Posted on 10/03/2007 5:04:35 PM PDT by neverdem
There is no such thing as the “Veterans Disarmament Act.” There is no pending legislation that would take firearms away from veterans. There is no pending legislation that would prevent a person with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), veteran or not, from purchasing a firearm or ammo.
But, there is a huge campaign of misinformation and scare tactics being forwarded by a small gun owners group who view themselves to be in competition with the National Rifle Association (NRA).
Let’s use some common sense instead of nonsense. If veterans were to lose the right to own firearms, you’d have a lot of unemployed cops. If those who have PTSD were to lose that right, there’d be even more unemployed cops and other first responders, as well. The arguments about a “Veterans Disarmament Act” are, quite simply, ridiculous and illogical.
The piece of legislation is question is H.R. 2640, the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007. H.R. 2640 was carefully-crafted by the NRA and Members of Congress to protect the rights of gun owners, especially those who may have mental health issues such as PTSD.
Alert: Tell your public officials how you feel about this legislation.
The NICS is the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, the database that contains the names of those not allowed to buy firearms and ammo. There are nine specific groups of persons who are included in the database.
(Excerpt) Read more at military.com ...
I'm not comfortable with it. I'm not a lawyer. I haven't read all of § 922. H.R. 2640 strikes me as half a loaf. IMHO, lock them up, or let them be free.
The concept of keeping guns out of the hands of mentally disturbed individuals is a good one.
In the good ole days, we did not have that problem because we’d just put the individuals in straight jackets.
The concept of keeping guns out of the hands of mentally disturbed individuals is a good one.
In the good ole days, we did not have that problem because we’d just put the individuals in straight jackets.
Double posting is a sign of mental illness.
Larry Pratt of G.O.A. is really going overboard on this one, and he is not making a good impression of himself IMO.
The law has been on the books since 1968. There is a program on the books, since the Clinton administration, to remove the firearms bar for persons deemed well after they have been adjudicated mentally defective, and also for vets to clear their records. Needless to say, a certain political party ensured that the program never got funded. N.R.A. says the law will correct this issue and I believe them.
Right now, The History Channel is showing “Gangster Guns,” with an interviewee who puts a very nice take on the old pocket pistol: “You didn’t mess with a man’s lady, you didn’t kick his dog, you didn’t go after his kids, because you didn’t know who had one.”
An armed society is a polite society. :)
Just a reminder: The NRA is the country's oldest gun control advocacy organization:
http://www.duke.edu/~mms16/Singeron_NRA_w_Chart.pdf.
The NRA gradually began to play an active role in efforts by the federal government to regulate firearms.
In the 1930s Congress passed three main gun control acts. The Uniform Firearms Act of 1930 forbade the delivery of pistols to "convicts, drug addicts, habitual drunkards, incompetents, and minors under the age of 18."
Karl T. Frederick, then president of the NRA, served as a special consultant in the framing of this act.
The NRA also supported the National Firearms Act of 1934, which taxed and required registration of such firearms as machine guns, sawed-off rifles, and sawed-off shotguns, although some controversy existed surrounding Congress's definition of a machine gun.
Finally, the NRA supported the Federal Firearms Act of 1938, which imposed regulations on interstate and foreign commerce in firearms and pistol ammunition and restricted the use of sawed-off shotguns and machine guns.
Congressional hearings over the National Firearms Act of 1934 (H.R.9066) took place April 16 & 18 and May 14, 15, & 16 of 1934.
Then-NRA President Karl T. Frederick testified on behalf of the National Rifle Association (NRA). His testimony is below and includes the text in full plus scanned images of each page.
MR. FREDERICK: ... "I have never believed in the general practice of carrying weapons. I seldom carry one. ... I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses"
Link:
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/NRA/NFA.asp
And, of course, testimony from someone who has felt the full force and fury of gun control:
May you stand before God and man as my two precious grandchildren's killer if you pass any more gun legislation that will make me a felon should I own a handgun or any other gun for that matter.
Sincerely,
Mary Carpenter
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=7CCB40F421ED4819
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/2nd_Amend/deaths_in_merced.htm
http://www.grnc.org/mary_carpenter_letter.htm
Best regards,
And most of those guys are probably dead. Are you going to go stomp on their graves?
The NRA does more in one month than a particular group has done since their existence and if it had ten times the members, we wouldn’t have gun control.
If we didn’t have gun control, the NRA could go back to it’s gun ranges and still have a nice organization. If the GOA didn’t have gun control, they would cease to exist. Maybe that’s the GOA never does anything.
great choice to lead the cause /sarc
If Mr. Frederick had his way pistols would be under the same Class III restrictions as machineguns.
Best regards,
If you consider the repeal of 1934 and 1938 gun control to be "stomping on their graves", then, by gosh I intend to make the most of it.
Best regards,
Sounds like a great idea! Gun Control Bills should have never been created!
Link here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1906267/posts
Best regards,
They left out trash from world net whatever.
As for nutcases like the one that shot up VT, the solution is simple, dial .357.
Their reasons for doing so seem well-founded to me.
Just thought I'd make a mention of that, as much for the sake of any others whom might later lurk thru here...
The NRA could be "wrong". Though I've not delved deeply into this one, for now, I'm *with* those veterans at Military.com.
Thanks for the update.
I would have never seen it, if not for your posting of it here.
Federal judge says he needs more time to issue ruling on illegal immigration crackdown
Independents Could Help Swing More Than One Primary Toward the Unexpected There are a number of states with fairly high numbers of independent voters. IIRC, NJ is one.
From time to time, I’ll ping on noteworthy articles about politics, foreign and military affairs. FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
The law will only correct the issue if the states go along with it. If New Jersey decides not to accept the grant money, they don’t have to set up a program for rights restoration, and anyone unjustly inserted into the database by the new mandate will have no recourse but to move out of the state to one which does have a program.
Thanks for the ping!
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.