Three More Wins for Gun Owners

Acujeff · December 22, 2011, 07:50 PM

Thursday, December 22, 2011

H.R. 2055—the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012—has been passed by the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate and has been sent to the President for his expected signature. This bill contains three NRA-backed provisions that will strengthen our Second Amendment rights and prohibit your federal tax dollars from being used to advance an anti-gun agenda.

Stopping Your Tax Dollars From Funding Anti-Gun Studies

No Tax Dollars to Lobby and Promote Gun Control

Protecting Historic Firearms and Spent Brass Casings from Destruction

Full story and details at:
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=7211

HoraceHogsnort · December 22, 2011, 09:44 PM

A big thumbs up to the NRA.

Standing Wolf · December 22, 2011, 10:09 PM

Quote:

A big thumbs up to the NRA.

Amen. I hope this will help quiet some of the anti-NRA grumbling.

C0untZer0 · December 22, 2011, 10:44 PM

I keep thinking that now that Illinois is the only state thay denies it's citizens any form of carry, that the full force of the NRA and all it's resources will descend upon our state and focus all their polictical might like a laser...

But it hasn't happened...

Bartholomew Roberts · December 23, 2011, 09:01 AM

Quote:

I keep thinking that now that Illinois is the only state thay denies it's citizens any form of carry, that the full force of the NRA and all it's resources will descend upon our state and focus all their polictical might like a laser...

But it hasn't happened...

Actually, it has happened/is happening... all of the various Chicago cases regarding firearms are all laying the groundwork for that type of challenge. However, the NRA, being the NRA, is just moving slowly and cautiously and the opposition is doing their best to delay and draw it out hoping for a change in the higher court.

Glenn E. Meyer · December 23, 2011, 09:55 AM

Good for them. One thing - it mentions the option to buy M-14s. These are fully auto - can they be converted to semi? Or what?

Just renewed for three years - I need to add to my collection of NRA knives.

**Spats McGee** · December 23, 2011, 10:33 AM

Good for the NRA. I'm glad that I renewed my memberhship.

Doyle · December 23, 2011, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Good for them. One thing - it mentions the option to buy M-14s. These are fully auto - can they be converted to semi? Or what?

We had non-full auto versions in the Navy.

Glenn E. Meyer · December 23, 2011, 10:45 AM

Just wondering - if the M-14s can be converted such that they cannot be easily turned back into full auto?

Seems that might be a snag in sales.

Of course, we could send them to Mexico: Merry X-Mas from the AG.

Snide remark on my part.

Gary L. Griffiths · December 23, 2011, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Just wondering - if the M-14s can be converted such that they cannot be easily turned back into full auto?

I believe they can, and there were, as mentioned, a large number of the semi-only version produced. The only thing blocking their DCM sales was ATF's ruling, "Once a Machine Gun, Always a Machine Gun."

**44 AMP** · December 23, 2011, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Just wondering - if the M-14s can be converted such that they cannot be easily turned back into full auto?

I believe they can, and there were, as mentioned, a large number of the semi-only version produced. The only thing blocking their DCM sales was ATF's ruling, "Once a Machine Gun, Always a Machine Gun."

There were no semi auto only M14s produced or adopted in govt service. All M14s were select fire. What the govt did, when they realized that the M14 in select fire configuration was not a good idea for general issue to all troops was, to replace the selector lever with a round knob that did not have the cam to move the full auto parts into engagement. They called this part the "selector lock".

With the exception of the activating lever (replaced by the lock) all the full auto parts were retained in the weapon. This meant that driving out a pin, replacing the lock with the lever and putting the pin back in returned the gun to select fire capability.

The lever mounts on a stud near the rear of the receiver. Receivers with the stud for mounting the selector lever are select fire capable, and are machine guns under the law. And as far as I know, all GI M14 receivers have the stud.

The stud can be cut off, rendering the gun semi auto only (even if the rest of the full auto parts -minus the selector lever- are there. And it cannot be returned to select fire capability unless another mounting stud is welded to the receiver, which is not a simple process and can ruin the gun unless done perfectly.

The BATF's rule that "once a machinegun, always a machine gun" is why there have never been any GI M14s for sale to the public. Cut off the stud and take out the rest of the FA parts, its still legally a machine gun, so no sale to civilians, period.

Springfield Armory (and later, other companies) began by selling semi auto M14s (the M1A is Springfield's name for thiers) made from GI parts, with new made civilian semi auto only receivers. All the early guns are made from GI surplus parts, except the receiver. As time passed, the supply of available GI surplus parts was depleted, and today nearly all parts are new made to the original specs.

zxcvbob · December 23, 2011, 01:30 PM

Quote:

I keep thinking that now that Illinois is the only state thay denies it's citizens any form of carry, that the full force of the NRA and all it's resources will descend upon our state and focus all their polictical might like a laser...

What about Hawaii?

spacecoast · December 23, 2011, 01:51 PM

Quote:

What about Hawaii?

According to handgunlaw.us, Hawaii is extremely restrictive but is considered a "may issue" state. Permits are only good for 1 year and in the county of residence, and they don't recognize any other state's permits.

http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/hawaii.pdf

speedrrracer · December 23, 2011, 02:24 PM

I'm glad this victory has been won.

Why? So that the lobbyists can turn their full attention here to California, where the gun laws need so much help it will take decades to fix them!

**Tom Servo** · December 23, 2011, 11:27 PM

The President's not happy. From his statement:

Quote:

Additional provisions in this bill, including section 8013 of Division A and section 218 of Division F, purport to restrict the use of funds to advance certain legislative positions. I have advised the Congress that I will not construe these provisions as preventing me from fulfilling my constitutional responsibility to recommend to the Congress's consideration such measures as I shall judge necessary and expedient.

C0untZer0 · December 24, 2011, 02:23 AM

^ The average person has no idea what the president is saying here.

What is he saying?

Is he saying that even though no money can be spent on skewed anti-gun studies, he's going to recomend anti-gun legislation anyway ?

Glenn E. Meyer · December 24, 2011, 11:27 AM

What do I know but I think it means that he won't tell departments that he has excutive control over to take actions.

So, don't destroy the 1911s. But I order that you do not sell them.

But I ain't no poly sci type.

shortwave · December 24, 2011, 12:50 PM

Quote:

What do I know but I think it means that he won't tell departments that he has executive control over to take actions

...

...and since he's soooo fond of HA-Ha-Ha-Hawaii, don't look for gun laws to loosen up there. After all, when he vacations there, he doesn't have to worry about the bad guys getting next to him. His SS army worries about that for him.

ltc444 · January 2, 2012, 01:07 AM

It is a good effort.

The congress also needs to look into the National Safety Council's, the council recieves federal funding, compilation of Accident Facts.

A number of years back while I was reviewing the publication, I reviewed the stats on accidental death in AR. I noticed a name which seemed familiar. It was a teenager who attempted to rob a liquor store with a broken TEC 9. Unfortunately, for the punk, a Floating poker game for off duty Cops was in progress in the back room. They shot the robber dead when he pointed the gun at them.

I challenged the NSC on this. They never responded.

I wonder how many teenaged robbers were included as accidents and in turn used to justify the NSCs antigun stance.

**Aguila Blanca** · January 2, 2012, 12:34 PM

Quote:

I challenged the NSC on this. They never responded.

I wonder how many teenaged robbers were included as accidents and in turn used to justify the NSCs antigun stance.

But it WAS an accident.

The kid accidentally chose the wrong liquor shop to rob.

**44 AMP** · January 2, 2012, 02:59 PM

Years ago, thanks to a "defector" it became common knowledge that Handgun Contol Inc was using anyone shot and killed under the age of 25 as their "death of a child due to a handgun" statistic.

This included suicides, murders, accidents, gang shootings, defensive shootings, people the police shot in the line of duty, anyone under 25 shot and killed in the US (with anything!) went into their database for that statistic.

Why should we expect anyone else with a similar agenda to be any more accurate (even if they do get govt funds)?

And even if its not the official policy of the agency to be anti gun, how do you know the people compiling the statistics don't have agenda's of their own?

Not many folks will, or can, check the "facts" touted by "reputable" organizations, those on our side, included...

CowTowner · January 3, 2012, 07:04 AM

Glenn,

Perhaps you're looking for something like this:

http://www.wideners.com/itemdetail.c...m_id=100000377

Radagast · January 3, 2012, 08:05 AM

CountZero:
I translate it as he reserves the right to use federal money to pay white house staffers to write up antigun bills and submit them to the congress, even though the Act bans the use of tax dollars to lobby & promote gun control. He could also do so in person as the paid chief executive if used the State of the Union address to do so. This is probably a legitimate position if you set aside the fact that gun control is uncostitutional.
It will be interesting to see if he stretches it to paying CDC to do antigun research for the executive office.

bitttorrrent · January 4, 2012, 03:34 AM

Move faster NRA to get Illinois on board with the rest of the Nation. The state is going broke and should not have money to fight these.

December 22, 2011, 07:50 PM	#1
Acujeff Senior Member Join Date: October 11, 2000 Location: Boston Posts: 200	Three More Wins for Gun Owners Thursday, December 22, 2011 H.R. 2055—the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012—has been passed by the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate and has been sent to the President for his expected signature. This bill contains three NRA-backed provisions that will strengthen our Second Amendment rights and prohibit your federal tax dollars from being used to advance an anti-gun agenda. Stopping Your Tax Dollars From Funding Anti-Gun Studies No Tax Dollars to Lobby and Promote Gun Control Protecting Historic Firearms and Spent Brass Casings from Destruction Full story and details at: http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=7211 __________________ Get and stay informed with "America's First Freedom" NRA monthly magazine. Subscribe free NRA-ILA Legislative and RKBA E-mail Alerts: https://www.nraila.org/get-involved-...-informed.aspx

December 22, 2011, 10:44 PM	#4
C0untZer0 Junior member Join Date: April 21, 2011 Location: Illinois Posts: 4,555	I keep thinking that now that Illinois is the only state thay denies it's citizens any form of carry, that the full force of the NRA and all it's resources will descend upon our state and focus all their polictical might like a laser... But it hasn't happened... Last edited by C0untZer0; December 22, 2011 at 10:57 PM.

December 23, 2011, 09:55 AM	#6
Glenn E. Meyer Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2000 Posts: 20,064	Good for them. One thing - it mentions the option to buy M-14s. These are fully auto - can they be converted to semi? Or what? Just renewed for three years - I need to add to my collection of NRA knives. __________________ NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens

December 23, 2011, 10:33 AM	#7
Spats McGee Staff Join Date: July 28, 2010 Location: Arkansas Posts: 8,821	Good for the NRA. I'm glad that I renewed my memberhship. __________________ I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.

December 23, 2011, 10:45 AM	#9
Glenn E. Meyer Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2000 Posts: 20,064	Just wondering - if the M-14s can be converted such that they cannot be easily turned back into full auto? Seems that might be a snag in sales. Of course, we could send them to Mexico: Merry X-Mas from the AG. Snide remark on my part. __________________ NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens

December 22, 2011, 09:44 PM	#2
HoraceHogsnort Senior Member Join Date: February 28, 2008 Location: Stanislaus Co., Mexifornia Posts: 615	A big thumbs up to the NRA.

December 23, 2011, 02:24 PM	#14
speedrrracer Senior Member Join Date: December 15, 2011 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 317	I'm glad this victory has been won. Why? So that the lobbyists can turn their full attention here to California, where the gun laws need so much help it will take decades to fix them!

December 24, 2011, 02:23 AM	#16
C0untZer0 Junior member Join Date: April 21, 2011 Location: Illinois Posts: 4,555	^ The average person has no idea what the president is saying here. What is he saying? Is he saying that even though no money can be spent on skewed anti-gun studies, he's going to recomend anti-gun legislation anyway ?

December 24, 2011, 11:27 AM	#17
Glenn E. Meyer Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2000 Posts: 20,064	What do I know but I think it means that he won't tell departments that he has excutive control over to take actions. So, don't destroy the 1911s. But I order that you do not sell them. But I ain't no poly sci type. __________________ NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens

January 2, 2012, 01:07 AM	#19
ltc444 Senior Member Join Date: March 3, 2011 Location: Vernon AZ Posts: 1,195	It is a good effort. The congress also needs to look into the National Safety Council's, the council recieves federal funding, compilation of Accident Facts. A number of years back while I was reviewing the publication, I reviewed the stats on accidental death in AR. I noticed a name which seemed familiar. It was a teenager who attempted to rob a liquor store with a broken TEC 9. Unfortunately, for the punk, a Floating poker game for off duty Cops was in progress in the back room. They shot the robber dead when he pointed the gun at them. I challenged the NSC on this. They never responded. I wonder how many teenaged robbers were included as accidents and in turn used to justify the NSCs antigun stance.

January 2, 2012, 02:59 PM	#21
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,820	Years ago, thanks to a "defector" it became common knowledge that Handgun Contol Inc was using anyone shot and killed under the age of 25 as their "death of a child due to a handgun" statistic. This included suicides, murders, accidents, gang shootings, defensive shootings, people the police shot in the line of duty, anyone under 25 shot and killed in the US (with anything!) went into their database for that statistic. Why should we expect anyone else with a similar agenda to be any more accurate (even if they do get govt funds)? And even if its not the official policy of the agency to be anti gun, how do you know the people compiling the statistics don't have agenda's of their own? Not many folks will, or can, check the "facts" touted by "reputable" organizations, those on our side, included... __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

January 3, 2012, 07:04 AM	#22
CowTowner Senior Member Join Date: October 17, 2007 Location: Cowtown of course! Posts: 1,747	Glenn, Perhaps you're looking for something like this: http://www.wideners.com/itemdetail.c...m_id=100000377 __________________ NRA Chief Range Safety Officer, Home Firearms Safety, Pistol and Rifle Instructor *“Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life......”* President John F. Kennedy

January 3, 2012, 08:05 AM	#23
Radagast Senior Member Join Date: July 13, 2001 Posts: 449	CountZero: I translate it as he reserves the right to use federal money to pay white house staffers to write up antigun bills and submit them to the congress, even though the Act bans the use of tax dollars to lobby & promote gun control. He could also do so in person as the paid chief executive if used the State of the Union address to do so. This is probably a legitimate position if you set aside the fact that gun control is uncostitutional. It will be interesting to see if he stretches it to paying CDC to do antigun research for the executive office.

January 4, 2012, 03:34 AM	#24
bitttorrrent Senior Member Join Date: April 21, 2011 Location: Chicago Posts: 703	Move faster NRA to get Illinois on board with the rest of the Nation. The state is going broke and should not have money to fight these.