Quote:
Originally Posted by dragon813gt View Post
And the highlighted part is where the problem lies. Instead of everyone sticking together they only care about themselves. Gun shows may not effect you but they definetley effect others. Think beyond your own needs when it comes to these type of issues. It's selfishness like this that has us in this position. Gun shows don't effect me as well. But I still won't accept anymore laws when there is no need for anymore.
Brought to you by TapaTalk
Being able to buy across state lines would be a good thing. I have always found that particular rule a bit troublesome. Many live close to a state line and routinely shop in a couple of states.
BUT, that could be done without inplementing UBCs. I expect that is the carrot that is being dangled to get support from gun owners. Gun owners need to be unified in their voice. But even a vocal minority can be chopped up politically and that is what happens with the references to hunters and families. The Toomey thing on UBCs is consistant with the current PA law. One could say that PA residents or gun owners wouldn't be affected by these particular changes. But again, gun owners need to think in broad terms and the effects overall versus their own state, gun buying, gun show attending, modern sporting rifle buying, handguns, magazine capacity... etc restrictions or impacts.
Sure let the Feds regulate carry permits. While you're killing the 2nd Amendment take out the 10th, that's what Democrats call an efficient government. NO FALSE DEBATE - NO FALSE DEALS
Am I over reacting, don't think so. Here's an email from Senator Bob Casey (PA):
" Dear Mr. msb45:
Thank you for taking the time to contact me about recent proposals related to guns. I appreciate hearing from you about this issue.
As you know, on December 14, 2012, an individual in Newtown, Connecticut forced his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School and opened fire on teachers and staff in the building. In total, the perpetrator murdered 20 students between the ages of six and seven years old, as well as six adults, many of whom heroically sought to stop the shooter and save the lives of children. Like many Americans, I was deeply affected by the scope and brutality of this act. The motives that led to this senseless massacre will likely never fully be comprehended. However, I believe that all public officials have a responsibility to work to prevent such an event from occurring again. This incident reflects a complex problem that requires a comprehensive strategy, including funding for law enforcement officers and the mental health care system.
As you may know, I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. Pennsylvania has a fine hunting and sporting tradition, and I will defend the right to bear arms as it is enshrined in our Constitution. I will continue to back the right to bear arms for purposes of self-defense, recreation, sporting and collection. However, I also believe that the attack at Sandy Hook Elementary School highlights very serious dangers posed to public safety by the misuse of certain military-style weapons and technology originally developed for warfare. According to reports, the shooter possessed a military-style semiautomatic weapon and was able to kill many children and adults very quickly. He also allegedly used magazines containing up to 30 rounds of ammunition and carried hundreds of rounds more. After much reflection and careful study of the issue, I have decided to support a federal assault weapons ban as well as legislation restricting high capacity magazines. In light of what occurred at Sandy Hook, these are two measures that could lessen the chances that this will happen again. Before supporting such a law, I would first and foremost ensure that it did not infringe upon the right to bear arms as established by the Second Amendment.
Our Nation has already begun a critical dialogue as we examine what steps must be taken to prevent this type of tragedy in the future. On January 17, 2012, President Obama unveiled a package of proposals to reduce gun violence, which included strengthening the system of background checks, reinstating the assault weapon and high-capacity magazines ban, improving school safety and expanding access to mental health services.
On January 24, 2013, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California introduced S. 150, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013. This legislation would explicitly permit the possession of affected firearms that were owned prior to the bill’s enactment; firearms that are manually operated; firearms used by military, law enforcement and retired law enforcement; and antique weapons. Further, this legislation lists 2,258 hunting and sporting rifles and shotguns that are entirely exempt from the ban.
This legislation would ban the sale, transfer, manufacturing and importation of all semiautomatic rifles that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one of seven specified military features. S. 150 would further ban semiautomatic pistols that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one of certain listed military features, as well as ammunition magazines that can accept more than 10 rounds. The Assault Weapons Ban would also regulate the transfer and storage of permitted, grandfathered weapons and allow local law enforcement to use certain federal funds for voluntary gun buyback programs. On March 14, 2013, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary approved the Assault Weapons Ban by a vote of 10-8. The Judiciary Committee also recently approved legislation to expand background checks for gun sales and legislation to punish and deter firearms trafficking.
On March 21, 2013, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada introduced S. 649, the Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013. This bill includes three pieces of gun legislation previously reported out of the Judiciary Committee: S. 374, the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013; S. 54, the Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013; and S. 146, the School and Campus Safety Enhancements Act of 2013. On April 8, 2013, Senator Reid moved to proceed to S. 649 and begin consideration in the full Senate. Please be assured that as the Senate considers this important legislation, I will have your views in mind.
Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about this or any other matter of importance to you.
For more information on this or other issues, I encourage you to visit my website,
http://casey.senate.gov. I hope you will find this online office a comprehensive resource to stay up-to-date on my work in Washington, request assistance from my office or share with me your thoughts on the issues that matter most to you and to Pennsylvania.
Sincerely,
Bob Casey
United States Senator
P.S. If you would like to respond to this message, please use the contact form on my website:
http://casey.senate.gov/contact/ "
