Biased One Sided Hearings in the US House of Reps

Status
Not open for further replies.

jpk1md

Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2007
Messages
620
Biased One Sided Hearings in the House

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Fe...id=2978&issue=

Gun Ban Activists Push More Restrictions At U.S. House Hearing

Friday, May 11, 2007


A one-sided hearing Thursday in the House Oversight & Government Reform Subcommittee on Domestic Policy, chaired by long-shot presidential candidate Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Oh.), was used by anti-gunners as a platform for pushing the same, old, tired anti-gun restrictions.

The hearing - chaired by "F"-rated Rep. Dennis Kucinich - was entitled "Lethal Loopholes." To anti-gun activists, of course, a "loophole" is the lack of any restriction they support, and their testimony bore this out in spades.

As expected, Brady Campaign president Paul Helmke used his testimony to promote the gun ban lobby’s agenda, including a startling comment about the dangers of individuals buying or owning an "arsenal" of firearms. Helmke failed to enlighten the committee about how many guns would comprise an "arsenal," though his written testimony suggested it might be as few as ten guns. (Longtime readers will remember federal "arsenal licensing" as a part of the gun ban lobby’s "Brady II" legislation more than a decade ago.)

Helmke also attacked the private sale of guns, claiming that 40% of firearm transactions are off the books and that an unlicensed person "can sell a gun to a criminal or an escaped mental patient, no questions asked." Helmke omitted, of course, that an unlicensed seller who knows of a potential buyer’s criminal status could be imprisoned for up to 10 years. Helmke’s call for California-style controls also ignores the results in California itself, which has a murder rate 24% higher than the rest of the country.

Robyn Thomas of the Legal Community Against Violence also attacked private sales. She, too, called for broader restrictions on who can own guns.

John Feinblatt, "Criminal Justice Coordinator" for New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, used the hearing as a platform to blast the Tiahrt Amendment - the critically important provision in the Justice Department appropriations bills that protects law enforcement officers and the integrity of criminal investigations by preventing inappropriate release of federal firearms trace data. But pro-gun Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.) blasted Feinblatt for downplaying law enforcement support for the Tiahrt Amendment. The leaders of both the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and America’s largest police union -- the Fraternal Order of Police -- have recently written in support of the law.

Anti-gun "public health" researchers Daniel Webster and Susan Sorenson continued their movement’s long-running effort to prohibit more Americans from possessing firearms. In particular, Webster suggested that federal law should also deny guns to those with misdemeanor records.

In contrast to those seeking expansion of gun laws, Ron Honberg of the National Alliance on Mental Illness pointed out that current federal laws may impose an unfair burden on some people who may have had mental difficulties in the past, but who currently don’t pose a threat to public safety.

Committee Republicans, led by ranking member Darrell Issa (R-Cal.), noted the hearing’s lack of balance in a letter to Chairman Kucinich. That letter suggested the majority intended "to silence entirely the view of Second Amendment supporters by denying them the ability to present even a single witness," and suggested that the hearing should have focused on problems with the instant check system.

Whether the hearing will contribute to NICS reforms remains unclear. It did, however, serve as a reminder that anti-gunners will shamelessly take advantage of any opportunity to push for laws aimed at disarming law-abiding citizens.
 
Can anyone explain the Brady II bill. I have not really heard much about it. I am a little to young to remember the 1994 fiasco or anything else. But what excatly did it ask the government to write into law?

As far as the article. I am wondering why hasnt the NRA gotten a say into this little hearing? Perhaps it is time to start calling the Congress people some more.
 
SEC. 303. LICENSE APPLICATION FEES.

Section 923(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in paragraph (1)(A) by striking "$1,000" and inserting "$10,000";

(2) in paragraph (1)(B) by striking "$50" and inserting "$1,000";

(3) in paragraph (1)(C) by striking "$10" and inserting "$1,000";

(4) in paragraph (2)(A) by striking "$1,000" and inserting "$10,000";

(5) in paragraph (2)(B) by striking "$50" and inserting "$1,000";

(6) in paragraph (3)(A) by striking "$1,000" and inserting "$10,000";
and

(7) in paragraph (3)(B) by striking "$200 for 3 years, except that
the fee for renewal of a valid license shall be $90 for 3 years" and
inserting "$1,000 per year".
 
YIKES!!!

SEC. 401. PROHIBITED WEAPONS.

(a) Prohibition.--Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as amended
by section 301(a), is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:

"(z)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for any
person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a prohibited weapon.

"(2) Paragraph (1) does not apply with respect to--

"(A) the manufacture by or for, transfer to or by, or possession by
or under the authority of, the United States or any department or agency
thereof or a State, or a department, agency, or political subdivision
thereof;

"(B) any lawful transfer or lawful possession of a prohibited weapon
that was lawfully possessed before the date this subsection takes effect;
or

"(C) the manufacture, transfer, or possession of any prohibited
weapon by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes
of testing or experimentation authorized by the Secretary.".

(b) Definitions.--Section 921 of title 18, United States Code, as amended
by section 101(b), is amended--

(1) in subsection (a)--

(A) in paragraph (28) by striking ""semiautomatic rifle' means
any repeating rifle" and inserting ""semiautomatic firearm' means any
repeating firearm"; and

(B) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:

"(31) The term 'prohibited weapon' means--

"(A) a firearm muffler or firearm silencer;

"(B) a short-barreled shotgun;

"(C) a short-barreled rifle;

"(D) a destructive device;

"(E) a semiautomatic assault weapon;

"(F) a Saturday-night-special handgun;

"(G) a nonsporting ammunition; and

"(H) a large-capacity ammunition feeding device.

"(32)(A) The term 'semiautomatic assault weapon' means--

"(i) any of the firearms, or types, replicas, or duplicates in any
caliber of the firearms known as--

"(I) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat
Kalashnikovs (all models);

"(II) Israeli Military Industries Uzi and Galil;

"(III) Beretta AR-70;

"(IV) Colt AR-15 and Sporter;

"(V) Fabrique Nationale FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC;

"(VI) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12;

"(VII) Steyr AUG;

"(VIII) Intratec TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and

"(IX) revolving cylinder shotguns, such as (but not limited to)
the Street Sweeper and Striker 12;

"(ii) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a
detachable magazine and has at least 2 of the following:

"(I) a folding or telescoping stock;

"(II) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the
action of the weapon;

"(III) a bayonet mount;

"(IV) a flash suppressor or barrel having a threaded muzzle; and

"(V) a grenade launcher;

"(iii) a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a
detachable magazine and has at least 2 of the following:

"(I) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside
of the pistol grip;

"(II) a barrel having a threaded muzzle;

"(III) a shroud that is attached to or partially or completely
encircles the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm
with the nontrigger hand without being burned;

"(IV) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol
is unloaded; and

"(V) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and

"(iv) a semiautomatic shotgun that has at least 2 of the following:

"(I) a folding or telescoping stock;

"(II) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the
action of the weapon;

"(III) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds; and

"(IV) an ability to accept a detachable magazine.

"(B) The term 'semiautomatic assault weapon' shall not apply to--

"(i) any of the firearms specified in Appendix A to this section as
such firearms were manufactured on or prior to January 1, 1994; and

"(ii) any firearm that--

"(I) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action;

"(II) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or

"(III) is an antique firearm.

"(33) The term 'Saturday-night-special handgun' means--

"(A) any handgun that has a barrel, slide, frame or receiver which is
a die casting of zinc alloy or any other nonhomogeneous metal which will
melt or deform at a temperature of less than 800 degrees Fahrenheit;

"(B) any pistol which does not have a positive manually operated
safety device, a double action revolver which does not have a safety
feature which automatically causes the hammer to retract to a point where
the firing pin does not rest upon the primer of the cartridge, or any
single action revolver which does not have a safety feature which by
manual operation causes the hammer to retract to a point where the firing
pin does not rest upon the primer of the cartridge;

"(C) any revolver with a safety device which cannot withstand the
impact of a weight equal to the weight of the revolver dropping from a
distance of 36 inches in a line parallel to the barrel upon the rear of
the hammer spur, a total of 5 times;

"(D) any pistol that has a combined length and height less than 10
inches with the height (right angle measurement to barrel without
magazine or extension) being at least 4 inches and the length being at
least 6 inches, or any revolver that has a barrel length of less than 3
inches or has an overall frame (with conventional grips) length (not
diagonal) of less than 4 1/2 inches; or

"(E)(i) uses ammunition of the following calibers--

"(I) .22 short;

"(II) .25;

"(III) .32; and

"(ii) has an overall weight, while unloaded, of less than 18 ounces.

"(34) The term 'nonsporting ammunition' means--

"(A) any of the ammunition, or types, replicas, or duplicates of the
ammunition known as--

"(i) Dragon's Breath; or

"(ii) .50 caliber BMG;

"(B) any ammunition that contains an incendiary or explosive charge;

"(C) any handgun ammunition measuring more than .45 inches in
diameter; or

"(D) any handgun ammunition that produces a force at the muzzle in
excess of 1,200 foot pounds.

"(35) The term 'large-capacity ammunition feeding device'--

"(A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device
which has a capacity of, or which can be readily restored or converted to
accept, more than 6 rounds of ammunition, or any combination of parts
from which such device can be assembled; but

"(B) does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept,
and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition."; and

(2) by adding at the end the following appendix:
 
These people pushing this continue to crap on the constitution.. why do they still have jobs?

Because the people (that'd be us y'know) refuse to hold them personally, and completely accountable for infringing our rights.

Inaction against this... stuff... is supporting it.
 
(B) any pistol which does not have a positive manually operated
safety device
Glock and Friends
a double action revolver which does not have a safety
feature which automatically causes the hammer to retract to a point where
the firing pin does not rest upon the primer of the cartridge, or any
single action revolver which does not have a safety feature which by
manual operation causes the hammer to retract to a point where the firing
pin does not rest upon the primer of the cartridge;
Old S&Ws, or pretty much anything interesting or collectible
"(I) .22 short;

"(II) .25;
...because they're such effective calibers

(D) any pistol that has a combined length and height less than 10
inches with the height (right angle measurement to barrel without
magazine or extension) being at least 4 inches and the length being at
least 6 inches,
...convenient for carry...
or any revolver that has a barrel length of less than 3
inches or has an overall frame (with conventional grips) length (not
diagonal) of less than 4 1/2 inches
...all snubbies...
(C) any handgun ammunition measuring more than .45 inches in
diameter;
Strictly speaking, .45ACP is .451
(D) any handgun ammunition that produces a force at the muzzle in
excess of 1,200 foot pounds
...Doubletap claims to produce this amount or more in their .44 Magnum rounds...and what barrel length do they propose for testing? Would it be illegal in a 12" gun, but fair game in a 4.5"?


In short, GRRRR!
 
well...

...it covered everything...anything will just about be ruined at 800 degrees...right...


It would have put all the gun companies out of business overnight...

rauch06.gif
 
Inaction against this... stuff... is supporting it.
Yes...exactly.

Can anyone doubt that know is the time to get off our collective butts and get our collective "stuff" together and prepare to put a stop to this nonsense?

We can't stop it right now only because we're not prepared to.
We've been talking instead of doing for too long.
 
Really now, what else should be expected when you put loonies like Dennis the Menace in charge of the asylum? I realize that he isn't representative of the Democratic Party as a whole, but I'd love to see some of these pro-gun Dems stand up to him and their party leadership. I know they're out there. They need to stand up and be heard, like, yesterday.
 
Dennis is just paying lip-service for them. This same thing, almost to a tee, happens every year. The mental health thing isnt likely to pass because of resistance by the medical community.
Anti-gun "public health" researchers Daniel Webster and Susan Sorenson continued their movement’s long-running effort to prohibit more Americans from possessing firearms. In particular, Webster suggested that federal law should also deny guns to those with misdemeanor records.

Wow now that is scary.
 
Ok, lets take that Misdemeanor thing to a logical conclusion.

If thats how he feels about firearms then we should carry it over to vehicles too!

If you've been convicted of a misdemeanor then you should not be allowed to possess a car....far more people die on our roads each year due to the actions of criminals and irresponsible drivers.
 
Ok, lets take that Misdemeanor thing to a logical conclusion.

If thats how he feels about firearms then we should carry it over to vehicles too!

If you've been convicted of a misdemeanor then you should not be allowed to possess a car....far more people die on our roads each year due to the actions of criminals and irresponsible drivers.

Yeah thats an extreme position to take. Only the 'fringe' gun grabbers would support that.
 
Ratz, my point is that we should equally/universally apply the same rules/regulatory procedures to ANY potentially dangerous object.

Do you think people would stand for this crap for very long?
 
Do you think people would stand for this crap for very long?

No, all I am saying is that idiot is in the fringe, youd probably end up barring about 10-15% of policemen if you included misdemeanors as 'prohibited'. thats insane, and Ive never even heard Bradys advocate it.
 
No matter what the law it needs to be applied fairly and evenly.

There can be no selective application for Cops and "The People".

I know that you are not suggesting that we should Ratz, I am only stating the obvious.

Isn't it time that we all wrote a few letters/e-mails to these critters?
 
After reading the posting on Brady II I was physically nauseated. These people assault our Constitution, which is supposed to be the supreme law of the land, every single day and they get away with it. Whats worse, is that elected officials agree with them!
 
Thing is, stopping this train requires something that gunowners seem to be incapable of collectively doing...

Drawing a line in the sand and saying "No further, push us and we will push back."

To that end I invoke the wisdom of a genuine american thinker, Mr. Henry David Thoreau.

A wise man will not leave the right to the mercy of chance, nor wish it to prevail through the power of the majority. There is but little virtue in the action of masses of men.

Is a democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement possible in government? Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man? There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly.

Any man more right than his neighbors constitutes a majority of one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top