detachable magazine capacity outside the pistol grip (the previous ban requires two of these features);
a semi-auto shotgun with a revolving cylinder or with folding stock, pistol grip, detachable magazine capacity, or fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds (the previous ban requires two of these features);
many frames, receivers, or conversion kits;
a military- or police-design semi-auto rifle or shotgun not suitable for sporting purposes.
It would also add four additional anti-semi-auto provisions. These would:
expand to semi-autos the provisions in 18 U.S.C. 922(x) making it virtually impossible to legally teach your kid the safe and lawful use of handguns (subjecting you and your kid to a prison sentence, for example, if he does not have a written permission letter from you on his person at the time you are training him);
expand and make statutory an import ban on semi-auto magazines;
require that transfers of semi-autos be through FFL’s; and
prohibit transfer of “any assault weapon with a large capacity ammunition feeding device” and require that an FFL transferring a grandfathered “large capacity ammunition feeding device” report to the Attorney General.
H.R. 1096 (Paul): This bill would (1) repeal the Brady law and the Instantcheck system; (2) repeal federal provisions discriminating against firearms which the government determines to have no “sporting purpose,” and (3) repeal the requirement that trigger locks be purchased by anyone purchasing a handgun from a dealer.
H.R. 1141 (Cannon): This bill would grant amnesty to any veteran with a pre-1968 unregistered automatic firearm.
H. R. 1167 (McCarthy): This bill would prevent anyone whose name turns up on one of the government’s secret “no fly” watch lists from possessing a firearm.
H. R. 1168 (McCarthy): This bill would reverse the Supreme Court’s U.S. v. Small decision by prohibiting firearms possession by any person who has been convicted of a felony in a foreign court, including political felonies by Nazi, Communist, and other totalitarian regimes.
H. R. 1399 (Ross, Souder): This bill would repeal the D.C. gun ban.
H. R. 1582 (Schiff, Bono): This bill would treat your family as a “criminal street gang” if you committed two gun-related offenses — including driving 1,000 feet from a school with a gun in your glove compartment.
H. R. 1592 (Conyers, et al.): This bill would reauthorize federal “hate crimes” legislation extending protections to homosexuals and transvestites and providing for a ten year federal prison sentence for anyone who uses a firearm to “attempt” to cause bodily injury.
H.R. 1593: This bill would reauthorize and expand upon transitional programs for reentry of prisoners into society, focusing particularly on drug offenders.
H.R. 1784 (Engel, McCarthy, Kennedy, et al.): This bill would essentially allow the Attorney General to ban most ammunition by defining as “armor-piercing” any ammunition which may be fired by any type of handgun and is “capable of penetrating body armor” — in accordance with tests in which the AG would solely determine the angle, the distance, the firearm, the number of shots, the quality of the body armor, and the number of penetrations required. H.R. 1791 (Gingrey, Paul, McCotter, Musgrave, Sessions, Rogers, Boozman, Jones, Goode): This bill would require BATFE to make videorecordings of firearms and ammunition testing. H.R. 1859 (McCarthy): This bill would reinstate the ban on “large-capacity” magazines. H.R. 1874 (Andrews): This bill would require firearms importers and manufactures to microstamp all firearms (or insure that they are microstamped), and would require ballistics resting of any firearm in the custody of the U.S. that is suspected of having been used in a crime. Such results would have to be computerized. H.R. 1895 (McCarthy): This bill would:
repeal current appropriations language prohibiting the disclosure of firearms trace information — thereby opening the door to new lawsuits against large firearms dealers;
require that all firearms used in crimes go into the trace database;
apply federal racketeering laws to “prohibited persons” violations.
H.R. 1897 (Paul): This bill would prohibit any federal regulation banning the possession or carrying of a firearm based in whole or in part on the fact that the possession or carrying occurs within a national park.
H.R. 2013 (Blackburn, et al.): This bill would make “technical corrections” in the current federal language prohibiting state regulation of toy “look-alike” guns and replicas.
H.R. 2074 (King of New York): This bill would potentially allow the Attorney General to make anyone on a federal “watch list” a “prohibited person” and to withhold information on why they are prohibited from possessing firearms.
H.R. 2093 (Meehan, Shays): This bill, which is almost identical to legislation GOA helped successfully defeat in the Senate as it pertains to GOA, would require reporting of “grassroots lobbying” (i.e., efforts to influence public opinion) by any group that hires a consultant to influence the public (by, e.g., doing radio broadcasts) and which spends an aggregate of over $100,000 a quarter to influence public opinion.
H.R. 2325 (Gohmert et al.): This bill would:
enhance and federalize crimes dealing with attacks against judges, court personnel, and their families;
allow judges and prosecutors to carry guns and insulate them from some types of liability.
H.R. 2424 (Paul): This bill would repeal the 1996 “gun-free school zones” law, which prohibits, in many instances, bringing a gun within 1000 feet of a school.
H.R. 2640 (McCarthy et al.): This bill would dramatically increase the number of personal records on Americans handed over to the FBI Instant check center in West Virginia and would, for the first time, statutorily make a battle-scarred veteran, a troubled school kid, or a senior with Alzheimer’s a “prohibited person” based solely on a diagnosis.
H.R. 2666 (Rush): This bill would require a firearms license for any person possessing a handgun or semi-auto (whether or not subject to the expired semi-auto ban). The license would be issued by the Attorney General, who would require a thumbprint, a certificate that the person has passed an exam, and a certificate that the firearm will be locked up, among other things. The license will have to be renewed after five years, and all information on transfers will have to be submitted to the Attorney General. Private sales of firearms without an Instant check would be outlawed. In addition, the bill provides for firearms lock-up requirements, unlimited inspections of FFL’s, various and sundry additional firearms-related crimes, and, of course, an exemption of police from its requirements.
H.R. 2726 (Forbes, Gohmert, Smith, Chabot, Buchanan, Boozman): This bill would expand, in modest ways, the circumstances under which current law enforcement personnel (e.g., Amtrak police) or retired law enforcement personnel (after 15 years of service, with firearms certification during the past year) are authorized to carry outside their jurisdiction (with the exception of machine guns and silencers).
H.R. 3142 (Reichert): This bill would:
establish civil penalties for FFL’s who engage in both “minor” and “serious” violations of federal gun laws;
dramatically expand penalties for gun offenses — increasing penalties for —
certain repeat “prohibited persons” offenses to twenty years (and a minimum sentence of 15 years in some cases);
“conspiracy” to commit a federal crime from five years to twenty years (unless this exceeds the penalty for actually committing the crime);
certain racketeering, illegal alien, murder-for-hire, and “other felony crimes of violence”;
expand the rebuttable presumption against release of persons (such as PTSD veterans charged with firearms possession) who have been charged with “firearms offenses,” but who have not been convicted of anything;
extend the federal statute of limitations for “violent crime offenses” and terrorism offenses to ten years.
H.R. 3156: This substantial rewrite of many provisions in the federal crime code would, inter alia, include “criminal street gang” language which would treat many minor gun offenses like criminal “racketeering” crimes.
H.R. 3305 (Paul): This bill would prohibit any federal agency from prohibiting a pilot from carrying a firearm in order to protect his craft.
H.R. 3436 (Reyes): This bill would allow courts to act more leniently with respect to firearms offense sentencing in cases of persons who are “authorized to carry” firearms in connection with their jobs.
H.R. 3462 (Lampson): This bill would:
expand penalties for violent crimes committed during drug trafficking crimes;
expand the rebuttable presumption against release of persons (such as PTSD veterans charged with firearms possession) who have been charged with “firearms offenses,” but who have not been convicted of anything;
extend the federal statute of limitations for “violent crime offenses” and terrorism offenses to eight or ten years, respectively.
H.R. 3474 (McNerney): This bill would expand funds (by $10,000,000 a year) for dealing with “gang crimes,” but would not expand substantive law to attack guns in the same way as other gang-related legislation.
H.R. 3547: This bill would include “criminal street gang” language which would treat many minor gun offenses like criminal “racketeering” crimes.
H.R. 3766 (Norton): This bill would authorize up to $100,000,000 a year for “gun buyback” programs.
H.R. 4128: This bill is a comprehensive rewrite of the federal criminal code, comparable to the one that was killed in 1982 by GOA and NRA because of its dramatic expansion of criminal liability for gun owners.
H.R. 4818 (King of New York, Rangel): This bill would:
impose a 20 year prison sentence on the sale of two or more firearms, e.g., to a “prohibited person” (such as a veteran with PTSD);
expand penalties for things like possession of a stolen firearm or a firearm with an obliterated serial number during the commission of a felony;
expand sharing of gun trace information.
H.R. 4900 (King): This bill would do the following:
Section 101: Current subsections 18 U.S.C. 923(e) and (f) allow BATF to revoke FFL’s, after notification and the opportunity for a hearing. Section 101 would create a bifurcated structure:
“non-serious” violations could trigger civil penalties of up to $1,000 ($5,000 per inspection) and a suspension of not more than 30 days;
“serious” violations could trigger $2,500 civil penalties ($15,000 per inspection), up to 90 days suspension, or revocation. “Serious” violations would consist of, inter alia, actions which could result in the acquisition of a firearm by a prohibited person or interfere with a criminal investigation. There would be a five-year statute of limitations, and there would be procedures for contesting penalties (before an administrative law judge in the case of minor penalties and before a court in the case of revocation). These procedures would be relatively pro-defendant — with a bar to bringing a civil charge after an unsuccessful attempt at a criminal prosecution.
Section 102: This section would allow an FFL applicant to supplement his application, in the case of problems, before final denial.
Section 103: One of the big battles in McClure-Volkmer was over “scienter” (state-of-mind) requirements. In particular, there has been a tendency to diminish what is required for an individual to act “knowingly” or “willfully.” This section would define “willfully” to mean “intentionally,” which is about the most culpable state-of-mind requirement in existence.
Section 104: This section would require BATF to establish guidelines for conducting investigations.
Section 105: This section would prohibit purchaser information concerning a non-prohibited person from being shared with any other agency –unless the agency agrees not to share it with anyone but a court, prosecutor, or law enforcement agency.
Section 106: This section would give an FFL with a revoked license 60 days (with the possibility of an extension) to liquidate his inventory.
Section 107: This section would allow more flexibility in permitting an FFL with a revoked license to transfer his business to another FFL without automatically assuming that the violation giving rise to the revocation continues — and with an opportunity for the acquiring FFL to cure any defects.
Section 108: This section would decriminalize a non-material (i.e., minor and irrelevant) “false entry” in FFL records.
Section 109: This section broadens federal supervision of state oversight of explosives.
Sections 201 through 210:
make minor non-controversial corrective changes to federal gun law;
allow testing and security corporations to test machine guns without getting a license;
make the Smith amendment permanent;
eliminate the provision of 18 U.S.C. 922(x) which would allow a parent to be prosecuted because his son possessed a handgun without a written permission slip — even if the parent were physically present;
limit sharing of trace information;
expand the ability to import gun parts; and
limit access to inactive licensee information.
Senate Bills
S. 77 (Schumer): Most importantly, this bill would allow the Attorney General to inspect gun dealers as many times as he wants for any purpose. In addition, the bill tweaks the Firearms Trace System on issues of confidentiality and coordination, and doubles many gun-related prison sentences for a wide variety of offenses.
S. 368 (Biden et al.): This bill would massively expand federal funding for (and hence control of) local law enforcement.
S. 376 (Leahy, Specter, Kyl, Cornyn): This bill would tweak the police concealed carry reciprocity law to, for example, (1) expand its provisions to retired police who had served 10 years (rather than 15), and (2) allow competency certification by “a certified firearms instructor” (as opposed to the state).
S. 378 (Leahy, Specter, Reid, Durbin, Cornyn, Kennedy, Collins, Hatch, Schumer): This bill would dramatically expand federal funding for law enforcement resources to guard federal and state judges, prosecutors, jurors, and other persons involved in the judicial process — and would expand criminal penalties for certain related offenses, including, for instance, placing a false lien on a judge’s home.
S. 388 (Thune, Nelson, Sununu, Inhofe, Coburn, Burr, Martinez, Crapo, Baucus, Cornyn, Dole, Craig, Lott): This is the NRA-backed version of national concealed carry reciprocity. It would set “national standards” for recognition of concealed carry permits, but would provide no relief in cases of states like Vermont that don’t require permits as a condition of concealed carry.
S. 456: Although differing in details, like H.R. 880, this bill would treat firearms offenses like Mafia crimes.
S. 607 (Vitter): This bill would create a 15-year prison for “forcibly… resist[ing]” law enforcement personnel during an emergency with a “weapon.”
S. 1001 (Hutchinson et al.): This bill would repeal the D.C. gun ban.
S. 1237 (Lautenberg): This bill would, at the sole discretion of the Attorney General, make you a “prohibited person” if he “suspects” you of being a terrorist. The Attorney General is specifically authorized to refuse to tell you why he has made you a “prohibited person.”
S. 1316 (Feinstein): This bill would overturn U.S. v. Small and would make persons convicted of felonies in foreign courts — including political offenses and actions not unlawful in the U.S. — a “prohibited person” unless they can affirmatively establish that the conviction violated “fundamental fairness” or that the activity would be legal (and not just a felony) anywhere in the U.S.
S. 1331 (Feinstein, Kennedy, Levin, Menendez, Mikulski, Clinton, Durbin, Boxer, Lautenberg, Schumer, Dodd): This bill would treat a rifle firing a .50 BMG caliber cartridge like a bomb, grenade, or missile for purposes of federal law.
S. 1860: This comprehensive crime bill contains a number of anti-gun provisions, including sections which would:
expand penalties for certain “prohibited persons” offenses;
expand the rebuttable presumption against release of persons (such as PTSD veterans charged with firearms possession) who have been charged with “firearms offenses,” but who have not been convicted of anything;
extend the federal statute of limitations for “violent crime offenses” and terrorism offenses;
include “criminal street gang” language which would treat many minor gun offenses like criminal “racketeering” crimes;
dramatically expand federal abilities to enact civil and criminal forfeiture.
S. 2237: This bill, which would dramatically expand the role of the federal government in going after ordinary street crime, contains, inter alia, “criminal street gang” language which would treat many minor gun offenses like criminal “racketeering” crimes.
Max didnt take his/her medications today… Max is on an irrational run here… At this rate, my dfanger warnings about gun owners like Max, look real well grounded in FACT…
Max cannot show where I have called for a BAN on any guns… Max just gets on his one trick pony, and rides!!
You probably couldn’t even tell me why “cop killer bullets” are called that, where the term came from, or what would make a bullet a “cop killing” one.
Yet you try to say they should be banned?
What a fool you are. Drink the purple Kool-Aid like a good little liberal sheep.
H.R. 2424 (Paul): This bill would repeal the 1996 “gun-free school zones” law, which prohibits, in many instances, bringing a gun within 1000 feet of a school.
I was worried about that one max not enough kindergarteners get to bring they’re tech 9’s to show and tell.
Max, how would you define “Well-regulated Militia?? Any bullet capable of piercing body armor on a police officer, SHOULD be banned!! With severe penalties for ownership!!
“But what the NRA was counting on was that the issue would blow over. After all, the bill’s primary constituency — the police — were, up to that time, close friends of the NRA and they were disorganized as a lobbying organization and split between rank and file and the officers.
But the NRA miscalculated the effects. While the NRA had long publicized its close relationship with the police, now it was the opposition’s turn, and Handgun Control was running ads in police trade magazines calling on the police to “Help Stop the Cop-Killers.” The campaign was successful and the NRA reacted in it’s standard manner (see “The Ultimate Lobbying Machine”) — it sent a mailing to its membership claiming the effort was part of the plot to separate gun owners from their guns:
“Mark my words, the so-called ‘cop-killer” bullet issue is a Trojan Horse waiting outside the gun owners’ doors. If the anti-gunners have their way, this highly publicized and emotionalized issue will be used to enact a backdoor, national gun control scheme…. The anti-gun forces will go to any lengths to void your rights to keep and bear arms…”/3/
Meanwhile, in an effort to lessen the damage the NRA position had its relationship with the police and because it wanted their support in its primary legislative goal of gutting GCA’68 that was starting as the McClure Volkmer Bill (it would be passed several years later, with some modifications, as the Firearm Owners’ Protective Act of 1988), it sat down behind closed doors with the officials from the Treasury and Justice department to craft a minimalist bill. This bill was presented to the the police as a take it or leave it bill (they weren’t told it had been authored by the NRA) and, with the Biaggi bill going nowhere, they supported the “administration” measure. In spite of the “as is” demand, the bill eventually passed with little fanfare.
The NRA calculation that the damage its opposition had caused might have been correct, except for two problems: 1) it taught the police a lesson about organized lobbying, and even as it was trying to mend fences, it was launching new attacks on specific police officers who opposed its efforts to block “plastic guns” and McClure Volkmer.
It was Police Chief Neil Behan (of Baltimore) who was puzzled by the NRA’s claim that police organizations backed McClure-Volkmer. He checked and found no such support had been given. Recalling the battle over the cop-killer bullets, he organized an umbrella organization, the Law Enforcement Steering Committee (LESC), to provide for coordination and cover for the individual officers and chiefs.”
1. Cop killer bullets are treated with a teflon-like substance so that they can easily penetrate bullet-proof vests.
They have no purpose other than killing law-enforcement personnel, hence the name “cop killer,” but thank GOD! the NRA makes sure they’re legal and available.
2. Max,
Fer heaven’s sake, man. Slow day in Iowa.
Dumb question . . . every day is a slow day in Iowa.
3. Both FrmGrrl and Max work up fake outrage over Obama’s “bitter rural people” comment.
Favors banning 1/2 the guns sold today.
Favors more gun laws restricting gun sales.
Favors free health care and raising all our taxes.
Even favors Welfare, Medicaid, and Social Security for illegal immigrants.
Favors an amnesty program for illegal immigrants.
Went to both Muslim and Catholic schools and now attends the United Church of Christ?
How do you know this?
You do not know anything about what Mr. Obama supports because you obviously haven’t taken the time to read or listen to him or his positions. Mr. Obama would talk to you and listen to your concerns-he is doing that all over the state. Do you have the ability to have an intelligent conversation with another person or are you so afraid to actually have your assumptions challenged and learn something that you will remain misinformed and embarrassingly ignorant on what Senator Obama favors.
PS-Even if he did support banning certain gun sales-it’s probably because he has seen the damage it has done to our nation’s children, neighborhoods, and cities…You’re being reactionary and selfish to think that anyone (assuming that you are a law-abiding citizen)would restrict your ability to purchase a gun-why not be part of the solution and work to keep guns out of criminal hands instead of only worrying about your self interests on this issue.
Favors banning 1/2 the guns sold today.
Favors more gun laws restricting gun sales.
Favors free health care and raising all our taxes.
Even favors Welfare, Medicaid, and Social Security for illegal immigrants.
Favors an amnesty program for illegal immigrants.
Went to both Muslim and Catholic schools and now attends the United Church of Christ?”
[Des Moines Newspaper -- 200?]
210 Comments
Still hating neocons today.
Well Mom it is just because you have missed Doug Feith all over the airwaves!
He knew what was best, it was everyone else who was wrong! Rumsfield was a great military leader and the world had not seen his like since Alexander the Great.
Colin Powell was the one whom put a monkey wrench in the whole thing and if the State department had kept their fat nose out of it. Everything would have gone fine, oh yeah its Paul Brimers fault too, he was given clear instructions and went his own way!
(Yet funny is the case that no one above Brimer called him on it when it might have made a difference?)
Yeah Feith is a Neo-con and pride of it under the lavender sky in his world.
It s a catch 22, I want to hear what they have to say. Their explaining their actions and logic. But within about ten minutes I shake my head and want to go back to bed!
Good Morning people and Libs!
:)
This could have ramification in the future on other types of legislation including abortion. If the legislature is allowed to stop future legislatures from governing where does it stop?
Lobbyists create a bill that prohibits government oversight.
Attorney general says lawmakers can’t touch state-run gaming.
The eagerness of the Kansas Legislature and Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to embrace gambling as a way of paying for growing government expenditures drove legislators to pass an expanded lottery bill in apparent violation of the Kansas Constitution.
The passage of the bill required lawmakers to do a lot of fancy footwork, including rushing through a vote on a gutted bill created by the gaming industry without debate. Now all of that may have come back to trip them up.
Rep. John Faber, a Brewster Republican and member of the House Rules and Regulations Committee, said Assistant Attorney General Mary Feighny informed committee members this week that they could face misdemeanor charges if they attempt in any way to influence the Gaming Commission or the Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission.
The commission would, in effect, become an autonomous government agency not subject to conventional checks and balances, including, Faber said, legislative oversight.
Faber said committee members were discussing the possibility of sending a letter to the Gaming Commission when Feighny alerted them that such correspondence could put them in jeopardy under Section 31 of the expanded lottery act.
That section makes it a Class A misdemeanor for members of the Kansas Legislature and other specified parties to attempt to influence the state’s gaming regulators.
“Basically with this we can’t even visit with them about the lottery without facing a misdemeanor charge,” Faber said.
Faber, who opposed SB 66, said the current predicament reflected the haste with which legislators rammed through the expanded lottery act last year.
“The original bill was written by the Kansas gaming industry and the legislators who carried it didn’t know what was in it. There were no committee hearings, and they just basically did a gut-and-go on the House floor to get the thing through,” he said.
If, when or how the situation will be resolved is anybody’s guess.
Faber said he expected the attorney general to issue a formal opinion on the impact of Section 31 within a month or so. Until such an opinion is forthcoming, he said a strict interpretation of the bill as written will force the Rules and Regs Committee to take a hands-off approach to the gaming industry.
If that opinion concludes that legislators in fact are in jeopardy of misdemeanor charges if they engage in their oversight responsibility, Faber said it was possible the expanded lottery act could be revisited.
He believes that scenario is highly unlikely, however.
“If they opened up that bill again, it might pass the House but it would never get through the Senate,” Faber said.
In the meantime, the Kansas Supreme Court is expected to review the constitutionality of the expanded lottery act that allowed state-owned gambling facilities.
Faber said he was eagerly awaiting the Supreme Court’s decision.
“I think they’ll say it’s constitutional, but I want to see if they can say it with a straight face,” Faber said. Faber pointed to Article 15, Section 3 of the Kansas Constitution, which states, “Lotteries and the sale of lottery tickets are forever prohibited.”
The Supreme Court is under no deadline to hear the case, although then-Attorney General Paul Morrison asked when he filed the action that the high court act expeditiously.
Thoughts too consider::…
1. Bush will give out departure/exit Pardons when he leaves office.
2. Some in Congress “need” these.
3. Clinton, Obama, and McCain are in the current Congress.
4. Petraeus is in line for a departure/exit Pardon for Tortue/Waterboarding.
5. Cheney needs a Pardon.
6. He can be Impeached, they just wont because they want their Pardons.
7. How much oil has Saudi Arabia pumped from the Iraqi, Saudi, and Iran crude oil underground shelf?? Is this amount within NATO/UN Treaty guidlines or is Bush and Saudi allowed do too us being at WAR??
8. Saddam was found justified by the UN when he attacked Kuwait and proved Saudi was pumping more barrels per day than the treaty allowed.
9. We hung him.
10. We are stealing the Iraqi Oil and we are stealing the Iran Oil.
11. We have lost American lives for oil.
12. We have allowed Congress and BUSH to destroy our country because we are spoiled and lazy.
13. For the People bt the People is a catch phrase.
14. We need to be taught how to be American, yet we demand to be allowed to tell others how to be American when again, we dont know how.
15. We wipe eachother out at all levels and let Congress and Bush win.
16. Why???
17. Where are we United in Statehood if we dont exercise our Rights?
18. Look at our history, Hung/Burned Blacks, Hung Indians, Japanese in concentration camps, Mexicans looked at because they have darker skin, how dare women have the right to vote, babies being raped, people being shot for stealing food, our enviroment is shot, zoo animals in cages, greyhounds slaughtered because they run slow, babies aborted because people change their minds, zero offical sy so in our politics, illegal human research, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, abused soldiers/vets, denied healthcare, overgrounded nursinghomes, abused elderly, starving Americans, people with $Billions. 1000 $Million in a Billion. Go figure, lets stop living blind when we have the ability too see. Thanks as allways, Herbert West III, opinionist.
Too sunflower5, you are correct. The State is notorious for setting up Legistation and selling it out after the fact. “INSIDER TRADING IS INSIDER TRADING”". KPERS was set up as the, Kansas Public Employees Retirement System. It was regulated directly by the States Legislature. It was under Insurance Commissioner Sebelius. It was a State Office. It is know private with “”ZERO”" Legislative Control, Regs or Jurisdiction. The State Treasurer advises to use it for Vision Quest for Public School 401K’s.They then pull accredidation from schools and “re-appropriate” the schools sources to include diverting the 401k”s. Bussinesses force us to use KPERS or we cannot work therre. They buy in and abuse their staff with these lies. Again, the State tells me “they have ZERO Regs, Jurisdiction or say so over this Private Company, KPERS, they are self Regulated”. In this, I cannot get a proper State Disability Check. I have “ZERO” State Representation to fix this problem. I agree, nothing should be privatized, after the State fattens it up thru Extortion/Racketereeing. These are forms of “Racketeering and Etortion”. Herbert West III, opinionist. west.herb@yahoo.com
Interesting article on obama’s comments regarding those rural penn people. Could this be a turning point? Could the honeymoon be over?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080412/pl_politico/9561
Oh, and to quote Alanis “isnt it ironic” that the spam/porn bot put a porn post on the old thread of “blog registration coming”?
goodness. Just trolls and spammers left here after the multiple nics narrowed their numbers.
“ksfarmgrrl” –
I’m still not convinced that “Pee Public Pee Public Pissing” isn’t “Regular.” Or “Sex With Dogs Dog Sex Have Sex With My Dogs And I’ll Shoot you” isn’t really “Nathan.” “Gay Teen Sex with Gay Teen Dogs,” of course, is Parkay.
Steven Davis, if you are reading here…
This is the link I was looking for in regards to electoral college votes. Thanks to Rage for posting the link.
As you can see from both maps, mccain leads both obama and clinton. But last week, clinton was ahead in e.c. votes. It changes frequently.
something for the superdelegates to consider.
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/Apr13.html
Have any of you actually MET john faber?
hehehehehhe. He’s exactly who obama was talking about regarding rural folks.
Buffoon. Just who you THINK far northwest kansas would send to topeka. Repeatedly.
Yet another mossback who needs to spend more time with his family….
MH, I’m thinking it’s got to be a registered user to be so effective. Someone with a grudge against the WE or the editors or the blog?
MH, I’m thinking it’s got to be a registered user to be so effective. Someone with a grudge against the WE or the editors or the blog?
Naw, KFG, just the latest salvo in the Spam Wars. Wordpress blogs are frequently targeted. The spammers use scripts to register the names automatically. In fact,
“Many of them use special blog spamming tools like Trackback Submitter to bypass comment spam protection on popular blogging systems like Movable Type, Wordpress and others.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spam_in_blogs
Not sure how they’re getting around the captcha in the registration process–either through random chance (thrown 10,000 registration attempts at it and see which one guesses the word), or simply thru optical character reading software. Probably the latter.
Aaargh.
“ksfarmgrrl” asks –
“…on obama’s comments regarding those rural penn people. Could this be a turning point? Could the honeymoon be over?”
Who knows? Political campaigns have turned on sillier stuff.
I was surprised that “Meet the Press” aired the whole comment, in context, which would have been altogether different had Obama said “…embraced religion and guns…” rather than “cling to.”
Hardly sounds like a Jerry Ford “Poland isn’t ‘oppressed’” moment. Now that was a screw-up; and positively prescient considering that a few years later the Polish people were in the vanguard of bringing down the Soviet Union.
Whose definition is it? “A ‘gaffe’ is when a politician inadvertantly tells the truth.” Something like that.
We see the small-town lower-to-middle-middle-class frustration Barak talks about every day in this forum. Obama’s “bitter” comments are a metaphor for his candidacy. He was raising money from Silicon Valley millionaires and trying to explain how not all of us are shopping for hot and cold Maseratis. It’s odd that the Clintons — who’ve earned $109 Million since Bill left office — can accuse Obama of “elitism.”
The poster previously known as “J R” represents the frustration Obama speaks to. Like Richard Farinia, he’s “…been down so long it looks like up.”
I understand and respect your objection to Obama based on the McClurkin thing. It’s stinky. But I suspect there’s a sisterhood thing behind your support for Senator Clinton. I understand that, too.
Thing is, I’m such a goddamned moderate I’m perfectly willing to do everything in my power to get a Democrat elected in November. As always, I think Senator Clinton is best fit as a leader in the Senate. I think Obama is the better candidate for lots of reasons. But we’ll see.
We’ll see if the voters of rural Pennsylvania have heard from a candidate who gets it or not.
I know why she’s doing it but have a problem with Senator Clinton trying to convince people she’s an avid duck-hunter. Puh-leeeeeze.
Shame on Obama, why the next thing he may point out is the White American’s are from European descent!
He may even sink so low as saying that the sun is shining at 10 O’clock in the morning. The ruckus that is being raised by his opponents and the MSM indicates they must think that people are shallow and superficial. That we can be easily swayed but the stupid things and not under real differences and issues.
Watch if this works then the Mc Cain camp will release the information that Hillary is a woman!
Of course that would force the Clinton camp to notify the public that Mc Cain is old! Then both will be damned for saying something that is true.
#
Monkeyhawk
Posted April 13, 2008 at 9:24 am | Permalink
“ksfarmgrrl” –
I’m still not convinced that “Pee Public Pee Public Pissing” isn’t “Regular.” Or “Sex With Dogs Dog Sex Have Sex With My Dogs And I’ll Shoot you” isn’t really “Nathan.” “Gay Teen Sex with Gay Teen Dogs,” of course, is Parkay.
————————
What a lovely sentiment.
Actually, you dumbkopft Libs, it’s the trackback messages that are spamming the blog. Disable trackbacks and the problem is solved.
Actually, you dumbkopft Libs, it’s the trackback messages that are spamming the blog. Disable trackbacks and the problem is solved.
No doubt the biggest cause (see my post above), but I wouldn’t count on it getting rid of it entirely.
P.S. MH’s comments, of course, were thoroughly tongue-in-cheek.
Sincerely,
Dog Sex Animal Woof Woof
So when will I see dog/cat sex? I feel so left out as I nevr have seen the spam. OK not exactly left out. Sounds like I am not missing much….
#
Rage
Posted April 13, 2008 at 11:49 am | Permalink
P.S. MH’s comments, of course, were thoroughly tongue-in-cheek.
Sincerely,
Dog Sex Animal Woof Woof
———————
Yeah, when a Lib like MonkeyHock makes a comment like that it’s “tongue-in-cheek.”
Lesser inflammatory comments by someone from the right is classified as flaming, trolling behavior.
Double standards anyone?
But.. but… MH is speaking to an issue, not flaming and trolling a poster…
writercat ;-),
Look at the “latest comments” section on the left side of the screen. The spammers routinely target old posts. Don’t click on the names or you’ll end up in Spamland.
Personally, I think its the TrackBack thingy…
Trackbacks by themselves don’t cause spam, but it’s one thing spammers like to use to spot “fresh meat,” so to speak!
#
Chas
Posted April 13, 2008 at 12:14 pm | Permalink
But.. but… MH is speaking to an issue, not flaming and trolling a poster…
——————————-
Okay, let’s change up the names then, since it’s just speaking to an issue
—————————–
I’m still not convinced that “Pee Public Pee Public Pissing” isn’t “Chas.” Or “Sex With Dogs Dog Sex Have Sex With My Dogs And I’ll Shoot you” isn’t really “Rage.” “Gay Teen Sex with Gay Teen Dogs,” of course, is CapnAmerica.
———————————
There, no one flamed or troll, just speaking to an issue according to Chas…
Rage, I havve noticed that my level of spam porno email has gone down since the Blog went to Sign-in/Registration… IF somebody had managed to hack the Blog for email adfdresses, maybe that has stopped — at least for now…
What point did that prove, Regular?? That you can make an idiot out of yourself?? or what??
if (username) {
username = username.split(”%7c”)[0];
username = username.split(”%7C”)[0];
if (username != “.threshold”) {
insite_name_pref = “0″;
usercookie = readCookie(”userinfo”);
var fnamepos = 1;
var lnamepos = 2;
email = readCookie(”userinfo”).split(”%7C”)[0];
}
}
email = email.replace(’%40′,’@');
switch (insite_name_pref) {
case 1:
username = usercookie.split(”%7C”)[fnamepos] + ” ” + usercookie.split(”%7C”)[lnamepos];
break;
case 2:
username = usercookie.split(”%7C”)[fnamepos];
PRN>chas.txt
#
Chas
Posted April 13, 2008 at 12:22 pm | Permalink
What point did that prove, Regular?? That you can make an idiot out of yourself?? or what??
——–
just speaking to an issue…
Here I thought the official language of Kansas was English… now we got putereze… LOL
Glasgow has still not been found! Missing since 1/28/08.
Now why would the authorities speculate that Clinon’s Library Builder, John Glasgow, committed suicide?
(Vince Foster, Vince Foster, Vince Foster)
Naw, Hillary has nothing to hide.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,338294,00.html
Clinton Library Builder’s CFO Disappears Amid Audit
Sunday, March 16, 2008
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — John Glasgow had a healthy salary, with an opportunity to pick up stock in the construction company where he worked. He was the kind of guy who paid back a $500 bonus he got for completing an anti-smoking program because he started to light up again.
But now Glasgow has been missing since Jan. 28, with his car found abandoned the next day, and family and police say it’s impossible to tell whether he killed himself, was abducted or left to start a new life elsewhere.
“It looks like he’s just walked off,” Stover said.
So, Clinton hired a contractor and is now responsible for everything that contractor has ever done?
I got a great laugh out of this story in today’s newspaper:
Former A.G. Gonzales still hasn’t found work
“What makes Gonzales’ case extraordinary is that former attorneys generals, the government’s chief lawyer, are typically highly sought.”
“Lawyers say perjury allegations concerning testimony about eavesdropping and his role in the politically motivated firing of federal prosecutors are the biggest problems with Gonzales’ resume.”
I’m hoping everyone from this most corrupt administration gets to experience all of life’s difficulties (or worse). It’s the least they all deserve!
Lies, Lies, and yet more Lies!!
Didn’t say that Clinton was responsible for the contractor.
It’s odd though that the contractor for Clinton’s $500 Million Library disappears in the middle of a financial audit.
And for a transparent Presidential Candidate, it’s odd that Hillary Clinton hides everything when it comes to Half a Billion Dollars in donations.
HALF A BILLION DOLLARS! Where’d it come from?
Don’t you want to know who bought the next President?
The WE today had an interesting article (it is an AP article):
“Salmonella found in recalled cereal”
In the article we find:
1. People are getting sick after eating the cereal.
2. Malt-O-Meal is doing a voluntary recall after finding contamination during routine testing.
People are getting sick and this was found during routine testing. Wow.
Then if you look at the “best if used by” dates being recalled you wonder about these “routine test”.
“best if used by” dates being recalled: April 8, 2008 to March 18, 2009.
It appears the “best if used by” date is 12 months after processing, so this stuff has been on the market for 12 months and they are just now doing “routine test”. Or maybe they have known about this for a while and were hoping it would just go away; along with a few dead people.
I would laugh but this is just a little serious.
“Didn’t say that Clinton was responsible for the contractor.” [Max]
Maybe not MAX… But you’re hinting real loud!
>>>>>>>>>>
“Glasgow has still not been found! Missing since 1/28/08.
Now why would the authorities speculate that Clinon’s Library Builder, John Glasgow, committed suicide?
(Vince Foster, Vince Foster, Vince Foster)
Naw, Hillary has nothing to hide.” [Max]
I’m hoping everyone from this most corrupt administration gets to experience all of life’s difficulties (or worse). It’s the least they all deserve!
“Sigh. . . Yes , that’s who I am, Ma’am! Now do you want fries with that?” :)
Ran across this stuff and will repost just for Mary:
For 2005 in the US:
12,352 murders with firearms
18,124 total murders
17,002 suicides with firearms
32,637 total suicides
19,656 deaths from accidental falling
23,618 deaths from accidental poisoning
45,343 motor vehicle deaths
846 US soldiers killed in Iraq
2,448,017 total deaths from all causes
http://www.disastercenter.com/cdc/Number%20of%20Deaths%20113%20Causes%202005.html
And 789 accidental deaths from firearms in 2005.
plus 12,352 murders with firearms
plus 17,002 suicides with firearms =
30,143 total deaths using firearms in 2005
Obama is an elitist snob, who will ban the guns of the bitter small town people in America!
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/13/obama.clinton/
“You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. …
“And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are going to regenerate and they have not,” he said.
“And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations,” he also said.
Tucker Bounds — spokesman for McCain, the senator from Arizona — also said that the reverence for faith and the Second Amendment in the United States are “cornerstone customs” and that Obama’s “dismissal of those values is revealing.”
“Barack Obama’s elitism allows him to believe that the American traditions that have contributed to the identity and greatness of this country are actually just frustrations and bitterness.”
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/13/obama.clinton/
Guns, guns, and more guns… goes along with the Lies, lies, and more lies!!
Doesnt look like Obama said anything wrong there, Max…
Translation of Obama’s apology: Ah, I didn’t polish my words effectively enough to hide what I really think!
LIE! LIE! LIE!
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/13/obama.clinton/
Sen. Barack Obama on Saturday tried to clarify what he meant when he said some small-town Pennsylvanians are “bitter” people who “cling to guns and religion.”
Sen. Barack Obama told a newspaper if he offended anyone, he deeply regrets it.
“I didn’t say it as well as I should have,” Obama admitted in Muncie, Indiana, on Saturday, the day after he first defended his comments, “because the truth is that these traditions that are passed on from generation to generation — those are important.”
The Illinois senator made the controversial comments at a California event that was closed to the media last Sunday.
Obama defended his point of view amid intensified criticism from Democratic rival Hillary Clinton and presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain that’s he’s elitist and out of touch.
“Obviously, if I worded things in a way that made people offended, I deeply regret that,” Obama said Saturday in an interview with the Winston-Salem Journal
It is interesting that Max seems intent on proving Obama right.
“What’s the matter with Kansas?”
Of course to a gun banner Liberal Socialist Democrat like Chas, Obama said nothing wrong!
LOL!
Where did Obama say he wants to take away guns?? Doesnt look like that to me!!
Somebody need to cvontrol you people Max… You gun toters can be most dangerous!!
Here’s a parable on how best to handle the “dirt” Max loves to dish out:
One day a farmer’s donkey fell down into a well. The animal cried piteously for hours as the farmer tried to figure out what to do. Finally he decided the animal was old, that the well needed to be covered anyway and that it just wasn’t worth retrieving the donkey. So he invited all his neighbors to come over and help him. They all grabbed a shovel and began to shovel dirt into the well. At first, the donkey realized what was happening and cried horribly. Then, to everyone’s amazement, he quietened down. A few shovel loads later, the farmer finally looked down the well and was astonished at what he saw. With every shovel of dirt that hit his back, the donkey was doing something amazing. He would shake it off and take a step up. As the farmer’s neighbors continued to shovel dirt on top of the animal, he would shake it off and take a step up. Pretty soon, everyone was amazed as the donkey stepped up over the edge of the well and trotted off! Life is going to shovel dirt on you, all kinds of dirt. The trick to getting out of the well is to shake it off and take a step up.
Our tax dollars support the child-rape cult:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/33519.html
FT. WORTH, Tex. _American taxpayers have unwittingly helped finance a polygamist sect that is now the focus of a massive child abuse investigation in West Texas, with a business tied to the group receiving a nearly $1 million loan from the federal government and $1.2 million in military contracts.
The ability of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, or FLDS, to operate and grow is largely dependent on huge contributions from its members and revenue from the businesses they control, according to a former accountant for the church, and government officials in Utah and Arizona, where the sect is primarily based.
One of those businesses, NewEra Manufacturing in Las Vegas, has been awarded more than $1.2 million in federal government contracts, with most of the money coming in recent years from the Defense Department for wheel and brake components for military aircraft.
A large portion of the awards were preferential no-bid or “sole source” contracts because of the company’s classification as a small business, according to online databases that track federal government appropriations.
linda - and Max’s kind of ‘dirt’ makes real good fertilyzer.
It would need to be sanitized first.
good point … and might be toxic to boot …
Has anyone ever had a gun confiscated? Am I missing the let’s take everyone’s guns away movement? Could someone point me to a link showing door to door searches of suspected gun owners? So what gives with max?
Why did it take 10 years to stop the rape and kidnapping of 400 plus children on 1700 acres in “W”s backyard?? “No Child Left Behind my Ass”!!! Herbert West III, opinionist. west.herb@yahoo.com
Chas
Posted April 13, 2008 at 2:27 pm | Permalink
Somebody need to cvontrol you people Max… You gun toters can be most dangerous!!
—————————————————
THE Liberal Agenda: The People need to be controlled!
Look out!
I’ve posted Obama’s anti-gun agenda dozens of times. Shall I do it again?
Attack Max all you want you Libs. Throw all kinds of dirt on ME. I don’t care.
You can’t shut me up. And you can’t hide from the truth!
Be afraid of the truth. Be very afraid.
Most are familiar with the pending US Supreme Court case DC vs. Heller. This is perhaps the biggest Supreme Court challenge to the 2nd Amendment in the history of the USA.
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/?s=dc+v+heller
Did you know that Clinton and Obama BOTH failed to support the Individual Right to Bear Arms in this case?
Here is the Summary from the Amicus Brief (friend of the court opinion) signed by 55 Senators and 250 House members who do support the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution.
For some reason, this wasn’t important enough for Clinton or Obama to sign.
And here’s a link to the actual Brief:
http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/ … 8020800127
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
The Second Amendment provides: “A well
regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Congress adopted that wording and proposed it to the States in 1789. It became part of the Bill of Rights which the States ratified in 1791. As the text and the drafting history demonstrate, the Amendment was intended to guarantee the right of individuals to possess and keep ordinary firearms.
IF you believe in the Individual Right to Bear Arms as described in the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution, then you would certainly support the Amicus Brief signed by 305 members of the US Congress.
Any Presidential candidate who does NOT agree with the 2nd Amendment or any other part of the US Constitution, should not run for President.
For it is the job of the President of the United States to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”.
If Clinton and Obama are not willing to do that, then neither one should accept the job of President.
But don’t worry, I’m sure neither Clinton nor Obama, will be asked to provide specific reasons why they did not sign-off on the brief supporting the Individual Right to Bear Arms, which WAS signed by 55 other Senators and 250 House members. The Liberal Press is on their side.
Freedom is not an issue for Clinton and Obama. How many times do you hear them talk about Individual Freedom? You see, under their Socialist approach to buy votes through Social programs, there cannot be Individual Freedom. Why?
Because forcing one group of people to support another group of people is robbing the freedom from one group, to enslave the other. If America remains Free, it cannot become Socialist.
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Feder … px?id=3451
John McCain DID stand up for the 2nd Amendment. He signed the Amicus brief.
Obama’s Gun-Ban Agenda is scary:
1. Obama supports gun bans.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_ … ontrol.htm
Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:
Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.
Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms.
Require manufacturers to provide child-safety locks with firearms.
2. Firearms Manufacturers Protection bill. Obama voted against this Bill, which passed and became law. Obama supports lawsuits against gun manufacturers.
http://votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_deta … an_id=9490
S 397: A bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others.
Project Vote Smart’s Synopsis:
Vote to pass a bill that provides liability protection for manufacturers, dealers or importers of firearms or ammunition products, as well as their trade associations, for harm caused by criminal or unlawful misuse.
Max, you are living in fantasy land.. You WANT to have a ban on guns, so you can fight off the government… You WANT to take on the Feds, Max. THAT’s why you and your kind are dangerous…
Show us some link that wants to take your guns… All I have ever supported are controls on gun owners… you know, like cars, and motorcycles, and other items that can kill people… even accidentally…
http://www.gunlawnews.org/Senators/Barack-Obama.html
BARRACK OBAMA’S VOTES AGAINST GUN OWNERS
Lobby Ratings:
Gun Owners of America F
National Rifle Association F (2004)
Voting Record:
Year Link Senate Bill / Amendment Obama Stand
2006
SA4615
Prohibition On Confiscation Of Firearms
Vote for gun owners.
2005 S.397 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act Vote against gun manufacturers twice.
SA1615 Cop Killer Bullet Ban Vote against gun owners.
SA1620 S.397 Exemption for Children Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA1623 Gross Negligence Amendment Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA1626 Child Safety Lock Act of 2005 Vote against gun owners.
SA1644 Update to SA1620 Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA1645 Update to SA1615 Neutral vote.
I hope an opportunity arises where Clinton and Obama are asked these questions:
Let’s hear about Obama and Clinton’s positions on Gun Control.
1. Will they ban hand-guns?
2. Will they ban high-capacity guns, and if so, what is high-capacity?
3. Will they ban semi-automatic guns?
4. Will they sign another Brady Gun Ban Bill?
5. Will they sign bans on ammunition like hollow-points?
6. Will they restrict sales in any way?
7. Will they support nationwide concealed carry?
8. Will they work to ban concealed carry in all states?
There are many in our current US Congress that have a gun-ban agenda. If Clinton or Obama becomes our next President, you can bet that they will support and sign any Gun Control bill passed by Congress.
Here’s a link to a few Gun-Ban proposals just from the current Congress:
HR 1022. Sponsored by Democrats.
See also S1237 introduced and sponsored by Democrats.
For more Gun-Ban bills introduced by the Current Congress see:
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets … &issue=010
It’s amazing how anyone can make the case that no one in Congress is trying to ban guns.
Look how Hillary has flopped in order to disguise her gun ban position on the 2nd Amendment:
http://www.issues2000.org/2008/Hillary_ … ontrol.htm
Backed off a national licensing registration plan on guns
I believe in the Second Amendment. People have a right to bear arms. But I also believe that we can common-sensically approach this, and backed off a national licensing registration plan.
Source: 2008 Democratic debate in Las Vegas Jan 15, 2008
License and register all handgun sales
Hillary Rodham Clinton offered her support for a legislative proposal to license hand guns. The legislation, sponsored by Sen. Charles Schumer, would require anyone who wants to purchase a gun to obtain a state-issued photo gun license. “I stand in support of this common sense legislation to license everyone who wishes to purchase a gun,” Clinton said. “I also believe that every new handgun sale or transfer should be registered in a national registry, such as Chuck is proposing.”
Source: CNN.com Jun 2, 2000
http://www.gunlawnews.org/Senators/Hill … ton-2.html
HILLARY CLINTON’S VOTES AGAINST GUN OWNERS
Year Link Senate Bill / Amendment Clinton Stand
2006
SA4615 Prohibition On Confiscation Of Firearms Vote against gun owners.
2005
S.397 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act Vote against gun owners.
S.527 Protect Law Enforcement Armor Act Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.578 Terrorist Apprehension and Record Retention Act of 2005 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.620 Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2005 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.645 Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2005 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.935 Fifty Caliber Sniper Weapons Regulation Act of 2005 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
SA1615 Cop Killer Bullet Ban Vote against gun dealers and manufacturers.
SA1617 Five-seveN and Armor Piercing Ammunition Ban Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
SA1618 FN Five-SeveN, APA and Risk of Injury Openings Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
SA1619 S.397 Exemption for Police Cosponsor against gun owners. Failed on a voice vote.
SA1620 S.397 Exemption for Children Cosponsor against gun owners. Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA1621 Fifty-Caliber Sniper Weapons Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
SA1623 Gross Negligence Amendment Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA1626 Child Safety Lock Act of 2005 Vote against gun manufacturers.
2004
S.1805 Gun Manufacturer Lawsuit Protection Vote against gun owners.
S.2498 Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization of 2004 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
SA2619 The ‘Cop Killer Bullet Ban’ Vote against gun owners.
SA2620 Trigger Lock Requirement Vote against gun owners.
SA2623 National Concealed Carry for Police For police.
SA2627 SB1805 Exemption for Victims of DC Snipers Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA2628 SB1805 Exemption for Victims of DC Snipers Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA2629 SB1805 Exemption for Police Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA2630 SB1805 Exemption for Police Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA2631 Gross Negligence Amendment to SB1805 Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA2635 To modify the definition of ‘reasonably foreseeable’. Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA2636 Close ‘Gun Show Loophole’ - restrict private sale of firearms Vote against gun owners.
SA2637 Extend the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban Vote against gun owners.
2003
S.22 Justice Enhancement and Domestic Security Act of 2003 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.1034 Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2003 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.1431 Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.1774 Terrorist Firearms Detection Act of 2003 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.1807 Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2003 Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
2001
S.16 21st Century Law Enforcement, Crime Prevention, and Victims Assistance Act Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
S.890 McCain / Lieberman Gun Show Loophole Bill Cosponsor against gun owners. No votes taken.
SA1231 Kill a HUD Gun Buyback Program Vote against gun owners.
Hillary and Barrack are Gun-shy of the gun issue. Funny, they aren’t shy about anything else.
They are afraid of alienating the 100 million gun-owners in America. If their true colors are shown by the mass media, they cannot win the election in November.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=4303968
But so far, the Democratic presidential hopefuls have offered no solutions or preventive measures to combat this problem. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., offered his sympathies, but specified no new ideas to enforce gun control in his home state of Illinois. “I’ve said before, and continue to believe, that we need to do a more effective job of enforcing our gun laws,” he said, speaking in Milwaukee, Wis., on Friday.
Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., offered similarly vague statements. “We just have to figure out how we are going to get smart about protecting our kids,” she said.
Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Organization, a grassroots effort to prevent gun violence, says we need leadership from both Clinton and Obama on this issue.
But the candidates are quick to remember what happened to Al Gore in 2000. Gore lost West Virginia, in large part, because of negative ads paid for by the NRA. “I think a lot of candidates and politicians are afraid of getting the gun lobby upset,” said Helmke. “They fear that talking about guns, it’s gonna lose them elections.”
HillaryClinton.com is noticeably gun shy; she lists her views on plenty of issues, but not gun control. However, she’s spoken out about protecting the Second Amendment — the right to bear arms.
Obama thinks the 2nd Amendment is about “hunting” and “target shooting”.
Again, Clinton and Obama are strangely Silent or Missing, on Gun Control. (Hiding their agenda.)
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/edito … n_control/
Missing on gun control
February 19, 2008
BARACK OBAMA offers hope and Hillary Clinton offers solutions, but they offer little of either on gun control.
“As a former constitutional law professor, Barack Obama understands and believes in the constitutional right of Americans to bear arms. He will protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport, and use guns for the purposes of hunting and target shooting.”
Obama and Clinton are trying SO HARD to stay out of the gun control debate - less their gun-ban agenda be exposed.
You see this? The “illegal guns” cause the crime. The person shooting the gun is not responsible. Implication - Get rid of the guns.
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/edito … n_control/
Clinton said this year in a Nevada debate, “Illegal guns are the cause of so much death and injury in our country. I am also a political realist and I understand that the political winds are very powerful against doing enough to try to get guns off the street, get them out of the hands of young people.”
YES, THE DEMOCRATS WANT TO BAN YOUR GUNS!
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=213&issue=019
McCarthy Bill Bans Millions More Guns Than The Infamous Clinton Gun Ban
On Feb. 14, 2007, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) introduced H.R. 1022, a bill with the stated purpose, “to reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes.” McCarthy`s choice of words warrants explanation.
Obviously, what she means by “assault weapons ban” is the now-discredited Clinton Gun Ban of 1994. Congress allowed the ban to expire in 2004 for multiple reasons, including the fact that studies by the Congressional Research Service, congressionally-mandated studies, and studies by state and local law enforcement agencies showed that guns affected by the ban had been used in only a small percentage of crime, before and after the ban was imposed.
Reauthorizing the Clinton ban would be bad enough. The guns that it temporarily banned–very widely used for target shooting, hunting and home protection–are still used in only a small percentage of crime. But McCarthy`s “other purposes” would make matters even worse. H.R. 1022 would ban every gun banned by the Clinton ban, plus millions more guns, including:
Every gun made to comply with the Clinton ban. (The Clinton ban dictated the kinds of grips, stocks and attachments new guns could have.
Manufacturers modified new guns to the Clinton requirements. H.R. 1022 would ban the modified guns too.
Guns exempted by the Clinton ban. (Ruger Mini-14s and -30s, and Ranch Rifles; .30 cal. carbines; and fixed-magazine, semi-automatic, center-fire rifles that hold more than 10 rounds.)
All semi-automatic shotguns. (E.g., Remington, Winchester, Beretta and Benelli, used for hunting, sport shooting and self-defense. H.R. 1022 would ban them because they have “any characteristic that can function as a grip,” and would also ban their main component, called the “receiver.”)
All detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles-including, for example, the ubiquitous Ruger 10/22 .22 rimfire-because they have “any characteristic that can function as a grip.
Target shooting rifles. (E.g., the three centerfire rifles most popular for marksmanship competitions: the Colt AR-15, the Springfield M1A and the M1 “Garand.”)
Any semi-automatic shotgun or rifle an Attorney General one day claims isn`t “sporting,” even though the constitutions of the U.S. and 44 states, and the laws of all 50 states, recognize the right to use guns for defense.
Damn, diahrrea of the keyboard Max… Geez!!
You listed these >>>>
“SA1615 Cop Killer Bullet Ban Vote against gun owners.
SA1620 S.397 Exemption for Children Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA1623 Gross Negligence Amendment Vote against gun manufacturers.
SA1626 Child Safety Lock Act of 2005 Vote against gun owners.”
Those look like GOOD votes Max… You gun owners are fanatics… Anybody with an ounce of brains would vote against cop killer bullets… and vote for mandatory child safety locks… And votes against certain gun manufacturer proposals…
Good grief, BAR OWNERS have to live with, and work around “cram shop laws” — They can be a nuisance… but they are there for the SAFETY of the general public, as well as the drinker at the Bar!!
After all, the 2nd Amendment DOES use the words “well-regulated” Without regulation, there would be sheer chaos!!
Chas, you have already stated you want the Feds to control the people.
You want that Chas. Not me.
I want to be left alone, to have my Constitutional Rights and God given rights of Freedom maintained.
Chas you would have guns banned to ensure that your beloved Government has complete control over the people. That’s the only way you can ensure that Socialism is enacted across all of America. You want to steal from the rich and give to the poor. And you know the people will not allow that to happen, if they maintain their right to bear arms.
The 2nd Amendment is in place Chas, to protect freedom-loving Americans from people like you.
So what gives with max?
——————-
max who?
You mean whoever that is that posts so many long uninteresting posts we’re in danger of exhausting our supply of scroll grease?
Shake off the dirt and step up!
How about this gun-banner?
This look good to you too?
Anti-Gun Legislation in the 110th Congress
S. 77, The Firearms Dealer Harassment Act
Sen. Charles Schumer, (D-N.Y.) has introduced S. 77, the “Anti-Gun Trafficking Penalties Enhancement Act of 2007.” A more accurate title would be the “Firearms Dealer Harassment Act.”
Here`s why:
First, S.77 would require that confidential Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) records on firearms traces be turned over–on demand–to any government entity, for any purpose. (Currently, information from firearms traces can only be used in bona fide criminal investigations by law enforcement agencies.)
S. 77 would require that these records be made available to any government agency for any reason, or for no stated reason whatsoever, without any justification or respect for the privacy rights of law-abiding gun owners.
S. 77 would also unleash the federal government to harass FFL holders at will, for any reason, as often as it chooses.
Finally–and perhaps most ominously–S. 77 would define certain firearm violations as “racketeering activity” under the “Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act” (RICO), allowing massive criminal penalties and civil suits.
For more information on S. 77 see
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=210&issue=023.
FIREARMS LEGISLATION IN THE 110th CONGRESS
Analysis by Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102
Springfield, VA 22151
(703)321-8585, fax: 321-8408
House Bills
H.R. 73 (Bartlett): This bill would affirm the right of Americans to keep and bear arms for defense of themselves, their families, and their homes.
H.R. 96 (Castle, Shays, Kirk): This bill would require Instantchecks for private transactions at gun shows. If the sponsor “knowingly” fails to notify every attendee of his responsibilities under the Brady Law (new 18 U.S.C. 932(a)(2)(D) and new 18 U.S.C. 924(a)(8)(B)), every board member of the sponsor could be fined $250,000 for every person not notified and sent to prison for five years per violation. And, while the “knowing” requirement is an improvement over earlier versions, it is far from certain that a Brady-Law-pamphlet-distributing guard who intentionally leaves his post during a busy time for a bathroom break would not (1) be interpreted as “knowingly” failing to notify attendees, and (2) be interpreted as violating the law vicariously as an agent of every board member of the sponsoring organization. Obviously, at the hands of an anti-gun administration, this has the potential of permanently putting an end to all gun shows.
H.R. 171 (Lee and 16 others): This bill, which would authorize additional funds for school mental health counselors, makes a finding about the need to reduce the number of weapons in schools. Such a finding would demonize Utah teachers and administrators — who are allowed, by law, to possess firearms in schools — as well as, other heroes (such as Joel Myrick of Pearl, Mississippi) who have used firearms to stop school massacres and, thus, save the lives of students.
H.R. 203 (Rothman): This bill would interfere with the discretion of states by requiring that police seize firearms of persons suspected of domestic violence, based on “probable cause,” even though no court has heard the case. In addition, it allows a court to permanently bar an individual slapped with a “protective order” from possessing a firearm and to order a search of his home, even though, unlike current federal law, the order was an “ex parte” order with respect to which the individual had no notice, no right to be present, no right to be heard, and no right to an attorney.
H.R. 226 (Stearns): This is the NRA-backed reciprocity bill, which would set a “national standard” allowing persons who have obtained concealed carry licenses to be granted reciprocity in other states. Residents of Vermont, which does not require a license for concealed carry, would not be granted relief under this legislation.
H.R. 254 (Jackson-Lee): This bill would amend the hate crimes law — which prohibits using a firearm to cause bodily injury to any person on account of race or religion — to also include sexual orientation.
H.R. 256 (Jackson-Lee): This bill would:
extend current provisions of 18 U.S.C. 922(x) (making it virtually impossible to legally teach your children the safe and responsible use of firearms) by (1) raising the across-the-board age to 21, (2) covering semiautos, and (3) increasing the penalties;
require FFL’s (including small FFL’s) to keep guns in a government-approved storage facility;
require you to lock up all firearms (making them unavailable for self-defense) — or face a three-year prison sentence if a child gets hold of the firearm and causes bodily injury;
prohibit unaccompanied minors at guns shows; and
spend more money on anti-gun “education” programs.
H.R. 297 (McCarthy): This bill provides, in the form of grants, about $1 billion to the states to “provide the National Instant Criminal Background Check System [NICS] with all records concerning persons who are prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm under subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code, regardless of the elapsed time since the disqualifying event.”
Covered under this bill are records pertaining to the Lautenberg misdemeanor gun ban, lists of persons under indictment, mental health records, records relevant to the identification of illegal aliens and other records.
NICS is the system used by the FBI to conduct a background check prior to a firearm sale by a federally licensed gun dealer. Most people are aware that NICS records include a list of convicted felons, but there are many other categories of persons who are prohibited from possessing firearms for which computerized lists may not be available. It is these categories that are targeted by this bill.
For instance, the bill expands upon the unconstitutional Lautenberg misdemeanor gun ban [18 USC 922 (g)(9)]. This gun ban, passed as an amendment to a 1996 omnibus spending bill and signed into law by President Clinton, was originally introduced by leading anti-gun Senators Frank Lautenberg, Dianne Feinstein, and Edward Kennedy.
Under the Lautenberg ban, people who have committed very minor offenses that include pushing, shoving or, in some cases, merely yelling at a family member can no longer own a firearm for self-defense. The Lautenberg gun ban should be repealed, not expanded.
The bill also seeks to computerize records of persons “under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.” Such persons, though not even convicted of the crime in question, are prohibited from possessing a firearm.
The gun grabbers are seeking to force the states to provide the federal government all of these indictment records, updated quarterly. Given the maxim among those in the legal profession that prosecutors can get a grand jury to “indict a ham sandwich,” this, too, is a gun prohibition that should be repealed, not expanded.
Mental health records are also covered under the McCarthy bill. This could have a significant impact on American servicemen, especially those returning from combat situations and who seek some type of psychiatric care. Often, veterans who have suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder have been deemed as mentally “incompetent” and are prohibited from owning guns under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(4). Records of those instances certainly exist, and, in 1999, the Department of Veterans Administration turned over 90,000 names of veterans to the FBI for inclusion into the NICS background check system.
Mental health records can also have a future impact on young people, as this country trends closer to mandatory mental health screening for students. In a 2003 report by a subcommittee of the President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, the author states that “The problem of emotional disorders in children is large — 20% of all children are affected — and it seems to be growing.” It is unknown how these people will be categorized in the future.
The fact that metal health ‘experts,’ a notoriously anti-gun community, would have a say in who is allowed to possess a firearm is, quite frankly, frightening. Many in the profession would just as soon consider anyone who owns a gun as ‘mentally incompetent.’
Another sobering thought is how computerized data are often mishandled. Consider the disturbing news reports that 25 million Social Security number records of veterans were hacked. The more that our private data gets added into government computers, the more likely we are to have our identity compromised.
Perhaps the provision that would lead to the greatest number of ‘fishing expeditions’ is that related to illegal aliens.
Federal law prohibits illegal aliens from owning guns. The bill requires all relevant data related to who is in this country illegally. But what records pertaining to illegal aliens from the states would be relevant? Perhaps a better question would be, what records are not relevant?
In order to identify illegal aliens, “relevant” records could allow the FBI to demand state tax returns of all citizens, employment records, library records (we’ve already seen how these have been deemed relevant to terrorism investigations), DMV and hospital records — all in the name of making sure that you’re not an illegal.
The sponsor of the bill, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, is one of the most virulent anti-gunners in the entire Congress. Of the 32 cosponsors of the bill in 2006, 31 were GOA “F” rated, one was rated “D.”
H.R. 354 (McCarthy): This bill would spend $965 million a year on trying to figure out why and remedy the fact that schools that ban guns are not safe from “gun violence.”
H.R. 428 (Towns): This bill would require the Consumer Product Safety Commission to ban realistic toy handguns.
H.R. 623 (Rangel): This bill would allow a “nonviolent offender” to have his record expunged if he has complied with a variety of conditions, including obtaining a GED, performing a year of community service, staying free of substance abuse for a year, and not committing any other state or federal offense in the future. A “nonviolent offense” is one which does not involve “the use of a weapon or violence.”
H.R. 660 (Conyers): This bill would dramatically expand federal funding for law enforcement resources to guard federal and state judges, prosecutors, jurors, and other persons involved in the judicial process — and would expand criminal penalties for certain related offenses, including, for instance, placing a false lien on a judge’s home.
H.R. 861 (Stearns): This is the NRA-backed version of national concealed carry reciprocity. It would set “national standards” for recognition of concealed carry permits, but would provide no relief in cases of states like Vermont that don’t require permits as a condition of concealed carry.
H.R. 880 (Forbes, Wolf, Chabot, Coble, Franks, Gallegly, Goodlatte, Pence, Smith): This bill would subject guns to the same sort of mandatory minimum sentencing currently applied to organized crime. You would be sentenced to at least 10 years in prison if “a formal or informal group or association of 3 or more individuals” (such as your family), in relation to the group (e.g., protecting them), commit two or more “gang crimes,” one of which constitutes a “crime of violence” (which could include brandishing a firearm in order to protect your family from a robber). “Gang crimes” include driving within 1000 feet of a school with a firearm and training your kid how to use a handgun without first writing a letter of permission for him to keep on his person while you are training him. Other anti-gun provisions in this bill are section 109 (making it harder for a person charged with a “firearms offense” — including paperwork violations — to be released), section 114 (upping the mandatory penalties for simply owning a gun if you are convicted of a crime of violence — including trying to defend yourself when state law mandates that you retreat), and section 115 (allowing your kid to be prosecuted as an adult if you train him to use a handgun, but he fails to possess a written letter of permission while you are doing so).
H.R. 1022 (McCarthy): This bill would reauthorize the ban on semi-automatic firearms more or less verbatim. It would change the list of explicitly banned firearms to include:
a much broader list of named firearms which are banned;
a semi-auto rifle with detachable magazine capacity that has any one of the following: folding stock, threaded barrel, pistol grip, forward grip, or barrel shroud (the previous ban requires two of these features);
most semi-autos with fixed magazines with more than 10 rounds;
a semi-auto pistol with detachable magazine capacity that has any one of the following: second pistol grip, threaded barrel, barrel shroud, or detachable magazine capacity outside the pistol grip (the previous ban requires two of these features);
a semi-auto shotgun with a revolving cylinder or with folding stock, pistol grip, detachable magazine capacity, or fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds (the previous ban requires two of these features);
many frames, receivers, or conversion kits;
a military- or police-design semi-auto rifle or shotgun not suitable for sporting purposes.
It would also add four additional anti-semi-auto provisions. These would:
expand to semi-autos the provisions in 18 U.S.C. 922(x) making it virtually impossible to legally teach your kid the safe and lawful use of handguns (subjecting you and your kid to a prison sentence, for example, if he does not have a written permission letter from you on his person at the time you are training him);
expand and make statutory an import ban on semi-auto magazines;
require that transfers of semi-autos be through FFL’s; and
prohibit transfer of “any assault weapon with a large capacity ammunition feeding device” and require that an FFL transferring a grandfathered “large capacity ammunition feeding device” report to the Attorney General.
H.R. 1096 (Paul): This bill would (1) repeal the Brady law and the Instantcheck system; (2) repeal federal provisions discriminating against firearms which the government determines to have no “sporting purpose,” and (3) repeal the requirement that trigger locks be purchased by anyone purchasing a handgun from a dealer.
H.R. 1141 (Cannon): This bill would grant amnesty to any veteran with a pre-1968 unregistered automatic firearm.
H. R. 1167 (McCarthy): This bill would prevent anyone whose name turns up on one of the government’s secret “no fly” watch lists from possessing a firearm.
H. R. 1168 (McCarthy): This bill would reverse the Supreme Court’s U.S. v. Small decision by prohibiting firearms possession by any person who has been convicted of a felony in a foreign court, including political felonies by Nazi, Communist, and other totalitarian regimes.
H. R. 1399 (Ross, Souder): This bill would repeal the D.C. gun ban.
H. R. 1582 (Schiff, Bono): This bill would treat your family as a “criminal street gang” if you committed two gun-related offenses — including driving 1,000 feet from a school with a gun in your glove compartment.
H. R. 1592 (Conyers, et al.): This bill would reauthorize federal “hate crimes” legislation extending protections to homosexuals and transvestites and providing for a ten year federal prison sentence for anyone who uses a firearm to “attempt” to cause bodily injury.
H.R. 1593: This bill would reauthorize and expand upon transitional programs for reentry of prisoners into society, focusing particularly on drug offenders.
H.R. 1784 (Engel, McCarthy, Kennedy, et al.): This bill would essentially allow the Attorney General to ban most ammunition by defining as “armor-piercing” any ammunition which may be fired by any type of handgun and is “capable of penetrating body armor” — in accordance with tests in which the AG would solely determine the angle, the distance, the firearm, the number of shots, the quality of the body armor, and the number of penetrations required. H.R. 1791 (Gingrey, Paul, McCotter, Musgrave, Sessions, Rogers, Boozman, Jones, Goode): This bill would require BATFE to make videorecordings of firearms and ammunition testing. H.R. 1859 (McCarthy): This bill would reinstate the ban on “large-capacity” magazines. H.R. 1874 (Andrews): This bill would require firearms importers and manufactures to microstamp all firearms (or insure that they are microstamped), and would require ballistics resting of any firearm in the custody of the U.S. that is suspected of having been used in a crime. Such results would have to be computerized. H.R. 1895 (McCarthy): This bill would:
repeal current appropriations language prohibiting the disclosure of firearms trace information — thereby opening the door to new lawsuits against large firearms dealers;
require that all firearms used in crimes go into the trace database;
apply federal racketeering laws to “prohibited persons” violations.
H.R. 1897 (Paul): This bill would prohibit any federal regulation banning the possession or carrying of a firearm based in whole or in part on the fact that the possession or carrying occurs within a national park.
H.R. 2013 (Blackburn, et al.): This bill would make “technical corrections” in the current federal language prohibiting state regulation of toy “look-alike” guns and replicas.
H.R. 2074 (King of New York): This bill would potentially allow the Attorney General to make anyone on a federal “watch list” a “prohibited person” and to withhold information on why they are prohibited from possessing firearms.
H.R. 2093 (Meehan, Shays): This bill, which is almost identical to legislation GOA helped successfully defeat in the Senate as it pertains to GOA, would require reporting of “grassroots lobbying” (i.e., efforts to influence public opinion) by any group that hires a consultant to influence the public (by, e.g., doing radio broadcasts) and which spends an aggregate of over $100,000 a quarter to influence public opinion.
H.R. 2325 (Gohmert et al.): This bill would:
enhance and federalize crimes dealing with attacks against judges, court personnel, and their families;
allow judges and prosecutors to carry guns and insulate them from some types of liability.
H.R. 2424 (Paul): This bill would repeal the 1996 “gun-free school zones” law, which prohibits, in many instances, bringing a gun within 1000 feet of a school.
H.R. 2640 (McCarthy et al.): This bill would dramatically increase the number of personal records on Americans handed over to the FBI Instant check center in West Virginia and would, for the first time, statutorily make a battle-scarred veteran, a troubled school kid, or a senior with Alzheimer’s a “prohibited person” based solely on a diagnosis.
H.R. 2666 (Rush): This bill would require a firearms license for any person possessing a handgun or semi-auto (whether or not subject to the expired semi-auto ban). The license would be issued by the Attorney General, who would require a thumbprint, a certificate that the person has passed an exam, and a certificate that the firearm will be locked up, among other things. The license will have to be renewed after five years, and all information on transfers will have to be submitted to the Attorney General. Private sales of firearms without an Instant check would be outlawed. In addition, the bill provides for firearms lock-up requirements, unlimited inspections of FFL’s, various and sundry additional firearms-related crimes, and, of course, an exemption of police from its requirements.
H.R. 2726 (Forbes, Gohmert, Smith, Chabot, Buchanan, Boozman): This bill would expand, in modest ways, the circumstances under which current law enforcement personnel (e.g., Amtrak police) or retired law enforcement personnel (after 15 years of service, with firearms certification during the past year) are authorized to carry outside their jurisdiction (with the exception of machine guns and silencers).
H.R. 3142 (Reichert): This bill would:
establish civil penalties for FFL’s who engage in both “minor” and “serious” violations of federal gun laws;
dramatically expand penalties for gun offenses — increasing penalties for —
certain repeat “prohibited persons” offenses to twenty years (and a minimum sentence of 15 years in some cases);
“conspiracy” to commit a federal crime from five years to twenty years (unless this exceeds the penalty for actually committing the crime);
certain racketeering, illegal alien, murder-for-hire, and “other felony crimes of violence”;
expand the rebuttable presumption against release of persons (such as PTSD veterans charged with firearms possession) who have been charged with “firearms offenses,” but who have not been convicted of anything;
extend the federal statute of limitations for “violent crime offenses” and terrorism offenses to ten years.
H.R. 3156: This substantial rewrite of many provisions in the federal crime code would, inter alia, include “criminal street gang” language which would treat many minor gun offenses like criminal “racketeering” crimes.
H.R. 3305 (Paul): This bill would prohibit any federal agency from prohibiting a pilot from carrying a firearm in order to protect his craft.
H.R. 3436 (Reyes): This bill would allow courts to act more leniently with respect to firearms offense sentencing in cases of persons who are “authorized to carry” firearms in connection with their jobs.
H.R. 3462 (Lampson): This bill would:
expand penalties for violent crimes committed during drug trafficking crimes;
expand the rebuttable presumption against release of persons (such as PTSD veterans charged with firearms possession) who have been charged with “firearms offenses,” but who have not been convicted of anything;
extend the federal statute of limitations for “violent crime offenses” and terrorism offenses to eight or ten years, respectively.
H.R. 3474 (McNerney): This bill would expand funds (by $10,000,000 a year) for dealing with “gang crimes,” but would not expand substantive law to attack guns in the same way as other gang-related legislation.
H.R. 3547: This bill would include “criminal street gang” language which would treat many minor gun offenses like criminal “racketeering” crimes.
H.R. 3766 (Norton): This bill would authorize up to $100,000,000 a year for “gun buyback” programs.
H.R. 4128: This bill is a comprehensive rewrite of the federal criminal code, comparable to the one that was killed in 1982 by GOA and NRA because of its dramatic expansion of criminal liability for gun owners.
H.R. 4818 (King of New York, Rangel): This bill would:
impose a 20 year prison sentence on the sale of two or more firearms, e.g., to a “prohibited person” (such as a veteran with PTSD);
expand penalties for things like possession of a stolen firearm or a firearm with an obliterated serial number during the commission of a felony;
expand sharing of gun trace information.
H.R. 4900 (King): This bill would do the following:
Section 101: Current subsections 18 U.S.C. 923(e) and (f) allow BATF to revoke FFL’s, after notification and the opportunity for a hearing. Section 101 would create a bifurcated structure:
“non-serious” violations could trigger civil penalties of up to $1,000 ($5,000 per inspection) and a suspension of not more than 30 days;
“serious” violations could trigger $2,500 civil penalties ($15,000 per inspection), up to 90 days suspension, or revocation. “Serious” violations would consist of, inter alia, actions which could result in the acquisition of a firearm by a prohibited person or interfere with a criminal investigation. There would be a five-year statute of limitations, and there would be procedures for contesting penalties (before an administrative law judge in the case of minor penalties and before a court in the case of revocation). These procedures would be relatively pro-defendant — with a bar to bringing a civil charge after an unsuccessful attempt at a criminal prosecution.
Section 102: This section would allow an FFL applicant to supplement his application, in the case of problems, before final denial.
Section 103: One of the big battles in McClure-Volkmer was over “scienter” (state-of-mind) requirements. In particular, there has been a tendency to diminish what is required for an individual to act “knowingly” or “willfully.” This section would define “willfully” to mean “intentionally,” which is about the most culpable state-of-mind requirement in existence.
Section 104: This section would require BATF to establish guidelines for conducting investigations.
Section 105: This section would prohibit purchaser information concerning a non-prohibited person from being shared with any other agency –unless the agency agrees not to share it with anyone but a court, prosecutor, or law enforcement agency.
Section 106: This section would give an FFL with a revoked license 60 days (with the possibility of an extension) to liquidate his inventory.
Section 107: This section would allow more flexibility in permitting an FFL with a revoked license to transfer his business to another FFL without automatically assuming that the violation giving rise to the revocation continues — and with an opportunity for the acquiring FFL to cure any defects.
Section 108: This section would decriminalize a non-material (i.e., minor and irrelevant) “false entry” in FFL records.
Section 109: This section broadens federal supervision of state oversight of explosives.
Sections 201 through 210:
make minor non-controversial corrective changes to federal gun law;
allow testing and security corporations to test machine guns without getting a license;
make the Smith amendment permanent;
eliminate the provision of 18 U.S.C. 922(x) which would allow a parent to be prosecuted because his son possessed a handgun without a written permission slip — even if the parent were physically present;
limit sharing of trace information;
expand the ability to import gun parts; and
limit access to inactive licensee information.
Senate Bills
S. 77 (Schumer): Most importantly, this bill would allow the Attorney General to inspect gun dealers as many times as he wants for any purpose. In addition, the bill tweaks the Firearms Trace System on issues of confidentiality and coordination, and doubles many gun-related prison sentences for a wide variety of offenses.
S. 368 (Biden et al.): This bill would massively expand federal funding for (and hence control of) local law enforcement.
S. 376 (Leahy, Specter, Kyl, Cornyn): This bill would tweak the police concealed carry reciprocity law to, for example, (1) expand its provisions to retired police who had served 10 years (rather than 15), and (2) allow competency certification by “a certified firearms instructor” (as opposed to the state).
S. 378 (Leahy, Specter, Reid, Durbin, Cornyn, Kennedy, Collins, Hatch, Schumer): This bill would dramatically expand federal funding for law enforcement resources to guard federal and state judges, prosecutors, jurors, and other persons involved in the judicial process — and would expand criminal penalties for certain related offenses, including, for instance, placing a false lien on a judge’s home.
S. 388 (Thune, Nelson, Sununu, Inhofe, Coburn, Burr, Martinez, Crapo, Baucus, Cornyn, Dole, Craig, Lott): This is the NRA-backed version of national concealed carry reciprocity. It would set “national standards” for recognition of concealed carry permits, but would provide no relief in cases of states like Vermont that don’t require permits as a condition of concealed carry.
S. 456: Although differing in details, like H.R. 880, this bill would treat firearms offenses like Mafia crimes.
S. 607 (Vitter): This bill would create a 15-year prison for “forcibly… resist[ing]” law enforcement personnel during an emergency with a “weapon.”
S. 1001 (Hutchinson et al.): This bill would repeal the D.C. gun ban.
S. 1237 (Lautenberg): This bill would, at the sole discretion of the Attorney General, make you a “prohibited person” if he “suspects” you of being a terrorist. The Attorney General is specifically authorized to refuse to tell you why he has made you a “prohibited person.”
S. 1316 (Feinstein): This bill would overturn U.S. v. Small and would make persons convicted of felonies in foreign courts — including political offenses and actions not unlawful in the U.S. — a “prohibited person” unless they can affirmatively establish that the conviction violated “fundamental fairness” or that the activity would be legal (and not just a felony) anywhere in the U.S.
S. 1331 (Feinstein, Kennedy, Levin, Menendez, Mikulski, Clinton, Durbin, Boxer, Lautenberg, Schumer, Dodd): This bill would treat a rifle firing a .50 BMG caliber cartridge like a bomb, grenade, or missile for purposes of federal law.
S. 1860: This comprehensive crime bill contains a number of anti-gun provisions, including sections which would:
expand penalties for certain “prohibited persons” offenses;
expand the rebuttable presumption against release of persons (such as PTSD veterans charged with firearms possession) who have been charged with “firearms offenses,” but who have not been convicted of anything;
extend the federal statute of limitations for “violent crime offenses” and terrorism offenses;
include “criminal street gang” language which would treat many minor gun offenses like criminal “racketeering” crimes;
dramatically expand federal abilities to enact civil and criminal forfeiture.
S. 2237: This bill, which would dramatically expand the role of the federal government in going after ordinary street crime, contains, inter alia, “criminal street gang” language which would treat many minor gun offenses like criminal “racketeering” crimes.
Max didnt take his/her medications today… Max is on an irrational run here… At this rate, my dfanger warnings about gun owners like Max, look real well grounded in FACT…
Max cannot show where I have called for a BAN on any guns… Max just gets on his one trick pony, and rides!!
At minimum an unhealthy obsession.
Does, as someone pointed out upthread, prove Obama’s recent statements.
Did anyone actually read those posts? Thought not.
Chas,
You probably couldn’t even tell me why “cop killer bullets” are called that, where the term came from, or what would make a bullet a “cop killing” one.
Yet you try to say they should be banned?
What a fool you are. Drink the purple Kool-Aid like a good little liberal sheep.
H.R. 2424 (Paul): This bill would repeal the 1996 “gun-free school zones” law, which prohibits, in many instances, bringing a gun within 1000 feet of a school.
I was worried about that one max not enough kindergarteners get to bring they’re tech 9’s to show and tell.
Max, how would you define “Well-regulated Militia?? Any bullet capable of piercing body armor on a police officer, SHOULD be banned!! With severe penalties for ownership!!
“But what the NRA was counting on was that the issue would blow over. After all, the bill’s primary constituency — the police — were, up to that time, close friends of the NRA and they were disorganized as a lobbying organization and split between rank and file and the officers.
But the NRA miscalculated the effects. While the NRA had long publicized its close relationship with the police, now it was the opposition’s turn, and Handgun Control was running ads in police trade magazines calling on the police to “Help Stop the Cop-Killers.” The campaign was successful and the NRA reacted in it’s standard manner (see “The Ultimate Lobbying Machine”) — it sent a mailing to its membership claiming the effort was part of the plot to separate gun owners from their guns:
“Mark my words, the so-called ‘cop-killer” bullet issue is a Trojan Horse waiting outside the gun owners’ doors. If the anti-gunners have their way, this highly publicized and emotionalized issue will be used to enact a backdoor, national gun control scheme…. The anti-gun forces will go to any lengths to void your rights to keep and bear arms…”/3/
Meanwhile, in an effort to lessen the damage the NRA position had its relationship with the police and because it wanted their support in its primary legislative goal of gutting GCA’68 that was starting as the McClure Volkmer Bill (it would be passed several years later, with some modifications, as the Firearm Owners’ Protective Act of 1988), it sat down behind closed doors with the officials from the Treasury and Justice department to craft a minimalist bill. This bill was presented to the the police as a take it or leave it bill (they weren’t told it had been authored by the NRA) and, with the Biaggi bill going nowhere, they supported the “administration” measure. In spite of the “as is” demand, the bill eventually passed with little fanfare.
The NRA calculation that the damage its opposition had caused might have been correct, except for two problems: 1) it taught the police a lesson about organized lobbying, and even as it was trying to mend fences, it was launching new attacks on specific police officers who opposed its efforts to block “plastic guns” and McClure Volkmer.
It was Police Chief Neil Behan (of Baltimore) who was puzzled by the NRA’s claim that police organizations backed McClure-Volkmer. He checked and found no such support had been given. Recalling the battle over the cop-killer bullets, he organized an umbrella organization, the Law Enforcement Steering Committee (LESC), to provide for coordination and cover for the individual officers and chiefs.”
http://www.saneguns.org/gunlobby/nra_cops.html
Max wants to fight the Feds over Gun Control… Max is really anti-government!!
1. Cop killer bullets are treated with a teflon-like substance so that they can easily penetrate bullet-proof vests.
They have no purpose other than killing law-enforcement personnel, hence the name “cop killer,” but thank GOD! the NRA makes sure they’re legal and available.
2. Max,
Fer heaven’s sake, man. Slow day in Iowa.
Dumb question . . . every day is a slow day in Iowa.
3. Both FrmGrrl and Max work up fake outrage over Obama’s “bitter rural people” comment.
Nice company you keep there, Grrl.
Max — You LIKE Des Moines???
Max Grobnik wrote:
Well, Obama:
Favors banning 1/2 the guns sold today.
Favors more gun laws restricting gun sales.
Favors free health care and raising all our taxes.
Even favors Welfare, Medicaid, and Social Security for illegal immigrants.
Favors an amnesty program for illegal immigrants.
Went to both Muslim and Catholic schools and now attends the United Church of Christ?
How do you know this?
You do not know anything about what Mr. Obama supports because you obviously haven’t taken the time to read or listen to him or his positions. Mr. Obama would talk to you and listen to your concerns-he is doing that all over the state. Do you have the ability to have an intelligent conversation with another person or are you so afraid to actually have your assumptions challenged and learn something that you will remain misinformed and embarrassingly ignorant on what Senator Obama favors.
PS-Even if he did support banning certain gun sales-it’s probably because he has seen the damage it has done to our nation’s children, neighborhoods, and cities…You’re being reactionary and selfish to think that anyone (assuming that you are a law-abiding citizen)would restrict your ability to purchase a gun-why not be part of the solution and work to keep guns out of criminal hands instead of only worrying about your self interests on this issue.
[From Dese ZMoines Newspaper - 200?]
Max only wrote this much >>>>
“Max Grobnik wrote:
Well, Obama:
Favors banning 1/2 the guns sold today.
Favors more gun laws restricting gun sales.
Favors free health care and raising all our taxes.
Even favors Welfare, Medicaid, and Social Security for illegal immigrants.
Favors an amnesty program for illegal immigrants.
Went to both Muslim and Catholic schools and now attends the United Church of Christ?”
[Des Moines Newspaper -- 200?]
Obama never went to a Muslim school.
That’s just a lie.
Really, Max, I wish you lived in Wichita so I could call you a “f***ing liar” to your face, because that’s what you are.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp
The schools that Obama attended in Indonesia were public schools that had a lot of Muslim students, since most people there are Islamic.
They were not “madrassas” or schools for Islamic studies.