New Gun Ban proposed in US

[Curly1]

And so it begins......


Saturday, February 24, 2007

On Feb. 14, 2007, Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) introduced H.R. 1022, a bill with the stated purpose, â??to reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes.â?�
McCarthyâ??s verbiage warrants explanation. Presumably, what she means by â??assault weapons banâ?� is the Clinton Gun Ban of 1994. Congress allowed the ban to expire in 2004 for multiple reasons, including the fact that federal, state and local law enforcement agency studies showed that guns affected by the ban had been used in only a small percentage of crime, before and after the ban was imposed.

With the nationâ??s murder rate 43% lower than in 1991, and the re-legalized guns still used in only a small percentage of crime, reauthorizing the Clinton Gun Ban would be objectionable enough. But McCarthyâ??s â??other purposesâ?� would make matters even worse. H.R. 1022 would ban every gun banned by the Clinton ban, plus millions more guns, including:

â?¢ Every gun made to comply with the Clinton ban. (The Clinton ban dictated the kinds of grips, stocks and attachments new guns could have. Manufacturers modified new guns to the Clinton requirements. H.R. 1022 would ban the modified guns too.)

â?¢ Guns exempted by the Clinton ban. (Ruger Mini-14s and -30s and Ranch Rifles; .30 cal. carbines; and fixed-magazine, semi-automatic, center-fire rifles that hold more than 10 rounds.)

â?¢ All semi-automatic shotguns. (E.g., Remington, Winchester, Beretta and Benelli, used for hunting, sport shooting, and self-defense. H.R. 1022 would ban them because they have â??any characteristic that can function as a grip,â?� and would also ban their main component, called the â??receiver.â?�)

â?¢ All detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles-including, for example, the ubiquitous Ruger 10/22 .22 rimfire-because they have â??any characteristic that can function as a grip.â?�

â?¢ Target shooting rifles. (E.g., the three centerfire rifles most popular for marksmanship competitions: the Colt AR-15, the Springfield M1A and the M1 â??Garand.â?�)

â?¢ Any semi-automatic shotgun or rifle an Attorney General one day claims isnâ??t â??sporting,â?� even though the constitutions of the U.S. and 44 states, and the laws of all 50 states, recognize the right to use guns for defense.

â?¢ 65 named guns (the Clinton law banned 19 by name); semi-auto fixed-magazine pistols of over 10 rounds capacity; and frames, receivers and parts used to repair or refurbish guns.

H.R. 1022 would also ban the importation of magazines exempted by the Clinton ban, ban the sale of a legally-owned â??assault weaponâ?� with a magazine of over 10 rounds capacity, and begin backdoor registration of guns, by requiring private sales of banned guns, frames, receivers and parts to be conducted through licensed dealers. Finally, whereas the Clinton Gun Ban was imposed for a 10-year trial period, H.R. 1022 would be a permanent ban.

Please be sure to contact your U.S. Representative and urge him or her to oppose H.R. 1022!

You can call your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121.

[Edward Tinker]

To write your congresman;

http://www.house.gov/writerep/


Too many gun owners sit by and expect others to do their job for them.

Click on the link, send a polite note that you OPPOSE bill H.R. 1022


ed

[tudorbug]

Easy to do, via Ed's link. Here's my send to Congressman Jim Marshall of Georgia's 8th:

"Jim:

I understand that Representative Carolyn McCarthy of New York introduced HR 1022 on 14 February, 2007, a bill that would reauthorize the Clinton era gun band, banning every gun covered by that useless and and ill-conceived legistlation and as well as many, many others owned by collectors, hunters and sport shooters.

These others included target shooting rifles such as those used at Camp Perry such as the M1 Garand, and semi-automatic shot guns which are a main stay of small game hunting.

I am totally opposed to any such legislation.

I ask that you oppose this bill to an extreme.

Very kindly,

David"

[zeke1312]

OK, I've sent an email to our Nebraska Congressman Jeff Fortunberry regarding this issue. Jeff is pro gun but I thought I'd reinforce his position.

[Curly1]

Thanks Ed for posting the link, I just posted it over at the gunboards and Stills luger forums.

[John Sabato]

Just sent mine to Congressman Frank Wolf of Virginia. Thanks for the notification and the link...

[susan]

Sent in my comments. Proud to live in a country that allows us to voice our opinions this way.

Likewise....thank's for the link.

[Navy]

I would e-mail Jim Moran , my congress critter, but I have bigger issues than this to deal with him, his being a contemptable cut and run democrat. I consider him a feral animal of the lower orders and, you know what? I REALLY question his patriotism.

Tom A.

[Brent B.]

This needs to be posted on ALL gun forums. I'm only a memeber of this one but I'm sure some of the other members are in other groups as well. Just a thought. Brent B.

[stefanosg]

I also heard but could not find in writing that this bill, whih is currently in commitee, will also require you to turn in the banned weapon to local law enforcement. Has anyone else heard this?

[Steinar]

Brent B.
Your inbox is full

[OGN]

Originally posted by Brent B.
This needs to be posted on ALL gun forums. I'm only a memeber of this one but I'm sure some of the other members are in other groups as well. Just a thought. Brent B.

Out here in California, where we are pretty much the testing ground for oppressive gun laws, believe me, this bill is being talked about fervently on all the forums out here and WE ARE writing our representatives to let them know. This is one of the most oppressive anti-gun bills to be thrown at us at a national level since the 1994 ban (or even before that), and it's even worse.

[davidkachel]

Until gun owners and the NRA go on the offensive instead of just holding our ground, these lunatics will keep on steadily whittling away at gun rights until the only guns we can own are caulking guns.
We should take a lesson from their playbook. They almost got away with eliminating gun manufacturers by suing them. We should make their lives so miserable and costly that they WANT to give up their treasonous efforts.

The treasonous scumbag who proposed H.R. 1022 knows full well it will not pass with all those provisions. She loaded it down knowing she would "get something" because gun owners would be so relieved to see the worst of it eliminated, they would go along with some whittling.

Elected officials are not stupid. There is zero chance that gun grabbing politicians are unaware they are assaulting the Constitution. These people are traitors and should be treated as such.

[stefanosg]

Originally posted by davidkachel
The treasonous scumbag who proposed H.R. 1022 knows full well it will not pass with all those provisions. She loaded it down knowing she would "get something" because gun owners would be so relieved to see the worst of it eliminated, they would go along with some whittling.

Elected officials are not stupid. There is zero chance that gun grabbing politicians are unaware they are assaulting the Constitution. These people are traitors and should be treated as such.

Amen Brother. Its like selling your car. If you want 10k you ask for 12k and let the other guy talk you down. As for treason, I think anyone proposing a law that conflicts with the Constitution should be brought up on charges. They swore to UPHOLD the Constitution What about that

Here is an online petition you can sign to help oppose the ban
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/409898348

[johnnv]

Well, here she is. Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) on the left next to the woman who wants to be your President.

[George Anderson]

The one on the right looks a lot like our RINO senator John Warner(R-VA) in drag. For those who don't know, he is the former Mr Elizabeth Taylor no.12.

[Curly1]

Hillary's head has gotten pretty big with visions of the white house.

[stefanosg]

Especially for someone who said she had no plans , two years ago, to run for the Presidency.

[Curly1]

I never believed that for a minute. I am all for a women getting there but not this one.

[davidkachel]

The difference between Bill & Hillary:

Bill makes you really want to believe him when he says he isn't a crook.
Nobody believes Hillary when she says she isn't a crook.