Jesus, this is moving fast.
This is a discussion on DC Gun Ban Repeal Passes House Senate Pressure Needed within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 Gun Owners of America Wednesday, September ...
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
Gun Owners of America
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Thank you so much for your activism!
Today, the U.S. House of Representatives opted to pass Representative Childers' D.C. gun ban repeal instead of the anti-gun bill sponsored by Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton which would have allowed D.C. to continue enacting gun control.
The bill now goes to the Senate, but unless there is a ton of pressure put on Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), the bill will languish in committee.
Thankfully, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) is spearheading an effort to get a vote on the House-passed bill. She is asking her fellow Senators to cosponsor a letter which she will then deliver to Sen. Reid.
The Hutchison letter points out that, "In DC v. Heller, the court affirmed that the District of Columbia's ban on ownership of handguns was an unconstitutional restriction on that right."
After noting that D.C. has continued to deprive its residents of their Second Amendment rights for more than 30 years, the letter asks Sen. Reid" to ensure that D.C. residents do not have to wait any longer to realize their constitutional rights by allowing the full Senate to consider H.R. 6842 before the 110th Congress concludes."
(Norton's bill was the original HR 6842, but it now contains the Childers pro-gun language instead thanks in no small part to your efforts.)
There are not many days left before Congress recesses for the remainder of the year, and Sen. Reid is expected to try to run out the clock on the D.C. repeal bill. That's why it's important to act quickly and contact your own two U.S. Senators.
This is the last chance we have this year to put some teeth into the Supreme Court's decision in Heller. Gun Owners of America will score the signing of this letter in its upcoming congressional rating.
ACTION: Please contact your two Senators and ask them to co sign the Hutchison letter to Senator Reid. You can visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at GOA Legislative Action Center to send your Senators the pre-written e-mail message below. And, you can call your Senators at 202-224-3121 or toll-free at 1-877-762-8762.
----- Pre-written letter -----
I was happy to see that the House of Representatives voted for the Childers substitute language which will repeal the D.C. gun ban (HR 6842).
I recognize that there is not much time left in the legislative session, and so I hope you will do everything in your power to pressure Majority Leader Harry Reid to bring up HR 6842 for a vote.
Hence, I urge you to cosign by Friday the Hutchison letter which urges Reid "to ensure that D.C. residents do not have to wait any longer to realize their constitutional rights by allowing the full Senate to consider H.R.6842 before the 110th Congress concludes."
Gun Owners of America will score the signing of this letter in its upcoming congressional rating. Please let me know how you intend to act.
#2 The democrats need to pander to us in order to show they are a viable alternative to the republicans.
Neither side can afford to anger the NRA right now before the election.
Afterward...well. Another story.
No, this is bigger than the NRA and it's intellectually dishonest to think otherwise. This is a case of appeal to gun owners, not the subset of gun owners that is involved in arguably the third most powerful lobbyist group in the nation. The District only changed its tune as a power save because it knew that if the House got too far in deliberation then the District would be shut out of the conversation and be relegated to "yes sir". It also gives them (D.C.) the chance to stall even more if the bills pass the house but get stuck in the Senate; they can hold off on implementing their more gun-owner-friendly plan because, you know, it's out of their hands, right? Diffusion of responsibility (they can point the finger at Congress). Fenty and gang want to keep what power they can, only in this case it was too little, too late.
Remember, while this bill is moving quick, there's an "anti-gun" version on the same subject that's got a ton of bi-partisan support. In fact, it might even be mostly supported by Republicans, but that may have changed since I last looked, nor do I know how far it's gone.
Has anyone actually read this bill yet or are we cheering for something with a good name and well-hidden fine-print? I can already tell you Congress doesn't believe NFA weapons are constitutionally-protected, based on Section 3 of HR 6842, and it says the District can still regulate or prohibit concealed or open carry outside one's home or business (directly contradicting with a sentence some seven or eight lines above it). Little bad, lotta good, guess we gotta start somewhere right?
In a nutshell, it calls on D.C. to honorably follow the SCOTUS ruling. It covers a bit of ground, brief as it is.
Link: H.R. 6842 -- National Capital Security And Safety Act
Basic "headline" text, with body of text snipped (which you can read by following the link, above):Sent letter to each of my Senators, urging them to push it to the floor and debate: check.SEC. 3. REFORM D.C. COUNCIL’S AUTHORITY TO RESTRICT FIREARMS.
SEC. 4. REPEAL D.C. SEMIAUTOMATIC BAN.
SEC. 5. REPEAL REGISTRATION REQUIREMENT.
SEC. 712. CONSISTENCY WITH FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS.
SEC. 6. REPEAL HANDGUN AMMUNITION BAN.
SEC. 7. RESTORE RIGHT OF SELF DEFENSE IN THE HOME.
SEC. 8. REMOVE CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR POSSESSION OF UNREGISTERED FIREARMS.
SEC. 9. REMOVE CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR CARRYING A FIREARM IN ONE’S DWELLING OR OTHER PREMISES.
SEC. 10. AUTHORIZING PURCHASES OF FIREARMS BY DISTRICT RESIDENTS.
Short Version of HR 6842:
- Findings: Second Amendment says this, D.C. not following and declares intention not to follow this, existing federal gun crime laws are fine so D.C. doesn't need to pass their own restrictions.
- D.C. law amended to prevent D.C. from prohibiting (directly or effectively) or unduly hindering a person's ability to possess firearms in their homes or businesses for lawful purposes (self defense specifically mentioned)
- Congress states that all non NFA weapons are included in the "now-legal" group of weapons.
- And then this gem: "Nothing in the previous two sentences shall be construed to prohibit the District of Columbia from regulating or prohibiting the carrying of firearms by a person, either concealed or openly, other than at the person’s dwelling place, place of business, or on other land possessed by the person." (Meaning, D.C. can still regulate or prohibit concealed or open carry other than in someone's home, business, or on their property).
- D.C.'s definition of "machine gun" changed to be consistent with other federal law
- Description of weapons remaining illegal specifically mentions "sawed off shotguns", "machine guns", and "short barreled rifles". Other NFA items are attacked later as well.
- Registration requirements effectively neutered.
- Remove restrictions on buying/selling handgun ammo; no mention of rifle ammo, and I don't know if you can lawfully buy rifle ammo in the District or not.
- "Right to self defense in the home" added; really, current prohibition removed, but paves the way for a Castle Doctrine.
- US Code modified to let DC residents buy from Maryland and Virginia FFLs.
Look, I'm not saying it's a bad law. It's got a lot of good, enough to win my support. I don't want anyone to overlook the two very flagrant negatives, though: Congress doesn't feel NFA weapons are constitutionally protected, and Congress feels D.C. doesn't need the gun-related crime laws because it already has National laws on the subject. Both of those are trends I, personally, and going to be very watchful for, because both have the potential to be used as bartering points for future compromises in federal gun laws.
Yes, I support HR 6842. No, I won't ignore the negatives just because the positives out number them.
I sent the emails to both my senators, but I'm a little dismayed they didn't sign the amicus for Heller. That's usually a bad thing to be on the gun control side in WV, but apparently somebody likes the 2 we've got now.
"The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree..."
Nunn v. State GA 1848