Gun control bill filed in house - 01/06/09

[tns0038]

I shall write my legislators abut this bill. Just a note to everyone here and Ill probably post it in a few otherthreads over time, we need to not only focus on gun related bills but also other issues that move us. I wouldnt want my legislators to think I was a one issue freak or something.

Write them, tell them whats what and make sure they know they need to act appropriately

EDIT:I mailed my legislators using the very easy links through NRA-ILA

Good idea

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[edr9x23super]

This kind of legislation will only insure that a whole bunch of congressmen will get voted out of office.

Between this and all of the economic problems there is plenty of dirt that is going to get heaped on the current congress.

[zephyr3]

Just called my (3) House representatives to express my opposition to this bill. I know, I know, New Mexico doesn't have much representation. The first two representatives I contacted, told me that they did not represent my district. I informed them that any representative from New Mexico should be representing me. Is any one else getting this run-a-round? The 3rd representative (who does represent my district) was clueless about this bill and said they would get back to me. I am not making a political statement, just wondering how everyone else is fairing in expressing their opinion to their representatives.

[C9H13NO3]

I've been having trouble shooting this down in my letter to the reps. IMO, when you write, you have to shoot down the purpose section.

(c) Purposes- The purposes of this Act and the amendments made by this Act are--

(1) to protect the public against the unreasonable risk of injury and death associated with the unrecorded sale or transfer of qualifying firearms to criminals and youth;

According to ATF and FBI statistics, 80-90% of guns were bought by someone legal to buy them FOR someone not legal to own them, rather than stolen guns. Can't back up shooting this down with fact.

(2) to ensure that owners of qualifying firearms are knowledgeable in the safe use, handling, and storage of those firearms;

Everyone who owns a firearm should be knowledeable...I just don't think it should be regulated by law...so no facts to back it up really, and obviously cant say you shouldn't be safe with a firearm to own one..

(3) to restrict the availability of qualifying firearms to criminals, youth, and other persons prohibited by Federal law from receiving firearms; and

This is just reiteration of point number 1.

(4) to facilitate the tracing of qualifying firearms used in crime by Federal and State law enforcement agencies.

No facts for this also...just that I don't like my firearms being connected to my name...but the main reason for this is because when firearm ownership becomes illegal, i have full intent to break the law, and I'd rather have the government not know what and how many firearms I own. Liberty or death. (mods if saying that breaks forum rules, i apologize...please edit it). Can't say that to a senator or representative though either.



So no facts to support why I don't want this to pass, other than I don't want it to because I don't like it. Any ideas?

[Frogbones]

can you say....one step closer to this country tearing itself apart?...again.

[kentuckycarry]

Does the FOID card required in IL expire?

Every 5 years and if you let it expire you can have all your guns taken away. The state has dragged its feet in processing peoples renewals and it is no excuse, you can still have your guns taken away even if its the states fault.

[Pro2A]

I just want to know how they plan on enforcing this? How are they going to know what guns you decide to register and which you decide "Hey they don't need to know about this one"?

[tns0038]

Using the email account from a hunting and fishing magazine I work for, I contacted both State of Florida Senators. Ones Republican the other Democrat, but in the past they have both responded that they are pro 2 A.

I’ll update you when I get a response this time.

[Pro2A]

Both my Senators seem to be against this. Hopefully this will fail in the Senate.

[fatcat]

I'm glad people are paying attention to Obama and his minions.

But what I don't understand is why people have not been paying attention all the time. Fear of Obama might be the best thing to happen to gun rights in the USA.

Most of the gun laws on the books already, have gone through in the past 30 years. Of those past 30 years, only 8 of them had a Democrat in office. So it was sleeping Republican voters who fell asleep at the wheel while thinking all would be fine because their guy won.

80-88 Reagan
88-92 Bush Sr.
92-00 Clinton
00-08 Bush Jr.

Most people would assume that Clinton presided over the most anti-gun legislation, but in fact it was Reagan who presided over most, in fact more than half were all signed by Reagan. Even both Bush CICs were more than happy to appease the antis with more legislation. Bush Jr was too busy to do more damage. And hopefully Obama too has bigger fish to fry.

If people had been paying attention like they are now, we would not be where we are. So as I said, Obama is the best thing to happen to gun rights because people are now more awake.

The people we really need to watch are the ones running our states, because just like with any law the state holds veto power over the federal government.

[Hopyard]

I want to make a couple of suggestions for everyone who is interested in contacting their reps on this or any other issue.

Use FAX. Mail takes forever to reach them because of screening. E-mails are mostly handled with automated processes and largely ignored. I got that info from someone who spoke to a large group on behalf of a certain "critter," and advised the group as to the best way to get the group's message to their office. (completely different topic, but good advice)

Also, I made a modest donation to my Congressman's re-election campaign, attended a "by invitation only" rally for donors, and actively worked as a volunteer before the last election. As a result, I am getting some surveys and e-mail opinion gathering stuff which I think is not going out to the general public--not certain though, just my sense that it is a special mailing.

The most recent survey did have a question on the gun control issue with the option of answering y or n.

There are a variety of ways to help your congressman or senator, and doing so will help get your input noticed.

I realize not everyone can make a donation, or spend time as a volunteer, or find time to attend a rally, but if you are able, doing so is worthwhile. If nothing else, you have made an investment in your future.

Also--I want to point out that the Obama transition team has a very active e-mail and web based mechanism for seeking suggestions, input, opinion on a very broad array of issues. I do not recall how I got on the list, it wasn't through a donation, I know that. In any case, this is a vehicle for making one's voice heard too.

Change.gov: Citizen's Briefing Book

You do have to register, which means giving your name, address, and e-mail address etc.

Fatcat's post above has some good points for all to consider.

Finally, the entire gun-control agenda is one which has a major geographical component to it. IOWA, WISCONSIN, ILLINOIS-- are a midwest block with moderate to severe restrictions. The South and Southwest tend to be least restrictive. The North East very restrictive.

If you live in a least restrictive state, as I do, chances are your senator and reps. already do support our point of view. It doesn't hurt to communicate and reinforce, but you are likely preaching to the choir.

The folks who really need to become outspoken are our participants here from CA, IL, WI, NY, NJ, Maryland, MA.

These are the states where the reps. really push gun control, and these are the folks whose minds need to be changed.

Unfortunately, as a practical matter, the elected folks from these states (all really) will not give out-of-state writers much attention; which necessarily must go to constituents.

What this means is that a writing campaign needs to somehow enlist and encourage especially those of us from the states where current practice is very restrictive. I think a special there is a special onus on the folks from NY or Maryland, or Ilinois--and we do have many from there posting here. You are the guys who can make a difference if you use a place like this to communicate with each other and work together.

[webhead]

The first two representatives I contacted, told me that they did not represent my district. I informed them that any representative from New Mexico should be representing me. Is any one else getting this run-a-round?

I have started writing letters to US Congress because of all the crazyness I'm hearing and have gotten the run around as well. I'm particularly annoyed when I hear that from members that chair a committee. I understand that they get a lot of calls and emails but that's the job. I get annoying robocalls when they need my help.....

For anyone in the US Congress to refuse to listen to you because "I don't represent you" should be pulled from office. Congress represents the citizens of the USA. They pass laws for every person, not just those that got them elected.

[nutz4utwo]

(c) Purposes- The purposes of this Act and the amendments made by this Act are--

(1) to protect the public against the unreasonable risk of injury and death associated with the unrecorded sale or transfer of qualifying firearms to criminals and youth;

It is already illegal to transfer a firearm to a criminal or youth (felon or minor). There is already a federal database (a la' Brady Bill) that is consulted for this purpose... How will issuing a license change that? Will the Attorney General look through the licenses to make extra sure that you are not 7 years old?

(2) to ensure that owners of qualifying firearms are knowledgeable in the safe use, handling, and storage of those firearms;

This will not stand up to constitutional challenge. If you are not "knowledgeable" in the use of firearms, you still have a right to self defense (and other lawful purposes) and your right to posses a firearm is protected. As SCOTUS told us in Heller:

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a
firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for
traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

(3) to restrict the availability of qualifying firearms to criminals, youth, and other persons prohibited by Federal law from receiving firearms; and

See #1...

(4) to facilitate the tracing of qualifying firearms used in crime by Federal and State law enforcement agencies.

I believe most guns used in crimes are totally unconnected to their original FFL purchaser. They get sold (legally or illegally), stolen, lost... ?

`FIREARM LICENSE--NOT VALID FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE'.

Wow, he got that one right! If it serves "no purpose" why do we really need it? Once again, we are protected in our individual right to own a firearm for lawful purposes. Congress cannot take that away.

[Duisburg]

....and I glance over to see my stash for the up and coming illegal law about to come ....

[crzy4guns]

Amen. Hopefully everyone saw this coming and stocked up on firearms and ammo.