New HR 1022 Assault Weapons Ban - threads merged

Those folks in 94 "compromised" and voted yes....The NRA didnt make any comprimises next election. They went stright for the political jugular.

If you look at the House vote in 94 with a Democratic Congress and a Democratic President thats a clue to the power that 900 lb gorilla called the NRA wields in Congress.

Thats what caused me to become a life member instead of an annual member.
 
The Blue Dog Dems and other Dem conservatives are a vote to be reckoned with. Look what happened to Murtha. I read something where they had a ballot boxes for the Murtha-Hoyer election and she watched as they voted.

Inside the room where the election was being held, there were boxes for members to drop their secret ballots. Pelosi and her crew watched as people voted. Some members actually brought fellow lawmakers with them when they marked their ballots so they could prove to Pelosi that they did vote for Murtha. And because the Murtha vote ended up being so small, the Pelosi forces can count almost down to the last ballot who voted for Murtha and who for Hoyer.
Click to expand...

So I dont think Nancy has any illusions about what happens when it comes to a choice between the party line and the Dem conservatives next election.
 
from the NRA

While this quote is in reference to Jim Zumbo's stupidity, I am posting it here because of the paragraphs I have in bold. I did not want to post it in two places as I feel the Zumbo debacle has been well reported and commented upon and this thread is far more important.
=====
NRA Publications Suspends Ties to Jim Zumbo

(FAIRFAX, VA) – The following statement was issued by the National Rifle Association of America.

Comments expressed by outdoor writer Jim Zumbo reflect neither the opinions of the National Rifle Association and America’s gun owners, nor are they an accurate portrayal of facts in regard to semi-automatic firearms lawfully owned by millions of citizens. Therefore, NRA Publications has suspended its professional ties with Mr. Zumbo.

The ensuing wave of grassroots response in support of the Second Amendment is a clear indication that America’s gun owners will act swiftly and decisively to counter falsehoods or misrepresentations perpetuated by any member of the media – whether it is one of the major networks or a fellow gun owner.

That depth of feeling and the unanimity of the response from the nation’s firearms owners sends a message to the new Congress. It says that millions of people understand the issue of semi-autos and will resist with an immense singular political will any attempts to create a new ban on semi-automatic firearms.

At the root of this grassroots response is the basic truth that ‘gun control merely makes the innocent pay the price for the guilty’ and our folks fully understand that their rights are at stake. It says that for the enemies of the Second Amendment there is no chance that the kind of divide and conquer propaganda strategy which preceded the 1994 ban on semi-auto firearms will ever succeed again.

It is our hope that Mr. Zumbo will use his energy and talent to help preserve our Second Amendment, America’s First Freedom, by ensuring that no one else falls prey to the tragic demonization of gun owners.
 
Critique my letter please.

Here is the letter I have wrote and plan to mail to my represenative. (I'll send it to my Senators if it makes it to the Senate.) Please critique my letter so I may improve it. I tried to keep it short and simple and resist the temptation to write a 20 page letter showing the flaws of HR 1022. Feel free to use it when contacting your own represenatives.

I am writing to you concerning bill H.R 1022 introduced by Representative McCarthy of New York. This bill basically brings back the ill-conceived and ineffective 1994 AWB. The 1994 AWB thankfully had a 10 year sunset provision and expired in 2004. H.R 1022 embraces the fallacy that bringing back the 1994 AWB and banning an inanimate object, guns, will have any affect on crime. Even the FBI agreed that the AWB had no effect on crime while it was in effect, 1994-2004. The only people it affected were legal, law abiding gun owners.

All this law will do is penalize legal gun owners while criminals will continue to do as they have always done; rob, rape, and kill. Claming that banning an inanimate object, like a gun, will reduce crime and make people “safer” is faulty logic that borders on insanity.

I urge you to strongly and vocally oppose H.R 1022 as not only because it will fail, just as the original AWB of 1994, to have any visible affect on crime. But because it is a violation of the Second Amendment of the US constitution, almost every states constitution, and the natural right of every persons right to defend themselves from criminals.

I thank you for your time,
Click to expand...

What do you all think?
 
I tinkered a little


I am writing to you concerning bill H.R 1022 introduced by Representative McCarthy of New York. This bill basically revives the ill-conceived and ineffective 1994 "assault weapons ban." This is curious, since even the FBI conceded that the assault weapons ban had no measurable effect on crime while it was in effect from 1994-2004. The 1994 assault weapons ban thankfully had a 10 year sunset provision and expired in 2004.

All this law will do is turn otherwise law-abiding gun owners into felons for what are, essentially, cosmetic differences in their firearms. Criminals will continue to do what they do by definition: break laws.

I urge you to strongly and vocally oppose H.R 1022, not only because it will surely fail to have any detectable effect on crime, but because it is a violation of the Second Amendment of the US Constitution, which you swore an oath to uphold.

I thank you for your time,
 
Here's what I wrote to Steny Hoyer (D-MD) - feel free to steal from this as appropriate.

Congressman Hoyer,

I am deeply disturbed to see that your colleague from New York, Cathy McCarthy has introduced a bill that will outlaw many popular collectible and hobbyist firearms, at least one of which (the M1 Carbine) is all-too-infrequently for sale from the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP). The M1 Carbine was carried by many of our WW2 service members in service of our great nation. Ms. McCarthy would deny them to own a piece of their own history in the name of denying the rest of us access to a mis-named assault weapon. The CMP was created by congress for the express purpose of creating a vehicle whereby US Citizens could legally acquire surplus US military firearms. No one with any knowledge of firearms in the most general of terms, not to mention knowledge of the M1 Carbine specifically, would classify it as an "assault weapon".

This bill is a sham on several levels, not the least of which is its short title "`Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007'." I researched the list of Maryland Law Enforcement officers' death's in the line of duty, and could not find that a single one of them - going back to BEFORE 1900, is directly attributable or was caused by one of the firearms on Ms McCarthy's list.

On another level, this bill has no business being dignified with any verbiage that includes the words "Law Enforcement Protection Act"; it will do NOTHING to increase the safety of our law enforcement officers. In fact, it's only predictable effect will be to create a market run of these firearms before the bill is enacted into law, after which time, only the criminal element -that already shows its strong disregard for the inconvenience of our laws, will continue to acquire them with impunity.

My one consolation is that Ms. McCarthy is singularly ineffective in getting ANY of her legislation passed, and I urge you in the strongest terms to see to it that her record remains unbroken with this bill.

Do not let this bill see the light of day.

I will be in Annapolis this coming Tuesday to voice my protest to Maryland's own SB43, a similar unnecessary intrusion into my gun rights. I shall have no problem visiting Capitol Hill for the same purpose.
[end letter]

Does anyone else find it ironic that this bill carries the same number as one of our favorite rifles?

Cheers,
Rob
 
I called my Rep's office today to inform him that I'm "totally, unequivocally and utterly opposed" to HR 1022, and to remind him that I'm a voting NRA member. Now, my Rep has gotten an "A" rating from the NRA for years, so I don't know what that call was worth, but hey ... he can't say he doesn't know what this particular constituent wants...

If y'all haven't called your Rep -- do so. Send an e-mail at the very least. I used to e-mail. HR 1022 is the first time I've ever called.
 
The following is a copy of the pertainent part of an NRA alert I received this evening, along with my own thoughts/comments/questions. Some might find the following interesting. Use of links not required.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NRA-ILA Grassroots Alert Vol. 14, No. 8 02/23/07

States with updates this issue: Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming.


THE MOST SWEEPING GUN BAN EVER INTRODUCED IN CONGRESS;
McCarthy Bill Bans Millions More Guns Than The Clinton Gun Ban

On Feb. 14, 2007, Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) introduced H.R. 1022, a bill with the stated purpose, "to reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes."

McCarthy's verbiage warrants explanation. Presumably, what she means by "assault weapons ban" 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 nation'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 McCarthy's "other purposes" would make matters even worse. H.R. 1022 would ban every gun banned by the Clinton ban, plus millions more guns, including:

. 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.)

. 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.)

. 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 "any characteristic that can function as a grip," and would also ban their main component, called the "receiver.")

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

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

. Any semi-automatic shotgun or rifle an Attorney General one day claims isn't "sporting," 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.

. 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 "assault weapon" 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.

---------------------------

The following is a repeat from the beginning of the NRA alert:
On Feb. 14, 2007, Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) introduced H.R. 1022, a bill with the stated purpose, "to reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes."

Re reference to "and for other purposes", one does wonder as to exactly what, in plain English, these "other purposes" might possibly be. Perhaps some of our "congress critters" might be able to offer clarification. Directing questions to members of The Congress might prove worth while. A TOLL FREE number for CAPITOL SWITCHBOARD IS 1-866-220-0044. Interested parties might consider using making use of it.
 
While THIS bill may be a longshot, it's great building material for a successful effort after '08. What's particularly funny to me is I distinctly remember a certain Alaskan member telling us, shortly after the last elections, how "See, the Dems aren't after our guns!" :rolleyes: I said I'd be back to laugh when they showed their true colors...

xxrotflmao.gif
 
STOP THIS BILL NOW... Read This Post

Pay Attention...

THE MOST SWEEPING GUN BAN EVER INTRODUCED IN CONGRESS H.R.1022

This will effect gun rights in EVERY STATE

We ALL MUST call our local representatives to defeat this bill. This will
set gun control back to the CLINTON DAYS, except worse!

Don't put this off. Every voice counts.
Tell your representative that if he/she supports this bill they will NOT get your
future vote and you will notify all your friends that they have taken away more
of our gun rights

Read the disturbing H.R. 1022 bill
http://www.nraila.org//Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?ID=2668

Pass this on to everyone you know and post it on message boards

DO YOUR PART OR LOSE YOUR RIGHTS. If you can't take a few minutes
to call and voice your opinion then don't complain when our gun
rights are taken away. FIGHT FOR YOUR GUN RIGHTS, Every voice counts!

Mike
 
H.R. 1022 is not a bad bill, it is a horrible bill. Personally, I am shocked at the brashness of the author. If this isn't a clear indication that the anti's want to ban all guns I don't know what is.
 
Emailed my congressmen about it. The problem is how do I get rid of the CA, NY, MA, and IL ones? The vast majority of damage isn't being done by my state.
 
gnut writes:

H.R. 1022 is not a bad bill, it is a horrible bill. Personally, I am shocked at the brashness of the author. If this isn't a clear indication that the anti's want to ban all guns I don't know what is.

-------------------

The anti gunners have been telling us all about their ultimate and unchanging goals, THE TOTAL PROSCRIPTION OF FIREARMS, for lo these many years. Why, I wonder, should any particular piece of proposed legislation, one that simply advances the above mentioned goals, come as a surprise to gun owners, as this H.R. 1022 seems to?

Rep.Carolyn McCarthy has been riding the same horse for some years now, that nag being the shooting of her son and husband by an ILLEGALLY ARMED NUT CASE. Despite her past performances, her antics and proposals never-the-less seem to surprise some. This leaves me curious since she is nothing much other an an elected to public office version of Sarah Brady, or so it seems to me. Of course, I could be wrong.

All that I can say, at this point is the following. Wake up people!! The anti gunners really mean it, and they aren't about to give it up. Preserving your rights is truly that endless battle. Recognize that, and act on the recognition or loose the battle along with your rights.
 
If Democrats would just leave guns and gay marriage alone they would win more elections.

With that said, I am right now reading throughly the bill and finding what/anything I can do so this mindless nonsense does not go through. I am also signing any petitions I can find against this bill.
 
Alan is right!!!

Alan is totally right. 25 years ago I was drinking cofee with co-workers. Somebody mentioned something about a gun control bill that was being argued about. I have always hunted and been a gun lover my whole life but had never concerned myself with political issues. The bill that was being introduced made sense to me. Really, it sounded logical, so I said, " well it sounds logical to me." One of the older guys cussed me up one side and down the other telling me how stupid I was. This guy and I deer hunted and duck hunted together. I thought a lot of him and still do. He said, "son that exactly what they are want you to think. The anti's want all your guns and will do any thing to get them." That day 25 years ago I became politically involved. I have read everthing I have beeen able to obtain on gun rights, pro and against. What my friend or mentor told that day, no matter how harsh has held true for 25 years. Bottom line he was right, still is right , and will always be right. So if your sitting on the fence, get off on our side. You grandchildren and great children will thank you for it long after your cold in the grave.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top