C-Span Alert (Debate begins this morning @ 9:30am on S. 1805 & Assasult Weapons Ban Renewal)

[conservativefromGa]

Senate debate on the gun manufactures liability bill will begin at 9:30 this morning on C-Span2. Expect Feinstein to attach her Assault Weapons Ban renewal rider on it. Also McCain may attach a rider closing the so called "gun show loophole". This is it folks.

[looscnnn]

I did not know they had done a movie. Thanks for the info.

[No.6]

I don't know the law about MI's 24 hour rule and vacations. I think the law involves 24 hours from when you realize the theft, but I'm not sure. So in this case I guess you'd come home, see the break-in and the drilled safe, and file your report then. If during your vacation everything happens so fast that the theft, a murder, and a resultant lawsuit have already happened before you return, the police will probably already have been in your house and documented the situation. I'm sure you can find some scenario under which you're still liable (what if they took the whole safe, for instance, and presumably whatever it was bolted to) but that's missing the point.

Please keep in mind that you can already be sued under these conditions you're describing. This amendment doesn't open up new legal vulnerabilities. If it did I would oppose it. The change is to close a vulnerability under the circumstance that you have your firearm locked up.

[DBrow]

Yup, I see your point. You'd think a Senator would be able to write clearly and unambiguously.

That, of course, leaves little wiggle room and less for lawyers to do.

[No.6]

"Unfortunately, this is the case for me at the present time."

That's a shame (verifying an earlier post I found a little bedside safe for $99 online at Cabela's) but keep in mind presently you can be sued if that firearm is stolen and used wrongly. If this bill passes and you still have no safe nothing changes.

IMO entirely independently of laws and lawsuits or lack thereof it is reasonable to secure a firearm when you're not going to be around it. If you're home, certainly don't put any dam trigger lock on your gun and turn it into a club. But if you're away, and your firearm isn't with you, put some kind of lock on it. Better yet get your CCW in order and take it with you :)

[DBrow]

Since they do not (yet) define "gun safe", I suspect a stout metal box with a padlock would qualify as a safe storage device- like a yardsale or fleamarket toolbox. You could lag it to a beam or the floor if you wanted immobility. I know a guy who got a row of lockers from a factory that was upgrading and uses those to store long guns- combo padlocks on each 18" x 56" door.

If the feds issue standards on what is and is not a "gun safe" then the financial crunch will make many of us liable for civil and criminal penalties if a gun is taken.

Me, I just carry all day and wear my Ernie Hill leather to bed- it's under my control, eh?

[looscnnn]

Right now I am working on trying to get the house reshingled and shed replaced. Then I want to get reloading equipment, etc (may need it). I want to get a decent safe for my guns, I like the big Cabela's safes but don't have that kind of money right now.

[OXENinFLA]

http://www.usanetwork.com/movies/dcsniper/

[OXENinFLA]

Oh great, Levin is about to put forth an Amendment.

[looscnnn]

"Oh great, Levin is about to put forth an Amendment"

We need term limits!!!!! This joker has been in office how long?

[IGOTMINE]

Our guys need to read quotes from the bottom feeding lawyers behind these suits. "Second Amendment...BooooSHEET"

[Ronaldus Magnus]

If AP is defined by a performance standard, that's about any centerfire rifle ammo.

Exactly, the demoncrats are intentionally confusing the issue. "Armor piercing ammunition" used to mean steel or tungsten cored bullets intended to penetrate steel armor. The demoncrats are attempting to expand that definition to include any ammunition that can penetrate soft body armor. The highest level of DOJ soft armor protection, level IIIa, is only intended to stop handgun and some shotgun ammunition. This amendment could effectively ban all center-fire rifle ammunition, since any bullet (including jacketed soft point or even cast lead) with a velocity over about 1,500 feet per second can penetrate soft body armor.

[MileHi]

Exactly, the demoncrats are intentionally confusing the issue. "Armor piercing ammunition" used to mean steel or tungsten cored bullets intended to penetrate steel armor. The demoncrats are attempting to expand that definition to include any ammunition that can penetrate soft body armor.

That tactic work well with the term "assault rifle".

[looscnnn]

What is Levin proposing?

[CougarGA7]

(1) STUDY.--The Attorney General shall conduct a study to determine whether a uniform standard for the uniform testing of projectiles against Body Armor is feasible.

I love that line. It says that the Attorney General will conduct a study to see if we can do ballistics testing. Duh.

[Monitor]

Which is all pretty much what I was saying from the get-go you moron.

No, it's not. Here are your words:

Boxer's Child safety locks REQUIRED on all guns amendment.

Oops, not quite. According to the amendment, gun dealers will have to supply all guns they sell with a lock. No big deal, as NIB guns come with one anyway. And I don't have to keep my guns locked up, but if I do, I "shall be entitled to immunity from a qualified civil liability action." Oooo, that EEEEvil Barbara Boxer (along with all those EEEEvil Republicans) just granted me immunity - how dare they.

Nope, she is calling this a LAW. You would be required to use it by the sound of it. Enforcement? Sounds mostly like Point of Sale kinda thing, but I'd be willing to bet they would want a penalty for non-comppliance when they stumble on it.

BZZZT! Wrong again. We would not be required to use a locking device.

BS. You shoulda heard what Boxer just added to it. They gave away half the farm on that one.

Half of who's farm to who? Again, I now have a way (which I never did before) to gain immunity from civil liability. Who wins and who looses? Little Johnny "Off-his-meds" Prozak takes a hammer and chistle to your gun lock, takes your gun, shoots up a school, and YOU HAVE IMMUNITY.

The Boxer Amendment requires that gun lock be sold with all new handgun purchases. $2500 fine if your unlocked gun is used in an accident, stolen and used in crime, ect... It also REQUIRES that firearms manufacturers have integral locking devices and load indicators. We are waiting for the amendment to be added to Thomas.loc.gov to see exactly what it DOES say.

You got the first sentence right, but the next two sentences are both wrong. AGAIN.

Bullsh*t Shooter. We were sold out by at least 20 Republicans.

Sold out. By 20 Republicans. Who gave us immunity from civil liability. Get a grip.

Hey jackass. Can't you count? Look at the list I posted above. Your beloved Republicans SOLD US OUT. Are you so enamored of the GOP that you actually think one single Libertarian or RLC candidate would have voted with those 23 traitors? Get a grip.

And here we go with the bashing of not only the Republicans - who didn't sell you out - but of Republican supporters who aren't so quick to condemn (unlike you) before all the evidence is in.

Well the rest is just more of the same uninformed Republican and Republican supporter bashing.

[Dead Corpse]

Got it. You approve of Boxers Amendment and Gun Locks.

At least we are clear which side you are on. I qualified quite a few of those statements, which you conventiently left out.

A locked front door on my house, hell... just OWNING a house and the private property Rights that go with it, should be enough to make me immune from the actions of some theif. But you apparently APPROVE of a gun lock requirement which actually increases my liability. Thanks, but no thanks.

[Monitor]

Got it. You approve of Boxers Amendment and Gun Locks.

Again, totally misrepresenting my posts on the subject, which comes as no surprise as you've got nothing else to argue with.

At least we are clear which side you are on.

I'm a gun owner. That's the side I'm on, regardless of your misrepresentations to the contrary. Do a little digging, and you'll see I was active in trying to get CCW passed here in Wisconsin.

I qualified quite a few of those statements, which you conventiently left out.

Each of your posts, I posted in their entirety. But I did not post every one of your posts. I only posted those to clearly show how wrong you were. And you were wrong about most of that amendment from the git-go.

But you apparently APPROVE of a gun lock requirement which actually increases my liability.

That amendment does no such thing. It doesn't create any liabilities for gun owners that didn't exist before. The only liabilities added are for gun dealers, and NIB guns come with locks anyway. It does, however, provide immunity from liability if your handguns are locked up. But again, your complete lack of comprehension comes as no surprise to me.

I advise you to sit down, STFU, and READ the amendment before making an even bigger arse of yourself.

[OXENinFLA]

Lootenburg (the greased skids Senator) is up blabbing about .50cal and TERRORISTS buying guns.

He's putting forth an amendment.

[Ronaldus Magnus]

Anyone catch Sen. Frank Lautenberg say:

"We have to lay the first amendment aside before proceeding to the second amendment."

I wish I was taping the debate since, although I know he wasn't talking about the Bill of Rights, this would have made a great video clip!

[CougarGA7]

Of course Terrorist buy guns. But the don't go to a gun dealership to get them.

When are these chowder-heads going to figure out that terrorist buy guns from illegal arms dealers. And the more gun restrictions you put on the books, the more illegal dealers there will be.