[Copernicus]

Comments? Questions?

[Copernicus]

Might want to pass this around to interested parties.

[Monty22]

This thing is so loaded with awful stuff now, it simply *has* to be killed.

The scary thing is, Feinstein promised to attach the AWB on ANYTHING she can, so if this fails, she'll keep going on it

[CheezyD]

(we do not have the language, but will shortly)

There's way too much misinformation going around right now. Perhaps one should wait until they know what really is in the bill before calling for it's death. I myself was PO'ed because I though the bill included mandated storage when in fact it doesn't. I've taken a few deep breaths and now I'm waiting to see what the bill will really contain. I'm not going to jump to conclusions based on rumor.

[CHICAGOFARMER]

Well you gun owners may want to hold your horses as this plays out.

Here is the latest read from NRA. I received it at 9:45am chicagotime.




On Wednesday morning, the U.S. Senate began to debate S. 1805—the "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act" (formerly referenced as S. 659/S. 1806.) A bi-partisan 75-22 vote allowed debate to proceed, lifting the threat of a filibuster.

The debate continued late into the evening with no substantive movement on the bill and no additional votes were taken. Senators did, however, reach a "Unanimous Consent Agreement" spelling out specific amendments that would be permitted to be offered during the debate in anticipation of a final vote on the underlying measure next Tuesday.

On Thursday, the Senate reconvened and first considered was an amendment by anti-gun Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) that would require all handguns be sold with a mechanical safety device approved by the Consumer Product Safety Commission(CPSC). This amendment was then replaced with a "second degree" amendment by Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI). The Kohl amendment is much less restrictive and also provides liability protection for gun owners. The revised amendment passed 70-27.

The Senate next debated an amendment by Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-CO) which would permit current and retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed firearms off duty in other states. Arguing hysterically against the amendment, anti-gun Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) revealed his deep distrust of gun carrying even by sworn police officers. A vote on the Campbell amendment was deferred until Tuesday.

Sen. Kennedy then introduced an amendment to ban the manufacture and sale of "armor-piercing" ammunition. Kennedy, who actually condemned the .30-30 Winchester cartridge during debate, wants to institute a "performance-based" standard that would grant any future Attorney General sweeping authority to ban any center-fire ammunition, including most common-place rifle hunting ammunition. The standard proposed by Sen. Kennedy was rejected in the 1980s as overly broad and unnecessary to meet any threat posed to law enforcement officers` safety. A vote on this NRA-opposed amendment will take place Tuesday.

The Senate next debated and voted upon two amendments seeking to gut S. 1805. The first related to the D.C. sniper case, but the proposal by Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) was defeated, 56-40. A "law enforcement" exemption offered by Sen. John Corzine (D-NJ) was soundly defeated, 56 to 38.

NRA strongly opposed both amendments. One of the strengths of S. 1805 is that it adopts the same rules for all plaintiffs, no matter how sympathetic or unsympathetic, and no matter how notorious or mundane their victimization. Plaintiffs` rights should depend on settled principles of law, not on emotion or sympathy.

NRA-ILA stands totally committed to enacting S. 1805 without anti-gun amendments, and will continue to vigorously oppose any reauthorization of the 1994 Clinton gun ban and any attempt to ban gun shows.

Please continue to contact your U.S. Senators at (202) 224-3121 and urge them to support S. 1805 without any anti-gun amendments. Call ILA`s Grassroots staff at (800) 392-8683, or visit http://www.nraila.org/stoprecklesslawsuits.aspx for additional information and to utilize the "Write Your Representatives" feature to contact your U.S. Senators.

This post is to provide information to the histeria that is running rapid on the internet.

I do not support NRA, nor am I a friend of NRA. However, U suggest that you don't have all the information.

[jocko12]

BUSH VETO THIS BILL.

[JennysCool]

Kill 1805 Immediately

I think anything above about 1,500 or so is overkill.

[Shooter 2.5]

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

[TigersEye]

Previous discussion on this bill here.

[lepton]

So...the bill should be killed, not because of what it contains, but because along with it there is an opening for amendments? Thus even if the Amendments fail to be added, the bill should be killed because they could have been?

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

Text of the Second Amendment
"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."

Anyone who actually reads AND understands the 2nd Amendment will see that there is no need or authority for any type of gun registration and there is no need for anyone to have to apply for a license to carry a gun.
Any political party, politician, judge (etc), organization or individual who trys to convince you that:
1) you must register a firearm
2) you must pass a background check
3) you must wait (x) amount of days before you can get your firearm
4) you need to have a license to carry a gun
is either uneducated about OUR rights as citizens
OR is actively working to undermine OUR country.

How Did the Founders Understand the Second Amendment?

CONGRESS in 1866, 1941 and 1986 REAFFIRMS THE SECOND AMENDMENT
The Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment right to keep and bear firearms,
originated in the United States Congress in 1789 before being ratified by the States.
On three occasions since then--in 1866, 1941, and 1986--
Congress enacted statutes to reaffirm this guarantee of personal freedom
and to adopt specific safeguards to enforce it.

ON THE DAY BEFORE Thanksgiving 1993,
the 103d US Congress brought forth a constitutional turkey.
The 103d Congress decided that the Second Amendment did not mean what it said
("...shall not be infringed") and passed the Brady bill.
How the Brady Bill Passed (and subsequently - "Instant Check")
When the Brady Bill was passed into law on November 24, 1993,
the Senate voted on the Conference Report
and passed the Brady Bill by UNANIMOUS CONSENT.

[SevenDaysInMay]

Every Constitutional citizen has the duty to replace our elected officials with honorable men and women who will honor their oath to defend our only Ratified Constitution or we shall not have one.

The fascist (criminally corrupt socialsim) tyranny is marching under cover of islam's Terror War. Incumbant nomenclatura and apparatchiks & dudes of both parties want protection from We the People. Islamokazies are an excuse to nullify further our Bill of Rights and 14th equal protection; nothing has changed since the Clintonazis ruled us. Regardless of who is president, we shall soon be ruled under totalitarian "Emergency Powers" with our Constitution effectively suspended, certainly when D.C. is attacked with plague and/or nukes/dirties.

No one in government has the lawful authority to usurp our Ratified Constitution, yet such temporary people in high office undermine our Law of the Land to press their police power agenda. We shall be ruled because of statist blackrobes' contrived, self-serving fiats: "compelling State interests" and "sovereign immunity", despite no basis in our Constitution, THE Law of OUR Land.

Incumbants too soon become citizens' rulers, uninhibited in their rogue powers. State's police powers always overpower citizens' rights, unless stopped. Thomas Jefferson acknowledged this fact together with his peers.

American socialists of both parties must disarm America for American fascism to prevail. The Dems demand it.

Citizens must soon become more familiar with the European socialism history from 1910 to WWII to foresee our future. Hitler was duly elected and lawfully legislated his "Emergency Powers", quite similar to ours, reorganized for efficiency under XXX-Clinton, for Hillary cum Kerry-on packages. "War Powers" legislated for Woodrow Wilson in 1917 in WWI are in effect to this day, so we have an elites' shadow government with out Constitutional restrictions prepared to rule us. IT can happen here.

[FBD]

ping

[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.

[petro45acp]

I've actually gotten two recorded message calls from Wayne LaPierre of the NRA, asking me to call my senator. The message was pretty simple, pass the Gun Manufacturers Protection Bill without any amendments. NRAILA has also sent email messages to the effect that they have NOT struck any deals with our congresscritters regarding this legislation (or any other version of the AWB for that matter). This collusion rumor is most likely being spread by our enemies.

Call your congresscritter. Pass the Gun Manufacturers Protection Bill without any amendments or kill it 'daid.'

[PsyOp]

Here's a little ammo for the fight:
The Second Amendment - Commentaries

[Fenris6]

Anyone who seeks to deprive us of our 2nd Ammendment rights should be hunted down and killed.

Semper Fi
Fen

[The_Eaglet]

Bump for further review