Posted on 04/20/2007 1:49:09 AM PDT by Oakleaf
-snip-
...the National Rifle Association has begun negotiations with senior Democrats over legislation to bolster the national background-check system and potentially block gun purchases by the mentally ill.
Rep. John D. Dingell (Mich.), a gun-rights Democrat who once served on the NRA's board of directors, is leading talks with the powerful gun lobby in hopes of producing a deal by early next week, Democratic aides and lawmakers said.
Under the bill, states would be given money to help them supply the federal government with information on mental-illness adjudications and other run-ins with the law that are supposed to disqualify individuals from firearms purchases. For the first time, states would face penalties for not keeping the National Instant Criminal Background Check System current.
-snip-
The gun lobby stayed relatively neutral during past efforts to pass the measure, but this time Dingell is pushing for an endorsement, or even for the NRA to make it a "key vote" for its supporters.
McCarthy, whose husband was killed during a gunman's rampage on the Long Island Rail Road, admits her crusades for far more stringent gun control measures have made her toxic in gun circles.
So Dingell is handling negotiations with the NRA, said an aide participating in those talks...House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has asked Dingell to broker a deal by Tuesday. But the aide said Dingell and NRA negotiators are skeptical they can reach an accord that quickly.
-snip-
But pitfalls remain. The NRA must balance its desire to respond to the worst mass shooting by a lone gunman in the nation's history with its competition with the more strident Gun Owners of America, which opposes any restrictions on gun purchases.
An NRA lobbyist said last night that the group would not comment on the effort.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I’m torn over this but I think they are wise to get out in front on this because we all know that the “Do something!!!” cries are already starting.
I don’t think it is unreasonable that you have to be a citizen in order to purchase a gun. And if the Fed is going to demand background checks, they should have access to mental health records that indicate when a person has serious issues with reality...
I just flipped through that listing of the enumerated powers of the Federal government detailed in Article 1 Section 8 of the US Constitution, and I don't see a word in there about 'demanding' background checks.
Not one.
L
Yeah, this is a disturbing development.
Definitely not there.
Can't do that. HIPPA regulations....
L
L
At least you are sane.
‘Negotiations’ with the ‘crats needs to be done like we ‘negotiated peace’ with the Japanese.
And you are absolutely right, the rules don’t mention anything about ‘checks’.
One other thing.
I don’t think that a single signer was actually a citizen at the time. So disarming ‘residents’ surely wasn’t their plan either.
The language is pretty darned clear - at least to me. And if I remember correctly, some of those ‘resident aliens’ back in the day actually owned BATTLESHIPS. If they had ‘Evil Assault Weapons’ you can bet your nation they would have used them to ‘Great Effect’.
nra = appeasement
nra not = constitution
If this bill is amended to include all domestic abuse cases, it will be troublesome. Divorce lawyers will be able to throw this against the wall and make even more extensive misuse of restraining orders during divorce cases.
I expect Sen. Dodd to propose the amendment doing so.
They did indeed. It's also true that darned nearly every cannon in the Colonies was privately owned. And in those days, that was quite a WMD.
L
->I expect Sen. Dodd to propose the amendment doing so.
That’s funny.
In those days a 'Battleship' was the equivalent of nuclear weapons. Some of those bad boys mounted dozens of cannon, and had been used to literally level cities.
So a new law goes in to affect, and when that fails what then? OK, so the wacko, borrows his father’s, brother’s gun and shoots 55 students, now we need a law which, holds the gun owner responsible for lending the gun, but the 40 YO wacko’s relatives did not know he was a basket case, because they were not notified.
Here in NH there is a indoor rage where you can rent, for use on prem, just about any type of gun made including SMG’s. So you go to the range, rent an UZI 200 RNDs of ammo, and proceed to kill everyone in the place. The next law will be, present your “Not A Wacko” ID card to rent a firearm.
Presently there are states, I think CT is one, if you see our neighbor with an “assault rifle” turn him in to be arrested.
When you look at Libs and the Constitution, over the last 40 years, they are erasing it line by line, and word by word.
The best the NRA can do, is drag these negotiations out to the point where the Libs give up on this, at least for now. And remember, Mitt and Rudy are gun grabbers.
Signs of Intelligence?
By Fred Thompson
One of the things that’s got to be going through a lot of peoples’ minds now is how one man with two handguns, that he had to reload time and time again, could go from classroom to classroom on the Virginia Tech campus without being stopped. Much of the answer can be found in policies put in place by the university itself.
Virginia, like 39 other states, allows citizens with training and legal permits to carry concealed weapons. That means that Virginians regularly sit in movie theaters and eat in restaurants among armed citizens. They walk, joke and rub shoulders everyday with people who responsibly carry firearms — and are far safer than they would be in San Francisco, Oakland, Detroit, Chicago, New York City, or Washington, D.C., where such permits are difficult or impossible to obtain.
The statistics are clear. Communities that recognize and grant Second Amendment rights to responsible adults have a significantly lower incidence of violent crime than those that do not. More to the point, incarcerated criminals tell criminologists that they consider local gun laws when they decide what sort of crime they will commit, and where they will do so.
Still, there are a lot of people who are just offended by the notion that people can carry guns around. They view everybody, or at least many of us, as potential murderers prevented only by the lack of a convenient weapon. Virginia Tech administrators overrode Virginia state law and threatened to expel or fire anybody who brings a weapon onto campus.
In recent years, however, armed Americans — not on-duty police officers — have successfully prevented a number of attempted mass murders. Evidence from Israel, where many teachers have weapons and have stopped serious terror attacks, has been documented. Supporting, though contrary, evidence from Great Britain, where strict gun controls have led to violent crime rates far higher than ours, is also common knowledge.
So Virginians asked their legislators to change the university’s “concealed carry” policy to exempt people 21 years of age or older who have passed background checks and taken training classes. The university, however, lobbied against that bill, and a top administrator subsequently praised the legislature for blocking the measure.
The logic behind this attitude baffles me, but I suspect it has to do with a basic difference in worldviews. Some people think that power should exist only at the top, and everybody else should rely on “the authorities” for protection.
Despite such attitudes, average Americans have always made up the front line against crime. Through programs like Neighborhood Watch and Amber Alert, we are stopping and catching criminals daily. Normal people tackled “shoe bomber” Richard Reid as he was trying to blow up an airliner. It was a truck driver who found the D.C. snipers. Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that civilians use firearms to prevent at least a half million crimes annually.
When people capable of performing acts of heroism are discouraged or denied the opportunity, our society is all the poorer. And from the selfless examples of the passengers on Flight 93 on 9/11 to Virginia Tech professor Liviu Librescu, a Holocaust survivor who sacrificed himself to save his students earlier this week, we know what extraordinary acts of heroism ordinary citizens are capable of.
Many other universities have been swayed by an anti-gun, anti-self defense ideology. I respect their right to hold those views, but I challenge their decision to deny Americans the right to protect themselves on their campuses — and then proudly advertise that fact to any and all.
Whenever I’ve seen one of those “Gun-free Zone” signs, especially outside of a school filled with our youngest and most vulnerable citizens, I’ve always wondered exactly who these signs are directed at. Obviously, they don’t mean much to the sort of man who murdered 32 people just a few days ago.
http://abcradio.com/article.asp?id=389928&SPID=15663
Thank you for that.
It should read (IMHO) -
Communities that don't deny Second Amendment rights to responsible adults have a significantly lower incidence of violent crime than those that do not.
What I meant to say was -
Communities that don't deny Second Amendment rights to responsible adults have a significantly lower incidence of violent crime than those that do.
Note to self - CAREFULLY read posts to Jim.
It would be an improvement if the NRA could get the mentally impaired members of Congress out of office!
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.