Dems pressured on guns

Status
Not open for further replies.

tennreb

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
19
Location
Painesville, Ohio
The National Rifle Association is putting the election-year squeeze on conservative Democrats, demanding that they buck their leadership to support a bill to erase more of the District of Columbia’s gun laws.


Democratic gun rights supporters will risk losing their A-plus rating if they don’t sign a discharge petition to be filed Wednesday bringing the gun-rights bill directly to the floor.

The Hill
 
I doubt we'll see anything come of this. If its one thing Democrats have learned to do, its steer clear of gun legislation.
 
I am betting on some kind of procedural thing to delay it rather than it actually being taken up.

Personally, I think it is better at this point to let this thing run out in the courts.
 
Text of the bill, for reference:

District of Columbia Personal Protection Act (Introduced in House)

HR 1399 IH


110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 1399
To restore Second Amendment rights in the District of Columbia.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

March 8, 2007
Mr. ROSS (for himself and Mr. SOUDER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform


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


A BILL
To restore Second Amendment rights in the District of Columbia.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `District of Columbia Personal Protection Act'.

SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:

(1) The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

(2) The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the rights of individuals, including those who are not members of a militia or engaged in military service or training, to keep and bear arms.

(3) The law-abiding citizens of the District of Columbia are deprived by local laws of handguns, rifles, and shotguns that are commonly kept by law-abiding persons throughout the United States for sporting use and for lawful defense of their persons, homes, businesses, and families.

(4) The District of Columbia has the highest per capita murder rate in the Nation, which may be attributed in part to local laws prohibiting possession of firearms by law-abiding persons who would otherwise be able to defend themselves and their loved ones in their own homes and businesses.

(5) The Federal Gun Control Act of 1968, as amended by the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986, and the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, provide comprehensive Federal regulations applicable in the District of Columbia as elsewhere. In addition, existing District of Columbia criminal laws punish possession and illegal use of firearms by violent criminals and felons. Consequently, there is no need for local laws which only affect and disarm law-abiding citizens.

(6) Legislation is required to correct the District of Columbia's law in order to restore the fundamental rights of its citizens under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and thereby enhance public safety.

SEC. 3. REFORM D.C. COUNCIL'S AUTHORITY TO RESTRICT FIREARMS.

Section 4 of the Act entitled `An Act to prohibit the killing of wild birds and wild animals in the District of Columbia', approved June 30, 1906 (34 Stat. 809; sec. 1-303.43, D.C. Official Code) is amended by adding at the end the following: `Nothing in this section or any other provision of law shall authorize, or shall be construed to permit, the Council, the Mayor, or any governmental or regulatory authority of the District of Columbia to prohibit, constructively prohibit, or unduly burden the ability of persons not prohibited from possessing firearms under Federal law from acquiring, possessing in their homes or businesses, or using for sporting, self-protection or other lawful purposes, any firearm neither prohibited by Federal law nor subject to the National Firearms Act. The District of Columbia shall not have authority to enact laws or regulations that discourage or eliminate the private ownership or use of firearms.'.

SEC. 4. REPEAL D.C. SEMIAUTOMATIC BAN.

(a) In General- Section 101(10) of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2501.01(10), D.C. Official Code) is amended to read as follows:

`(10) `Machine gun' means any firearm which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily converted or restored to shoot automatically, more than 1 shot by a single function of the trigger, and includes the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machine gun, and any combination of parts from which a machine gun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.'.

(b) Conforming Amendment to Provisions Setting Forth Criminal Penalties- Section 1(c) of the Act of July 8, 1932 (47 Stat. 651; sec. 22-4501(c), D.C. Official Code) is amended to read as follows:

`(c) `Machine gun', as used in this Act, has the meaning given such term in section 101(10) of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975.'.

SEC. 5. REPEAL REGISTRATION REQUIREMENT.

(a) Repeal of Requirement-

(1) IN GENERAL- Section 201(a) of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2502.01(a), D.C. Official Code) is amended by striking `any firearm, unless' and all that follows through paragraph (3) and inserting the following: `any firearm described in subsection (c).'.

(2) DESCRIPTION OF FIREARMS REMAINING ILLEGAL- Section 201 of such Act (sec. 7-2502.01, D.C. Official Code) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

`(c) A firearm described in this subsection is any of the following:

`(1) A sawed-off shotgun.

`(2) A machine gun.

`(3) A short-barreled rifle.'.

(3) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- The heading of section 201 of such Act (sec. 7-2502.01, D.C. Official Code) is amended by striking `Registration requirements' and inserting `Firearm Possession'.

(b) Conforming Amendments to Firearms Control Regulations Act- The Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 is amended as follows:

(1) Sections 202 through 211 (secs. 7-2502.02 through 7-2502.11, D.C. Official Code) are repealed.

(2) Section 101 (sec. 7-2501.01, D.C. Official Code) is amended by striking paragraph (13).

(3) Section 401 (sec. 7-2504.01, D.C. Official Code) is amended--

(A) in subsection (a), by striking `the District;' and all that follows and inserting the following: `the District, except that a person may engage in hand loading, reloading, or custom loading of ammunition for firearms lawfully possessed under this Act.'; and

(B) in subsection (b), by striking `which are unregisterable under section 202' and inserting `which are prohibited under section 201'.

(4) Section 402 (sec. 7-2504.02, D.C. Official Code) is amended--

(A) in subsection (a), by striking `Any person eligible to register a firearm' and all that follows through `such business,' and inserting the following: `Any person not otherwise prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm under Federal of District law, or from being licensed under section 923 of title 18, United States Code,'; and

(B) in subsection (b), by amending paragraph (1) to read as follows:

`(1) The applicant's name;'.

(5) Section 403(b) (sec. 7-2504.03(b), D.C. Official Code) is amended by striking `registration certificate' and inserting `dealer's license'.

(6) Section 404(a)(3) (sec. 7-2504.04(a)(3)), D.C. Official Code) is amended--

(A) in subparagraph (B)(i), by striking `registration certificate number (if any) of the firearm,';

(B) in subparagraph (B)(iv), by striking `holding the registration certificate' and inserting `from whom it was received for repair';

(C) in subparagraph (C)(i), by striking `and registration certificate number (if any) of the firearm';

(D) in subparagraph (C)(ii), by striking `registration certificate number or';

(E) in subparagraph (D)(ii), by striking `or registration number'; and

(F) in subparagraph (E), by striking clause (iii) and redesignating clauses (iv) and (v) as clauses (iii) and (iv).

(7) Section 406(c) (sec. 7-2504.06(c), D.C. Official Code) is amended to read as follows:

`(c) Within 45 days of a decision becoming effective which is unfavorable to a licensee or to an applicant for a dealer's license, the licensee or application shall--

`(1) lawfully remove from the District all destructive devices in his inventory, or peaceably surrender to the Chief all destructive devices in his inventory in the manner provided in section 705; and

`(2) lawfully dispose, to himself or to another, any firearms and ammunition in his inventory.'.

(8) Section 407(b) (sec. 7-2504.07(b), D.C. Official Code) is amended by striking `would not be eligible' and all that follows and inserting `is prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm under Federal or District law.'.

(9) Section 502 (sec. 7-2505.02, D.C. Official Code) is amended--

(A) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:

`(a) Any person or organization not prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm under Federal or District law may sell or otherwise transfer ammunition or any firearm, except those which are prohibited under section 201, to a licensed dealer.';

(B) by amending subsection (c) to read as follows:

`(c) Any licensed dealer may sell or otherwise transfer a firearm to any person or organization not otherwise prohibited from possessing or receiving such firearm under Federal or District law.';

(C) in subsection (d), by striking paragraphs (2) and (3); and

(D) by striking subsection (e).

(10) Section 704 (sec. 7-2507.04, D.C. Official Code) is amended--

(A) in subsection (a), by striking `any registration certificate or' and inserting `a'; and

(B) in subsection (b), by striking `registration certificate,'.

(c) Other Conforming Amendments- Section 2(4) of the Illegal Firearm Sale and Distribution Strict Liability Act of 1992 (sec. 7-2531.01(2)(4), D.C. Official Code) is amended--

(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking `or ignoring proof of the purchaser's residence in the District of Columbia'; and

(2) in subparagraph (B), by striking `registration and'.

SEC. 6. REPEAL HANDGUN AMMUNITION BAN.

(a) Definition of Restricted Pistol Bullet- Section 101(13a) of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2501.01(13a)) is amended to read as follows:

`(13a)(A) `Restricted pistol bullet' means--

`(i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or

`(ii) a full-jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.

`(B) The term `restricted pistol bullet' does not include shotgun shot required by Federal or State environmental or game regulations for hunting purposes, a frangible projectile designed for target shooting, a projectile which the Attorney General of the United States (pursuant to section 921(a)(17) of title 18, United States Code) finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes, or any other projectile or projectile core which the Attorney General finds is intended to be used for industrial purposes, including a charge used in an oil and gas well perforating device.'.

(b) Repeal of Ban- Section 601 of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2506.01, D.C. Official Code) is amended--

(1) by striking `ammunition' each place it appears (other than paragraph (4)) and inserting `restricted pistol bullets'; and

(2) by striking paragraph (3) and redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (3).

SEC. 7. RESTORE RIGHT OF SELF DEFENSE IN THE HOME.

Section 702 of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2507.02, D.C. Official Code) is repealed.

SEC. 8. REMOVE CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR POSSESSION OF UNREGISTERED FIREARMS.

(a) In General- Section 706 of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 (sec. 7-2507.06, D.C. Official Code) is amended--

(1) by striking `that:' and all that follows through `(1) A' and inserting `that a'; and

(2) by striking paragraph (2).

(b) Effective Date- The amendments made by subsection (a) shall apply with respect to violations occurring after the 60-day period which begins on the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 9. REMOVE CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR CARRYING A FIREARM IN ONE'S DWELLING OR OTHER PREMISES.

(a) In General- Section 4(a) of the Act of July 8, 1932 (47 Stat. 651; sec. 22-4504(a), D.C. Official Code) is amended--

(1) in the matter before paragraph (1), by striking `a pistol,' and inserting the following: `except in his dwelling house or place of business or on other land possessed by that person, whether loaded or unloaded, a firearm,'; and

(2) by striking `except that:' and all that follows through `(2) If the violation' and inserting `except that if the violation'.

(b) Treatment of Certain Exceptions- Section 5(a) of such Act (47 Stat. 651; sec. 22-4505(a), D.C. Official Code) is amended--

(1) by striking `pistol' each place it appears and inserting `firearm'; and

(2) by striking the period at the end and inserting the following: `, or to any person while carrying or transporting a firearm used in connection with an organized military activity, a target shoot, formal or informal target practice, sport shooting event, hunting, a firearms or hunter safety class, trapping, or a dog obedience training class or show, or the moving by a bona fide gun collector of part or all of the collector's gun collection from place to place for public or private exhibition while the person is engaged in, on the way to, or returning from that activity if each firearm is unloaded and carried in an enclosed case or an enclosed holster, or to any person carrying or transporting a firearm in compliance with sections 926A, 926B or 926C of title 18, United States Code.'.

(c) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall apply with respect to violations occurring after the 60-day period which begins on the date of the enactment of this Act.
 
Timing is Right

Two factors are favorable:

1. The recent 2nd Amendment rling by the Supreme Court made it crystal clear that firearms ownership is an individual rather than a collective right.

2. Congress controls Washington D.C. The city council and mayor can pass ordinances, but they must be respectful of the guidelines set by Congress.
 
Section 4 of the Act entitled `An Act to prohibit the killing of wild birds and wild animals in the District of Columbia', approved June 30, 1906....

Ah, yes, that old canard "Ye shall not kill the King's animals." Unbelievable that such crap could enter our laws in 1906, let alone stay there. The Founders knew of such legislation in England in the 1600's and drafted the 2nd in order to avoid even the temptation of government to outlaw guns under some silly pretext like this. It is the embodiment of the "Guns are only for hunting" mindset - which inevitably lead to hunting being outlawed, which in turn leads to gun bans.

Mark my words: someday, someone will make a direct connection between the rise of animal rights groups and the statist anti-gun groups. They and the environmentalists have one goal in mind - to tame the population gradually, to make us incapable of doing anything without their permission, and incapable of resisting.
 
Why is the NRA pushing this now? DC is about to get smacked by the courts. This almost seems like a replay of when the NRA pushed a bill in Congress that would have mooted the Heller/Parker case in the first place, before it hit SCOTUS. :banghead:
 
You would probably be very surprised at the number of Democrats who own guns, and who are in favor of the Supremes decision. The problem is some of the pols got used to "gun control" as automatic free points with voters.

FWIW, the head of the Brady anti-gun group is a ...Republican.

mark
 
The tactic here is not to pass the legislation, although I think the NRA would not object if it happened to pass, but rather to get as many incumbents as possible on record as being either for or against giving DC residents full 2nd amendment rights. So this is mostly intended to be used in the up coming election. This is good politics and a very powerful political move on the part of the NRA and as you can see it has the Demo's more than a little stirred up with many of them running for cover.
 
Paul Hodes, a Democrat from NH and very liberal, signed on to an amicus brief "Friend of the Court" along with the two NH Senators siding with gun owners in the Heller case. The other ultra lib Congressperson did not and I hope NH voters make her pay for it come election time. I think this is a good tactic to show the voters if these "conservative" dems will have a backbone or tow the party line.
 
Why is the NRA pushing this now? DC is about to get smacked by the courts. This almost seems like a replay of when the NRA pushed a bill in Congress that would have mooted the Heller/Parker case in the first place, before it hit SCOTUS.

I'm sure I'll get flamed, but...The NRA, just like everything else, is driven by money. If gun control goes away, so does the NRA's paycheck, and so does the NRA.

Who's going to pay the head honchos' salaries when membership dies off due to more and more control laws being shot down?

Honestly I think this is exactly what the NRA needs to bring it back to it's roots and where it should be.
 
The courts are slow. Heller originally filed his lawsuit in Feb 2003. 5 and a half years and he still can't register his 1911.

How many years to strike down semi auto=machine gun. 1? 2? 3?
Once that is struck down dollars to doughnuts says they limit semi autos to 8 rounds or less. Any semi auto sold 9+ round mags are illegal. How long before that gets struck down. Another 1? 2? 3? years.

How long to strike down the vision test and written test?
How long to strike down outrageous fees/tax on a right?
How long to strike down the weapons must be locked portion?
How long to strike down no open or cc carry?

It litterrally could be 12, 15, 20 years before all of DC rights are restored. Or it could be done in a matter of weeks by Dems who are afraid of likely the only issue that can hurt them this fall. I think the dems will pick up 20+ seats in house and 3=5 seats in Congress plus have at 60%-70% chance of winning white house.

Now is time to put pressure on them. The pro 2nd amendment dems will break ranks to avoid losing their seat in an election cycle that is theirs to lose.
 
Another aspect to this is nothing succeedes like success. We won on Heller, so it is easier for the Dem pols to say they are just following the Court's decision. That protects their NRA rating without costing them too much political capital with the anti lefties. That short term thinking is usually as far as most of them seem capable of going.

Long term the example of another group of citizens with their RKBA without rivers of blood in the streets makes it harder to justify future anti laws. I think this is an excellent place for the NRA to expend some capital.
 
They definitely steer clear. I have a friend who is a complete liberal. Just doesnt understand nothing other than what the left tells him. Anytime a gun debate comes up he back pedals and just avoids the whole situation exactly like what the left and dems do because he knows he cant win the conversation and he told me that once in an email. He knows he and his side can't take it on directly. I hope that the more conservative dems do work with the NRA and support the NRA but I think they will just be run roughshod over by the extreme majority of the party now.
 
While their at it why don't they just free the rest of the country from state gun laws by simply preempting the issue and stating that only federal laws can restrict gun ownership, possession, ect. That would solve all kinds of problems across the country and leave the Brady Bunch and crew spinning their wheels at the city, county, and state levels.

The congress loves power, let them have it- for now. :evil:
 
Court action is slow and deliberate for a reason. Legislative action can be much faster and achieve similar ends while pulling certain Demos' shorts down around their ankles. Perhaps this will lead to re-evaluating some policies that have had the NRA endorsing incumbents when much more pro-2A challengers were on the ballot.

Personally, I'd like to see it happen.
 
I forgot who said it, and please forgive the war phraseology but it went something like this:
Press the enemy, in every way, and at every possible turn, whether you have the full ability to do it or only the appearance of doing it. You never know where the enemy are weak or what their reasons may be to give up and turn away, but you won't find out until you try every angle, and press at every facet.

Of course the downside to the above is losing a confrontation, but I think we should still try.

In the case of the Democrats, there is no predicting what each and every one will do, and if a few break ranks and support this bill, perhaps more may follow suit.
 
The courts are slow. Heller originally filed his lawsuit in Feb 2003. 5 and a half years and he still can't register his 1911.

How many years to strike down semi auto=machine gun. 1? 2? 3?
Once that is struck down dollars to doughnuts says they limit semi autos to 8 rounds or less. Any semi auto sold 9+ round mags are illegal. How long before that gets struck down. Another 1? 2? 3? years.

How long to strike down the vision test and written test?
How long to strike down outrageous fees/tax on a right?
How long to strike down the weapons must be locked portion?
How long to strike down no open or cc carry?

It litterrally could be 12, 15, 20 years before all of DC rights are restored. Or it could be done in a matter of weeks by Dems who are afraid of likely the only issue that can hurt them this fall. I think the dems will pick up 20+ seats in house and 3=5 seats in Congress plus have at 60%-70% chance of winning white house.

Now is time to put pressure on them. The pro 2nd amendment dems will break ranks to avoid losing their seat in an election cycle that is theirs to lose.

Sure it takes a lot longer for it to be struck down by a court rather than legislatively removed, but it then is that much more resistant to being reversed. If the NRA takes the legislative "shortcut" then two or three years from now after some Columbine or Virginia Tech shooting opportunistic Brady types can run the legislature the opposite way, too.

That said, I do grasp the political maneuvering aspect of the bill, but I hope it doesn't backfire like Bush's "I'll sign an AWB renewal if it hits my desk" line. :banghead:
 
Smart move. When forced on this issue a lot of Dems who claim to support RKBA will show their true colors. Hopefully some gun owners who have been duped will wake up.
 
I'm sure I'll get flamed, but...The NRA, just like everything else, is driven by money. If gun control goes away, so does the NRA's paycheck, and so does the NRA.

The NRA is about marksmanship, promoting gun safety, promoting hunting and promoting sport shooting.

The NRA-ILA is about fighting gun control.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top