The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 4, 2013, 05:19 PM   #1
W.E.G.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2007
Location: all over Virginia
Posts: 266
ten gun bills introduced today - action item

Feel free to forward to like-minded persons.

Mostly bad bills to oppose.
Two good ones at the bottom of the list.


Go to http://www.congress.org/congressorg/...046526&type=ML and enter these short messages for your elected officials.
The system will remember your name, etc., so you only need to enter all that once.
After that, its cut-and-paste to hammer each of the respective the messages forward.

Please send a separate message for each bill

Please oppose H.R. 137(sponsor: Representative McCarthy)
This bill would prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition clips.

Please oppose H.R. 138 (sponsor: Representative McCarthy)
This bill would prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition clips.

Please oppose H.R. 141 (sponsor: Representative McCarthy)
This bill would require criminal background checks on all firearms transactions at gun shows.

Please oppose H.R. 142 (sponsor: Representative McCarthy)
This bill would require face-to-face purchases of ammunition, the licensing of ammunition dealers, and the reporting of bulk ammo purchases.

Please oppose H.R. 34 (sponsor: Representative Rush)
This bill would "tighten" firearms “licensing” requirements.

Please oppose H.R. 117 (sponsor: Representative Holt)
This bill would "tighten" firearms “licensing” requirements.

Please oppose H.R. 65 (sponsor: Representative Lee)
This bill would raise the eligibility age to carry a handgun from 18 to 21.

Please oppose H.R. 21 (sponsor: Representative Moran)
This bill would require background checks for all gun sales, and to require gun owners to report when their guns have been stolen.




Please support H.R. 35 (sponsor: Representative Stockman)
This bill would end federal law requiring that areas around schools be designated as "gun free zones."

Please support H.R. 133 (sponsor: Representative Massie)
This bill would end federal law requiring that areas around schools be designated as "gun free zones."
W.E.G. is offline  
Old January 4, 2013, 07:33 PM   #2
Dr Big Bird PhD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 778
LOVE the last two bills. Glad there is something in the works in DC that's positive.

H.R. 34, 117, 137, 138 are not surprising. Do you have any more specifics on 34/117? What does "tightening" mean.

H.R. 21 seems the most likely to go through, in my opinion.

I FAIL to see how 65 and 141 has ANYTHING to do with ANYTHING, other than just jumping on the bandwagon.

H.R. 142 is the scariest in my opinion. That one has to go, out of all the others.
__________________
I told the new me,
"Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'"
But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back."
Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor
Dr Big Bird PhD is offline  
Old January 4, 2013, 07:48 PM   #3
Warrior1256
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 11, 2012
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 156
And so it begins. Get ready. It is going to be dog eat dog. These will not be that last anti bills proposed.
Warrior1256 is offline  
Old January 4, 2013, 08:30 PM   #4
Eagleks
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 23, 2009
Posts: 574
Quote:
Please oppose H.R. 21 (sponsor: Representative Moran)
This bill would require background checks for all gun sales, and to require gun owners to report when their guns have been stolen.
What ?? That's our "Republican" Senator, who's supposed to be such a strong 2A supporter. Putting the word on this one, and the letter /calling campaign will begin. He may need a new job after the next election...... when he gets voted out.

They (Dem's or someone) has really convinced them there is a "gunshow loophole" and unlicensed dealers selling guns without background checks.

We've been having a real time getting our reps to understand, there are NO unlicensed dealers at gunshows...... nor that aren't doing background checks. It doesn't exist. It is "personal sales" ....... at least one Rep assigned an aide to try to talk to me until the points I was making was understood. Finally..... they read the laws I was pointing out to them, and the lightbulb went off .. and they understood it. They kept saying, "there must be a section" ...... they finally realized, the info they had gotten ... was all bogus.... there is no "gunshow loophole".

Obviously, he doesn't get it either.
Eagleks is offline  
Old January 4, 2013, 08:56 PM   #5
doofus47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2010
Location: live in a in a house when i'm not in a tent
Posts: 1,253
hook a brother up. I can't find the bills.
__________________
I'm right about the metric system 3/4 of the time.
doofus47 is offline  
Old January 4, 2013, 09:40 PM   #6
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,759
These bills are more or less introduced day one of every congress.
__________________
$0 of an NRA membership goes to legislative action or court battles. Not a dime. Only money contributed to the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF. You could just donate to the Second Amendment Foundation
First Shotgun Thread First Rifle Thread First Pistol Thread
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old January 4, 2013, 10:28 PM   #7
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,074
Quote:
hook a brother up. I can't find the bills.
Same here. I'm not seeing anything but a few fluff resolutions so far.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old January 5, 2013, 08:09 PM   #8
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
All the bills can now be found at http://thomas.loc.gov. Be warned that it takes up to 10 working days for the GPO to print and post the bills.

So we won't know much more about them until they are printed.

Additionally, all these bills were referred to the Judiciary Committee.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old January 6, 2013, 01:35 PM   #9
danco
Member
 
Join Date: August 2, 2005
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 96
This needs to be a sticky, so we can track of things...
danco is offline  
Old January 6, 2013, 02:01 PM   #10
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
Not to worry, danco.

As the wording of the bills become available, I'm sure that others (than myself) are familiar enough with the Library of Congress to post the info. This will hardly get "lost."
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old January 12, 2013, 02:36 PM   #11
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 4,964
113th Congress, House Bills 101-140

A few more worth your time and attention

H.R.133 -- Citizens Protection Act of 2013 (Mr. MASSIE)

H.R.137 -- Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013 (Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York)

H.R.138 -- Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act (Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York)

H.R.141 -- Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2013 (Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York)

H.R.142 -- Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act of 2013(Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York)

I'm don't know who Mr.Massie is, but Mrs. McCarthy has been busy.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old January 12, 2013, 02:47 PM   #12
Crankgrinder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 24, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 642
133 (the first one) seems to seek to remove the 30.06 signs from schools. My mom works in a school has for 20 years that looks great to me. On the second one how do they think theyll know when you bought that mag? none of my mags have any way that i can see to indicate as to its date of manufacture or purchase. All this will do is make it waaaay more expensive.
Crankgrinder is offline  
Old January 14, 2013, 07:16 PM   #13
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 4,964
Could I get one of the mods to move this to L&CR? That seems like a more logical place for these.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old January 14, 2013, 07:50 PM   #14
Come and take it.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2009
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 999
Massie is from my state. Not my representative though. Guthrie is mine.

also introduced one like it into the kentucky congress
Come and take it. is offline  
Old January 14, 2013, 08:05 PM   #15
Wbdisco
Member
 
Join Date: September 3, 2012
Location: S. Pittsburg, TN
Posts: 15
hopefully being that these are all house bills, they will not pass.
Wbdisco is offline  
Old January 14, 2013, 10:21 PM   #16
armsmaster270
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2008
Location: California
Posts: 1,941
crankgrinder:

After the first High cap magazine ban they started stamping on the magazines

RESTRICTED LAW ENFORCEMENT
GOV'T USE AND/OR EXPORT ONLY 9-14-94

After the new ban they will add a serial number. So if there is no marking it is pre-ban. If it is marked restricted with the date it is post ban and if it has a S/N it is the new ban.
__________________
http://www.armsmaster.net-a.googlepages.com
http://s239.photobucket.com/albums/f...aster270/Guns/
Retired LE, M.P., Sr. M.P. Investigator F.B.I. Trained Rangemaster/Firearms Instructor & Armorer, Presently Forensic Document Examiner for D.H.S.
armsmaster270 is offline  
Old January 14, 2013, 10:54 PM   #17
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,303
Merging threads..... and making it a "sticky."
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old January 14, 2013, 11:12 PM   #18
nate45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
Lets compromise and tighten background checks. Most of us have a CCW, or some other thing like FOID, etc already. Lets have a license for ownership. It can only be revoked if you do the same crimes as would make you lose your gun rights now. Then anyone carrying a firearm who was a felon, etc would get a stiff fine and mandatory 2-5 years of moderately hard labor, to help discourage the practice.

The law would be written where the definitions of prohibited persons would be narrowly defined. The process to revoke would be tough and difficult, but so would the initial background check.

I know, I know, I know, I know firearms ownership is a right. I believe that as much, or more than anyone. However, tougher checks on who is buying firearms and ammunition, might actually prevent something. It would have for instance prevented Cho who did VA Tech.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
(>_<)
nate45 is online now  
Old January 15, 2013, 01:42 AM   #19
nazshooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 7, 2008
Posts: 150
Nate: If you are willing to give up our 2a rights over a few rare tragedies why retain any rights at all? Surely we could save far more lives by allowing the authorities to search your home without a warrant or put you in jail as soon as they "know" you've done something wrong rather than messing around with evidence and trials. We know these mass shootings tend to spur copycats so maybe we should ban reporting on them?

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2
nazshooter is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 06:01 AM   #20
nate45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
Proving one isn't a felon or a loon, isn't tantamount to surrendering our second amendment rights in my mind.

Haz-mat drivers, pilots, CCW holders, etc, etc under go governmental background checks everyday. Its done in the interest of safety.

I've tried, but I can't find an excuse for not making it as difficult as possible for felons and those adjudicated to be mentally ill from acquiring firearms. Background checks and coordinating mental health records with the database, is actually one of the few things that would really help.

Screaming my rights, in the face of something that would actually keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, isn't doing us any favors.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
(>_<)
nate45 is online now  
Old January 15, 2013, 09:52 AM   #21
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 4,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by nate45
Proving one isn't a felon or a loon, isn't tantamount to surrendering our second amendment rights in my mind. . . .
Perhaps not in your mind, but it puts the burden on those wishing to exercise this fundamental, individual right on those wishing to do so, before they are allowed. For a comparison in the First Amendment context, it is akin to a prior restraint.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nate45
. . . .I've tried, but I can't find an excuse for not making it as difficult as possible for felons and those adjudicated to be mentally ill from acquiring firearms. Background checks and coordinating mental health records with the database, is actually one of the few things that would really help.

Screaming my rights, in the face of something that would actually keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, isn't doing us any favors.
There's little evidence to support the notion that imposing such a restriction (forcing everyone to prove that they're entitled to exercise the 2A prior to exercise of same) would actually keep firearms out of the hands of criminals.

Mind you, I'm not fussing about the coordination of mental health records. That's probably a good idea. My concern on that front is how we (the American public & Congress) will define "mentally ill," and where we'll draw the policy line at when it's appropriate to deny someone the 2A.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 11:04 AM   #22
btmj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 1, 2011
Location: Near St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 747
Nate, I understand your sentiment. I also believe that if our backs are against the wall, we may need to offer comprimises which we can live with, instead of having no say at all.

BUT (and this is a very important "but"), we are nowhere near the point where our back is against the wall. Well, unless you live in New York State. I feel bad for those folks, but as a resident of a different state, I have no say in what goes on there. It is their fight.

As far as federal action goes, I don't think anything will get through congress, except for the most harmless of window-dressing...if that...
btmj is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 11:12 AM   #23
btmj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 1, 2011
Location: Near St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 747
I would also like to say this:

I think that real, meaningful, positive, effective firearm regulation could be possible. Regulations that the vast majority of gun owners could agree with. But NEVER in the current political envirionment. The gun-ban crowd have so poisoned the politics that there is no sense of trust among our side... and why should we have any trust? The gun-ban politicians have demonstrated repeatedly that their ultimate goal is a prohibition on private ownership of any firearm which could possibly be used in self defense. After the Newtown tragedy they have shown their cards yet again. Our side does not trust them to negotiate sensible laws in good faith.
btmj is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 11:26 AM   #24
Strafer Gott
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 12, 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,118
So only the government can have big guns? And we can only have little ones?
So one gov't. says sell them magazines or go to jail, and the other gov't.says sell em and go to jail. Boy Howdy, what's a cowgirl to do? Even if the founding fathers hadn't said from now on, we get what the gov't. gets, I'd smell a rat. But then, I never was completely civilized. Just another failure of the system.
It's a wonderful life. Don't weaken your resolve.
Strafer Gott is offline  
Old January 16, 2013, 03:45 AM   #25
nazshooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 7, 2008
Posts: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by nate45 View Post
Proving one isn't a felon or a loon, isn't tantamount to surrendering our second amendment rights in my mind.
So every American should be forced to ask the Federal government for permission before exercising their 2a rights? That's not a right. Also, if we have universal background checks do you honestly believe that wouldn't turn into registration or are you ok with that too?

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2
nazshooter is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14293 seconds with 9 queries