Only those who have been convicted of a felony, are under indictment on felony charges, and/or have been adjudicated mentally ill, are prohibited from purchasing firearms.
(See: ATF Form 4473)
So, why will "minor infractions" even be included in the Federal database?
And what "minor infractions"? Jay walking? Traffic tickets?
I drove by a dead skunk on the road a few days ago.
That dead skunk smelled better than this NRA "compromise".
And NRA staunchly defends Mitt Romney for the Massachusetts Assault Weapons Ban- I mean, firearms reform bill that reduced the size of the carry permit to one that will fit your wallet.
Of course, once the legislation is passed and the courts and BATFE come up with “reasonable regulations” under which the opportunity to clear your name will be turned into legal process, NRA will be working toward their next compromise and will defend the last one.
The NRA compromises again?
A lot of folks were kept in the database for merely having harsh words for an ex-wife. Think that's right? The old rules had a lot of wiggle room. This should tighten things a bit. I wish the NRA had fought for national reciprocity, too. But that would have queered the deal, I'll bet. As far as I'm concerned this kind of legislation should slow down the overall juggernaut agenda of the extremeists until we can get a more solid progun majority and President into place.
Yes I'm suspicious of any deal the RATs agree to that would tend to offer us anything as a "concession." So we'll trust for now....trust but verify. If they try to add more of their wish list, it'll be easy to scream "breach of trust" and fight it. Then it makes them devote more and more resources in an election year which raises the issue even higher into the public eye. West-by-God-Virginia went Republican for the first time in decades during the 2000 election on JUST this issue! That cost Gore the White House.
The 1934, and 1968 gun control acts were also supported by the NRA.
NOT !!!
Where was the NRA everytime new more restictive gun laws were passed in the past? They we either supporting them or nowhere to be found.
I recall 1994 rather vividly - the NRA "worked with" legislators on that one as well. It was couched as "common-sense" gun control, "gun control we can live with." The next thing you know the kiddies in the Clinton war room decided to get partisan with it and slide the knife into the back by presenting it as their royal personages having "stood up to the NRA." And what do you know if BJ Billy didn't end up stating "I'm going to stretch this just as far as I can." Which he did.
The Democrats have NO credibility on this issue, and there is no more reason to trust them on it once they've gotten their way than there is to trust a rattlesnake not to bite. The members of the NRA - specifically the ILA within it - are so enamored of their Beltway sinecures that they are willing to compromise on anything just to be considered one of the boys. They should know better. They DO know better. I'm one Life member who's going to be telling them so.
ping!
So how would this gun deal stop the mad man from killing 30 people? A question no one will ask and no one will answer either.
Here is a hint ... if the guy was sane enough to shoot 30 people, don’t you think he was sane enough to steal a gun?
Democrats made simple, ... raise taxes, fund socialism and gun control, it’s all they ever know. Feel good crap.
So how are we doing on eliminating gun free killing zones? Teaching self defense?
Ping
Like a piece of meat laying forgotten on a picnic bench, any deal with Democrats will soon turn rotten. I have had to pay up membership in NRA to shoot in some competitions but these compromising buggers will sell us out.
Once again the NRA preemptively surrenders. Instead of all out opposing a bill in which nothing is given to gun owners they go along to get along - scew ‘em and their anti-gun buddies.