President signed gun control bill

[Al Norris]

Publius, assuming what the GOA said is true (and I have no information that they did, in fact, submit some proposal), it must be obvious that no one thought to listen to them. So....

Get in touch with your Reps and Senators and get them to amend the law to include this action with both Federal and State authorities:

That Public Law ______ is to be amended as follows:

(a) That a new section, 101(d) be inserted, to read:

(d)DEFUNDING OF PROGRAM FOR RELIEF FROM DISABILITIES-

(1) In the event that any department or agency of the Federal Government that has had appropriations or funding for its relief of disabilities program withheld or explicitely denied, a person may immediately petition the courts for de novo review.​

(b) That a new section, 103(e)(3) be inserted, to read:

(d)DEFUNDING OF PROGRAM FOR RELIEF FROM DISABILITIES-

(1) In the event that any department or agency of the individual States that has had appropriations or funding for its relief of disabilities program withheld or explicitely denied, a person may immediately petition the courts for de novo review.​

Scout26, it is quite obvious that Te Anau has not read the bill.

 

[Te Anau]

That's why if they say "NO" you can go to court and get a new trial, right now.

Yah,and all you have to do is sell your house and draw out all your retirement for repeated lawsuits against an entity that has no budget.That's real nice.

Scout26, it is quite obvious that Te Anau has not read the bill.

I don't need to.That's what I pay my membership dues every year to the GOA for.They are far more qualified than me or 99% of people here to read between the lines and know whether or not any given legislation is relevant to gun owners today or in the future.

 

[publius42]

I like this version better:

(1) In the event that any department or agency of the individual States that has had appropriations or funding for its relief of disabilities program withheld or explicitely denied, a person will be immediately entitled to relief from disability

We'll just tell all the liberals it's an entitlement program intended to provide relief for the disabled.

 

[swman]

Signing this bill just adds to the Bush legacy of being against the Bill of Rights.

 

[Musketeer]

Antipitas said:

Scout26, it is quite obvious that Te Anau has not read the bill.

Te Anau responded:

I don't need to.That's what I pay my membership dues every year to the GOA for.They are far more qualified than me or 99% of people here to read between the lines and know whether or not any given legislation is relevant to gun owners today or in the future.

That about sums it up. You either take Larry Pratt's word as gospel or you don't He says the legislation is bad so it is bad. He says you should send him your money so you should. He says the NRA is selling you out so you should believe him.

At this point we might as well close the thread. The facts have been presented. The GOA fanatics have admitted to not even reading, let alone understanding, the legislation and to basing their opinion solely on the say of the GOA. When one side of a debate refuses to even look at the subject matter there is no debate, only rhetoric.

 

[scout26]

Were they all present?

They don't need to be. That's what each party's leadership is for. Basically the Whip's (or their staff) go around and ask each member "You got any heartburn with Bill XYZ ?? Nope, okay then it'll be scheduled."

The only time you see floor fights is when one side or the other (or both) want to make or score political points.

What happened with 2640 is that Sen Coburn DID have heartburn with it,so he put a "Hold" on it and (with the NRA help) re-wrote it. Yes, there were some compromises. But those were minor to get Schumer, Leahy and Kennedy to go along. The House leadership basically told McCarthy to "Put a good face/spin on it. We're getting something we can present to our moonbats as 'Gun Control' without incurring the wrath of the NRA."

I don't need to.That's what I pay my membership dues every year to the GOA for.They are far more qualified than me or 99% of people here to read between the lines and know whether or not any given legislation is relevant to gun owners today or in the future.

Well, don't we elect and pay the salary's of Senators and Representatives ??? They're far more qualified then me or 99% of the people here.

I don't recall voting for Larry Pratt for anything. And while I'm sure that he's as pure as the driven snow, I can't think of any reason why he might have any bias at all (*cough*, raise money, *cough*) to spin what's in any given piece of legislation.

I'll do my own reading and critical thinking, thank you, rather then let someone else tell me what to think. I suggest you might want to do the same.

 

[Al Norris]

I tend to agree with Musketeer.

Reasoned debate cannot proceed when one side refuses to read the relevent material, in this case the actual bill, and think for themselves.

The facts have been presented and summarily dismissed. I really don't see how anything new can be added.

It should come as no surprise, that the gun owning community may have the some of the same sorts of people that support the anti-gun proponents... And for the same reasons: Lack of motivation to think and reason for themselves.

Thread Closed.