Two congressmen that support repealing 922(o)!

Status
Not open for further replies.

jlbraun

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Messages
2,213
Both are from Montana:

http://www.helenair.com/articles/2006/11/01/montana/a09110106_01.txt

Tester, Burns both back gun rights
By JENNIFER McKEE - IR State Bureau - 11/01/06
HELENA — They may not agree on much, but when it comes to guns and gun rights, Republican Sen. Conrad Burns and his Democratic challenger Jon Tester seem to have found some enthusiastically shared common ground.

Both men are gun owners and say they have fired guns in the last month — Tester a Winchester .30-.30 and Burns a .30-06.

Both men say they oppose any kind of gun control and they are willing to talk about what, exactly, that means to them.

Burns: “I support the Second Amendment. Period.”

Tester: “I believe in our Second Amendment freedoms and the right of every law abiding American to keep and bear arms.”

Both Tester and Burns said they oppose a ban on guns in the nation’s capital. Burns said he opposed a ban on any kind of ammunition, a stance Tester has also voiced. Tester said he opposed the Brady Bill —- a federal law that requires a background check for everyone buying a handgun.

Tester said he would oppose any efforts to bring back bans on assault weapons.

Both men also said they favored doing away with a 1986-passed cap on the number of fully automatic weapons available for sale. At that time, Congress limited the number of fully automatic guns — guns in which as long as the trigger is depressed, bullets will fire — to those in circulation in 1986. Since then, the price of these limited weapons has gone up. However, civilian police forces are exempt from the cap and recently Congress allowed certain military contractors to be exempt from the 1986 cap too.

Asked if he favored lifting the cap, Burns was blunt in his opposition to the law.

“I oppose (it) because it’s one more infringement on our Second Amendment rights,” he said. “Regardless of the purpose of the law, it’s one more step by anti-gun advocates to disarm law-abiding citizens.”

Tester said he favored repealing the law and would consider “any (other) piece of legislation that will protect our Second Amendment rights and help fight the war on terror.”

Currently, people who buy guns from registered federal firearms dealers — like gun or sporting goods stores — fill out paperwork that the federal government keeps.

Both men say they oppose the government keeping those papers as a first step toward a national gun registry.

On the subject of concealed weapons, Tester said he supports a national law to allow Americans to carry concealed weapons. In Montana, concealed weapons are already legal. Burns said he supported allowing people in states that have already have concealed a concealed weapons law to carry their concealed weapons in any other state that has such a law.

Both men have received high marks from the National Rifle Association, with Burns snagging an A-plus and Tester getting an A. The group gave its endorsement to Burns, in part, said Autumn Fogg, an NRA spokeswoman, because he has a long track record of standing up for gun rights at the national level.

Burns made a clean sweep of gun endorsements, picking up the endorsement from the national Gun Owners of America and Montana’s leading gun group, the Montana Shooting Sports Association.

Gary Marbut, head of the MSSA, said he gave Burns the endorsement because Tester did not respond to the group’s candidate questions.
 
The GOP man Burns apparently has a track record that is consistent with
support of 2A rights. What is the voting record for his Democrtatic opponent. If he has had numerous votes in office that were pro 2A and none against it looks like a win win choice for Montana regarding that office. If the
Democrat however has no confirmed voting record that is pro 2A I, if I lived in
Montana could not vote for him. The past is a good predictor of the future.
Promises are not.
 
The ATF is trying now to get FFL holders to use computers to submit the needed forms a American must fill out to exercise the right to bear arms. This way no FFL holder could have no reason for not handing over their bound books or other required forms to the ATF on demand.
 
The ATF is trying now to get FFL holders to use computers to submit the needed forms a American must fill out to exercise the right to bear arms. This way no FFL holder could have no reason for not handing over their bound books or other required forms to the ATF on demand.

And where did this one start? Never heard of it, 07FFL holder, 01FFL before that and have never hear that before.

Got a link or documentation?
 
gezzer : And where did this one start?
Why don’t you try going to the ATF web site and asking some questions. Then go talk to some FFL holders. Yes I know what you claimed to be, but online you can claim anything because it is hard to disprove it online.
 
Why don’t you try going to the ATF web site and asking some questions. Then go talk to some FFL holders. Yes I know what you claimed to be, but online you can claim anything because it is hard to disprove it online.

I'm confused, you claimed something, he asked you to back up the claim, and you turn it around and ask him to back up his request for you to back up your claim?
 
Tester can claim he supports repealing 922 (o) but until he acts on legislation to actually do it, it's all for nothing.
 
I want to see sound suppressors removed from any regulation beyond ordinary product regulations that apply to, say, automobile mufflers. I don't understand why this is such a big deal and hasn't already been done :confused:
 
carnaby : I want to see sound suppressors removed from any regulation beyond ordinary product regulations that apply to, say, automobile mufflers
There are rumors going around that the military is buying a lot of suppressors to issue them to front line troops. Some say because it is cheaper then the cost of the medical problems with combat soldiers hearing later on.
I have talk with police officers that say they would like them on their duty firearms.
 
I think we should contact Tester's office and remind him of his position.

It would be good to get a Democrat behind repealing 922(o) because that party is in charge.
 
So far aside from a few mundane ramblings by the regular far left communists, the Dems have behaved themselves as far as gun control goes. Lets hope they did indeed learn their lesson in 94. If not they will have to take a refresher course in 08.
 
There are rumors going around that the military is buying a lot of suppressors to issue them to front line troops. Some say because it is cheaper then the cost of the medical problems with combat soldiers hearing later on.
I have talk with police officers that say they would like them on their duty firearms.


So first the ATF is going to force FFL's to file online... and you have no backup of this, and now rumors about supressors... Where do you come up with this stuff???

In europe it is downright rude to fire a gun without a supressor... Silly hollywood based laws continue to haunt us...
 
You can still find antique ads that show suppressors as a gentlemanly thing for more civilized shooting.

When, precisely, did the myth start that they were devices meant for criminal assassinations?
 
[sarcasm] Come on guys, we all know that only contract killers use supressors... they screw them onto their barrels then shoot innocent people in their sleep, I saw it in a movie! [/sarcasm]
 
and now rumors about supressors... Where do you come up with this stuff??? In europe it is downright rude to fire a gun without a supressor...
Not rumor. I frequent a chat board oft visited by suppressor manufacturers (yes, I've met them). AAC has seriously ramped up their production for military customers - as in several leaps in automating what was largely a handcrafted process, and running that system practically 24/7. Major runs of specialty stuff have been produced, with a few extras made for the relatively paltry civilian market.

Suppressors may be common, even expected, in Europe.
In the USA, they are generally presumed (incorrectly) by most people (most shooters included) to be more illegal than bank robbery.

BTW: I see you have only 8 posts on this board. Welcome - but don't start mouthing off to the regulars with things like "where do you come up with this stuff???", as many here are far more experienced & involved in the field than you expect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top