Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

HR 2640 is Janet Reno's dream (NRA Director Opposes McCarthy Veteran Disarmament Act)
www.tednugent.com ^ | 07/11/07 | Ted Nugent

Posted on 10/08/2007 6:41:14 PM PDT by Copernicus

"...with ATF harrassing the [deleted] out of numerous mom & pop gunshops in SC, ID & elsewhere, this is THE American issue of alltimes. I pray to God ya all hammer relentlessly." -Nuge

McCARTHY BILL COULD COME UP AT ANY TIME IN THE U.S. SENATE

Now that Congress returns to work this week, your liberties are in jeopardy once again!

You will remember that before the Independence Day break, the House of Representatives passed a McCarthy gun control bill (HR 2640) without any hearings, without any committee action... they put it on the Suspension Calendar and simply got a non-recorded voice vote.

An important part of the legislative process is to introduce a bill in committee, to get both public and private observers to ask questions, make recommendations and offer comments on the bill.

But for some reason, HR 2640 was not given this benefit. The bill was rammed through the legislature with very few Representatives present on the House floor... there was no recorded vote at all!

(Excerpt) Read more at tednugent.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: 110th; 2ndamendment; banglist; democratparty; goa; hr2640; mccarthy; military; militaryfamilies; nics; nra; rkba; schumer; secondamendment; veteran
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-60 next last
Ted Nugent is on the Board Of Directors of the NRA and apparently has broken with the NRA-ILA Talking Points about the blessings and benefits of NRA sponsored gun control.

Best regards to all,

1 posted on 10/08/2007 6:41:16 PM PDT by Copernicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Copernicus

2 posted on 10/08/2007 6:43:54 PM PDT by sure_fine (• " not one to over kill the thought process " •)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sure_fine

Thanks for the nightmares. The terrifying, cold sweat fueled noghtmares that I am going to have because of that photograph.


3 posted on 10/08/2007 6:45:20 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Shooter 2.5

You a Nugent fan?


4 posted on 10/08/2007 6:48:39 PM PDT by mad_as_he$$
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Copernicus

Now that Congress returns to work this week, your liberties are in jeopardy once again!

That's a great line!...but since when does Congress work?

5 posted on 10/08/2007 6:54:08 PM PDT by G8 Diplomat (Know thy enemy. Learn Farsi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Copernicus

An important part of the legislative process is to introduce a bill in committee, to get both public and private observers to ask questions, make recommendations and offer comments on the bill.

But for some reason, HR 2640 was not given this benefit. The bill was rammed through the legislature with very few Representatives present on the House floor... there was no recorded vote at all!
:::::::
The liberal socialists continue their efforts to harass and disarm the LAW-ABIDING AMERICAN PUBLIC...without due process in the Congress, and in any sleazy, underhanded, anti-American way they can. CLEARLY, Washington is out of control. Where are the voices and action from those that still care about America, its Constitution, and the liberties and RIGHTS of the People ???


6 posted on 10/08/2007 6:58:33 PM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sure_fine

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

I practically did a wheeze laugh when I saw that. Thanks


7 posted on 10/08/2007 7:05:43 PM PDT by wastedyears (George Orwell was a clairvoyant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sure_fine

Is that Janet just after leaving Clinton’s Oval Office?


8 posted on 10/08/2007 7:06:59 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Copernicus

9 posted on 10/08/2007 7:09:03 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Copernicus; DaveLoneRanger
I agree with Ted and disagree with the NRA’s stand. There is too much left to interpretation in the law and while those pooh-poohing our concern say it takes a court adjudication, the bill says a “court, board, commission, or other government entity determines ...” Sorry, but all it takes is one liberal judge to make a doctor’s raw diagnosis sent into that “other government entity” (can you say BATFE?) to run roughshod over everybody. Who is to say that a 20 year old mild depression when mom died diagnosis wouldn’t qualify? Prima facie evidence is that Chuckie & co. is happy with the bill. That should scare the ever-loving crap out of anyone.

I am not opposed to true mental illness being a disqualifer for firearms ownership with the proper safeguards in place, but if you want the basis to be a court order SAY THAT AND ONLY THAT. "Or other government entity" leaves it WIDE OPEN and you might as well try to convince me to vote for Hillary as to swallow that phrase as being no problemo.

10 posted on 10/08/2007 7:10:49 PM PDT by NonValueAdded (Fred Dalton Thompson for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sure_fine

Oh geez man! Speaking of old Janet, you don’t hear a lot out of her these days. Of course if I was her I’d keep a low profile too.


11 posted on 10/08/2007 7:14:38 PM PDT by dljordan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA

“Where are the voices and action from those that still care about America, its Constitution, and the liberties and RIGHTS of the People ???”

Not in Washington, you can bet on it.


12 posted on 10/08/2007 7:16:22 PM PDT by ought-six ("Give me liberty, or give me death!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Copernicus; All
On the HR 2640 is this

(a) In General- Beginning 3 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, a State shall be eligible to receive a waiver of the 10 percent matching requirement for National Criminal History Improvement Grants under the Crime Identification Technology Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 14601) if the State provides at least 90 percent of the information described in subsection (c). The length of such a waiver shall not exceed 2 years.

Here is (c)

(c)

Assurances

(1) In general

To be eligible to receive a grant under this section, a State shall provide assurances to the Attorney General that the State has the capability to contribute pertinent information to the national instant criminal background check system established under section 103(b) of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (18 U.S.C. 922 note ).

(2) Information sharing

Such assurances shall include a provision that ensures that a statewide strategy for information sharing systems is underway, or will be initiated, to improve the functioning of the criminal justice system, with an emphasis on integration of all criminal justice components, law enforcement, courts, prosecution, corrections, and probation and parole. The strategy shall be prepared after consultation with State and local officials with emphasis on the recommendation of officials whose duty it is to oversee, plan, and implement integrated information technology systems, and shall contain—

(A) a definition and analysis of “integration” in the State and localities developing integrated information sharing systems;
(B) an assessment of the criminal justice resources being devoted to information technology;
(C) Federal, State, regional, and local information technology coordination requirements;
(D) an assurance that the individuals who developed the grant application took into consideration the needs of all branches of the State Government and specifically sought the advice of the chief of the highest court of the State with respect to the application;
(E) State and local resource needs;
(F) the establishment of statewide priorities for planning and implementation of information technology systems; and
(G) a plan for coordinating the programs funded under this subchapter with other federally funded information technology programs, including directly funded local programs such as the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant program (described under the heading “Violent Crime Reduction Programs, State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance” of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998 (Public Law 105–119)) and the M.O.R.E. program established pursuant to part Q of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 [42 U.S.C. 3796dd et seq.].

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode42/usc_sec_42_00014601----000-.html

Read the entire link I posted.

13 posted on 10/08/2007 7:21:09 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Copernicus

This is quite interesting.

A week ago, or so, a friend, after hearing of HR2640 asked if, “It could be for real that the Congress would try to pass a law disarming the veterans?”

My responce to him was:

“Why do you act so astonished?

First thing you need to realize is that the anti-gun folks won’t be satisfied until EVERYONE ( I should say everyone but them) is disarmed.

The second thing you need to realize is that the rabid gun-banners despise veterans above all others, because they know veterans have already demonstrated their willingness to use force (not to mention their patriotism).

I’ll look into this.”

After a little googling, here was the rest of the responce to my friend:

“Here are some links of interest on this subject:

These two are from the NRA website. They seem to confirm some of the basis for the claims in this article but the practical effects regarding vets diagnosed with PTSD in specific are not addressed:

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=3097

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=219&issue=018

BTW, even though I do believe in the NRA and consider them a valuable organization, I don’t always agree with their decisions, and they have been known to make compromises for political reasons that I don’t believe are always in the interest of the general gun-owning public.

Here’s a link to more info than I have time to read right now:

http://www.gunowners.org/netb.htm

Here’s one where you can get info on the actual text and status of the law in question:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.02640

I’d like to say, though, before I’m done tonight, that any gun law that is sponsored by Carolyn McCarthy, as this one is, I’d be very skeptical about. Not to mention that the list of co-sponsors is a who’s who of anti-gun politicians.

It don’t look good!”

After reading some of the info on the Gunowners.org site, I have to say that I am disapointed in the stand the NRA has taken.

This last year, due to a family member’s illness, I had to drop my membership in all clubs and organizations and devote my time and resources to remedy that situation. Now that I am getting past that crisis and considering once again contributing to the NRA, the stand the organization has taken, on this subject, I’ve found disapointing.

Now I find it very curious that Ted N. is coming out in appearent opposition to the NRA’s official stand.

I urge all to check out the links I’ve included here.

It will be interesting to hear what others think on this subject.


14 posted on 10/08/2007 7:33:20 PM PDT by Liberty Rattler (Don't tread on me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Copernicus; fieldmarshaldj
All this b-tch ever does to get her name in the paper is sponsor anti-gun legislation, and she still gets reelected thanks to the symphathy vote. She's also not the brightest bulb on the lamp.

Man, for the days when my childhood district was Norman Lent. When Lent ran for his first congressional campaign against socialist and closet homosexual Allard Lowenstein in '72, his slogan was "Give up Lowenstein for Lent."

15 posted on 10/08/2007 7:39:06 PM PDT by Clemenza (Rudy Giuliani, like Pesto and Seattle, belongs in the scrap heap of '90s Culture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Copernicus; All
Here's the bill. Click on links provided in the bill.

HR 2640

16 posted on 10/08/2007 7:39:58 PM PDT by processing please hold (Duncan Hunter '08) (ROP and Open Borders-a terrorist marriage and hell's coming with them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

Love the slogan. It doesn’t give me the warm fuzzies when you look at where we are in history with this current bunch of politicians.


17 posted on 10/08/2007 7:45:27 PM PDT by stevio ((NRA))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

I got a signed photo of Lowenstein. It’s worth a lot of money. He was murdered by one of his own groupies.


18 posted on 10/08/2007 7:51:57 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (~~~Jihad Fever -- Catch It !~~~ (Backup tag: "Live Fred or Die"))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

Correction, Lent first ran in 1970. If that useful idiot McCarthy lasts another decade, she’ll tie his 22 years in Congress.


19 posted on 10/08/2007 7:54:52 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (~~~Jihad Fever -- Catch It !~~~ (Backup tag: "Live Fred or Die"))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj
Lowenstein was effectively killed by two things:

A. Redistricting. The Fourth District lost SE areas of Queens (Springfield Gardens, Cambria Heights, Rosedale, etc.), which at the time were in considerable racial transition (from Jewish/Italian/German to black). After 1970, it became an all-Nassau district. All the Dem votes in the Five Towns couldn't hold up to the pubbie votes in Garden City, Franklin Square, Rockville Centre, etc.

B. The backlash against bussing and Lowenstein's antiwar stance.

20 posted on 10/08/2007 7:57:43 PM PDT by Clemenza (Rudy Giuliani, like Pesto and Seattle, belongs in the scrap heap of '90s Culture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-60 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson