Posted on 02/27/2004 7:54:46 AM PST by 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
Do you think your comment is funny? Do you think the topic of this thread is a joke?
Actually when the founders, and even others much later, used the term "privilege" they meant "right" as in the "privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States" language of the 14th amendment.
There seems to be a ban on manufacture and sale of AP. The study is to determine if a standard for the uniform testing of projectiles against Body Armor is feasible. It's a ban, but just what is banned, beyond the currently definition, is not clear, to me at least:
SEC. 5. ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.
(a) UNLAWFUL ACTS.--Section 922(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking paragraphs (7) and (8) and inserting the following:
``(7) for any person to manufacture or import armor piercing ammunition, unless--
``(A) the manufacture of such ammunition is for the use of the United States, any department or agency of the United States, any State, or any department, agency, or political subdivision of a State;
``(B) the manufacture of such ammunition is for the purpose of exportation; or
``(C) the manufacture or importation of such ammunition is for the purpose of testing or experimentation and has been authorized by the Attorney General.
``(8) for any manufacturer or importer to sell or deliver armor piercing ammunition, unless such sale or delivery--
``(A) is for the use of the United States, any department or agency of the United States, any State, or any department, agency, or political subdivision of a State;
``(B) is for the purpose of exportation; or
``(C) is for the purpose of testing or experimentation and has been authorized by the Attorney General.''.
...
(c) STUDY AND REPORT.--
(1) STUDY.--The Attorney General shall conduct a study to determine whether a uniform standard for the uniform testing of projectiles against Body Armor is feasible.
(2) ISSUES TO BE STUDIED.--The study conducted under paragraph (1) shall include--
(A) variations in performance that are related to the length of the barrel of the handgun or centerfire rifle from which the projectile is fired; and
(B) the amount of powder used to propel the projectile.
(3) REPORT.--Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall submit a report containing the results of the study conducted under this subsection to--
(A) the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee of the Senate; and
(B) the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives.
I agree, though: it's a complete deal breaker. Status quo is better than any new anti-gun legislation.
Actually when the founders, and even others much later, used the term "privilege" they meant "right" as in the "privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States" language of the 14th amendment.
xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Actually my point was today you need a permit to own a firearm, or Conceal Carry. Today Civil rights was not part of the Bill of Rights.
Which is pretty much what the conventional Internet wisdom seems to be: a "clean" (no amendments whatso ever)bill or no bill!
I would say the folks at the NRA-ILA have been caught with their hands in the cookie jar once again.
Best regards,
Anything over 1500 IS overkill. The entire Magna Carta fit on one piece of goat skin and was sufficient to found modern ideas of jurisprudence.
Best regards,
Right?(/caustic sarcasm)
I called Senator Craig's office=---
They said Senator Craig is sponsoring legislation "to prohibit possession and sale of armor piercing ammunition."
Please clarify your position.
Shooter 2.5 is an immature, frightened person as far as I'm concerned who cannot bear to face the truth regarding the NRA and their attempts to bring the 2nd to a quiet death.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.