[Magog]

Legislative Schedule · House.gov

 

[campbell3per]

I dont see the rifle ban making it but I am nervous about the magazine ban.

 

[grumpy_old_man]

Legislative Schedule · House.gov

Hi Magog;

Here's the deal on that; legislation like this can start in either house, and McCarthy got hers in early. Feinstein has had a couple of delays - it was supposed to be out on Jan 3, along with McCarthy, but it looks like she re-tooled it because of the backlash to take out some things that were out and out deal-killers.

Since it was delayed, it is now in committee (and given the composition of the committee it WILL make it out of it) but will soon be out and on the calendar too.

FWIW I think the "no personal transfers" and "mag ban" are the most likely to pass, but I also think that if we write enough letters, make enough calls, etc. they will back off those too.

All the best,
Grumpy

 

[jimbojones39]

I am concerned as well. I bought five guns last year and it wasnt enough apparently.

My local Texas State representative Steve Toth has talked about introducing a "Firearms Protection Act" similar to the one introduced in the Wyoming legislature.

Breaking news: Texas lawmakers to introduce law threatening felony arrest of any feds who attempt to enforce Obama's gun control orders

"The Firearms Protection Act bill would make any federal law banning semi-automatic firearms or limiting the size of gun magazines unenforceable within the state's boundaries. Anyone trying to enforce a federal gun ban could face felony charges under the proposal," reads Steve Toth's website announcement.

So it may protect some rights but that doesnt mean gunmakers will make any guns on the banned list just to sell in states like Texas and Wyoming. I feel for all my fellow firearm aficionados living the Peoples Republic of Californiawith their AWB moving through the legislature (it will pass) and today, there is talk of a "bullet tax." As if ammo prices werent high enough already.

I have already contacted all of my Federal representatives in response to an email campaign Ruger made this month to get people involved.

I encourage everyone to do the same. Heres the link to the Ruger advocacy web page.

Ruger - Protect Your Rights

Regards

Jim

 

[grumpy_old_man]

Late Tuesday night, NRA sent out a warning that the Senate dems were planning a committee hearing that will launch Feinstein's ban, probably Weds. Since she removed the worst of the provisions for current owners, it is my opinion that it is far from dead at this point - the media put gunnies to sleep in New York so that they would be oblivious to an 11th hour attack.

Don't let it happen federally as well. We are vulnerable to a bum's rush, if we let the media lull us into complacency ("even Piers Morgan admits AWB has lost", etc). Write your Senators, asap. And don't forget to mention that you oppose all infringements on our 2A rights, not just Feinstein's Intolerable Act. The ban on personal transfers is sneaking through and should be stopped if at all possible, as should the mag ban.

All the best,
Grumpy

 

[RUT]

>>"no personal transfers"<<

Kind of makes you wonder how they'd even police this?

 

[grumpy_old_man]

>>"no personal transfers"<<

Kind of makes you wonder how they'd even police this?

At first, probably nothing, then whine a lot about all the people breaking the law. Next up, DROS ("Dealer Record Of Sale") like they have in Kali. Basically you have to go to a gun store, fill out the paper (4473), etc. And with the new electronic records on the transfer they're already most of the way to a national registration system.

That's why I really think we shouldn't budge one inch on this, no matter how "reasonable" it may sound on the surface.

All the best,
Grumpy
PS Anyway, the whole "instant check" idea is fundamentally flawed - if we know that there is someone too dangerous to possess a gun in society, lock him or her up. There are too many ways to hurt/kill others that have nothing to do with guns. Think I'm mistaken about that whole "too many ways for evil people to hurt us without guns" thing? look up "jellied gasoline" sometime.

 

[scottybaccus]

The larger concern, folks, is the risk of Dems painting the GOP as the bad guy in such a way that they lose control of the House in the 2014 mid-term elections. There are several issues at hand where this could be the case; immigration, tax hikes, efforts to reign in Obamacare, etc.
If the GOP loses the House in 2014, we are all screwed, far worse than any gun ban. I'm not Alex Jones, but I see potential for a crazy power grab in Obama's last two years; perhaps with gun confiscation, serious bans, maybe martial law scenarios in response to protests stemming from such legislation?
We might even see a genuine effort to lift term limits on the Office of President.
Watch for the left to paint consrvatives as bad guys at every turn.

 

[grumpy_old_man]

The larger concern, folks, is the risk of Dems painting the GOP as the bad guy in such a way that they lose control of the House in the 2014 mid-term elections. There are several issues at hand where this could be the case; immigration, tax hikes, efforts to reign in Obamacare, etc.
If the GOP loses the House in 2014, we are all screwed, far worse than any gun ban. I'm not Alex Jones, but I see potential for a crazy power grab in Obama's last two years; perhaps with gun confiscation, serious bans, maybe martial law scenarios in response to protests stemming from such legislation?
We might even see a genuine effort to lift term limits on the Office of President.
Watch for the left to paint consrvatives as bad guys at every turn.

Hi Scottybaccus;

Respectfully, I would disagree on the possibility of losing the House. Up until now there has been no unifying issue for conservatives, but the Dear Leader just gave us one. If the Senate allows anything really substantive to pass (magazine ban or AWB) the backlash will be at least as big as in '94, even though its 2 years away. Dems will lose the Senate, and the House will get shored up. Even if nothing passes, at this point there will be some level of backlash, and there will be some formerly progun democrats who regret giving in to "Sandy Hook hysteria" last December. We should gain ground in both House and Senate at this point, but not enough to retake the Senate completely if no AWB/mag ban passes. All of that assumes we can block "immigration reform" however.

The biggest risk IMHO is that the Republicans in the House will cave on immigration, giving 11 million new voters to the democrats. By definition, illegals came to this country breaking the laws of the Republic, from a disarmed country where the people have no "hands on" role in policing themselves. Why should we expect them to suddenly discover civic virtue and the role of the armed citizen/militia? They won't, and they'll oppose us, helping turn America further into Hellhole-istan. You really will need those "high cap" magazines then, as the economy finally does dissolve into a morass of large scale gang warfare in the inner cities. Even if you're out in the countryside, you'll want a good rifle with a decent mag cap, since there could well be raiding parties from the cities.

So, I hope the House Republicans can be "obstructionist" on everything that the Dear Leader wants. If the gun issue is the thing that puts some steel into their backbones, so be it.

Respectfully,
Grumpy

 

[Donnel]

they have never HAD any backbone, and never will have, either. if they did, we wouldn't HAVE 20 miilion illegals, to include the ones whose illegal moms dropped them here, and the wishy washy bs 'amnesties" that have been granted for decades now.

 

[Painfulitchingandswelling]

Dems are tired of losing elections over firearms. Look at where the legislation is coming from. No one in the red or barely blue states is sponsoring this stuff. Dems will never risk losing the Senate over this. Now some legislation will get through, but not on the scale Feinstein is calling for.

IMHO, the NRA has handled this poorly. They became the story. If they would have come out the day after Sandyhook and offered condolences to the families and just said, "Sure we will sit down and talk about gun regulation." and then let the nat'l focus shift, but instead they said nothing for a week and then came out all hyped up. That's when the NRA became the story. LaPierre is not helping our situation.

I remain optimistic. I personally am boycotting firearm and ammo buys until this stuff chills out.

 

[swansonk]

You may be right, my friend, but I'd say the NRA was going to be the story no matter what response they made. The anti-gun crowd and their media allies have thoroughly demonized the NRA as the combination perpetrator and symbol of the "gun violence culture."

 

[Painfulitchingandswelling]

Maybe so

You may be right, my friend, but I'd say the NRA was going to be the story no matter what response they made. The anti-gun crowd and their media allies have thoroughly demonized the NRA as the combination perpetrator and symbol of the "gun violence culture."

I am not satisfied at all with the way they handled the situation though. They played right into the hands of those who would criminalize firearm ownership. LaPierre sounded like the nut they were trying to portray him as.

This is not the same NRA I belonged to. That sponsored my rifle team when I was a teenager.

And I sincerely miss that NRA. We all change with age, but damn.