Seems the lady who wrote the column here doesn't quite see eye-to-eye with me on H.R. 45 or the root causes of some of the crime facing the big cities in this country. I tried to set her straight:
Mrs. Beam-
I just read your piece, “Common Ground on Gun Control” on wiscnews.com. While I find it refreshing that you and your brother-in-law can sit down and discuss a politically charged topic like gun control in a rational and sane manner, I must point out some flaws in your argument for H.R. 45.
First, and most importantly, imposing the same restrictions and licensing requirements on firearms would be in direct contradiction to the Constitution. By supporting this bill, what you advocate is placing a prior restraint on a civil right. The same sort of prior restraint codified in Jim Crow laws by requiring literacy tests to vote, a version of which is required under this bill. “A certificate attesting to the completion at the time of application of a written firearms examination [sec 102 (7)]”.
What is misunderstood, glossed over, or simply ignored is that the crime to which this bill is attributed was committed in the city of Chicago. A city which, since the ban on private ownership in Washington D.C. was found to be unconstitutional, has the most restrictive gun laws in the country. There has been, since the early 1980’s, a complete ban on handgun ownership in the city, with few exceptions. So how was it, that this heroic young man died protecting another, in a city that bans hand guns, with a hand gun?
Your brother-in-law touched on something in your conversation that scratches the surface of the problem. Socio-economic problems play a small part of this, but the larger question that must be asked is this. What has happened during the last 40 yrs to turn our larger urban population centers into killing fields? Is it poverty? Doubtful. Poverty is prevalent all over the country. Rural America, from border to border and sea to sea, has more than it’s share of poverty, yet you don’t see young people shooting each other over the most mundane things. The problem here is cultural. A culture that says it’s ok to sleep with as many women as you can, steal as much as you can, sell as many drugs as you can, and shoot whoever you can is not one conducive to producing productive members of society. This kind of behavior is celebrated, and even rewarded by the rest of the country.
Social policy has taken the fathers out of these homes, telling them it’s ok they don’t have to take responsibility for their actions. Leaving a single mother, sometimes as young as 12 or 13, to fend for themselves or live off the government dole for the rest of their lives. So without a male influence in the home, is it any wonder these children turn to gangs? They offer the stability, respect, and emotional attachment these children crave.
No ma’am, Blair Holts Firearm Licensing and Record Act will not stop what happened to this bill’s namesake. This is proven every time a gun goes off in Chicago. What this bill will accomplish is the disarming of people like your brother, those who will never commit a crime, who shoot for fun or sport, and are generally ambivalent about the whole thing. Until someone shows up to take their guns away because the criminal element in this country cannot be controlled by a social experiment.
If I get a response back, I'll post it.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Monday, February 16, 2009
Wyoming 2A Resolution
There is a resolution pending in the state legislature calling on the .gov to cease and desist further encroachments on the 2nd Amendment. After leaving a few comments there, one poster had some interesting things to say. His post is first, I responded, and my response (editing out his/her name to protect the guilty) is below.
" For clarification: yes, I have guns and I hunt and my father-in-law was an accomplished hunting guide.
What I object to is the raving paranoia that the durn libruls are gonna take our firearms! Gimme a break.
The NRA is nurturing this paranoia for one reason -- to raise gobs of money, not because there's ANY threat to gun ownership.
There's only a minority of Democrats that want to restrict gun ownership and they are more than matched by the western Dems who won't go there.
As for these rants about socialism and communism, some of you are starting to make Glenn Beck sound sane (which he manifestly is not).
Finally, don't all you gun-huggers ever get tired of being manipulated by the NRA, GOP and talk radio wingnuts? "
==========================================================
"There is indeed justifiable fear on the part of gun owners. Look up the text of H.R. 45. It provides for a system of licensing to purchase handguns and semi-automatic rifles that accept a detachable magazine. This law would apply retroactively to include weapons already possessed. What this bill demonstrates is a prior restraint on exercising a civil right. We have learned, as a society, that this doesn't work. We no longer require literacy test to vote, there are no poll taxes paid to vote. You don't have to get a license from the gov't to buy a magazine or write a letter to the editor. Apples and oranges you say? Consider this. They say the pen is mightier than the sword, right? Well, who really pushed us into war? The soldier or the journalist?
The proposed law in question flies in the face of the law, as well as the recent Heller decision. Remember, BOTH sides found the right to arms an individual one. Federal law does not allow for registration.
One interesting fact about registration is that it invariably leads to confiscation. It happened in England and Australia in 1996 and 1997 respectively. You might say that it couldn't happen here, but you'd be wrong. It did, and it happened in 2005 in CA to law-biding owners of .50 BMG rifles. (Which coincidentally were developed for civilian use in long distance marksmanship competitions that the Navy took an active interest in.)
So don't sit there and tell me we have nothing to fear. The WH chief of staff wants anyone who's on the "Do Not Fly" watch list to be excluded from ever purchasing a firearm. No due process, no notification, nothing. Never mind that there are hundreds, perhaps thousands of names on that little "list" that don't belong there, including sitting US Senators.
So what country do you want to live in? One where you are stopped for no reason and searched with no regard for your rights, sent away to work in a forced labor camp for the "State", or just disappeared? Or one where you have the freedom to move wherever you want, without worry of being stopped just because, your labor belongs to you, not the state, and you are free to purchase what you want independent of what some faceless politician in a faraway office thinks? I know which one I want to live in. "
What his post tells me is he's a false flag. I'm a gunowner-but I don't think all you cousin-humping rednecks should have what I have. Anyone who follows, or has followed, the gun-law/gun control debate scene with even a passing curiosity knows that confiscation is the ultimate goal of the dhimmicrats. Has been since the 1960's. Right now is their best chance. They have the numbers. 59 votes in teh senate. Granted, some of them are 'pro-gun', but we are talking about the communist/socialist wing of American politics here, and their leadership will brook nothing short of the party line.
" For clarification: yes, I have guns and I hunt and my father-in-law was an accomplished hunting guide.
What I object to is the raving paranoia that the durn libruls are gonna take our firearms! Gimme a break.
The NRA is nurturing this paranoia for one reason -- to raise gobs of money, not because there's ANY threat to gun ownership.
There's only a minority of Democrats that want to restrict gun ownership and they are more than matched by the western Dems who won't go there.
As for these rants about socialism and communism, some of you are starting to make Glenn Beck sound sane (which he manifestly is not).
Finally, don't all you gun-huggers ever get tired of being manipulated by the NRA, GOP and talk radio wingnuts? "
==========================================================
"There is indeed justifiable fear on the part of gun owners. Look up the text of H.R. 45. It provides for a system of licensing to purchase handguns and semi-automatic rifles that accept a detachable magazine. This law would apply retroactively to include weapons already possessed. What this bill demonstrates is a prior restraint on exercising a civil right. We have learned, as a society, that this doesn't work. We no longer require literacy test to vote, there are no poll taxes paid to vote. You don't have to get a license from the gov't to buy a magazine or write a letter to the editor. Apples and oranges you say? Consider this. They say the pen is mightier than the sword, right? Well, who really pushed us into war? The soldier or the journalist?
The proposed law in question flies in the face of the law, as well as the recent Heller decision. Remember, BOTH sides found the right to arms an individual one. Federal law does not allow for registration.
One interesting fact about registration is that it invariably leads to confiscation. It happened in England and Australia in 1996 and 1997 respectively. You might say that it couldn't happen here, but you'd be wrong. It did, and it happened in 2005 in CA to law-biding owners of .50 BMG rifles. (Which coincidentally were developed for civilian use in long distance marksmanship competitions that the Navy took an active interest in.)
So don't sit there and tell me we have nothing to fear. The WH chief of staff wants anyone who's on the "Do Not Fly" watch list to be excluded from ever purchasing a firearm. No due process, no notification, nothing. Never mind that there are hundreds, perhaps thousands of names on that little "list" that don't belong there, including sitting US Senators.
So what country do you want to live in? One where you are stopped for no reason and searched with no regard for your rights, sent away to work in a forced labor camp for the "State", or just disappeared? Or one where you have the freedom to move wherever you want, without worry of being stopped just because, your labor belongs to you, not the state, and you are free to purchase what you want independent of what some faceless politician in a faraway office thinks? I know which one I want to live in. "
What his post tells me is he's a false flag. I'm a gunowner-but I don't think all you cousin-humping rednecks should have what I have. Anyone who follows, or has followed, the gun-law/gun control debate scene with even a passing curiosity knows that confiscation is the ultimate goal of the dhimmicrats. Has been since the 1960's. Right now is their best chance. They have the numbers. 59 votes in teh senate. Granted, some of them are 'pro-gun', but we are talking about the communist/socialist wing of American politics here, and their leadership will brook nothing short of the party line.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Follow Up On Brady Rankings
Yesterday I pointed out Wyoming's ranking with teh Brady Bunch. Today, lets have a look at South Dakota, shall we?
So, to rehash here, Cali has a violent crime rate of 522.6/per 100k and a murder rate of 6.2. Total number of murders was 2249 with 1305 committed by firearms.
For SD, it was 169.2 in '07, down from 171.4. The murder rate was 2.1/100k up slightly from 1.2 in '06. A whopping 15 people were murdered in SD last year, compared to 9 the previous year.
How does that 15 stack up? Well of those 15, 4. That's one more than 3, one less than 5. 4. That's how many people were murdered with a firearm in SD in 2007. 2 were killed with a hand gun and one each were killed with a rifle and shotgun. The rest were killed with sharp, pointy things or hands and feet.
So how does SDs gun laws rate on the Brady Bunch's state ranking? Tied with AZ, AR, FL, ID and NM for 36th with a whopping 6 points out of 100.
As I asked yesterday. Where would you rather live. CA or SD/WY?
So, to rehash here, Cali has a violent crime rate of 522.6/per 100k and a murder rate of 6.2. Total number of murders was 2249 with 1305 committed by firearms.
For SD, it was 169.2 in '07, down from 171.4. The murder rate was 2.1/100k up slightly from 1.2 in '06. A whopping 15 people were murdered in SD last year, compared to 9 the previous year.
How does that 15 stack up? Well of those 15, 4. That's one more than 3, one less than 5. 4. That's how many people were murdered with a firearm in SD in 2007. 2 were killed with a hand gun and one each were killed with a rifle and shotgun. The rest were killed with sharp, pointy things or hands and feet.
So how does SDs gun laws rate on the Brady Bunch's state ranking? Tied with AZ, AR, FL, ID and NM for 36th with a whopping 6 points out of 100.
As I asked yesterday. Where would you rather live. CA or SD/WY?
An Interesting Question
From Joe Huffman over at the View From North Central Idaho comes an interesting question:
Can you demonstrate one time or place, throughout all history, where the average person was made safer by restricting access to handheld weapons?
Several have tried (mostly the anti-freedom/citizen disarmament set) to answer it, and have failed miserably. What they cannot get their minds around is this. That when the .gov has the monopoly of force, there is no limit to what they can extort from the populace as a whole. I find it ironic that the very folks who eschewed "the Man" when they were in college now see fit to turn themselves into "the Man". The very same people who will hold a picket sign demanding "keep your laws off my body and your government out my bedroom" have no qualms at all with having armed agents of the state provoke a violent encounter with non-violent people doing things that non-violent consenting adults do.
What this all boils down to is, in response to the question posed above, they can't.
Can you demonstrate one time or place, throughout all history, where the average person was made safer by restricting access to handheld weapons?
Several have tried (mostly the anti-freedom/citizen disarmament set) to answer it, and have failed miserably. What they cannot get their minds around is this. That when the .gov has the monopoly of force, there is no limit to what they can extort from the populace as a whole. I find it ironic that the very folks who eschewed "the Man" when they were in college now see fit to turn themselves into "the Man". The very same people who will hold a picket sign demanding "keep your laws off my body and your government out my bedroom" have no qualms at all with having armed agents of the state provoke a violent encounter with non-violent people doing things that non-violent consenting adults do.
What this all boils down to is, in response to the question posed above, they can't.
Political Correctness Run Amok
Via David Codrea and the Gun Rights Examiner, we come across this little gem:
http://http//www.examiner.com/x-1417-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m2d6-The-new-blacklist
Seems a teacher in WI had picture of herself on Facebook holding a *gasp* gun. This is what happens when you let peoples emotions run amok. If you can be suspended for something as innocent as owning a gun, imagine what else they can let you go over.
Update: Seems as though the school thought she may pose a danger to others. It's not like she was molesting students or something.
http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m2d6-The-new-blacklistpart-two
http://http//www.examiner.com/x-1417-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m2d6-The-new-blacklist
Seems a teacher in WI had picture of herself on Facebook holding a *gasp* gun. This is what happens when you let peoples emotions run amok. If you can be suspended for something as innocent as owning a gun, imagine what else they can let you go over.
Update: Seems as though the school thought she may pose a danger to others. It's not like she was molesting students or something.
http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m2d6-The-new-blacklistpart-two
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Immigration Correctness
Since the Chosen One ascended the presidency last month, we have been treated to an endless barrage of talking heads on the T&V proclaiming that to oppose him is to be racist. Never mind that I do not subscribe to the socialist/marxist/communist agenda of the current administration. The color of the mans skin has nothing to with it, ideology does.
He wants to grant amnesty to millions of criminals who illegally crossed our borders. To speak out against this is to be labelled "racist".
Alright, if we're going to get into name calling, let me toss this turd on the table. How about "Traitor"?
I mean, if my opposing someone breaking the law by crossing our sovereign border illegally makes me a racist, then you supporting the continued attack on the sovereignty of this Great Nation makes you a Traitor.
How do you like them apples, buck-o?
He wants to grant amnesty to millions of criminals who illegally crossed our borders. To speak out against this is to be labelled "racist".
Alright, if we're going to get into name calling, let me toss this turd on the table. How about "Traitor"?
I mean, if my opposing someone breaking the law by crossing our sovereign border illegally makes me a racist, then you supporting the continued attack on the sovereignty of this Great Nation makes you a Traitor.
How do you like them apples, buck-o?
Brady Rankings Are Out
Seems the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Ownership has listed its annual ranking of the several states according to their gun laws. How did Wyoming fare this year?
Not very good. We wound up with a lousy 9 out of possible 100. As far as I'm concerned, we could do better. We need to strive to be like our friends in OK, KY, and LA. These states all have a combined score of 6, 2 each.
What does this mean? Well, it means that according to the hoplophobes from the Brady Bunch, our gun laws are so weak that anyone can walk into a gun store and walk out with a Sherman tank. Only in OK, KY, and LA can you get really premium hardware like an Abrams MBT.
Lets take this a step further. The violent crime rate for WY is 239.3 per 100k. For California, the #1 ranked Brady state, the rate was 522.6. Murder in WY was 3.1 (up from 1.7 in '06) compared to CA with a murder rate of 6.2 (which was down slightly 6.8 in '06). CA has double the murder rate for WY, yet they have a veritable wish list of laws the Brady Bunch drool over, like an "assault weapons ban", waiting periods, license to buy, and "may issue" of concealed weapons permits, among others.
Wyoming had a whopping 16 murders in 2007, with 7 committed with firearms (2 by handgun, 2 by rifle, 2 by shotgun, and 1 committed by a firearm of undetermined type). The remaining 9 were committed with knives, other types of weapons (not listed by the FBI) or hands/fists/feet etc. California had 2249 murders, with 1605 committed with firearms (1305 were handguns, 51 were rifles, 74 were by shotgun, and 106 were by firearms of undetermined type. The remaining 600 and change were knives/cutting instruments/hands/fists/feet, etc.
Where would you rather live?
Not very good. We wound up with a lousy 9 out of possible 100. As far as I'm concerned, we could do better. We need to strive to be like our friends in OK, KY, and LA. These states all have a combined score of 6, 2 each.
What does this mean? Well, it means that according to the hoplophobes from the Brady Bunch, our gun laws are so weak that anyone can walk into a gun store and walk out with a Sherman tank. Only in OK, KY, and LA can you get really premium hardware like an Abrams MBT.
Lets take this a step further. The violent crime rate for WY is 239.3 per 100k. For California, the #1 ranked Brady state, the rate was 522.6. Murder in WY was 3.1 (up from 1.7 in '06) compared to CA with a murder rate of 6.2 (which was down slightly 6.8 in '06). CA has double the murder rate for WY, yet they have a veritable wish list of laws the Brady Bunch drool over, like an "assault weapons ban", waiting periods, license to buy, and "may issue" of concealed weapons permits, among others.
Wyoming had a whopping 16 murders in 2007, with 7 committed with firearms (2 by handgun, 2 by rifle, 2 by shotgun, and 1 committed by a firearm of undetermined type). The remaining 9 were committed with knives, other types of weapons (not listed by the FBI) or hands/fists/feet etc. California had 2249 murders, with 1605 committed with firearms (1305 were handguns, 51 were rifles, 74 were by shotgun, and 106 were by firearms of undetermined type. The remaining 600 and change were knives/cutting instruments/hands/fists/feet, etc.
Where would you rather live?
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Our New AG
As it turns out, the mostly squishy minority in the Senate caved in the other day and confirmed one of the most ardently anti-freedom AGs in the history of the US. Although it amounted to urinating in the wind, the fine senators from WY, Barrasso and Enzi took a principled stand against this man and what he stands for. I applaud them both for taking such a stand.
My bet is, he'll find new and exciting ways to enforce the Patriot Act the previous administration could never dream about. I'll bet before too long, we'll look back at warrant-less wiretaps on international terrorist phone calls with nostalgia. I would also be willing to bet the NSA wiretapping fiasco that was part and parcel of Clinton's administration will be peanuts compared to what the Chosen One has in store for his political and ideological enemies.
He'll also find interesting ways to circumvent the Supreme Courts Heller decision. I'm betting it's gonna take a couple of court battles to get straightened out.
Yessirree, it's going to be a long 4 years under this administration.
My bet is, he'll find new and exciting ways to enforce the Patriot Act the previous administration could never dream about. I'll bet before too long, we'll look back at warrant-less wiretaps on international terrorist phone calls with nostalgia. I would also be willing to bet the NSA wiretapping fiasco that was part and parcel of Clinton's administration will be peanuts compared to what the Chosen One has in store for his political and ideological enemies.
He'll also find interesting ways to circumvent the Supreme Courts Heller decision. I'm betting it's gonna take a couple of court battles to get straightened out.
Yessirree, it's going to be a long 4 years under this administration.
Super Bowl XLIII Post Script
That was one hell of a game. Although they could have cut the preceding 56 minutes of game time out and went with the last 4. Arizona has nothing to complain about. Kurt Warner and his offense literally shredded the #1 ranked defense in the NFL. Richard Petty said it best. "All you can do is put yourself in a position to win and hope for the best." The Cardinals did just that. Unfortunately, their defense let them down.
As for the commercials, most were boring, to say the least. The best, in my opinion was the Pepsi Max commercial. Followed by the pair of Doritos commercials. Annheuser Busch came in a distant third with most of the Bud commercials a waste of good advertising money. The only bright spot there being the dog and Clydesdale each fetching a "stick".
Didn't much care for the half-time show, as I'm not much of a fan of the "Boss". What I did find telling was that he didn't play his (argueably) his most famous song, "Born In The USA". The wife found that awful telling. So did I initially, for that matter. That is until I remembered this man stumped for both John Kerry and The Chosen One. When taken in that context, it figures.
As for the commercials, most were boring, to say the least. The best, in my opinion was the Pepsi Max commercial. Followed by the pair of Doritos commercials. Annheuser Busch came in a distant third with most of the Bud commercials a waste of good advertising money. The only bright spot there being the dog and Clydesdale each fetching a "stick".
Didn't much care for the half-time show, as I'm not much of a fan of the "Boss". What I did find telling was that he didn't play his (argueably) his most famous song, "Born In The USA". The wife found that awful telling. So did I initially, for that matter. That is until I remembered this man stumped for both John Kerry and The Chosen One. When taken in that context, it figures.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Super Bowl XLIII
So here we are at Super Bowl XLIII. Pittsburgh vs Arizona. Who am I gonna pick? I hope the Cards pull it out. It's been, what 60 yrs since the then Chicago Cardinals were in a title game? It depends on which Arizona team shows up. The team that got their butts handed to them by Philly just before the end of the regular season, or the team that beat Philly in the playoffs.
I hope Arizona wins, I really do. But deep down, I think the Steelers are gonna win. Either way, it should be a good game. Lets just hope the commercials don't dissappoint. 'Cause if it's a blowout, that's the only thing that's gonna keep me watching.
I hope Arizona wins, I really do. But deep down, I think the Steelers are gonna win. Either way, it should be a good game. Lets just hope the commercials don't dissappoint. 'Cause if it's a blowout, that's the only thing that's gonna keep me watching.
Ruminations on AWB 2 and Other Nonsense
I've been 'into' semi-automatic weapons for as long as I could remember. I've always liked the looks of the sleek M-16s carried by the military when I was a kid. I mean what kid doesn't, right? When I joined the service, I actually got to shoot one. Wow, you know? A childhood dream come true. I also found the look of the AK alluring. It was the forbidden fruit, the 'preferred weapon of our enemy' as Clint Eastwood put it in "Heartbreak Ridge".
I'd always wanted one when I got out on my own, it was just that I never had the money, or a place to keep them, or they couldn't be found (or so I thought at the time). Then, in the winter of 2004, I found one. I had the money. I had a place to keep it. The stars, the sun, the moon, and the planets all lined up. That night, I came home from the gunstore with a Maadi MISR S/A. Not the greatest AK variant on the market, but it was an AK nonetheless. I couldn't believe I had one. I couldn't stop staring at it. I couldn't put it down.
Owning an AK is a lot of work. Not just the old elbow grease one puts into cleaning it, but research into the legalities surrounding possession of such a weapon. It didn't take me long to learn about the "Assault Weapons Ban" of 1994. Reading the text of the law, I couldn't believe the things that were illegal. You could have a pistol grip and a standard capacity magazine, but no bayonet lug. Or threaded muzzle. This was ridiculous. And I waited, with baited breath, for that fateful day in September when this ridiculous law would expire. Oh, there were attempts to reinstate it. But they failed. And on September 13 2004, it went the way of the Edsel. A waste of time and taxpayers money. From that day on, I haven't looked back.
Since that fateful day in 2004, I have purchased almost two dozen AK rifles of different chamberings. Sold a few, and have built a few. Since 2006, there have been two bills introduced in Congress that should put gunowners on edge. The first, H.R. 1022 would reinstate the 1994 ban, but with teeth. Not only would this bill ban the "assault weapons" listed in the old ban, but it would increase those weapons to include ones not covered originally. Standard hunting rifles such as the Browning BAR, Remington 7600, classic military rifles such as the M-1 Garand and M-1 carbine would fall under this new ban. Shotguns like the Benelli M-4, Remingtons 1100 and 1187 would all go away. It would also place in the hands of the Attorney General, the power to regulate which rifles, shotguns, and pistols would be affected and which ones wouldn't. Even use of one of these rifles, shotguns, or pistols in sporting competitions wouldn't exempt them from regulation.
The other bill that should scare all gunowners to their very core is H.R. 45. The Blair Holt Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009. The intent of this bill is to require owners of handguns and semi automatic rifles (regardless of whether they are "assault weapons" or not) that accept detachable magazines to register them with the government. This bill would require a passport photo, a thumbprint, passing a test deemed appropriate by the AG, and a fee to keep or acquire any pistol or semi-auto rifle. What this bill would do is create a registration database. Of all the things to come out this Congress so far, in my opinion, this is the most unAmerican one to date. And this includes what they have done with the so-called 'Stimulus Bill'; the largest single appropriations bill ever introduced in Congress.
I'd always wanted one when I got out on my own, it was just that I never had the money, or a place to keep them, or they couldn't be found (or so I thought at the time). Then, in the winter of 2004, I found one. I had the money. I had a place to keep it. The stars, the sun, the moon, and the planets all lined up. That night, I came home from the gunstore with a Maadi MISR S/A. Not the greatest AK variant on the market, but it was an AK nonetheless. I couldn't believe I had one. I couldn't stop staring at it. I couldn't put it down.
Owning an AK is a lot of work. Not just the old elbow grease one puts into cleaning it, but research into the legalities surrounding possession of such a weapon. It didn't take me long to learn about the "Assault Weapons Ban" of 1994. Reading the text of the law, I couldn't believe the things that were illegal. You could have a pistol grip and a standard capacity magazine, but no bayonet lug. Or threaded muzzle. This was ridiculous. And I waited, with baited breath, for that fateful day in September when this ridiculous law would expire. Oh, there were attempts to reinstate it. But they failed. And on September 13 2004, it went the way of the Edsel. A waste of time and taxpayers money. From that day on, I haven't looked back.
Since that fateful day in 2004, I have purchased almost two dozen AK rifles of different chamberings. Sold a few, and have built a few. Since 2006, there have been two bills introduced in Congress that should put gunowners on edge. The first, H.R. 1022 would reinstate the 1994 ban, but with teeth. Not only would this bill ban the "assault weapons" listed in the old ban, but it would increase those weapons to include ones not covered originally. Standard hunting rifles such as the Browning BAR, Remington 7600, classic military rifles such as the M-1 Garand and M-1 carbine would fall under this new ban. Shotguns like the Benelli M-4, Remingtons 1100 and 1187 would all go away. It would also place in the hands of the Attorney General, the power to regulate which rifles, shotguns, and pistols would be affected and which ones wouldn't. Even use of one of these rifles, shotguns, or pistols in sporting competitions wouldn't exempt them from regulation.
The other bill that should scare all gunowners to their very core is H.R. 45. The Blair Holt Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009. The intent of this bill is to require owners of handguns and semi automatic rifles (regardless of whether they are "assault weapons" or not) that accept detachable magazines to register them with the government. This bill would require a passport photo, a thumbprint, passing a test deemed appropriate by the AG, and a fee to keep or acquire any pistol or semi-auto rifle. What this bill would do is create a registration database. Of all the things to come out this Congress so far, in my opinion, this is the most unAmerican one to date. And this includes what they have done with the so-called 'Stimulus Bill'; the largest single appropriations bill ever introduced in Congress.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
