[Don't Tread On Me]

I say it should be the repeal of the "sporting purposes" clause in 922. That is the most subjective, ambiguous piece of **** legislation. Surely the definition of tyranny right there.


If it isn't what do you folks think the NRA should tackle next?


I don't think the 1986 machine gun ban is possible to repeal. Look at semi-auto rifles being called assault weapons..imagine real machine guns being blasted in the media...

I don't even think the "sporting purposes" clause is either. Remember, the NRA is backed by gun manufacturers also - and the very old, very established names in the business do NOT like affordable, reliable, high quality foreign arms undermining their over priced, cheaply made domestic firearms...*cough* Ruger, Remington et al *cough*



What do you folks think the next legislative priority should be that is realistic and feasable for the NRA to pull off? We're on the offensive now.

[Mulliga]

I'm guessing CCW and stand your ground laws in all 50 states. Not sure what else, though.

[Don't Tread On Me]

I am against national concealed carry. It would require compromises with very anti-gun states that would limit or repeal many of the forward steps we've made in states like Florida.


The idea of nationalizing something like that has about 100 reasons as to why it is a real BAD idea.


Ideally, it is a great idea, but the reality is - the whole nation isn't so gun friendly.

[alan]

Enactment of HR 1703 would be nice to see, as would the following. Repeal of GCA'68 and National Firearms Act of 1934 also.

It's my dime, so can't I dream whatever dreams I'd like?

[fourays2]

I say it should be the repeal of the "sporting purposes" clause in 922. That is the most subjective, ambiguous piece of **** legislation. Surely the definition of tyranny right there.


If it isn't what do you folks think the NRA should tackle next?


I don't think the 1986 machine gun ban is possible to repeal. Look at semi-auto rifles being called assault weapons..imagine real machine guns being blasted in the media...

I don't even think the "sporting purposes" clause is either. Remember, the NRA is backed by gun manufacturers also - and the very old, very established names in the business do NOT like affordable, reliable, high quality foreign arms undermining their over priced, cheaply made domestic firearms...*cough* Ruger, Remington et al *cough*



What do you folks think the next legislative priority should be that is realistic and feasable for the NRA to pull off? We're on the offensive now.


according to the media the AWB was all about machine guns "flooding the streets" so repealing the '86 ban should be a non-event for them. Don't you remember all the slanted stories with police chiefs doing mag dumps from FA AK47s?

[M-Rex]

Repeal the Roberti-Roos anti-firearm act, and all related 'assault weapons' legislation in California.

So California goes, so the rest of the nation follows. As long as one head of the hydra is alive, the beast still lives. As long as one state has this type of legislation active, other states will look on it as an example.

[K-Romulus]

Some of us will otherwise never see CCW pass in our home states, in our lifetimes . . .:uhoh:

[TexasRifleman]

As long as one state has this type of legislation active, other states will look on it as an example.

Sorry, I don't buy that. I dont' see Texas and Arizona, among others, looking at Caifornia as an example of anything other than how NOT to do it. It's always the Californians that think the rest of the country will follow them. I feel your pain, but you truly are alone. Well, you have Illinois, NY and Jersey with you, so you're not totally alone.

I do agree the CCW needs to stay out of Federal jurisdiction. I'd rather deal with 50 messed up state carry laws than one REALLY messed up Federal program.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

I'd stilll like to see the NRA own the lawmakers in New Orleans who thought it was OK to confiscate weapons from the people. But that's a legal priority, not a legislative one.

I'd also like to see the '86, '68, and '34 laws declared unconstitutional. Again, that's for the courts to handle, not the congress.

What we need are less laws, not more. Trying to push new law through congress probably isn't the right strategy.

[stsltd]

I would certainly like to see them step up the pressure to get the remaining may issue and no issue states to join the majority of the country as far as CCW is concerned - I suspect its easy for us "have nots" to dream of a federal system and accept potential limitations since our states may never see the light on their own...

[bamawrx]

Why not have fed's require other states to honor each others permits. Just like the drivers license. I don't see a down side to that.

[RealGun]

National gun lobbies have at least two fronts, one state and one federal. The big one that effects everything is that the 2A should apply to States via the 14th amendment. I would expect a national organization to have a strategy to move in that direction. Otherwise they will always be fire fighting. Once that is completed, there is essentially one front, all federal...everything trickles down.

So tactical operations with the feds and strategic with the States.

[Fly320s]

I agree with RealGun.

Force the States to recognize that the 2nd amendment is just like the 1st: the same in every state.

After that, we can start on the individual laws.

[Standing Wolf]

It's always the Californians that think the rest of the country will follow them.

In individuals, that's known as "megalomania."

Repeal the Roberti-Roos anti-firearm act, and all related 'assault weapons' legislation in California.

How is the N.R.A. supposed to do what Californians aren't willing to do for themselves?

[M-Rex]

In individuals, that's known as "megalomania."



How is the N.R.A. supposed to do what Californians aren't willing to do for themselves?

Lobbying efforts. Roberti-Roos was never voted upon by the general populous.

[Kharn]

I am against national concealed carry. It would require compromises with very anti-gun states that would limit or repeal many of the forward steps we've made in states like Florida.


The idea of nationalizing something like that has about 100 reasons as to why it is a real BAD idea.Congress could just pass a law similiar to the CCW-for-cops one just passed last year, but change it to any civilian with a CCW permit from any state. If we could get it to say they must accept non-resident permits, all the better (and I bet Florida would get an immediate jump in number of applications).

Kharn

[Hawk]

Reopen the registry?

according to the media the AWB was all about machine guns "flooding the streets" so repealing the '86 ban should be a non-event for them. Don't you remember all the slanted stories with police chiefs doing mag dumps from FA AK47s?
+1

The MSM shot their wad last year - everybody already believes they became available at firesale prices to grammer school kids last September.

Brady:
"Ah, we were just kidding before: now they really are going to flood the streets"

Still no chance though. Apart from a few altruistic types here and on TFL, the current owners won't want to see their M-16's drop to 1500.00 in a heartbeat. A lot of our friends have bought the equivalent of 2,000.00 beanie babies - I'd anticipate some internal resistance.

When one knowingly overpays for a product based on one's belief that somebody else will knowingly overpay even more due to an artificial paperwork shortage, they won't want to see the drain plug pulled. Can't say as I'd really blame them. Pity.
:(

[Kharn]

Still no chance though. Apart from a few altruistic types here and on TFL, the current owners won't want to see their M-16's drop to 1500.00 in a heartbeat. A lot of our friends have bought the equivalent of 2,000.00 beanie babies - I'd anticipate some internal resistance.Most class-3 shooters I've seen (at least on the various forums) are very hostile to those that openly never want the ban to expire due to their investment. Most just want cheap MGs just like the rest of us, since then they could just buy more of them, rather than having to sell one to afford to buy another.

Kharn

[dpesec]

Kharn, excellent. I'd like that before having the Feds issue permits. Actually, if I had my druthers, I'd like to see the 2A back to where it should be, living and breathing, not on life support.

Remember the phrase "shall not infringe? :D ?

[LAR-15]

Repeal 922 (o)

and tackle the DC handgun ban

[Kharn]

DC handgun ban is a good target (HR1288/S1082), it has 222 co-sponsors in the House, 35 in the Senate (S397 had 61 in the Senate and HR800 had 257 in the House, for comparison).

Kharn

[Don't Tread On Me]

Sorry California, but you guys are a LOST cause. I don't even think the NRA should spend a penny in your state that exceeds what members there put into it. It is just unworkable and a waste of RKBA resources.

If anything, California should go as anti-gun as possible so that we have a nice large example for the whole nation to the failure of gun control.


34, 68, and 86 bans aren't going away. But I think the "sporting purposes" clause can be attacked. Problem is, a large part of the pro-gun movement will be sabotaging it from the start (ie domestic manufacturers)



The repeal of the D.C. ban is a good idea. Very workable. D.C. doesn't get much say in it, and D.C. belongs to all of us. Although I don't know if it is worth the full efforts of the NRA to slug it out there. While it would be a blow to the gun-controllers...how does it serve the RKBA movement as a whole?


Say it is repealed, we all know D.C. will remain a crime infested ****hole for decades. Guns do reduce crime, they do deter violence, they do make people safer --- but they DO NOT reduce crime in slums, ghettos and areas plagued by drugs, gangs and thugs. That is where all the anti-gun statistics come from. The miscreants of society. A gun ban repeal in D.C. would be good for the citizens (which is the best reason to do it)..but will not show the nation that our cause is effective - it might give the other side ammo to say that it didn't help one bit.


It's like betting on a 3-legged horse to win the Kentucky Derby. I wouldn't want to see our main argument of more guns, less crime blown by a FREAK case like D.C....which is plagued by other issues.



For D.C. to reduce its murder and crime problem, it shouldn't ban guns, but instead should ban certain people!

[Lupinus]

I think working on the state level to get CCW in all states with reasonable terms and requirments. Also work with all fifty states so that the permit from your state is good in all 50 states. Open carry would be nice but I think concealed is a better stratagy anyway. Also I think that (sorry I don't know the exact bill) the idiocy that keeps people under 21 from purchesing handguns and even jsut handgun ammo needs to get kicked out. I can do just as much damage if not more depending on range with a shotgun then I can with a 9mm. Yet I can go to walmart buy a shotgun and a thousand rounds of ammo perfectly legal. And yet, I can't go buy a 9mm or ammo. I have to drag my mother out to buy my ammo (father isn't in the picture).

I think most gun law (like CCW) while pushed in all states needs to stay at the local level. Actully I think most every law should be at the state rather then federal level. This way states that are more pro gun can advance at their own faster pace. While states more anti gun like California and Jersey can advance at their own slower pace. Basicly all stupidity ridden federal laws should be worked to be repealed and on the state level same laws repealed as well while we work on the state level to get laws passed establishing gun owner's rights.

First it should be the repeal of such things as the federal law requiring 21 years old to buy a handgun. And on state levels removing bans on mag capacity, hollow points (not sure bout other states but I believe in Jersey hp's are illegal), and other such bans. While working for CCW and other things in state. The progression should not be to fast. To fast and you cause shock and backlash. If you take baby steps in the long run itll work much better. Restrictive CCW is better then no CCW. So get it in there and then work to refine it to being less restrictive. If you demand CCW with no restrictions (similer to PA's for example where you don't even need a class) in states like Jersey of Cali it will backlash. Rather get in there with one that is restrictive that you can get passed. Let people get used to the idea, get stats to prove your ground, and then you can push for less restrictions.

[Basura Blanca]

It's always the Californians that think the rest of the country will follow them.

Ever seen the "new improved" spill-proof gas cans?
Where was that idea born? Where has it spread to now and where is it (apparently) headed? Like it or not, California has a lot of political influence for reasons that should be pretty obvious.

[Waitone]

Get rid of the DC gun ban. Straight forward, in-your-face power play which will have tremendous symbolic value. Get rid of the ban and watch how fast congress loads up.

[Don't Tread On Me]

Symbolic value yes, more power for the NRA yes...but then it would be our luck that a rise in some meth or crack epidemic accelerates greater murders and gun violence.


Let's not forget that D.C. locals are highly anti-gun, and that there will be hundreds of authorities and officials cooking the stats books to make this law look like a failure.


The media will be ultra-shrill over this, pouncing on every gun murder and mischaracterizing each instance placing the blame on the availability of the firearm, not the fact that the firearm was probably illegal, or that the participants in the shootings where members of the bloods, crips (insert miscreants here)..


Fact is, repealing that ban will only arm those who would be inclined to own a firearm for self-defense or sporting. They tend not to live in the worst places. Where the daily shootings occur -slums/ghettos- the non-criminal element of those areas are not of the cultural nor mental attitude to take protection into their own hands. These people do not arm themselves to curb violence in their areas. They either don't know, don't care, or can't afford it.


Here in Florida, we have plenty of urban areas that are truly disgusting and crime infested. No amount of liberalizing gun laws will help those areas when the civilized inhabitants aren't part of the "gun culture" and don't have a sense for property value, individualism, responsibility. Most live in fear, or just accept it as how (their) world is.


Thus, the part of towns where you lock your car doors, and roll up the windows will remain the way it is. This is why pro-gun laws have had no effect in the urban areas of so many pro-gun states. Problem is bigger than the lack of guns.



This is why I have no faith for D.C. when it comes to gun laws. I hate to be a "Dick Morris" worrying more about image rather than what is right/wrong..but our movement is very fragile in this period of history.

[cbsbyte]

Repeal the Roberti-Roos anti-firearm act, and all related 'assault weapons' legislation in California.

So California goes, so the rest of the nation follows. As long as one head of the hydra is alive, the beast still lives. As long as one state has this type of legislation active, other states will look on it as an example.

This is true in the sense that other Liberal states look to California as proving grounds for new ideas to implement. Case in point, Massachusetts the bluest state in the Union. What ever CA does Mass is not close behind to adopt or vise versa. We have a similar state wide gun registrey, the same handgun regulations mandating all guns to have certain saftery features and past safety tests before being approved to be sold in the state. We also have a comprenshive AWB. Like CA before, the Mass legislators are now debating a .50 Cal ban. From here other Northeast states like New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maryland, New Jersey etc will adobt what we implement. It is only a matter of time before other states follow them. But there is hope, Vermont which is probably more liberal than MA and CA combined still has no state gun laws besides the federal laws. You can open carry in Vermont.

[Waitone]

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/10/21/00957.shtml

Friday, Oct. 21, 2005 12:07 a.m. EDT
Wayne LaPierre: Remember New Orleans

National Rifle Association Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre has a new rallying cry to spotlight the importance of every American's right to keep and bear arms: "Remember New Orleans."

In a speech earlier this week to the New York chapter of the Sportsmen's Association for Firearms Education, LaPierre painted a compelling picture of New Orleans residents left defenseless by Hurricane Katrina - as one-third of the city's police force deserted their posts and abandoned the streets to roving bands of looters and thugs.

Here is a partial transcript of LaPierre's rousing address:

"Picture your beloved hometown, the neighborhood where you live. Hold that image in your head. Now imagine that a massive natural disaster has transformed your beloved neighborhood into a putrid soup of splinters, muck and corpses. A massive natural disaster has pounded and ground your town into an ugly gravy of dead, toxic garbage. . . .


"There's no power to run a single thing that makes a sound. There's no water to bring in hydration or carry away waste. All life is stagnant around you - and dying.
"You can't call anyone. No one can call you. Phone lines and cell towers are down. 911 is gone. Police, fire, ambulance - the safety net of normal life - is completely gone. Think about what that would feel like. There's no one but you.

"The shadows of armed looters and thugs begin combing the streets with hard eyes and hungry looks. They take what they want. They rape who they want. They kill at will.

Every exit is impassable, so leaving is impossible. But staying is unimaginable. Life has been reduced to merely breathing, devoid of the barest essentials. Your throat throbs for water. Your gut aches for food. And both hungers are eclipsed by the inevitable fight for survival against those who would take your home, your wife and your life.

"It's a hellish nightmare of hopelessness, helpless terror - bigger than your brain can almost imagine . . . .

"You hear nothing but the buzz of mosquitoes, occasional shouts for help - and gunshots and looting in the dark.
"But you have a firearm.

"At dawn, a few neighbors emerge from their houses. Some of them also have guns. And you get together with them and you agree to take a stand - just as good people have done since civilization was formed.

"Until civilization returns, you band together to protect those who can't protect themselves. You realize suddenly that you're part of the militia in the truest historic sense of the word.

"You've got a lot of single mothers with kids on your street. . . . Everyone's doors and windows are wide open - they've been destroyed.

"So you tell the single mothers: 'If you have any trouble, just scream. We'll hear you. We'll be there.'

"You spray paint sheets of plywood with big red letters - 'We are home. We have guns. We will shoot.'

"And you know, because even the New York Times carried a picture of it - that's exactly what they did in neighborhood after neighborhood all over the Gulf states. Not in some foreign country - here in the U.S.A. Roving gangs see your sign, they see your guns and what do they do? They stay away.

"Those guns and nothing else during that time gave the hopeless hope . . . In the midst of all that misery you're struck at that moment by the beauty and the salvation of second amendment freedom in the United States of America . . .

"The armed authorities finally arrive. The blame a broken levee for your predicament. But then, something you couldn't imagine happening, happens. They destroy the one thing that was standing there between you and anarchy - the second amendment.

"They start confiscating firearms from the law abiding. Swat-style teams start swarming block-by-block as if on a war footing. They're tense, they're jumpy and they're trained for urban warfare . . .

"Keep in mind, these military folks, these police folks - they were on our side. They didn't want to carry out this order that was given by the police chief of New Orleans . . . In fact, they were outraged over what they'd been ordered to do.

"A reporters asked one of them - 'You mean [you might have to] shoot an American?' And the soldier said 'yes.'

"But the Americans he was talking about shooting, they weren't criminals. They were brave people who were simply left behind when the hurricane hit in one of the most corrupt cities in the United States of America.

"New Orleans was the first city in American history to disarm peaceable American citizens door-to-door at gunpoint. And I'll tell you this as we sit here today - it must be the last . . . .

"With your help, the National Rifle Association is going to make sure it never happens again. We're going to go state-by-state and change every state law that has some type of emergency powers statute that allows authorities to regulate or confiscate guns from law abiding citizens when an emergency is declared . . .

"The example of New Orleans is going to become to worst fear of those who want to ban guns in the good old U.S.A. Never again can the anti-gunners claim that honest citizens don't need firearms because the police and the government are going to be there to protect you . . .

"And we've got a good slogan that you're going to hear from one end of the country to the other. And that slogan is: Remember New Orleans . . .

"The next time anyone says to you: 'Are you just afraid or paranoid?' Look them straight in the eye and say: Remember New Orleans.

"If they ask you, 'Why does anyone need to own a gun?': Remember New Orleans.

"If they say to you, "Why does anyone need a high-capacity magazine?" Look them straight in the eye and say: Remember New Orleans.

"What's wrong with a 15 day waiting period? Remember New Orleans.

"What makes you think the government would ever confiscate your gun? Remember New Orleans.

"Is the second amendment relevant in the 21st Century? Remember New Orleans.

"That's our battle cry and let's never, ever let them forget it."

[Don't Tread On Me]

Hmm...that's a good idea. Lay the smack-down on cities with gun-confiscation contingency plans.


Gun and ammo sales lately are proof of how N.O. has galvanized the gun community to certain realities. The debate over LEO's or government actually attempting or carrying out a confiscation is OVER. The apologists crawl off with their tail between their legs.


The time for talking is over, now it is time for the gun-community to stop bickering over certain topics and form a position for tackling the issue of confiscations etc...


I think the NRA is right on. Go after locals with grassroot action to eliminate confiscation plans.

[RealGun]

I agree that prohibiting the DC Gun Ban would be highly significant, because it would establish how Congress feels about gun ownership by law abiding citizens who are entitled to the means of self defense. That stengthens the follow on argument that any gun ban is unconstitutional and that the 14th amendment removed any state or municipality authority to ignore the federal 2A and the RKBA in general.

I believe Congress is also free to preempt the Supreme Court and declare that the 14th amendment applies to the Second Amendment, if not the BoR in its entirety. That is, after all, what the 14A actually says.

[stevelyn]

So as California goes, the rest of the nation follows.

Yup, we're standing in line right behind ya patiently waiting our turn to jump off the cliffs.:rolleyes:

Stripping the "sporting purpose" clause from GCA 68 would be my first priority at the federal level. It would render a lot of laws (especially import) null and void.

At the state level I would like to see heads on pikes in New Orleans of the tyrants and their minions who suggested and carried out gun confiscations.:fire:

[rick_reno]

That's a good speech by LaPierre.

[VorpalSpork]

Hey-hey! Ho-ho! 18 § 922r has got to go! :)

That would be a good first step, but it is going to be a long incremental process. We didn't get all this legislation overnight, and we will have a hard time being rid of it overnight. The objective should be to remove the distinctions between different types of firearms, by lowering regulations on more regulated types of firearms until a gun is a gun is a gun.

I'd also like to see the '86, '68, and '34 laws declared unconstitutional. Again, that's for the courts to handle, not the congress. The supreme court decided they had a role in determining the constitutionality of laws, but that doesn't mean the congress can't decide they think a law is unconstitutional and repeal it.

[Lone_Gunman]

So California goes, so the rest of the nation follows.

Do Californians really believe that???

California is a lost cause. I don't think the NRA should waste money there.

[M-Rex]

This is true in the sense that other Liberal states look to California as proving grounds for new ideas to implement. Case in point, Massachusetts the bluest state in the Union. What ever CA does Mass is not close behind to adopt or vise versa. We have a similar state wide gun registrey, the same handgun regulations mandating all guns to have certain saftery features and past safety tests before being approved to be sold in the state. We also have a comprenshive AWB. Like CA before, the Mass legislators are now debating a .50 Cal ban. From here other Northeast states like New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maryland, New Jersey etc will adobt what we implement. It is only a matter of time before other states follow them. But there is hope, Vermont which is probably more liberal than MA and CA combined still has no state gun laws besides the federal laws. You can open carry in Vermont.

+1 cbsbyte.

I suppose I should clarify. I'd like to see the NRA make a concentrated, deliberate, high-profile campaign in California mainly for the reason you outlined you above ("other liberal states look to California as proving grounds for new ideas to implement"). The NRA working in other, less liberal states with a win here and there is great, but doesn't really impact the struggle to bolster the 2nd Amendment like taking down the great liberal dragon of California would be. Liberals in other states are emboldened by what they see happening in California. I guarantee you, if this asinine San Fransicko firearms ban somehow, miraculously passes, you will see other major cities rushing to enact similar legislation. With the 5th largest economy in the world, it's just plain 'putting one's head in the sand', and bruised pride to refuse to believe that as California goes, so the rest of the nation will follow.

[Smurfslayer]

ILA is still supporting the bill to amend DC's laws, so they still have active legislation that will likely become their "top" legislative priority until the end of the current session. If you want ILA to do something in particular then now is the time to act, not sit back and bitch about why ILA isn't doing something to get <insert your pet peeve gun control here> repealed.

WE have to do the leg work. Personally, I think the easiest addition for this year is to try and convince ILA to support the repeal of the National Parks ban on self defense. With enough pressure, this can be amended with the current petition stuck in DOI's bowels. Regardless of whether you agree with me or not, here's what to do:

Put the keyboard and mouse down.
Back away from it, and pick up the phone.
Dial up your representative and 2 Senators.
Tell them Hey, this law <insert stupid gun control law, give ch. & section> is really nonsensical, I'd like to meet with your staff to discuss our options to get this repealed. Get a meeting.

Keep at it until you've got a meeting. At the meeting, make your pitch to get it repealed, call ILA and tell them about your efforts.

Then, post about here, and we can x-post it and get other gun owners to jump on board.

In the amount of time it took you to read this post, you could've found out your representative & Senator's numbers, and called at least one of them.

I did...

[LAR-15]

In DC I still say go after 922 (o) first and then the DC handgun ban.

Repealing 922 (o) will benefit everyone, even those in states where machineguns are banned.

[Too Many Choices!?]

These guys don't really try to get laws off the books(Clinton Ban excluded as it cost little money to fight with it's sunset clause). IF the Spokesman for the NRA came out NATIONALLY AND STATED THEIR NEW MISSION STATEMENT IS:

" To insure that the Second Ammendment is no longer erroded, and ignored, but instead, recognized and incorporated via the 14th, we at the NRA WILL WORK TO REPEAL EVERY UNCONSTITUTIONAL FEDERAL AND LOCAL LAW pertaining to FIREARMA UNTIL a Gun, is a Gun, is a Gun regardless of it's develepment(military or civillian), it's purpose(hunting,defense, target shooting, offense), or it's misuse by a selected few(criminal use of full-auto, sbr's, and sbs's would not be reason enough to ban them or restrict them from CIVIL{key word} hands)";

Then I would join up ,and work free on weekends. But since that won't happen, maybe I should start an organization with that said same Mission Statement, as a goal(Hmmmmm)?? After all, it is still a partialy free Country:(...

Too Many Choices!?

[LAR-15]

Name a pro gun organization who has come out and said that?

[Silver Bullet]

Then I would join up ,and work free on weekends.
So what are you doing in the meanwhile ?

[Too Many Choices!?]

Obviously the same thing you are:confused: ;)

LAR-15- That is my point, nobody wants to get down and dirty and fight this fight the way it is being fought against us. Fight fire with fire.

[Silver Bullet]

Obviously the same thing you are
Perhaps not. I'm contributing a lot of funds to the NRA every year to fight these battles.

[lostone1413]

Why not have fed's require other states to honor each others permits. Just like the drivers license. I don't see a down side to that.

Have a bill for about 2 years that would do what you said. Trouble is the NRA hasn't been interested in pushing it. Far as I know it is dead. I think the bill is HR45 It is a Self Defense bill that would give national reciprocity. Call GOA if that isn't the right bill number and they can give it to you. If the Republicans were Pro 2nd Amendment (but they aren't) That bill would have been brought up long ago and passed. I for one can't see any bill that would benefit the gun owners getting passed when all I see is Washington wanting to destroy the Constitution. Even the protection bill that just passed I'd bet the farm them two amendments will come back to haunt the gun owners. Even with the Republicans running the whole show you really think they are Pro 2nd amendment? LOL

[Don't Tread On Me]

To summarize a few of the last posts...


Yes, California (Kalifornistan) is a lost cause. Sorry guys, when you elect people like Boxer and Feinstein you can't honestly expect the rest of the country to somehow come to your rescue. Don't feel bad, Mass, NY, NJ and IL are just as bad - you guys are just the innovators.


D.C. repeal is ify. Would be great for our mission, but could have consequences.


Parts of 922 gone is good. Little over all effect but to make us happier. Little for the overall RKBA. At this point, we need BOLD statements of individual RKBA cemented in law and courts.


Silverbullet: Sorry, but your position is extremist. You cannot demand to return to the gun laws of the early 1800's right away. That would be the best way for the NRA to lose all credibility and support, and would be marginalized. Instead, we will block bad laws, chip away at existing ones, liberate other areas...while trying to build up the "pro gun culture" in America in the meantime. Till there is a cultural shift, we can't make drastic moves like '34 repeal. This is why I adovate that everyone take a non-gun nut to the range and get them "hooked". It's easy, and most join the RKBA battle. Spread the disease.


GOA, JPFO et al are all worthless, their job is ONLY to keep the NRA honest and to expose them when they are wrong. For that, they have a great value as they create a deterrance for the NRA to not backstab us as there will be a mass exodus to these orgs. However, they have zero power, and they've never protected or accomplished anything legislatively. It's easy to talk from the sidelines.

Be a team player, not a whiner and help the movement move on. Waiting for some utopian idealistic day to come when the NRA will demand all gun control from day 1 to be repealed isn't going to happen as that isn't the America we live in.



Hopefully the NRA can find a way to threaten or prevent confiscations from occuring. With a terror attack possible at any time, a natural disaster, a plague etc....it won't be hard at all for authorities to want to "bring order" by knocking on your door for your guns. Remember, government lives and breathes for an excuse to oppress.


Either way, waiting around is a BAD idea. When you go idle, the sharks will circle.




Fortune favors the bold!

[Silver Bullet]

Silverbullet: Sorry, but your position is extremist. You cannot demand to return to the gun laws of the early 1800's right away. That would be the best way for the NRA to lose all credibility and support, and would be marginalized. Instead, we will block bad laws, chip away at existing ones, liberate other areas...while trying to build up the "pro gun culture" in America in the meantime. Till there is a cultural shift, we can't make drastic moves like '34 repeal. This is why I adovate that everyone take a non-gun nut to the range and get them "hooked". It's easy, and most join the RKBA battle. Spread the disease.
Do you have me mixed up with someone else ?

[bjbarron]

That's a good speech by LaPierre.

Maybe, just maybe the NRA got the message of the last 10 years or so. After their fumble of the AWB a lot of people started looking at them as just another compromise happy political action group....and they lost the respect of a lot of gunnies.

I'd like to see them get more proactive. Let them flex some muscle instead of being so afraid what the press says. They can never do anything right for the MSM no matter how much they tried anyway.

My most immediate desire would be to see a attainable CCW nationwide. The Great State (and Criminal Enterprise) of New Joisey has one on the books, but only 3000 have been issued (mainly to retired LEOs and security types) out of a population of 9 million.

Unfortunately Jersey is one of six states that does not have a 'keep and bare arms' provision in it's constitution.

Whatever would be done would have to be federal and stand up to court challenges. That's why who gets on SCOTUS is the most important issue of our time.

My dream would be to live long enough to see the Sullivan Law repealed. But as long as these moonbat states say 'hey, you can still buy guns...what's the complaint?", we'll never get anywhere.

Less than three years (http://www.physorg.com/news2411.html) to go before New Jersey makes all guns illegal except for 'smart' guns. What a trip that'll be.