Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Aim1, May 13, 2019.
This is good.
Thanks, Trump! I hope a new generation of shooters reaps a bounty here.
Maybe not the "Pro Gun" gesture everyone here would hope for but a nod nonetheless.
I challenge anyone to think of a Dem that would do the same in this political climate.
The NSSF estimates an expansion in gun range funding will result in an expansion of ammo and firearm demand for those ranges, which means more money will end up in the Pittman-Robinson funds as ammo and firearm makers pay the excise tax on their products. The great news is that the Pittman-Robinson funds “are the funds that drive wildlife restoration and conservation programs,” so as they grow so too does conservation.
To me, this sounds like like a win-win.
I was thinking something similar. I’m sure Dr Baby Killer Northam and Sen Timmy my kid is an ANTIFA leader and I’m proud of it Kaine are all against this.
I’m betting we won’t see any use of these funds here in Va because of them and their buddies.
Sadly we need more public ranges.
The only good thing is that we have several nice new private in door ranges here in Va so that at least helps so we aren’t going the wrong way. But more public outdoor ranges would really be nice.
I assume this bill passed the House, so I assume there are some Democrats that voted for it.
Sponsor and status
Sponsor. Representative for Wisconsin's 3rd congressional district. Democrat.
And nice to see, as we post all the time here, there are antis and pro gun politicians on both sides of the aisle. No, I don't want to argue about percentages, we need to focus on pro/anti and support the pro while not supporting the antis when we can.
Kind was one of very few Dems that signed on the Bill. The Bill was introduced in the 110th Congress and was iterated in no less than 29 prior bils. The Bill signed by the President was passed by the GOP controlled House in 2018, then by the GOP controlled Senate in 2019.
This is a big step for Pittman-Robertson excise tax generation and represents a decade long effort by NSSF, the Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies and a number of conservation organizations.
500 or 600 yards at least, yes.
100 yards only, no. almost useless.
Thank You President Trump !
I wish. I don’t trust any politician. I just trust some even less than others.
Having not read the bill I’m now wondering what was also tacked on and what other sort of nonsense is in it as there are so few clean bills.
I wonder if there is any way to make it so a bill has to be simple and only cover one thing. All bills should be easy to understand and not have riders with all sorts of pet projects.
The problem is that clean bills are seldom passed due to bargains and tit for tat deals and such. So I’d suspect we’d never get any pro 2A items passed but it’s a hope.
Touche'. Apparently you like to dig deep.
I should've specified by saying "prominent dem" or "potential runner for POTUS dem".
Not that some nobody from Wisconsin doesn't matter. I was talking about someone who had the ability to pass the same bill Trump did.
Yep, a few Democrats signed on as co-sponsors. One (D) is from New Jersey.
Let’s hope the Hearing Protection Act is next.
No hope whatsoever in the current House.
The HPA and any major progun legislation is not going to happen. The NRA underestimated the support for the HPA in the GOP. They thought it would be fought for, as with national reciprocity. It turned out that it wasn't the case.
While this is a good thing, it's really a side effect and an addition to the major bill. I doubt it was a major push by Trump personally. Others did the addition and he signed it.
Adding things to bills is a good strategy. It was suggested for the HPA and other legislation. However, GOP leadership before the loss of the House wasn't interested in doing that. You may remember that when the LEOSA bill was put forward, versions also had national reciprocity. The latter was seen as a poison bill as anti folks won't support the bill and thus the LEOs wouldn't get carry rights. LEO organizations said - pass the LEO only part and it will set a precedent for national reciprocity for civilians and our organizations would support such. Surprise, didn't happen and NO support from said organizations.
Hmm ... good.
Would have passed in 2016 if it wasn’t for the ‘opponents’.
Trump's favorite golf course will be converted to a rifle range?
That would be kind of awesome.
Then again I’m not one for golf.
Call me an optimist if you like but after decades of anti-gun laws, it sure is refreshing to see pro-gun laws, even though it may not be the kind of pro-gun laws we like to see. And if this law was passed with support of some democrat law makers, perhaps other pro-gun laws will pass in the future with support of same democrats. Anyways, I will take whatever pro-gun law as it sure beats another anti-gun law for sure.
(4/29/19) NSSF Commends Congress's passage of "Range Bill' - https://www.nssf.org/nssf-commends-congresss-passage-of-range-bill/
"NEWTOWN, Conn. — The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) ... commends Congress’s passage of the Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act (H.R. 1222). The bipartisan legislation, sponsored by U.S. Reps. Ron Kind (D-Wis.), Rob Bishop (R-Utah) and Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives.
Companion legislation (S. 94) was previously passed by the Senate. The bill will return to the Senate for a legislative formality, but is expected to pass by unanimous consent as the bill language is identical, and be sent to President Donald Trump for enactment.
... The Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act, also known as the 'Range Bill', would allow states to use their allocation of Pittman-Robertson funds to begin construction of new ranges, or improve existing state-run public recreational shooting ranges.
Currently, states are required to put up 25 percent of the cost of range construction projects to access the matching 75 percent of funds from Pittman-Robertson allocation. This legislation would allow states to access those funds with a 10 percent match and allow states five fiscal years to acquire land for range construction or expansion projects.
Pittman-Robertson funds are derived from an excise tax paid by firearms and ammunition manufacturers. Since 1937, the fund has generated more than $12.1 billion that has funded wildlife conservation and safety education programs in all 50 states. NSSF estimates more than 80 percent of Pittman-Robertson excise tax contributions are generated by sales attributed to recreational shooting. This means today’s recreational target shooter is an overwhelming contributor to conservation through excise tax support."
Will this bill include funding for remediation of lead, once the shooting ranges close down or become too contaminated to use?
Or did Trump just sign a bunch of future Superfund sites into existence?
Let's try to stay on the bill. It's a good thing but wandering into pure politics is something we can skip. Thanks.
I just read the bill. No, there is nothing in it to provide funding for remediation of lead or other heavy metals contamination on these public ranges.
Lead remediation is a self funding venture, the $$ is split between the range and the remediation company. Everyone smiles
No govt funding (and subsequent various levels of rules, regs, oversights, inspections, DELAYS, etc et al) is necessary
Separate names with a comma.