1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

H.r. 2910

Discussion in 'Activism' started by sporty66, Aug 9, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. sporty66

    sporty66 Member

    Feb 5, 2012
    To protect American children and their families from the epidemic of gun
    violence by banning access to certain weapons, strengthening the Nation’s
    mental health infrastructure, and improving the understanding of gun

    Bill introduced in the House by Harry Waxman (D) Cal. Aug 1 2013 don't think this will go anywhere but make sure you call your rep and voice your opinion on this.
  2. Yo Mama

    Yo Mama Member

    Jun 4, 2008
    The children! The children! .....well we knew they were going to bring this back. In the House, no chance, but still good to write all Reps now.
  3. Jaymo

    Jaymo Member

    Aug 21, 2010
    Did they also use the term "common sense measures"?
    They like that term as a substitute for "complete disarmament of the populace".
  4. spottedpony

    spottedpony Member

    Jan 9, 2007
    Don't misunderstand my comment as lack of caring or concern for anyone who's been the target in a weapons violence scenerio
    If the government agencies spent half the energy getting drunk drivers off the roads the world would be a much safer place, than banning guns would ever do.
    Drunks have killed more people than any amount of weapons violence ever thought of doing.
  5. barnbwt

    barnbwt Member

    Aug 14, 2011
    We already poked big holes in the 4th amendment in the name of reducing DUI's, called the "No Refusal Weedend" as well as DUI blockades ("Papers, Herr Driver?"). And what came of it? Art Acevedo down in Austin now wants to reduce the limit to .05%. "As long as it saves one life," right? :rolleyes:

    Totally besides the point of this legislation in any case. Evil or misguided legislation, I can at least disagree with; this HR2910 idiocy is just...there's no word to describe its inanity. The good Representative from California seeks to ban undefined "parts kits" that "could be used to construct a firearm." That means anything from so-called 80% receivers to billet stock, if interpreted expansively (as it would be).

    Mr. Waxman seeks nothing less than to prohibit the legal manufacture of firearms by unlicensed citizens. That is the only way to interpret this bill, since anyone trading in machine tools or raw stock would be in violation. I'm not terribly worried about passage, since this is in the house (whose frenemy majority is currently favoring us), and not even Pelosi would bring something this ridiculous to a vote (probably not Waxman, either; he's just "doing something for the children" of his Santa Monica district in the wake of the shooting there).

    What worries me, is that parts kits, and home-building in general, may get a spotlight out of this. As silly as it sounds, a great many people believe it is actually illegal to build your own gun. Therefore, this perfectly legal act is seen as "shady" and criminal, much like CCW back in the day, or AR15s before the ban expiration. I'd wager that more people think home-made guns are illegal, than think high capacity semi autos should be banned. Unlike other areas of the shooting world, building is still very much vulnerable since it is relatively obscure and has little public support or familiarity (and to my knowledge, no organizations backing/promoting it like the NRA).

    I want this bill to die decisively, but quietly. Meanwhile, I'll invite more and more people to get into building/assembling firearms of their own :cool:.

  6. Ryanxia

    Ryanxia Member

    Jun 18, 2010
    As was stated, we knew they'd be back again. Much less of a chance now but still always good to write your reps to be on the safe side.
  7. alsaqr

    alsaqr Member

    Jul 5, 2007
    South Western, OK
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page