Gun banning bill, S.645, MUST be stopped!!

[progunner1957]

Socialist scumbag Senator Frank Lautenberg has cooked up a masterpiece of antigun/antifreedom bigotry named S.645, "Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act" and it MUST BE STOPPED.

According to information made available by the Citizen's Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms, S.645 contains the following provisions:

1: An immediate ban on the manufacture, transfer or possession of most semiautomatic handguns, rifles and shotguns. It names guns made by Bushmaster, Calico, Kel-Tec, Sturm, Ruger & Co., Olympic Arms and others.

2: A ban on the manufacture, transfer or possession of magazines or firearm clips that hold or can accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

3: If you do not submit to these provisions, you are automatically a felon. You could go to prison for 10 years and lose your right to own any firearms, as well as your right to vote.

This bill is an outrage against all that the Bill of Rights stands for and all that The Founders of our nation believed in. If We The People are to remain a free people, this socailist power grab MUST BE STOPPED.

Write, call, e-mail and telegraph your Senators and respectfully insist that they kill this insidious bill even before it comes up for a vote in the Senate.

YOUR guns and YOUR freedom are at stake!

 

[Dead]

this is the same gun that said a fn57 pistol could go thru 35 layers of kevlar at 200meter (or was it yards)? not to mention other things I can not recall. The only time the tape records were going is when he spoke of the fn57.....

 

[azurefly]

Can't we just solve the problem for now and in the future by voting to exile Frank Lautenberg? :barf:


-azurefly

 

[Sulaco2]

Of a cert we must watch what the senile Sen. is doing, but he dropps a bill like this into the hopper about once a month. Unlikely in the extreme that it will get any place, still he needs watching. :barf:

 

[USP45usp]

Frank Lautenberg isn't a major player anymore (as in, no one listens to him on either side) and he drops these bills into the hopper just to pretend that he's still "on it" as a leader.

With the house controlled by the Repubs right now and the Presidentcy it won't get through.

What we have to watch for is 2006 and 2008. If he's still in office (or alive for that matter, he's not looking so good now days) then we will need to use our energy to write/call/email if we lose the house/senate/Presidentcy.

We have our own problems in Oregon with Ginny Burdick and Vickie Walker just to name a few. We keep em down and are safe until 2007 right now but they keep on coming and keep on doing the same idiot bills hoping that one or more will be passed.

Wayne

 

[tyme]

progunner, it's a California-style assault weapon ban, and it's been sitting in committee since March. Check the date on that CCRKBA alert. Let's save our energy for the battles that need fighting.

 

[Crosshair]

The good die young and the bad take forever to croak.

 

[Harley Quinn]

Crosshair

You are sure correct on that one, I will say it again.

The good die young and the bad take forever to croak:barf:

Harley

 

[alan]

One way to stop this proposal might be for people to get on to their elected things. Sometimes, that works.

 

[Helmetcase]

progunner, it's a California-style assault weapon ban, and it's been sitting in committee since March. Check the date on that CCRKBA alert. Let's save our energy for the battles that need fighting.

Agree with that sentiment; isn't HR1243 in the same committee since March? Anyone have a status update on that?

 

[tyme]

Since May. Unsurprisingly, national CCW reciprocity doesn't have enough support to get it out of committee.

I agree that it would be a major improvement for people visiting places like California, but there's still the colossal problem of fairness:

If 1243 passed, someone with a ccw could visit California and carry there even when a resident of San Francisco, Sacramento, or Los Angeles cannot. Furthermore, residents of gun-unfriendly cities or states are discriminated against because the bill only grants reciprocity for resident permits.

It gives Vermont and Alaska residents the ability to carry anywhere, while most others have to get a permit and a few (see the last paragraph) can't take advantage of the reciprocity bill at all.

I think those obvious unfairness issues may make this bill even less palatable to politicians than the alternative, that being:

"No state or lower level of government shall prohibit the carrying of arms, except in a clearly unsafe manner, or in a few particular places identified by law where reasonable means of detecting weapons are deployed and armed guards are present."