SHARE Act call for help

T

TrueBlue711

New member
SHARE/HPA Act call for help

I didn't know this myself, but the HPA was rolled into the SHARE act. And it sounds like the SHARE act is gaining some ground. Please read the article.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20170908/nra-applauds-reintroduction-and-expansion-of-share-act

There's a link in there "Take Action Today". Whether you think your voice won't make a difference or not, please spend the 2 min and just send the pre-filled out email (or put in your own 2 cents) to your representative. The more "spam" they get from everybody asking them to support it, the more likely they'll do so.
 
Last edited:
If you enjoy the freedoms you have and/or are dissatisfied with the restrictions on your freedoms and rights take a bit of time to write to your representatives. If they don't respond or respond negatively then make a note to remove them from your choices on the next ballot. Call them when they are not in session to let them know how you feel about all kinds of matters that affect you in any way.
That is the only way they know what you want them to do.
 
Which of my senators do you think would be more sympathetic to a pro gun rights bill, Diane Feinstein or Kamala Harris (former CA Attorney General)?
 
I have two representatives who are dyed in the wool liberals but I still contact them. Last time I contacted them I told them that if they can't support our right to self defense then they should initiate bills where the local state and federal government can be held responsible for the safety of each individual. That was done just a couple of days ago but I doubt I will hear back from them. They probably recognize my name by now and just toss the mail in the trash. I will keep writing though. I need to let them know that we expect more from them.
 
I understand that it can sometimes feel futile to write that letter; but here is the deal: we need 8 Democrats not to filibuster SHARE in the Senate for it to pass. So, we are going to need votes from Senators not usually friendly to us. The good thing is they don't have to vote for SHARE - they just have to vote to allow debate, which is easier to sell and still let's them tell their anti-gun comstituents they voted against it.

If I had an anti-gun Senator, I'd be emphasizing that approach. Because as futile as it might seem to write, our options are to change minds now or wait until 2018 and change Senators.
 
natman said:
Which of my senators do you think would be more sympathetic to a pro gun rights bill, Diane Feinstein or Kamala Harris (former CA Attorney General)?
Click to expand...
I understand your point, but if you think about it, the answer almost has to be Harris. As California AG and as a Senator, she can be stridently anti-gun because she's preaching to the [liberal] choir. If she does have aspirations of pursuing the presidency, she has to have seen what happened to Hillary Clinton, so there's a chance that she'll tone down her rabid anti-gun rhetoric. I'm not saying she'll suddenly become a staunch defender of the 2A, but she may tone things down a bit, and possibly even vote for (or abstain from voting against) an occasional bill that gives the pro-gun side something that she doesn't think is all that important.

Maybe ...
 
Hillary did ponder whether her antigun stance hurt her. She did attack Sanders has a gun lover - amusing as he had some mild progun votes in the past.

Obama kept the lid on antigun legilsation being pushed. The best you can hope for from a Democratic administration is to make talk about aniti-gun laws and do nothing.

It like the Republicans, they will make talk and do nothing also.

Keeps the donations flowing. If Republicans freed up all guns and the Democrats banned all guns - they lose an issue.

Wouldn't be surprised if they didn't talk this out among themselves - like the WWE matches not being fixed.
 
Best to keep calling, emailing, writing them. Even if they are anti gun-rights, convincing them that a bunch of their voters will go against them for those votes may be enough to convince them to ease up on trying to get others to vote for it...ie, not be the visible "ring-leader."
 
Aguila Blanca said:
I understand your point, but if you think about it, the answer almost has to be Harris. As California AG and as a Senator, she can be stridently anti-gun because she's preaching to the [liberal] choir. If she does have aspirations of pursuing the presidency, she has to have seen what happened to Hillary Clinton, so there's a chance that she'll tone down her rabid anti-gun rhetoric. I'm not saying she'll suddenly become a staunch defender of the 2A, but she may tone things down a bit, and possibly even vote for (or abstain from voting against) an occasional bill that gives the pro-gun side something that she doesn't think is all that important.

Maybe ...
Click to expand...

I see your point, but Harris is only less rabidly anti gun rights than Feinstein in the sense that a gasoline fire is less hot than an acetylene torch.

So there may be a distinction between them, but no practical difference. The chance of either voting for SHARE is zero.
 
Last edited:
Sometimes they vote for some 2A item, small or so. They know the thing will pass anyway so the party lets em vote against. Then when we write about it they can say "oh yes I voted blah blah blah" but it didnt mount to a dried slice of bread, moldy at that. Those kind are the real weasels.
 
Maybe, but I've watched Harris for years as California AG and trust me, the only reason that she has an F rating from the NRA is that there is no lower grade.
 
Based on the circumstances of multiple factors ("daring" senators to vote antigun before another round of elections, it being included in an omnibus package that has been accepted in the past by bipartisan account, Ronald Turk's white paper saying suppressors are a good candidate for deregulation....) don't count it out.

luckily in CO we have Cory Gardner so he needs little persuading on the Senate side, and I sent NRA-ILA another $25 just because it seems right.

That Politico article is absurd. Just the sheer nonsense being spouted from the anti-gun organizations - you can tell they didn't even read the friggin' bills, and are inclined to trumpet palpably flawed logic! That's probably why they hate DJT on Twitter, he's cutting into their turf :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
I just listed myself as someone's reference on his pistol license application (NY). For unrestricted license he must have a "compelling reason." Sad.
 
The devil is in the details on standards.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Here in FLA. we had issues with states that would not reciprocate with us because they felt our training standards were not up to THEIR training standards. I can see a nationwide CCW being a HUGE can of worms with regards to who's training sets the standard
 
Wouldn't be surprised if they didn't talk this out among themselves - like the WWE matches not being fixed.
Click to expand...
I have a few friends who work in the Democratic party, and this election has led to some real soul-searching on the ground. One thing they are hearing very consistently from the under-40 voters is that gun control is an unpopular issue that may actually be costing them votes.

Now, does writing to a long-time advocate like Feinstein or Schumer help? Probably not. But if you have a local Democrat who's not in such a secure position, it would be worth reaching out to them. Clinton's vocal support for stringent controls has been repeatedly cited as something that left much of the base nonplussed, and the party is keen on not repeating her mistakes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top