Rocky Mountain Gun Owners Alert: Kill 1805 Immediately

Rocky Mountain Gun Owners ^ | 02/26/04 | Rocky Mountain Gun Owners

[Copernicus]

Rocky Mountain Gun Owners

EMERGENCY ALERT - S.1805 has Gun Control attached -- KILL IT!

Feb. 26, 2004, 1300 hrs Mountain - As predicted, S.1805, the Lawsuit Liability bill, is being debated on the Senate Floor right now (at the behest of its sponsor, Idaho Senator Larry Craig).

And late last night, Senator Larry Craig (a board member of the NRA) worked with rabid anti-gunner Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) to come up with a "Unanimous Consent Agreement" which allows a large number of gun control amendments to be offered to S.1805.

By pushing this bill to be heard on the floor, and agreeing to hear a large number of gun control amendments (listed below), Senator Craig has opened up Pandora's Box of Gun Control.

That means you MUST call your US Senators immediately, even if you called them yesterday.

Senator Wayne Allard can be reached at (202) 224-5941.

Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell can be reached at (202) 224-5852.

Urge both of Colorado's Senators to VOTE AGAINST S.1805, now that it has gun control on it and is likely to contain more.

As this alert is being written, the Senate just passed an amendment (by 70-27, for story on this amendment click here, or here for full text) to require Trigger locks (we do not have the language, but will shortly) and is moving toward more gun control. It's a federal government intrusion on your right to self-defense, and FAR outweighs any good S.1805's original language would do.

And as this is being written, Sen. Teddy Kennedy is offering an amendment to ban "Cop Killer Bullets."

After agreeing to the "Unanimous Consent Agreement", Sen. Larry Craig said "Some of these amendments could pass." This C-Span2 admission is understating it -- some of these gun control amendments WILL pass. In fact, one already has, and others gun control advocates are lining up to join in on the "fun".

NRA Board Member Sen. Larry Craig has agreed to allow a slated list of gun control amendments to S.1805. These include, but are not limited to, the following unspecified gun controls:

Boxer - new Federal rules for Gun locks

Campbell - Cop-Only Nationwide Carry

Kennedy - Cop Killer Bullets

Mikulski - Snipers

McCain-Reed - Gun Show ban

Feinstein - Assault Weapons ban

Frist/Craig - Cop Killer bullets (a toned down, yet still anti-gun rights version of Kennedy's amendment)

And these are only the amendments that have been announced. Others almost certainly will be floated, and maybe passed.

Does this constitute proof that the NRA "struck a deal" to allow gun controls to pass? Of course, they claim they didn't cut any deals.

But ask these questions:

1. Have you received an e-mail from NRA-ILA urging voting against S.1805 IF it gets gun control on it? They KNOW quite well that this bill will have gun control on it, and have known it for weeks. Instead, they play inside baseball and tell gun owners "Trust us -- we have a plan", trusting in their own cleverness to circumvent the anti-gunners amendments. That is the same thing they said on the McCain-Fiengold Campaign Finance Deform bill (which stripped gun owners of their 1st Amendment rights) as well as the first Assault Weapons and High-capacity magazines ban bill, Brady Registration Checks, Lautenberg Gun Ban, etc, etc.

That's a failed strategy, and should be abandoned.

Remember, the definition of insanity is continuing to do what you've always done but expecting different results.

They'll post some things on their website (which is passive), but they won't apply real pressure. That mean's they are, by their silence, agreeing to this "Unanimous Consent Agreement." And their board member, Sen. Larry Craig, openly agreed to that agreement with Sen. Reed.

Craig will vote against most (not all -- in fact, Sen. Craig offered his own "Cop Killer Bullets" amendment in an attempt to appease Teddy Kennedy) of the gun controls, but he's the person who enabled all of these gun control amendments.

2. Why would an NRA board member accept a Unanimous Consent Agreement to allow a huge number of amendments to be debated, all of which strip gun owners of their rights and many of which that board member (and US Senator) knows will pass?

The writer of this alert is a former staff member (not intern) of the U.S. Senate, under Senator Bill Armstrong. I know how the U.S. Senate works, and have been in regular consultation with those who have worked in all aspects of Congress for decades.

One thing is crystal clear: the NRA's mouthpiece, US Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho), has agreed to let these amendments be heard, and he knows some will be attached to the bill.

3. Have you heard the NRA say that they will oppose S.659/S.1805 in the Senate if it gets gun control amendments on it? We haven't, and doubt we will, since their US Senator is the one who enabled those amendments to be attached. Their plan, to let these gun controls ride on the bill and hope they are stripped out in the House, is an incredibly risky gambit, which if lost will result in the largest erosion of our rights in American history.

There's no more time to waste.

Call your US Senators immediately and urge them to vote AGAINST S.1805.

Senator Wayne Allard can be reached at (202) 224-5941.

Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell can be reached at (202) 224-5852.

Urge them to vote against S.1805.

It's time to pull the plug on this well-meaning, but gun-control-laden dog.

E-mail: ExDir@RMGO.org

[FBD]

ping

[Shooter 2.5]

"Let's send a message that armor piercing ammunition is flat off limits," said Sen. Craig.

So how many times does he have to say this before it sinks in?

[ArrogantBustard]

"Let's send a message that armor piercing ammunition is flat off limits," said Sen. Craig. So how many times does he have to say this before it sinks in?

Before what 'sinks in'. Do you support banning armour piercing ammunition? Sen. Craig appears to support banning it.

[archy]

Wow.
A web site that makes keepandbeararms look almost sane. Remarkable.

I'm still waiting for them to post the photos of NRA Director Larry Craig keeping a smile on his friends' faces:

Fri Feb 27, 8:41 AM ET Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. laughs after being introduced as being from Texas by Sen. Larry Craig , R-Idaho, during a press conference on foster care with actor Bruce Willis at the U.S. Capitol in Washington Wednesday, June 11, 2003. Behind her are Sen. Mary Landrieu), D-La., and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, right.

(AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)

[TigersEye]

Frist/Craig - Cop Killer bullets (a toned down, yet still anti-gun rights version of Kennedy's amendment)

One more time for the sheep in the back.

[Shooter 2.5]

Beofre this sinks in:
"Let's send a message that armor piercing ammunition is flat off limits," said Sen. Craig.

Should I repeat it a couple more times?

[Shooter 2.5]

Is that a ban or a study? Do you know the difference?

[TigersEye]

Should I repeat it a couple more times?

A little louder, there's so much bleating it almost sounds like it's coming from the bandstand.

[Blood of Tyrants]

I agree with CheezyD, there is waaayyy too much rhetoric flying around. I have read all the amendments passed so far and there isn't a deal killer in there yet. Feinswines AW amendment hasn't even been added yet, so the accuracy of this article is suspect.

[TigersEye]

On the Senate floor today, he introduced, discussed, defended and tried to justify the "Craig/Frist" amendment. This amendment, said Craig, is needed "to strengthen current armor piercing ammunition law." NRA's point-man in the U.S. Senate says that this is "what the law enforcement community needs."

"We don't want to wipe out the hunting and sporting ammunition," said Craig. The "sporting purpose" test was used before -- as justification for firearm rights infringements via the 1938 Nazi Weapons Law and later copied nearly verbatim in the U.S. Gun Control Act of 1968.

"Let's send a message that armor piercing ammunition is flat off limits," said Sen. Craig.

Thank you, Shooter 2.5, for motivating me to reread this. Now that I read it all in context again I see that Sen. Craig means that AP ammo should be off limits to the public not to legislation. The study is for just what I've been saying it's for; coming up with new ways to define "armor piercing" ammunition.

[TigersEye]

Feinswines AW amendment hasn't even been added yet, so the accuracy of this article is suspect.

The article didn't say that it had been added already so how can you use that to show inaccuracy? You're creating disinformation.

[ArrogantBustard]

Repeat it?

No. You should explain it.

Try answering my question. The answer is either "yes" or "no". I realise that politicians have trouble with such simple honesty, but you shouldn't.

[philetus]

Levin is saying now that, basically, gun manufacturers and gun dealers should be guilty until proven innocent.

[Copernicus]

So how many times does he have to say this before it sinks in?

Since you appear to have access to a complete,full and accurate copy of the text of the Craig/Frist Amendment, I would be very grateful if you would post a link to or printout of the language.

In the public arena of political debate what someone SAYS or DOES or MEANS can be and frequently are completely separate activities.

I appreciate any input that does not involve hearsay or ad homeniem argument.

Best regards,

[philetus]

Levin is saying, someone who is injured (shot), should be able to get money from gun dealers and makers ,EVEN if the dealer or maker can NOT be shown to be at fault.

[tpaine]

It's pretty obvious there is a faction here at FR that is willing to accept 'bullet bans' [and possibly AWB's] in order to prevent spurious lawsuits against gun manufacturer's..

Bizarre/diversionary reasoning once again. The fox is in the henhouse, and they say we must pass more laws on arcane legalities regarding lawsuits.

[tpaine]

Now that I read it all in context again I see that Sen. Craig means that AP ammo should be off limits to the public not to legislation.
The study is for just what I've been saying it's for; coming up with new ways to define "armor piercing" ammunition.
30 -TE-


______________________________________


Incredible that the agit-prop line-makers would have that obvious position reversed, isn't it?
Almost duplicitous, I would say..

[DugwayDuke]

Very misleading. For example:

"NRA Board Member Sen. Larry Craig has agreed to allow a slated list of gun control amendments to S.1805. These include, but are not limited to, the following unspecified gun controls:"

This implies Craig (and the NRA) have agreed to these ammendments being included in the bill. But, later on, we learn:

" allow a huge number of amendments to be debated"

Craig hasn't "agreed" to these ammendments, he only agreed to allowing debate. This is the Senate, "the worlds greatest debating society".

But, the author goes further claiming:

" many of which that board member (and US Senator) knows will pass?"

Why should we trust his judgement in predicting passage when he's already been shown distort the facts?

As others have said, "don't get your panties in a wad", yet.

[SteveH]

I can't get through to any of the primary parties involved. I think there's too much smoke to pass anything.

The NRA should call it off if it can't even hold up its own phone line, and (sheesh) can't even control its own officers.

[philetus]

Pobert Byrd is on now. Is he drunk or just retarded?