Quantcast
Federal Gun laws passed quickly - THR
THR  

Go Back   THR > Social Situations > General Gun Discussions

Welcome to THR
You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have, access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!


If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit the help section.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 15, 2015, 09:50 AM   #1
Ryanxia
Member
 
 
Join Date: June 18, 2010
Location: In the trenches for Liberty.
Posts: 3,296
Federal Gun laws passed quickly

These are for the good but how did these pass so quickly without anyone hearing a peep? (Or have I just been living under a rock?)
Even though they seem to be in our favor it's kind of scary how quickly this moved.

Quote:
Last week, Congress approved the Fiscal Year 2015 Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act. Included in the Act were a number of pro-gun provisions that prevent the Obama administration from implementing its anti-gun agenda.
Operation Choke Point no longer legal
EPA or other agencies cannot regulate lead target ammo
No funds to implement the UN Small Arms Treaty


Link:
https://www.nraila.org/articles/2014...acted-into-law
__________________
Join NRA Today!
Takes 2 minutes to donate to NRA-ILA https://www.nraila.org/get-involved-...re/donate.aspx

www.odb.org
Ryanxia is offline  
Old January 15, 2015, 09:54 AM   #2
Trent
Contributing Member
 
 
Join Date: December 6, 2010
Posts: 9,634
Yeah... uhh.. doesn't Obama have to put pen to paper to codify passed resolutions from congress in to law? Has he done that yet?
__________________
Tyrant:
1. a sovereign or other ruler who uses power oppressively or unjustly.
Example: http://www.whitehouse.gov/
Trent is offline  
Old January 15, 2015, 09:58 AM   #3
Ryanxia
Member
 
 
Join Date: June 18, 2010
Location: In the trenches for Liberty.
Posts: 3,296
Yes he does Trent, I assumed since the headline said enacted into law that he's done that, but maybe it was a typo?
__________________
Join NRA Today!
Takes 2 minutes to donate to NRA-ILA https://www.nraila.org/get-involved-...re/donate.aspx

www.odb.org
Ryanxia is offline  
Old January 15, 2015, 10:04 AM   #4
Tirod
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 24, 2008
Location: SW MO
Posts: 2,972
If it's all good then the gun rights organizations don't beat the drums and waste bandwidth on a media storm. They have budgets and bannering a positive improvement doesn't net them a lot more contributions.

Another factor is that the media can't score points as the cheerleaders of gun control highlighting good things for us in the news. Looks like a fail on their part and they don't need to let the people understand it's happened. So, they keep a lid on it and put another police shooting in those column inches or time slot.

It's not the way it should be but it is what happens. You have to dig into the press releases of pro gun organizations to find these things because nobody else will report them. It's not so much being under a rock as the media simple blacking out those stories.

It's about agenda reporting, even the local broadcasters do it. Light and fluffy news with a headliner tragedy to focus their anti gun slant is what we get, and trusting them to tell all truthfully is like asking Dan Rather to give it to us straight up. Not happening.
Tirod is offline  
Old January 15, 2015, 10:06 AM   #5
rbernie
Contributing Member
 
 
Join Date: January 21, 2004
Location: Plain Ol', Texas
Posts: 19,066
These laws were amendments to a larger appropriations (funding) bill. Passing and then getting presidential signature on the funding bill is what gets these laws on the books.
__________________

Support THR by becoming a Contributing Member. Texans should be a member of the Texas State Rifle Association.
-
Trying to alter human behavior by regulating objects has been historically proven a fools errand, and yet is the fundamental underlying premise of gun control.
-
A conclusion is not a destination, it's simply a convenient place to stop thinking.
-
Reading a thing doesn't automatically make it so, and repeating it doesn't necessarily make it any truer.

-
I cried because I had no shoes, until I met a man who had no class.
rbernie is offline  
Old January 15, 2015, 10:08 AM   #6
Ryanxia
Member
 
 
Join Date: June 18, 2010
Location: In the trenches for Liberty.
Posts: 3,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbernie View Post
These laws were amendments to a larger appropriations (funding) bill. Passing and then getting presidential signature on the funding bill is what gets these laws on the books.
I know and that shouldn't be allowed. Like the time a couple years ago they tried to get a 10 round magazine limit attached to an internet privacy Bill.
__________________
Join NRA Today!
Takes 2 minutes to donate to NRA-ILA https://www.nraila.org/get-involved-...re/donate.aspx

www.odb.org
Ryanxia is offline  
Old January 15, 2015, 10:13 AM   #7
Ohio Gun Guy
Member
 
 
Join Date: April 30, 2008
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 2,347
^ What he said. Over the years I believe I've gotten better at finding sites, information sources, etc. over the internet to find out about things I care about. Because as mentioned above, if they do report about it, there's an agenda & spin, and then there's the other method....not reporting it at all. If you've ever been close to a news report / had first hand knowledge, you will see just how bad they torture the facts.

NRI-ILA is a good site for legislative action information.
Here in Ohio the Buckeye Firearms Association has good information.

Sometimes for world events, I'll look at a variety of foreign news outlets (Note, they have their own biases). Sometimes you hear about things a few days ahead of the US news, and sometimes with different / more detail.
Ohio Gun Guy is offline  
Old January 15, 2015, 10:15 AM   #8
Mannlicher
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 24, 2002
Location: North Central Florida
Posts: 3,426
at best, a sop thrown to the masses.
__________________
no Signature line
Mannlicher is offline  
Old January 15, 2015, 08:39 PM   #9
Trent
Contributing Member
 
 
Join Date: December 6, 2010
Posts: 9,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryanxia View Post
I know and that shouldn't be allowed. Like the time a couple years ago they tried to get a 10 round magazine limit attached to an internet privacy Bill.
Oh there's still workarounds for that stuff even if they did try to prevent it.

Illinois' state constitution was designed to prevent that..

Quote:
Bills, except bills for appropriations and for the
codification, revision or rearrangement of laws, shall be
confined to one subject. Appropriation bills shall be limited
to the subject of appropriations.
So what really ends up happening is we get a bill titled "PROTECTION OF CHILDREN" (or whatever), which upon submission reads:


"Modifies the criminal code of 2012 Section {whatever}; Adds a space after line three, second comma."

Then they take that shell bill, hit it with floor amendments, and pass crap right out of there without so much as any review process, committee oversight, or other forms of due diligence.
__________________
Tyrant:
1. a sovereign or other ruler who uses power oppressively or unjustly.
Example: http://www.whitehouse.gov/
Trent is offline  
Old January 15, 2015, 09:28 PM   #10
OilyPablo
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 2, 2012
Location: WA State (NOT in Seattle)
Posts: 1,917
Sounds like Choke Point is alive and kicking:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...-bank-account/
__________________
It's simple: If you don't like guns, don't own one.
OilyPablo is offline  
Old January 15, 2015, 11:21 PM   #11
Outlaw75
Member
 
 
Join Date: October 10, 2014
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 12
Quote:
Yeah... uhh.. doesn't Obama have to put pen to paper to codify passed resolutions from congress in to law? Has he done that yet?
According to this, yes.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-.../house-bill/83
Outlaw75 is offline  
Old January 15, 2015, 11:44 PM   #12
Old Fuff
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 24, 2002
Location: Arizona
Posts: 22,186
What happened here was that a major "must have" appropriation bill was amended to include the 3 mentioned pro-gun clauses. This put the president behind a rock and a hard place. If he didn't (or doesn't) sign the bill the government will shut down. Most likely the bill was signed or will be, but I'm sure he isn't a happy camper...

The bill itself isn't really that new, it was still going through hearings late last year.
Old Fuff is offline  
Old January 16, 2015, 12:01 AM   #13
JTHunter
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 25, 2010
Location: Southwestern Illinois
Posts: 1,026
OilyPablo said:
Quote:
Sounds like Choke Point is alive and kicking:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...-bank-account/
This happened last November.
__________________
“Crime is to be expected since humans are never perfect. But the failure of Justice may be more damaging to Society than the crime itself.” - - Clarence Darrow
JTHunter is offline  
Old January 16, 2015, 12:08 AM   #14
OilyPablo
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 2, 2012
Location: WA State (NOT in Seattle)
Posts: 1,917
Understood. The article said:

by Michael Patrick Leahy14 Jan 2015

Not sure when that abuse will actually end was my point.
__________________
It's simple: If you don't like guns, don't own one.
OilyPablo is offline  
Old January 16, 2015, 12:29 AM   #15
barnbwt
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 14, 2011
Posts: 3,917
"These are for the good but how did these pass so quickly without anyone hearing a peep? (Or have I just been living under a rock?)
Even though they seem to be in our favor it's kind of scary how quickly this moved."
No one 'peeped' since no one read the thing. It was over 2000 pages long (remember when ACA was the first bill that long, and it was such an outrage to everyone that no one had read it? Man, those were the days...). That's why we are all still subject to general warrants to tap our communications, because a select few individuals with their hands on the controls removed some key language before the final vote

What's funny, is that even in such an environment that obviously incentivizes 'dishonest' maneuvers like these, the Republicans clearly telegraphed their intentions as far as gun issues, and appear to have been completely consistent in enacting only what they said they would. No poison pills, no anti-Lautenberg amendment slipped in at zero hour, just what they had been pitching for like a week beforehand (that Chokepoint sucks, that the EPA needs to shut up, and that they still hate the Small Arms Treaty, which Kerry/Obama had no business signing without their say so in the first place).

Three measly items that weren't even contested significantly, on the back of the greatest rebuke to both their political opposition and gun control we've ever seen. No, I'm not impressed with their 'solidarity' to our cause, just yet

"This put the president behind a rock and a hard place."
Yup, I'm sure the Prez was sweatin' bullets that he lost three of the most unimportant potential-possible-indirect threats to our hobby that he could come up with. The free market would circumvent Chokepoint (gun friendly creditors), the case law is clear on the EPA, and the SAT managed to be so bad that even a subservient Senate threatened to rebel over its very endorsement (let alone the implementation of its language)

TCB
__________________
"The pistol stabilizing brace was neither “designed” nor approved to be used as a shoulder stock, and therefore use as a shoulder stock constitutes a “redesign” of the device because a possessor has changed the very function of the item." --BATFE

Last edited by barnbwt; January 16, 2015 at 12:35 AM.
barnbwt is offline  
Old January 17, 2015, 04:33 PM   #16
MarkDido
Member
 
 
Join Date: April 5, 2003
Location: 01-255-0-L
Posts: 957
Quote:
These laws were amendments to a larger appropriations (funding) bill. Passing and then getting presidential signature on the funding bill is what gets these laws on the books.
A similar tactic was used by Republicans several years ago to allow concealed carry in National Parks as long as the carrier complied with the state's concealed carry law.

I believe the amendment was attached at a bill about credit cards or something like that.
Want the bill to pass? Bite off on the amendment.
__________________
PRC (AW) USN (Ret)
"I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.... "

The oath I took doesn't have an expiration date.
MarkDido is offline  
Old January 18, 2015, 07:17 PM   #17
thirty-ought-six
Member
 
 
Join Date: January 1, 2015
Posts: 181
While I like some aspects of the NRA, the gun-grabbing side of things if nothing but fear mongering in order to get people to buy more guns.

Numerous politicians have over the years regulated guns in such ways as automatic weapons bans, or magazine limits.

But there is no evidence, none, other than malarkey published on questionable news blogs that our President is going to plain out take away guns.

Won't happen. I've been hearing "Obama is gunna git yer guns!" for over 6 years now. I'll believe it when I see it. Quite frankly it's a load of crap.
thirty-ought-six is offline  
Old January 18, 2015, 09:01 PM   #18
chris in va
Member
 
 
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 5,779
Quote:
Won't happen. I've been hearing "Obama is gunna git yer guns!" for over 6 years now. I'll believe it when I see it. Quite frankly it's a load of crap.
Wool over your eyes. President Obama's MO has been to appoint people to high positions in various government offices that indirectly restrict gun rights, such as the EPA, SCOTUS and justice system. It's pretty slick, effectively protecting himself from being directly responsible for anything.
__________________
There are two kinds of people in the world: (1) the free; and (2) food animals.

-Aristodemus
chris in va is offline  
Old January 18, 2015, 09:58 PM   #19
OilyPablo
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 2, 2012
Location: WA State (NOT in Seattle)
Posts: 1,917
Quote:
Wool over your eyes. President Obama's MO has been to appoint people to high positions in various government offices that indirectly restrict gun rights, such as the EPA, SCOTUS and justice system. It's pretty slick, effectively protecting himself from being directly responsible for anything.
This. Very slick.
__________________
It's simple: If you don't like guns, don't own one.
OilyPablo is offline  
Old January 18, 2015, 10:06 PM   #20
kwguy
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 17, 2012
Posts: 748
^^^ Yup.

The ONLY reason for gun laws not being stricter, especially post SH, is because of people like us joining the NRA in droves in response to the ludicrous proposals by anti's at the time, and a narrow R majority in the house, coupled with a real lack of appetite for it by Sen Leahy in the Senate.

It was close. We can't forget that. I'll take the 'fear mongering' by the NRA for what it is. It simply matches the strident anti drivel that is continually being pushed by the other side. The antis use emotion and politics to push their agenda, and the NRA matches their tactics. It's really the only way to do it.
kwguy is offline  
Old January 18, 2015, 10:25 PM   #21
barnbwt
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 14, 2011
Posts: 3,917
"I've been hearing "Obama is gunna git yer guns!" for over 6 years now. I'll believe it when I see it. Quite frankly it's a load of crap."

Surely you don't think it's not for lack of trying? While not his top priority (money, authority, pet social issues, and most importantly destroying his opponents come first) he's been anything but neutral on the issue. That he's been stymied is thanks to circumstances beyond his control. While it may not be realistic to say he will get our guns, if such fear mongering is successful in getting lazy, unmotivated sideliners involved to defend their personal stake, all the better. A lot of people will not believe these dangers until they have come to pass.

TCB
__________________
"The pistol stabilizing brace was neither “designed” nor approved to be used as a shoulder stock, and therefore use as a shoulder stock constitutes a “redesign” of the device because a possessor has changed the very function of the item." --BATFE
barnbwt is offline  
Old January 18, 2015, 10:34 PM   #22
OilyPablo
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 2, 2012
Location: WA State (NOT in Seattle)
Posts: 1,917
Do I need to bring up OPeration Choke Point again?
__________________
It's simple: If you don't like guns, don't own one.
OilyPablo is offline  
Old January 18, 2015, 10:59 PM   #23
kwguy
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 17, 2012
Posts: 748
Quote:
A lot of people will not believe these dangers until they have come to pass.
Yup, just look at England and Australia...
kwguy is offline  
Old January 19, 2015, 01:00 AM   #24
Ignition Override
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 15, 2007
Location: The Mid-South.
Posts: 4,417
kwguy:
The future threat of anything similar to the UK/Australia's confiscations is part of the motivation for so many of us buying guns FTF (in person).
Ignition Override is offline  
Old January 19, 2015, 01:06 AM   #25
JTHunter
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 25, 2010
Location: Southwestern Illinois
Posts: 1,026
Quote:
Yup, just look at England and Australia...
And, while not as bad as those, there are two examples closer to home, one to the north and one to the south.
__________________
“Crime is to be expected since humans are never perfect. But the failure of Justice may be more damaging to Society than the crime itself.” - - Clarence Darrow
JTHunter is offline  
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation by vB Optimise.
This site, its contents, Shooting Reviews, and its contents are Copyright (c) 2010-2013 Firearms Forum, Inc.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER
Although The High Road has attempted to provide accurate information on the forum, The High Road assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of the information. All information is provided "as is" with all faults without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. Neither The High Road nor any of its directors, members, managers, employees, agents, vendors, or suppliers will be liable for any direct, indirect, general, bodily injury, compensatory, special, punitive, consequential, or incidental damages including, without limitation, lost profits or revenues, costs of replacement goods, loss or damage to data arising out of the use or inability to use this forum or any services associated with this forum, or damages from the use of or reliance on the information present on this forum, even if you have been advised of the possibility of such damages.