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

It only takes a second to fill out the online form & send a message, it works & I receive written replies from my reps, so they do receive & read the messages.
1 posted on 11/12/2002 5:10:10 PM PST by chuknospam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last
To: chuknospam
It is in every law-abiding gun owner's interest to prevent nutjobs from walking in and buying a gun.
2 posted on 11/12/2002 5:12:19 PM PST by mvpel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
Really, folks, why should American voters have to stand watch over the Capitol to assure that their own representatives are not putting them out of the freedom business?

Isn't it about time to invite people like Schummer and others of his ilk to leave the business of politics to other, more "American Minded" people? Who keeps electing these ouevos dormindos?
5 posted on 11/12/2002 5:16:25 PM PST by RISU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
How did this pass the House? What is the President's position on this?
10 posted on 11/12/2002 5:26:42 PM PST by caltrop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
The House has passed H.R. 4757, the so-called "Our Lady of Peace Act." Its chief sponsor is the rabidly anti-gun Rep. Carolyn McCarthy of New York.

Did it pass some House Committee or has it been voted on in the whole House? What was the vote count?

13 posted on 11/12/2002 5:32:43 PM PST by hattend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
The Lautenberg Amendment must be repealed. Taking 2A rights from Americans for pushing, shoving, or yelling would disarm virtually every American.

Frank Lautenberg - "Don't you think, that is, wouldn't you agree that every American that has a semi-automatic weapon oughta turn that weapon in?"

16 posted on 11/12/2002 5:40:14 PM PST by copycat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
If I am reading the Louseinberg Law correctly, it means that Clintoon cannot own or purchase a firearm because of the perjury case ????
17 posted on 11/12/2002 5:40:36 PM PST by Renegade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
The House has passed

Gasp! But the House is controlled by the GOP. Hmmmmm. If Republicans are pro-RKBA, then why did they pass.......

Doh!!!

Be happy we have a Republican congress....no matter what they do.

20 posted on 11/12/2002 5:48:44 PM PST by ForOurFuture
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
This must be more of those "common-sense" restrictions we keep hearing about. You know, the ones that allow the Gestapo to monitor your every move and to decide if the Second Amendment applies to YOU?
21 posted on 11/12/2002 5:56:39 PM PST by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
Our Lady of Peace Act?

Our Lady of Peace Act??

Our Lady of Peace Act???

What's up with the title?

23 posted on 11/12/2002 6:03:40 PM PST by dasboot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
Funny how our fearless leaders...well protected with their private security and secret gun ownership..cant agree on Homeland Defense
But fall all over themselves disarming as many Americans as their hot little hands can manage..
Do I still have to pay the same amount of tax as Americans who have more "rights"?
25 posted on 11/12/2002 6:06:32 PM PST by joesnuffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
Plus these databases don't work like intended. Even if John Muhammed bought the gun from the Tacoma, WA gun store (it sounds as if it was stolen) his recently filed restraint order by his wife wasn't in the system yet. In fact, they had a backlog of 18 months of restraint orders due to a computer glitch.
While I'm all for going against big brother, we can be thankful that big brother screws up most of what he does. That is unless you anger the wrong people.
26 posted on 11/12/2002 6:08:37 PM PST by lelio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
Isn't it great that the republicans are in control? How long did they wait to pass anti-gun legislation? A week? I'm sure though that Homeland security can't possibly work without this legislation.
27 posted on 11/12/2002 6:12:12 PM PST by Demidog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
BUMP IT BABY
30 posted on 11/12/2002 6:18:34 PM PST by flamingbug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
Time to buy another weapon. Everytime the politicos introduce one of these bills, I buy another weapon. When they eventually do away with our rights I can still stand up to them.
33 posted on 11/12/2002 6:25:48 PM PST by caisson71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
This legislation will only discourage people who need mental health treatment from seeking it.
34 posted on 11/12/2002 6:27:06 PM PST by Djarum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
On October 16, the U.S. House of Representatives passed by voice vote legislation authorizing funding to ensure that states and
localities report the names of individuals "adjudicated as mentally defective" with the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background

Check System (NCIC). Sponsors of the legislation, known as "Our Lady of Peace Act" (HR 4757/S 2826), attempted to expedite
Senate passage late last week but were blocked in their effort to achieve unanimous consent. Since then, both the House and
Senate have recessed until at least the week of November 18 when members of Congress will return for a post-election "lame duck"
session. It is expected that sponsors of HR 4757/HR 2826 will again attempt to push the bill through the Senate and on to President

Bush's desk where it likely would be signed into law.

During the current congressional recess, NAMI will be attempting to force changes in the current version of the "Our Lady of Peace
Act" to address concerns raised about provisions in the bill that would erode the privacy of individual's mental illness treatment status
and reinforce existingstigma regarding people with mental illness. NAMI will also be urging the Senate Judiciary Committee to
convene hearings on the bill to examine the potential impact on privacy rights of individuals with mental illness and likelihood that
potential disclosure to the federal NCIC database might deter individuals from seeking treatment.

To date, neither the House nor the
Senate have held hearings on HR 4757/S 2826.

In an E-News message circulated on October 2, NAMI outlined a range of concerns about HR 4757/S 2826. Included below is
additional background material and a restatement of the impact this legislation could have on individuals with mental illness.
During
the current recess, NAMI advocates are encouraged to share these concerns with their U.S. senators and urge them to amend the
current version of this legislation to ensure that the privacy rights of consumers are not unfairly compromised as part of the effort to
ensure appropriate screening of individuals seeking to purchase firearms. All members of Congress can be reached by calling the

Capitol Switchboard toll free at 1-800-839-5276 or at 202-224-3121 or online through www.congress.org.

Background on "Our Lady of Peace Act"

Since 1968, federal law has required state and local government agencies to report the names of persons "adjudicated as mentally
defective" to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which is responsible for conducting the National Instant Criminal Background
Check System (NCIC) for people seeking to purchase firearms. However, most states and localities have never complied with this
law.

HR 4757/S 2826 authorize a set of incentive grants to state and local agencies to report these names. Although NAMI
recognizes the importance of screening individuals who wish to purchase guns, there is mounting concern that this legislation
contains overly broad language and has potential to reinforce stigma and compromise the privacy of individuals with mental
illnesses.

The term "adjudication as a mentally defective," as defined in HR 4757/S 2826, encompasses a variety of categories. While it is
much narrower than all individuals diagnosed with a mental illness, it does include all individuals that have been involuntarily
committed to a psychiatric facility, without regard to functional impairment, when the commitment occurred or the reason for the
commitment.

Additionally, any determination (formal or otherwise) by a governmental agency that a person is a danger to themselves
as a result of a mental disorder or illness would serve as a basis for reporting their name to the FBI's NCIC. Likewise, a determination
that a person lacks capacity to contract or manage their own affairs would also trigger a disclosure to the NCIC.

Second, as currently drafted HR 4757/S 2868 is lacking adequate protections to safeguard the privacy of individuals whose names
are reported to the FBI for maintenance in the NCIC system. Specifically, the bill directs the Attorney General to work with states,
local law enforcement and the mental health system to establish regulations and protocols for protecting privacy. However, the bill
contains no specific parameters or guidelines for doing so.

Finally, in NAMI's view the very use of the language "adjudicated as a mentally defective" in S 2826 is outdated and highly
stigmatizing of people with mental illness and would possibly deter some people from seeking necessary treatment.
35 posted on 11/12/2002 6:30:04 PM PST by joesnuffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
Why did the Republican controlled House pass this??
36 posted on 11/12/2002 6:31:36 PM PST by cake_crumb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
Hey how bout those RAPE VICTIMS... brutalized traumatized terrorized...who had the temerity to go see a MD and deal with what happened...
Now at the Govts. discretion (or lack of) these same RAPE VICTIMS wont be able to defend themselves from another attack...and if they do mangage to get a gun or if they havent been informed that they are NO LONGER eligible to own one...well Uncle Sugar can send his goons to take care of our little armed female...and teach her what fer...hell they might even hep they selves to a little...after all whose gonna complain :)
39 posted on 11/12/2002 6:40:53 PM PST by joesnuffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
E-mails sent.
41 posted on 11/12/2002 6:43:59 PM PST by RightWinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: chuknospam
Sent. Thanks! Bump
43 posted on 11/12/2002 6:54:40 PM PST by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

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