I'm really getting nervous about this New Legislation

[Fisherman_48768]

First I get notification that the NRA was backing this:

Senate Passes NICS Improvement Act
After months of careful negotiation, pro-gun legislation was passed through Congress today. The National Rifle Association (NRA) worked closely with Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) to address his concerns regarding H.R. 2640, the National Instant Check System (NICS) Improvement Act. These changes make a good bill even better. The end product is a win for American gun owners.

The NICS Improvement Act does the following:


Permanently prohibits the FBI from charging a "user fee" for NICS checks.

Requires all federal agencies that impose mental health adjudications or commitments to provide a process for "relief from disabilities." Extreme anti-gun groups like the Violence Policy Center and Coalition to Stop Gun Violence have expressed "strong concerns" over this aspect of the bill-surely a sign that it represents progress for gun ownership rights.

Prevents reporting of mental adjudications or commitments by federal agencies when those adjudications or commitments have been removed.

Requires removal of expired, incorrect or otherwise irrelevant records. Today, totally innocent people (e.g., individuals with arrest records, who were never convicted of the crime charged) are sometimes subject to delayed or denied firearm purchases because of incomplete records in the system.

Provides a process of error correction if a person is inappropriately committed or declared incompetent by a federal agency. The individual would have an opportunity to correct the error-either through the agency or in court.

Prevents use of federal "adjudications" that consist only of medical diagnoses without findings that the people involved are dangerous or mentally incompetent. This would ensure that purely medical records are never used in NICS. Gun ownership rights would only be lost as a result of a finding that the person is a danger to themselves or others, or lacks the capacity to manage his own affairs.

Improves the accuracy and completeness of NICS by requiring federal agencies and participating states to provide relevant records to the FBI. For instance, it would give states an incentive to report those who were adjudicated by a court to be "mentally defective," a danger to themselves, a danger to others or suicidal.

Requires a Government Accountability Office audit of past NICS improvement spending.


The bill includes significant changes from the version that previously passed the House, including:

Requires incorrect or outdated records to be purged from the system within 30 days after the Attorney General learns of the need for correction.

Requires agencies to create "relief from disabilities" programs within 120 days, to prevent bureaucratic foot-dragging.

Provides that if a person applies for relief from disabilities and the agency fails to act on the application within a year-for any reason, including lack of funds-the applicant can seek immediate review of his application in federal court.

Allows awards of attorney's fees to applicants who successfully challenge a federal agency's denial of relief in court.

Requires that federal agencies notify all people being subjected to a mental health "adjudication" or commitment process about the consequences to their firearm ownership rights, and the availability of future relief.

Earmarks 3-10% of federal implementation grants for use in operating state "relief from disabilities" programs.

Elimination of all references to Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives regulations defining adjudications, commitments, or determinations related to Americans' mental health. Instead, the bill uses terms previously adopted by the Congress.

Then I get notification that Sara Brady is jumping with glee with it:

VICTORY! U.S. CONGRESS STRENGTHENS BRADY BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM
Bill Now Moves to President's Desk: Please Call Today

Dear

Great news! Last night, Congress passed a bill that will strengthen the Brady background check system. It will help ensure that fewer guns end up in the hands of dangerous people like felons and those who have been found to be a threat to themselves or others because of mental illness.

After the Virginia Tech tragedy, with your help, we asked our national leaders, "What are YOU going to do about gun violence?"

The tide is turning. Yesterday, Congress passed the first major piece of legislation to reduce gun violence in over a decade -- and congratulations are in order: you, our donors and activists, helped make this victory possible. Thank you!

The "National Instant Check System (NICS) Improvement Amendments Act of 2007" (H.R. 2640) was passed by unanimous consent in the U.S. Senate and House, and now goes to the President's desk for signature.

*****************************************
PLEASE CALL PRESIDENT BUSH TODAY AT 202-456-1111
Urge Him to Sign the NICS Improvement Act Immediately
Give the Virginia Tech families this victory before the New Year
*****************************************

This legislation was passed in response to the Virginia Tech massacre. The killer was able to arm himself because the court order that should have blocked his gun purchase was not reported to the national Brady background check system.

We deeply appreciate the courage and strength of the Virginia Tech victims. On October 16, many of the Virginia Tech families joined Paul Helmke and me on Capitol Hill calling for passage of this legislation -- the efforts of all the families involved were crucial to this victory.

Click here for more information on the NICS Improvement Act:
http://www.bradynetwork.org/site/R?i=qY8dzuX3czWbuQ9Xd-1Jag..

Our special thanks go out to Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) and Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Edward Kennedy (D-MA) for their work on this legislation.

Much work lies ahead with the implementation of this legislation and our efforts to make the Brady background check system as strong as it can and should be. I know I can count on you to help us make future victories possible.

Thank you again and happy holidays.

Sincerely,

Sarah Brady, Chair
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence
[url

]www.bradycampaign.org[/url]

Does this make anyone else nervous. I'm really starting to think both sides of the argument are milking us for all the $$ they can get and nothing more.

 

[Thernlund]

...and congratulations are in order: you, our donors and activists, helped make this victory possible. Thank you!

There's the rub. The spin doctors are working to insure the funds continue to flow. The VPC, NRA, Brady's, all of them. Just political gorillas battling it out over your wallet. Where there's controversy, there's money to be made. Take a side and cash in. Doesn't matter which side.


-T.

 

[BobbyQuickdraw]

The NRA said that the bill was good and they supported it based on that, regardless of who supported it. On the surface it seems mostly ok.

However, Gun Owners of America was strongly against the bill and raised some very good points. I'm joining GOA as a Christmas present to myself and to gun owners everywhere.

 

[Michael Thomson]

Gun Lobby Hijacks Bill Intended to Improve Gun Buyer Background Checks

http://vpc.org/press/0712nics.htm

Gun Lobby Hijacks Bill Intended to Improve Gun Buyer Background Checks
Legislation Passed by Congress Would Revive Failed Multi-Million-Dollar Program to Restore Gun Privileges of Persons Currently Ineligible to Possess Firearms Because of Mental Health Disability

WASHINGTON, DC--Leading national gun violence prevention organizations the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, Legal Community Against Violence, and the Violence Policy Center today warned that a bill intended to improve the records available to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)--the national system used to screen gun buyers--has been hijacked by the gun lobby and would now do far more harm than good.

The “NICS Improvement Act” passed today by the U.S. House and Senate would:

Resuscitate a failed government program that spent millions of dollars annually to allow persons prohibited from buying guns to regain the ability to legally acquire firearms. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) would be required to establish a “relief from disability” program to allow persons now prohibited from possessing a firearm because they have “been adjudicated as a mental defective” or “committed to a mental institution” to apply to have their bar on firearms possession removed. As a result of the bill, more than 116,000 individuals would be eligible to apply. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) used to run a similar program that, in addition to those with mental disabilities, even allowed felons to apply for “relief.” Annual costs for the ATF program ballooned to more than $4 million in 1991, with an average cost of $4,800 per applicant and 43 full-time employees dedicated to processing the applications. Congress shut down the ATF program in 1992 because of its high cost, inefficiency, and threat to public safety. Under the bill, states would also be required to establish such “relief” programs to restore the gun privileges of those with mental health disabilities in order to be eligible for potential grant money to upgrade records submitted to the NICS.


Set an arbitrary time limit for the VA to act on applications for “relief.” If the agency fails to act within 365 days, applicants could file a lawsuit asking a court to restore their gun privileges, even if Congress fails to provide the VA with the appropriate resources to process these investigations. Some prevailing applicants would be entitled to attorneys’ fees. This provision is contrary to a unanimous 2002 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that ATF’s failure to act on a relief application from a felon (because of lack of appropriations) did not constitute a denial that would entitle the applicant to judicial review. The decision noted that courts are ill-equipped to make decisions on individual applications for “relief” under the standards that would apply under the “NICS Improvement Act,” stating: "Whether an applicant is `likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety' presupposes an inquiry into that applicant's background--a function best performed by the Executive, which, unlike courts, is institutionally equipped for conducting a neutral, wide-ranging investigation. Similarly, the `public interest' standard calls for an inherently policy-based decision best left in the hands of an agency."


Significantly narrow the category of records of people with mental disabilities that would be submitted to the NICS by the federal government. The current permanent bar on persons with certain health disabilities would be replaced with temporary restrictions.
Kristen Rand, legislative director of the Violence Policy Center, states, “This bill was intended to be Congress’ response to the mass shooting at Virginia Tech that left 32 people murdered. But rather than focusing on improving the current laws prohibiting people with certain mental health disabilities from buying guns, the bill is now nothing more than a gun lobby wish list. It will waste millions of taxpayer dollars restoring the gun privileges of persons previously determined to present a danger to themselves or others. Once a solution, the bill is now part of the problem.”

Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, adds, “It is ironic that the gun lobby has coerced Congress into providing resources to rearm mentally disabled veterans during a time when the VA is struggling to provide adequate mental health care to those in need.”

Robyn Thomas, executive director of the Legal Community Against Violence, comments, "The bill's original intent, to increase reporting of state records to the NICS database, is an important objective that would improve enforcement of federal laws governing persons prohibited from possessing firearms. The changes made by the gun lobby risk undermining those laws."





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


The Violence Policy Center is a national non-profit educational foundation that conducts research on violence in America and works to develop violence-reduction policies and proposals. The Center examines the role of firearms in America, conducts research on firearms violence, and explores new ways to decrease firearm-related death and injury.

 

[Winchester 73]

Now we all feel better if the VPC is crying!Or lying?
Who knows with them.

 

[Robert Hairless]

So let's not support this bill and just move on. I won't support it if you don't.

It already passed both houses of the Congress on December 19, 2007 and awaits the President's signature, but Gun Owners of America will fight against its passage anyway. Join them in fighting against this bill that passed.

I'm trying to round up support for our fight against the British for their brutality at Lexington and Concord. We can't let them get away with it. Join my organization, send me money, and I promise you that we will rebel against the British and we will win!

 

[MaddSkillz]

Yet more gun legislation that will keep law-abiding citizens from their right to defend themselves. And the crazy part is gun owners are for it!

Please tell me this is a sick episode of the Twilight Zone.

 

[Thumper]

Actually MaddSkillz, this bill helps many individuals regain their Second Amendment rights.

Please read the legislation instead of the spin.

 

[Outlaws]

So let's not support this bill and just move on. I won't support it if you don't.

It already passed both houses of the Congress on December 19, 2007 and awaits the President's signature, but Gun Owners of America will fight against its passage anyway. Join them in fighting against this bill that passed.

I'm trying to round up support for our fight against the British for their brutality at Lexington and Concord. We can't let them get away with it. Join my organization, send me money, and I promise you that we will rebel against the British and we will win!

A bill has not passed until it is signed.

This NRA cheer leading thing of yours is getting a bit old. You don't seem to like it when anyone speaks even the least bit of ill words towards the NRA (just based on you post a lengthy bit whenever there is a thread about them), but then you go and trash someones support for the GOA because they don't follow lock step with your perfect organization.

 

[Thumper]

The unfortunate histrionics of the GOA notwithstanding, you can't blame any knowledgeable gunowner from waving pom poms for the NRA.

The NRA has truly proven its high worth lately. For those of you new to the fight, we're winning. The NRA has been driving the momentous gains we've made since the early 'nineties.

 

[Liko81]

It's good both ways. NICS will be more complete, more accurate, faster, and cheaper. It will reduce the occurrence both of incorrect denials and incorrect approvals, meaning lawful citizens can buy guns, criminals can not. That was after all the purpose, and both the NRA and the Brady Campaign supported the system in the first place.

 

[Robert Hairless]

Outlaws:

A bill has not passed until it is signed.

This NRA cheer leading thing of yours is getting a bit old. You don't seem to like it when anyone speaks even the least bit of ill words towards the NRA (just based on you post a lengthy bit whenever there is a thread about them), but then you go and trash someones support for the GOA because they don't follow lock step with your perfect organization.

Rats. I didn't know that "A bill has not passed until it is signed." Neither do most Senators, Representatives, either house of the Congress, the President of the United States, the media, or any of the reporting organizations. Neither does anyone else, presumably, except Gun Owners of America and its fiercely loyal members. Doesn't it get a bit old to be wrong so much?

Here's what Govtrack reports:

Jun 13, 2007: This bill passed in the House of Representatives by voice vote. A record of each representative's position was not kept.

Dec 19, 2007: This bill passed in the Senate by Unanimous Consent. A record of each representative's position was not kept.

The bold type is from the original. I didn't add it. I think they want people to know that the bill ... uh ... passed--twice, in fact, and is awaiting the President's signature for it to become law. "Having passed in both the House and Senate, this bill now awaits the signature of the President before becoming law."

If you could spare some time from your work of correcting me perhaps you can correct them too? I'm sure they'll benefit as much as I do from your knowledge and judgment.

There obviously are some other misunderstandings here that should be just as easy to set right.

No, I don't "trash someones support for the GOA because they don't follow lock step with [my] perfect organization." I react to the stupidity, greed, and destructiveness of Gun Owners of America because I think it's a stupid, greedy, and destructive organization that does great harm to gun owners of America. I give reasons for my thinking and I'm interested in reasoned responses to it, but not in whatever it is you're doing.

For example, on December 18 Gun Owners of America solicited support and members for its upcoming fight in 2008 against this bill and suggested that it had a specially close relationship with Sen. Tom Coburn in its upcoming fight against passing the bill.

But on December 19 the bill passed the Senate with the aid of Sen. Tom Coburn, then went to the House where it passed unanimously. It passed both houses on the same day. Yes, I know you say it didn't but you don't know what you're talking about or even what the words mean, and it did pass both houses the very day after Gun Owners of America solicited members with the promise they would fight against it next year.

It is true that you've tried to defend Gun Owners of America by denying that the bill passed even though it did pass, but perhaps you just don't understand that you can't imitate GOA well enough to get away with fooling people by peeing on their legs and claiming it's raining.

So while Gun Owners of America has you and others like you convinced that it has real big influence with the movers and shakers in the Congress--and especially with Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma--either their real close ties didn't even get them a heads up about what was happening the day before it happened or they did get that heads up and lied by concealing that information. You choose.

Which way do you like it better:

1. Is GOA so politically incompetent that it doesn't know itself when it does or doesn't have a close relationship with a key Senator on a crucial bill?
2. Is GOA so disloyal to its own members that it didn't have so close a relationship with that Senator and tried to mislead them and everyone else into thinking that it did?
3. Is GOA so delusional that it mistakenly overestimates its influence or so corrupt that it does so intentionally?

I'm much easier than you seem to think. You get to sink GOA any way you like. What you can't do, though, is to claim that Sen. Coburn made a spur-of-the-moment, whimsical decision to work with the NRA and couldn't get to a phone to call Larry Pratt and say so. Please don't say such a thing. I'm laughing much too hard right now and my tummy is going to hurt if you make me laugh even harder. Be merciful.

What you could do too is point at something that GOA has achieved by way of influencing federal legislation. Anything? Hot air, unbelievable promises, and wild rants don't count, except with GOA members. Where are the goods?

When members of the Congress saw an urgent need to revise NICS and knew that rational gun owners in America would raise the roof if they didn't come out ahead, they did not contact GOA. They contacted the NRA and it told those Congressmen and women that the revision had to help gun owners in America or the NRA would expose them. The NRA--not GOA--got what does help gun owners of America.

When Sen. Tom Coburn blocked the bill in the Senate it was the NRA--not Gun Owners of America--who negotiated with him about his objections and came to a reasonable compromise that benefits us. In fact it looks like this negotiation produced even more for gun owners, which is what can happen during negotiations among reasonable people who can see each other's needs and try to meet them reasonably. Accomplishing that requires a willingness to compromise when the compromise gets each party what it wants and doesn't hurt the other party.

Gun Owners of America proudly adopted Ron Paul's slogan that it is "The only no compromise gun rights organization." I don't doubt it. But no one wants to deal with people--Gun Owners of America--who are interested only in what they want. An organization that proclaims that it won't compromise is telling everyone else not to bother with that organization unless they're willing to give them everything they want. That's what "no compromise" means: I want what I want and I won't budge until you give it to me. So GOA doesn't budge and everyone with something to give stays away from it while the malcontents flock to it. I'm sure that everyone in politics knows how to get in touch with Larry Pratt the moment they feel like giving him everything he wants and knows not to bother with him unless they feel that way. Live long enough for that to happen and you will be immortal.

I don't know for sure if you've just called the NRA a "perfect organization" or if you're only being snide. I'll credit you with snideness. In fact I don't think that the NRA is a "perfect organization" and I work within the NRA to improve what I think wrong. But I must confess what you should expect anyway: I am one compromising kind of guy, and happy as a result. I compromise every day, every chance I get. I like compromises because they make everyone happy, especially me, because I usually get what I want in them. I don't expect to rule the world and don't want to anyway. So I listen to other people in the NRA and I change my mind when appropriate. That's when I think it's appropriate, not when you or Larry Pratt thinks so. But I have a big advantage over you: I belong to the NRA and I work at it instead of complaining and whining and trashing people who really do things instead of trying to convince everyone that they don't. Join the NRA and participate in it and you get to criticize it from the inside too. Or stay outside and criticize all you want, but don't be surprised when nobody cares or pays much attention.

I'm sorry that you find this "NRA cheer leading thing" of mine getting a bit old. I promise that I will consider whether I should adjust my behavior to your requirements. In the meantime you might want to skip messages that irritate you, including mine. You won't hurt my feelings. Or what you could do, instead of telling me to shut up, is respond with reasons and facts to support your thinking.

But it's better to do that without making up nonsense such as "A bill has not passed until it is signed."

 

[jpk1md]

Actually, if I'm not mistaken a Bill is still a Bill despite the fact that it has passed in both houses of congress UNTIL:

1. A bill becomes law if signed by the President or if not signed within 10 days and Congress is in session.
2. If Congress adjourns before the 10 days and the President has not signed the bill then it does not become law ("Pocket Veto.")
3. If the President vetoes the bill it is sent back to Congress with a note listing his/her reasons. The chamber that originated the legislation can attempt to override the veto by a vote of two-thirds of those present. If the veto of the bill is overridden in both chambers then it becomes law.

Regarding this bill....I do not believe that anything that further legitimizes a system for infringing upon our 2A Rights is a good thing....even if it corrects SOME of the past inadequacies of the system.....a bad system is still a bad system....even if you make it a little less bad....

 

[Standing Wolf]

Yet more gun legislation that will keep law-abiding citizens from their right to defend themselves. And the crazy part is gun owners are for it!

I think we should give the Second Amendment a try before we pass new laws.

 

[novaDAK]

I don't like that we don't know who voted for or against this bill. The people these nuts REPRESENT should be able to know which way they vote so we can act accordingly. How do we know if our representatives are doing the job WE want when we don't know which way they're voting?
Isn't that how the machinegun ban in '86 got passed? :banghead:

 

[JohnBT]

You do know that the Senate passed it by Unanimous Consent. Unanimous means everybody/all/eachandeveryone.

"This NRA cheer leading thing of yours is getting a bit old."

We aren't cheerleading, just pointing out the facts, and I hope to have more time to do it in 2008 now that I have my folks moved into assisted living and their home sold. It wouldn't be necessary to repeat ourselves in thread after thread if there wasn't this ongoing flood of GOA misinformation, half truths and outright nonsense.

Yes, I'm all in favor of the 2A being the only gun law, but that isn't going to happen anytime soon, if ever, so the fight continues to roll back existing laws and improve them if we can't roll them back. Heck, I'm against mandatory driver's licenses and car registration, but that isn't going away either. And now Virginia has new high-dollar administrative fines for speeding, etc. and they only apply to VA residents. There's are battles raging on a number of fronts when it comes to freedom.

John
Member www.vcdl.org
NRA Patron

 

[Thernlund]

All this talk of Bills and Laws is reminding me of my childhood.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEJL2Uuv-oQ




-T.

EDIT: Then there's these... I was grinning like an idiot through both.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofYmhlclqr4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_TXJRZ4CFc

Idealistic, but nice to have a little less cynicism for the day.

 

[DDude]

I think we should give the Second Amendment a try before we pass new laws.

Exactly.

I've never understood why 535 idiots constantly have to keep writing, proposing and enacting legislation to protect us from ourselves when the Constitution and the Bill of Rights pretty much cover all the bases in a neat little, easy to read package.

 

[VARifleman]

That second school house rock song is annoying. I don't see why the those puritan pilgrim scum get so much airtime when the real colony was Jamestown, founded in 1607. The first Thanksgiving was there for pete's sake! Also, what the heck are the colonists doing chasing the king's men out with pitch forks!? They used guns darnit!

Anyway...back to the topic at hand. When I read the thing through I took the same take as the NRA, I was skeptical, but I just could not see what GOA was complaining about.

 

[scout26]

When I read the thing through I took the same take as the NRA, I was skeptical, but I just could not see what GOA was complaining about.

This is not directed at VARifleman:
Amazing what you learn when you read the actual bill, instead of the spin from GOA.

But I guess unless you can't get the gulli....errr....faithful to crack open their wallets unless you scream "The Sky is Falling" and "We're All Doomed".

 

[Outlaws]

We aren't cheerleading, just pointing out the facts

That comment wasn't at you.

Rats. I didn't know that "A bill has not passed until it is signed." Neither do most Senators, Representatives, either house of the Congress, the President of the United States, the media, or any of the reporting organizations. Neither does anyone else, presumably, except Gun Owners of America and its fiercely loyal members. Doesn't it get a bit old to be wrong so much?

Here's what Govtrack reports:

Quote:
Jun 13, 2007: This bill passed in the House of Representatives by voice vote. A record of each representative's position was not kept.

Dec 19, 2007: This bill passed in the Senate by Unanimous Consent. A record of each representative's position was not kept.
The bold type is from the original. I didn't add it. I think they want people to know that the bill ... uh ... passed--twice, in fact, and is awaiting the President's signature for it to become law. "Having passed in both the House and Senate, this bill now awaits the signature of the President before becoming law."

You yourself said sarcastically about the GOA, "Join them in fighting against this bill that passed." You implied that there is nothing left to fight and the bill is now set in stone. Well it isn't. Passed the house and passed in the senate is not the same as being passed. But then again since you like to compromise so much, you probably also quit as soon as you get behind.

 

[JohnBT]

"I think we should give the Second Amendment a try before we pass new laws."

How? When? Anytime soon? Is it even realistic? Should we sit back and do nothing until that magical pie-in-the-sky day comes and all Americans -
you, me, 2-year-olds, felons, the criminally insane - can once again own guns just like the 2nd Amendment says? Meanwhile, I see nothing wrong with taking back every bit of ground we can as soon as we can.

John

 

[sacp81170a]

1. A bill becomes law if signed by the President or if not signed within 10 days and Congress is in session.
2. If Congress adjourns before the 10 days and the President has not signed the bill then it does not become law ("Pocket Veto.")

One point that hasn't been addressed: with the Democratic leadership in the Senate keeping it in session to prevent the President from making recess appointments over the Christmas holiday, does this count as "Congress being in session"? If it does, Bush doesn't even have to sign it and it becomes law. I realize this has nothing to do with the content of the bill, but it is a fascinating question about the actual process.

 

[Roccobro]

I read the reason it was held up was a lone Republican holding it up because of what the NRA made possible. It was millions earmarked for gun owners to get a FREE chance to eliminate their name should it be on the list falsely, and FREE for those that wish to take their name off when on their for the right reasons. MILLIONS we would be paying out of pocket should any of us been wrongly denied our rights protected under the 2A. Once again, the NRA secured MILLIONS for our use from the .gov coffers.

The Brady's just want more money. They say they "won" when they actually lost. They gained NOTHING from this bill, but maybe one nights rest until they once again realize CRIMINALS are the ones they fear. The bill requires states to follow the NICS system in reporting, and timely update any changes to eligibility.

Fracturing gun owners is STILL one of the Bray's goals. Looks to be working from some "blind faith" gun owners not reading legislation for themselves and posting here.

Justin

 

[Al Norris]

Everyone does know that H.R. 2640 was not the bill that was passed, yes? It was S. AMDT. 3887 that was substituted for H.R. 2640.

While I hope that the NRA's analysis wqas correct, the bill hasn't been received from the GPO yet.... So none of us have read it yet.

Just saying....