The Infidel Guy Show
The Debate Hour Show

Faith and Freethought
3 Podcasts, One Feed

or visit this page.


FAQFAQ    SearchSearch    MemberlistMemberlist    UsergroupsUsergroups    RegisterRegister   
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
 VideoRoom and ChatLive Video and Chat Room   The Infidel Guy's Video RoomFreethought Videos
BlogsBlogs    My BlogWeblogs News


Embed Our Player

~ TIP JAR ~


Gun Owners of America Legislative Alert
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AtheistForums.com Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
WildB
Forum Plebian
Forum Plebian


Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 238
Local time: 11:19 PM
Location: USA

PostPosted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:28 pm    Post subject: Gun Owners of America Legislative Alert Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Gun Owners of America Legislative Alert
-- Oppose McCarthy Gun Control Bill, H.R. 297
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

The first major anti-gun bill of the new Congress has already been
introduced, and it could prove to be the most serious threat to the
Second Amendment we face under the new congressional leadership.

On the first full day of the new Congress, anti-gun Rep. Carolyn
McCarthy introduced H.R. 297, the most massive expansion of the Brady
law since it passed in 1993. This is a bill you helped kill last
year, but the new House leadership will be even more eager to pass it
than were their predecessors.

This bill provides, in the form of grants, about $1 billion to the
states to "provide the National Instant Criminal Background Check
System [NICS] with all records concerning persons who are prohibited
from possessing or receiving a firearm under subsection (g) or (n) of
section 922 of title 18, United States Code, regardless of the
elapsed time since the disqualifying event."

Covered under this bill are records pertaining to the Lautenberg
misdemeanor gun ban, lists of persons under indictment, mental health
records, records relevant to the identification of illegal aliens and
other records.

NICS is the system used by the FBI to conduct a background check
prior to a firearm sale by a federally licensed gun dealer. Most
people are aware that NICS records include a list of convicted
felons, but there are many other categories of persons who are
prohibited from possessing firearms for which computerized lists may
not be available. It is these categories that are targeted by this
bill.

For instance, the bill expands upon the unconstitutional Lautenberg
misdemeanor gun ban [922 (g)(9)]. This gun ban, passed as an
amendment to a 1996 omnibus spending bill and signed into law by
President Clinton, was originally introduced by leading anti-gun
Senators Frank Lautenberg, Dianne Feinstein, and Edward Kennedy.

Under the Lautenberg ban, people who have committed very minor
offenses that include pushing, shoving or, in some cases, merely
yelling at a family member can no longer own a firearm for
self-defense.

The Lautenberg gun ban should be repealed, not expanded.

The bill also seeks to computerize records of persons "under
indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term
exceeding one year." Such persons, though not even convicted of the
crime in question, are prohibited from possessing a firearm.

The gun grabbers are seeking to force the states to provide the
federal government all of these indictment records, updated
quarterly. Given the maxim among those in the legal profession that
prosecutors can get a grand jury to "indict a ham sandwich," this,
too, is a gun prohibition that should be repealed, not expanded.

Mental health records are also covered under the McCarthy bill.

This could have a significant impact on American servicemen,
especially those returning from combat situations and who seek some
type of psychiatric care. Often, veterans who have suffered from
post-traumatic stress disorder have been deemed as mentally
"incompetent" and are prohibited from owning guns under 18 U.S.C.
922(g)(4). Records of those instances certainly exist, and, in 1999,
the Department of Veterans Administration turned over 90,000 names of
veterans to the FBI for inclusion into the NICS background check
system.

Mental health records can also have a future impact on young people,
as this country trends closer to mandatory mental health screening
for students. In a 2003 report by a subcommittee of the President's
New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, the author states that "The
problem of emotional disorders in children is large -- 20% of all
children are affected -- and it seems to be growing." It is unknown
how these people will be categorized in the future.

The fact that metal health 'experts,' a notoriously anti-gun
community, would have a say in who is allowed to possess a firearm
is, quite frankly, frightening. Many in the profession would just as
soon consider anyone who owns a gun as 'mentally incompetent.'

Another sobering thought is how computerized data are often
mishandled. Consider the disturbing news reports that 25 million
Social Security number records of veterans were hacked. The more that
our private data gets added into government computers, the more
likely we are to have our identity compromised.

Perhaps the provision that would lead to the greatest number of
'fishing expeditions' is that related to illegal aliens.

Federal law prohibits illegal aliens from owning guns. The bill
requires all relevant data related to who is in this country
illegally. But what records pertaining to illegal aliens from the
states would be relevant? Perhaps a better question would be, what
records are not relevant?

In order to identify illegal aliens, "relevant" records could allow
the FBI to demand state tax returns of all citizens, employment
records, library records (we've already seen how these have been
deemed relevant to terrorism investigations), DMV and hospital
records -- all in the name of making sure that you're not an
illegal.

The sponsor of the bill, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, is one of the most
virulent anti-gunners in the entire Congress. Of the 32 cosponsors
of the bill last year, 31 were GOA "F" rated, one was rated
"D."
These representatives support the bill because it enhances their gun
control agenda, not because they are concerned about protecting your
Second Amendment rights.

Also among the bill's supporters are anti-Second Amendment groups
like the Brady Campaign and Americans for Gun Safety (AGS). In fact,
the McCarthy bill is taken point by point from a 2002 ASG "report"
entitled "How America's Faulty Background Check System Allows
Criminals to Get Guns."

This bill was first introduced in 2002 by Rep. McCarthy and Sen.
Chuck Schumer. It passed out of the House that year, and was only
defeated by a GOA-supported filibuster by former Sen. Bob Smith
(R-NH). Since the bill has already been around for several years,
look for Speaker Nancy Pelosi to put this bill on the fast track as a
way to thank Sarah Brady and her anti-gun cohorts.

The Brady law needs to be repealed, not expanded to allow anti-gun
administrations to find new ways to strip citizens of their Second
Amendment rights.

ACTION: Gun Owners of America is the only national pro-gun
organization opposing the McCarthy bill, so it is imperative that you
contact your representative immediately. Please take action today
and spread the word about H.R. 297! We need all the help we can get.

You can visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Representative a
pre-written e-mail message. And, you can call your Representative
toll-free at 1-877-762-8762.

---- Pre-written letter to your Representative ----

Dear Representative:

Gun Owners of America has told me that anti-gun Rep. Carolyn McCarthy
is trying to expand the Brady Law via H.R. 297. Well, on behalf of
those millions of Americans who:

* have had their gun purchases held up by the Brady background check
system for no apparent reason;

* know of people who have been targets of stalkers or abusive
husbands -- and were killed (or simply forced to live in fear) while
some bureaucrat in West Virginia fumbled around with their lives;

* have tried to buy a gun when the NICS system was shut down
completely -- thereby blocking gun purchases nationally;

* are just curious why the Brady Instant Check -- which was billed as
"the gun control bill that would stop future calls for gun control"
-- almost immediately became a stepping stone for gun control bills
dealing with gun show background checks, private sale background
checks, and more personal information for the NICS registration
system;

* are wondering why the FBI brags about the number of sales blocked
by the Brady check, but can produce no data showing that the Instant
check system has any relation to crime reduction;

* are struck by the fact that the anti-gun Clinton administration
tried to use the system -- without further legislation -- to impose
onerous fees and to retain records forever; and

* are wondering why the folks responsible for Waco and Ruby Ridge
should be put in charge of determining whether or not I can have a
gun --

I would ask you to oppose H.R. 297, the anti-gun legislation
sponsored by liberal Carolyn McCarthy. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Moloth
Coin Operated Boy


Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 23071
Local time: 11:19 PM
Location: Warner Robins, GA
us.gif

PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 12:31 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

MMmm i do love chain e-mails on my discussion forum.


wait... no i don't.
_________________
-=The Believer is Happy; the Skeptic is Wise=-

www.Moloth.com

Last edited by Moloth on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Nimitz
Guest




Local time: 2:19 PM

PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 12:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

*sniff* *sniff* Smells like SPAM in here!
Back to top
CET
The Spiritual Atheist


Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Posts: 12846
Local time: 8:19 PM
Location: SoCal, USA
us.gif

PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 1:06 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

As a gun owner, I don't mind background checks. I don't want someone with a violent criminal record to be allowed to own a gun. However, there should be some sort of expiration on that. Reform actually does happen from time to time and those individuals deserve to have a life again, with all of their rights.
_________________
Namaste,
CET Cool

The Spiritual Atheist

"Much of the suffering in the world comes from the delusion that we are separate from one another." - Gautama Buddha

"Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music." - George Carlin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Blog
Eyedunno
The Great JuJu at the Bottom of the Sea


Joined: 13 Aug 2005
Posts: 3810
Local time: 2:19 PM
Location: Cin City, OH!
us.gif

PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 1:54 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

CET wrote:
As a gun owner, I don't mind background checks. I don't want someone with a violent criminal record to be allowed to own a gun. However, there should be some sort of expiration on that. Reform actually does happen from time to time and those individuals deserve to have a life again, with all of their rights.

Very reasonable. Well, aside from the fact that a law prohibiting felons from owning guns doesn't necessarily prevent them from doing so. After all, they've already broken the law once...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yellow_Number_Five
Forum Master
Forum Master


Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Posts: 10036
Local time: 12:19 AM
Location: The 5% Nation

PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 2:48 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Eyedunno wrote:
CET wrote:
As a gun owner, I don't mind background checks. I don't want someone with a violent criminal record to be allowed to own a gun. However, there should be some sort of expiration on that. Reform actually does happen from time to time and those individuals deserve to have a life again, with all of their rights.

Very reasonable. Well, aside from the fact that a law prohibiting felons from owning guns doesn't necessarily prevent them from doing so. After all, they've already broken the law once...


And that's the real point. Legislation of prohibition does not prevent criminals from being criminals, it only makes criminals out of otherwise law abiding citizens. Be it drugs or guns or sex.
_________________
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

If you love God, burn a church! - Jello Biafra

When I hear of Schr?dinger's cat, I reach for my gun. - Stephen Hawking

Fear is just another word for ignorance. - Hunter S. Thompson

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Eyedunno
The Great JuJu at the Bottom of the Sea


Joined: 13 Aug 2005
Posts: 3810
Local time: 2:19 PM
Location: Cin City, OH!
us.gif

PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:58 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Yellow_Number_Five wrote:
Eyedunno wrote:
CET wrote:
As a gun owner, I don't mind background checks. I don't want someone with a violent criminal record to be allowed to own a gun. However, there should be some sort of expiration on that. Reform actually does happen from time to time and those individuals deserve to have a life again, with all of their rights.

Very reasonable. Well, aside from the fact that a law prohibiting felons from owning guns doesn't necessarily prevent them from doing so. After all, they've already broken the law once...


And that's the real point. Legislation of prohibition does not prevent criminals from being criminals, it only makes criminals out of otherwise law abiding citizens. Be it drugs or guns or sex.

Indeed, though I'm on the fence about people who are on parole/prohibition. It would still seem to be unconstitutional though, as the second amendment is even more uncompromising than the first - "shall not be infringed" as opposed to "Congress shall make no law."

Then again, a constitution is only valid to the extent that the people understand it and insist on its enforcement.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WildB
Forum Plebian
Forum Plebian


Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 238
Local time: 11:19 PM
Location: USA

PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 5:30 am    Post subject: Not Spam~ Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Eyedunno wrote:
Yellow_Number_Five wrote:
Eyedunno wrote:
CET wrote:
As a gun owner, I don't mind background checks. I don't want someone with a violent criminal record to be allowed to own a gun. However, there should be some sort of expiration on that. Reform actually does happen from time to time and those individuals deserve to have a life again, with all of their rights.

Very reasonable. Well, aside from the fact that a law prohibiting felons from owning guns doesn't necessarily prevent them from doing so. After all, they've already broken the law once...


And that's the real point. Legislation of prohibition does not prevent criminals from being criminals, it only makes criminals out of otherwise law abiding citizens. Be it drugs or guns or sex.

Indeed, though I'm on the fence about people who are on parole/prohibition. It would still seem to be unconstitutional though, as the second amendment is even more uncompromising than the first - "shall not be infringed" as opposed to "Congress shall make no law."

Then again, a constitution is only valid to the extent that the people understand it and insist on its enforcement.



Well said.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
sjc
P.I.T.A.


Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 1603
Local time: 12:19 AM

PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 5:56 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Its not as if you want to make easy so that any yahoo off of the street to have one. Rolling Eyes
_________________
America is not worth the effort anymore. RIP. It was suicide.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yellow_Number_Five
Forum Master
Forum Master


Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Posts: 10036
Local time: 12:19 AM
Location: The 5% Nation

PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 6:21 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

sjc wrote:
Its not as if you want to make easy so that any yahoo off of the street to have one. Rolling Eyes


Yes, actually it is. If you have a clean criminal record, why shouldn't you be permitted to purchase a firearm?
_________________
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

If you love God, burn a church! - Jello Biafra

When I hear of Schr?dinger's cat, I reach for my gun. - Stephen Hawking

Fear is just another word for ignorance. - Hunter S. Thompson

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
SvZurich
Loki's Little Valkyrie


Joined: 06 Oct 2003
Posts: 22928
Local time: 8:19 PM
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington DC

PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 6:27 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Yellow_Number_Five wrote:
sjc wrote:
Its not as if you want to make easy so that any yahoo off of the street to have one. Rolling Eyes


Yes, actually it is. If you have a clean criminal record, why shouldn't you be permitted to purchase a firearm?


Quoted for Truth.

If you are a law abiding citizen (no criminal record) then you have and should have all the right in the world to own a firearm. I do.
_________________
Kimberly (HSBUH) aka
Baroness Sylvia von Zurich (the only Goldwater Conservative) endorses the Meadow Party's Bill and Opus for the 2012 Presidential election!

The Atheist Forums have new rules!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
sjc
P.I.T.A.


Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 1603
Local time: 12:19 AM

PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 9:16 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Yellow_Number_Five wrote:
Yes, actually it is. If you have a clean criminal record, why shouldn't you be permitted to purchase a firearm?


Proof that you won't be irresponsible with said firearm and that you actually know how to handle one and I don't mean knowing just how to fire one. In Canada anyone who wants to legally own a firearm has to prove these things first. It may not stop everyone, but it does limit the problem. Its no different than having a driver's license. I have nothing against responsible gun ownership.

BTW, how would a firearm dealer know that you don't have a criminal record unless they check first? Identity thief is a growing problem.
_________________
America is not worth the effort anymore. RIP. It was suicide.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Eyedunno
The Great JuJu at the Bottom of the Sea


Joined: 13 Aug 2005
Posts: 3810
Local time: 2:19 PM
Location: Cin City, OH!
us.gif

PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 9:47 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

sjc wrote:
Proof that you won't be irresponsible with said firearm

There is no such proof, and part of me suspects that was your point.
I hate to paraphrase a rather tired analogy, but why not demand proof that anybody who fills up a container with gasoline will not use it for arson or keep the container open in the garage and smoke a bunch of cigarettes in there?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hillbillyatheist
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 29 Jun 2004
Posts: 15986
Local time: 11:19 PM
Location: Denver Colorado.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 10:42 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

wow, eyedunno, I love the gas analogy. I am gonna have to use that one in future gun debates I get into. thanks for the ammo. Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WildB
Forum Plebian
Forum Plebian


Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 238
Local time: 11:19 PM
Location: USA

PostPosted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:12 am    Post subject: Gulf club back ground cheaks ~ Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Gulf clubs make some fine tools for defence but in the wrong hands could be lethal. Ban all gulf clubs...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AtheistForums.com Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 1 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Loans - Web Advertising - Mortgage Calculator - Mobile Phones - Quick Collect
phpBB SEO