.

height=8

Quoted: height=8 Quoted: WHY IS THERE NO MENTION OF THIS BILL ON THE NRA WEBSITE? WTF IS GOING ON WITH THE NRA AND GOA????? The NRA is staffed by professionals. If they're not getting excited about this one it's probably because they know it's not going anywhere. You can be sure they're watching it though.

That's the exact same lackadaisical attitude that led to the passage of AWB 94.  

Quoted: It still has NO sponsors? That has to be a good thing, right? Maybe it won't make it out of committee despite that committee being far less friendly than the previous one. If something has no support, it seems kinda pointless to even pursue it.

The bill was introduced on February 13, 2007. So it has only been out there for a week as of today and three days of that week were government holidays. The last time this bill was introduced in the 109th Congress, it gathered 94 co-sponsors, including 14 current members of the House Judiciary Committee. I think chances are good that this bill will never leave the Committee; but we should make sure of that by writing our Reps if they are on the Committee.

Quoted: They try this every year, and it goes nowhere.

The critical difference is that every previous year they tried this, the House was controlled by the Republicans and the House Judiciary committee was stacked with pro-gun votes. Not to mention that even if the bill had managed to squeak out of committee, the Republican controlled Calendar committee would have scheduled the vote for the tenth Friday of the month.

This year there is a big difference. The Democrats control the House. John Conyers (a past co-sponsor of a virtually identical bill by McCarthy) is the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. The Democrats can have 3 pro-gun votes in Committee and STILL pass this legislation out of Committee without a single Republican going against us. I think we stand a real good chance of killing it in Committee again this year; but let's not get too cocky. This is a whole different ballgame from any previous attempt by McCarthy.

If your Congressman isn't on the Committee, it is probably too early to write them about it. If your Congressman is on the Committee, you can play a really big role in deciding whether we stop this dead in its tracks right now.

For those who want to know where we are at with this bill. Here is how this works:

1. Bill proposed to House committee. If the bill never leaves committee, we win. If it does leave then...
2. Bill goes to House Calendar committee to be scheduled for a vote. Maybe bill gets heard immediately, maybe it gets scheduled for the Friday before recess or not at all. If we lose here then...
3. Floor vote. The entire House votes on the bill. If we win, bill is dead for now. If we lose here then...
4. Bill goes to Senate. Senate can either adopt the bill as it was written in the House or do their own thing. Either way, we get another chance to kill it in the Senate Judiciary Committee (also Dem controlled and stacked with anti-gun votes). If we lose here then...
5. Senate cloture vote - this is the chance for pro-gun voters to filibuster the bill. If we lose here then...
6. Senate floor vote. Straight up vote and we either have the votes or we don't. If we lose here we get one more chance...
7. Beg the President to veto the bill. If we lose here, it becomes law.

So we have a long way to go before it gets serious; but the earlier we can kill it, the better our chances.

Quoted: I really fuckin hate Democrats. I mean it. I do. I wish those traitorous cocksuckers would leave. Split the country up. Whatever. I dont give a shit, I just want the goddamned Democrats OUT.

How grown up of you to say.  I will be sure to tell all of the pro-gun blue dog Democrats I know that you wish they'd drop dead.

Quoted: HIT THIS POLL!!!! www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1022.html

hit

Quoted: Quoted: I really fuckin hate Democrats. I mean it. I do. I wish those traitorous cocksuckers would leave. Split the country up. Whatever. I dont give a shit, I just want the goddamned Democrats OUT. How grown up of you to say.  I will be sure to tell all of the pro-gun blue dog Democrats I know that you wish they'd drop dead.

I'll tell them myself thank you.

There ARE no pro-gun blue Democrats. If your voting for a Democrat your ultimately voting against guns.

Not that alot of Republicans are any better mind you. But that doesnt change the fact I wish to shit we could just settle it once and for all and either get rid of the "pr gun socialists" or throw in the towel and let'm have their little socialist utopia country.

If we can do what we did about Jim Dumbo , then we can really do something about this and other things!

A big TAG and BUMP!

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: WHY IS THERE NO MENTION OF THIS BILL ON THE NRA WEBSITE? WTF IS GOING ON WITH THE NRA AND GOA????? The NRA is staffed by professionals. If they're not getting excited about this one it's probably because they know it's not going anywhere. You can be sure they're watching it though. That's the exact same lackadaisical attitude that led to the passage of AWB 94.

No. It's an attitude that reflects an understanding of the legislative process and professional lobbying. It is premature to get into a tizzy over this bill. This idiot introduces this bill every year. It goes no where. If somehow this year is different and this bill starts to get traction then that is the time for action. Until then, we just look like a bunch of boobs.

Write your congressmen? By all means, but don't make a big stink about this bill. Just tell your representative that you are a voter in their district and that the 2nd Amendment is important to you. Let them know that you expect them to support the right of honest law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. Tell them they should oppose ANY effort to renew a ban on military style weapons.

You should have been doing that already. I sure have. I also belong to the NRA and contribute to the ILA. Do you? If not, then maybe you should do something about that before accusing someone else of "lackadaisical attitude." (While you're at it, maybe you could pony up $24 to support this site.)

Again, NRA-ILA is staffed by professionals. You can bet they're aware of this bill but they're not going to "pull the trigger" before it's time.

Over 6000 members online as of this moment.  Lets get writing guys!  I did already and will keep writing.

I've sent letters to all of my elected state/federal reps. I joined GOA yesterday and have decided to renew my NRA membership tonight.

Everybody needs to get as motivated as they did to beat up Zumbo.

Get with it.....

BUMP for the after-dinner crew!

Bump fire.

Quoted: There ARE no pro-gun blue Democrats. If your voting for a Democrat your ultimately voting against guns.

Oh shit!  

I'll have to let a certain local state rep. that just because he thinks we should be able to shoot someone breaking into our vehicle doesn't mean he's pro gun.

Or my local US representative who has been fighting the good fight in D.C. for a long time and is a great ally to us all.

I'm in MN, our democrats are NOT your Pelosi/Clinton/Obama type.  Don't get too confused.

This needs to be on the front page.  More than that, it needs to be stickied, since the survival of this site depends on the defeat of this measure.

Here is where you go to fire off emails: www.house.gov/writerep/

Lets get these going folks.  The time to take a stand is now.  We must not rest on our laurels.  I will not look back as an old man and have to admit that I allowed this to happen to my children and their children.

Here is my sample letter (taken from page one and tweaked for spelling and wording):

Greetings Sir.  The House Committee on the Judiciary is currently considering H.R. 1022, to re-authorize the federal "Assault Weapons Ban".

As a Missourian, health care professional, USAF veteran, and law abiding owner of an AR-15 rifle, I find this legislation condescending and unnecessary.

I fully support efforts to reduce crime in America through improving social conditions and re-educating offenders, but believe this legislation would prove ineffective and would alienate law-abiding citizens.

I would greatly appreciate any effort you could make to encourage your peers on the Judiciary Committee to oppose this unneeded legislation, and to block it should it leave committee.

Thank you for your representation.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: WHY IS THERE NO MENTION OF THIS BILL ON THE NRA WEBSITE? WTF IS GOING ON WITH THE NRA AND GOA????? The NRA is staffed by professionals. If they're not getting excited about this one it's probably because they know it's not going anywhere. You can be sure they're watching it though. That's the exact same lackadaisical attitude that led to the passage of AWB 94.   No. It's an attitude that reflects an understanding of the legislative process and professional lobbying. It is premature to get into a tizzy over this bill. This idiot introduces this bill every year. It goes no where. If somehow this year is different and this bill starts to get traction then that is the time for action. Until then, we just look like a bunch of boobs. Write your congressmen? By all means, but don't make a big stink about this bill. Just tell your representative that you are a voter in their district and that the 2nd Amendment is important to you. Let them know that you expect them to support the right of honest law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. Tell them they should oppose ANY effort to renew a ban on military style weapons. You should have been doing that already. I sure have. I also belong to the NRA and contribute to the ILA. Do you? If not, then maybe you should do something about that before accusing someone else of "lackadaisical attitude." (While you're at it, maybe you could pony up $24 to support this site.) Again, NRA-ILA is staffed by professionals. You can bet they're aware of this bill but they're not going to "pull the trigger" before it's time.

Hehe, I respectfully disagree with you in this case, but I would have to call that pretty major ownage.

This isn't you run of the mill Kook legislation that is dead on arrival out of committee.  It has fairly broad support, and the sitting Republican President would most likely sign it into law.  Better to hit them early and often to let them know what we think.

As for everything else you said, right on!

Quoted: WHY IS THERE NO MENTION OF THIS BILL ON THE NRA WEBSITE? WTF IS GOING ON WITH THE NRA AND GOA?????

it's on GOA website...Here

fred

Quoted: This isn't you run of the mill Kook legislation that is dead on arrival out of committee.  It has fairly broad support, and the sitting Republican President would most likely sign it into law. . .

Why do you think this has broad support? Who are the co-sponsors? What evidence do you have that the Speaker is going to push this for passage? This thing has NO traction. NONE!

If and when it does, that is the time to act. Until then we look like a bunch of first time hunter firing into the bushes because their might be deer there.

Quoted: Why do you think this has broad support?

Broad support may be overstating it; but it certainly has a much better chance than it ever has before. It doesn't cost us anything to send a letter to a Committee member now and make sure that it never gets broad support.

Who are the co-sponsors?

So far there are none; but the bill is now eight days old (with three of those days being a government holiday, meaning that for about five of those days nobody has even looked at the bill). However, in 2005, 94 people co-sponsored identical legislation (H.R. 1312 in the 109th Congress). 14 of those people are on this Committee and it only takes 20 votes to move it out of Committee. McCarthy can get those six extra votes without a single Republican helping AND with multiple Democrats opposing her.

What evidence do you have that the Speaker is going to push this for passage?

Nancy Pelosi? Are you seriously suggesting that Nancy Pelosi would not support this bill? There is only one reason Pelosi would avoid supporting this bill and that is if she believes it will cost her House seats in the next election. One good way to make sure she believes it will cost her House seats in the next election is to write your elected representatives.

This thing has NO traction. NONE!

That's like saying that a drag racer sitting at the tree hasn't moved so it will obviously lose the race. The bill is barely a week old now and was introduced prior to a 3-day holiday. Much like the drag racer, it can pick up speed real fast.

If and when it does, that is the time to act. Until then we look like a bunch of first time hunter firing into the bushes because their might be deer there.

I'd agree that it is probably too early to contact your Representatives if they are not on the House Judiciary Committee. However, if the worst that happens is that we look a little over-eager to kill this legislation, I'd much rather look over-eager than be standing there wondering how they managed to get that legislation through the House so quickly.

Look at the 1986 FOPA for an example, it had been introduced every year for the preceding seven years and died in committee every time. With a combination of skillful politics and a discharge petition, Harold Volkmer managed to force it out of Committee despite a Democrat-controlled House in about five months (more like four since one month was the holiday recess). The Democrats in an attempt to derail the bill tried to introduce and report their own version of it out. They went from introduction (March 6) to final report (March 14) in eight days. If Volkmer's discharge petition had not succeeded on March 13, we would have lost for an eighth year in a row. Five months vs. 8 days - that is the kind of difference control of the Judiciary Committee can make. This is why it is a mistake to judge this bill's prospects based on how it did in the past. It is going nowhere right now; but that can change very quickly with the new Committee.

Start calling and emailing your Representative and Senators on HR 1022.  Rattle their cages.  Let them know we are out here, watching and more important voting!

Ive emailed my senators, i would suggest anyone else do the same.

BIG BUMP.

Quoted: Ive emailed my senators, i would suggest anyone else do the same.

Same

Quoted: does GOA really suck that bad?  I have no idea, but I like the alerts they send me.

No it does not!  They are our only hope if we are to retain and win back any rights.  I am not sure why the statement was made above.  

TPD

Quoted: What evidence do you have that the Speaker is going to push this for passage? Nancy Pelosi? Are you seriously suggesting that Nancy Pelosi would not support this bill? There is only one reason Pelosi would avoid supporting this bill and that is if she believes it will cost her House seats in the next election. One good way to make sure she believes it will cost her House seats in the next election is to write your elected representatives.

No, I'm sure Nancy Pelosi would love to see this pig fly. But I also know she's a smart politician and she understands that politics is the art of the possible. The Democrats lost their majority in Congress because of the assualt weapons ban. They regained it by putting forward a slate of candidates that appeared to be more moderate. In fact, many of the Democrats in 2006 claimed to be pro gun. I don't believe for a second that they're on our side but I do believe that they know that they mess with gun owners at their own peril. I'm quite confident that Nancy Pelosi is enjoying her newly acquired position and is in no hurry to give it up. She knows what's happened since they lost power the last time. She's seen the rise of CCW legislation, castle doctrines and the like. Until she sees a big shift in the political winds she's not going to stick her party's collective neck out by trying to get an assualt weapons bill passed.

Oh yeah, I have written my reps. I write them regularly. In my recent letters I didn't make a big stink about this particular bill. I just remind them that I expect them to support the 2nd amendment and oppose ANY effort to infringe on our liberties.

Hello Brian,

I would like to start by saying that I am very pleased with the accomplishments you've made in your short tenure in Congress.  I believe you have done more for the Western New York region than any elected official in recent memory.  Suffice it to say you've greatly exceeded my (somewhat cynical) expectations.  I am proud to have recently moved into the 27th district, where I can be well represented.

This being said, it has come to my attention there is a bill that has recently been introduced to the house that I find deeply disturbing on many levels.  I am referring to HR 1022 IH which was introduced on February 13, 2007 by Mrs. McCarthy.

First and foremost it is a blatant attack on the rights of every American citizen.  I believe, along with the founding fathers of this country, that the Second Amendment is every bit as important as the only amendment that comes before it.  I am sure you are versed in the federalist papers so I will not stay on this point for long.

Second, passing this bill is telling the American people that you, as a representative of the Federal government, do not trust its citizens.  Possession of a harmless item should not be a crime.  Yes, as a law abiding citizen of this country, an assault weapon would never harm even a housefly.  This goes for the vast, VAST majority of ALL legal firearm owners.

This bill is masked as a crime deterrance bill when it in fact makes criminals out of law abiding citizens.  An effective crime bill would enact or increase mandatory minimum sentancing for the people who commit crimes with firearms.  Put this vast minority of people who commit crimes away and crime goes away.

I could go on but I am sure you see my point.  I know that you will more than likely straying from your party if you vote against this bill, but I believe you have the integrity to make the right choice.  Let us stop voting for what amounts to the "better" newsmedia soundbite and start voting towards the heart of the issue.

Thank you for your time.

I hate when I notice errors after I already sent the email

Quoted: Quoted: After the November election, I told you that this bill was coming, who would submit it and which committee it would be referred to. Y'all said I was an alarmist and that the dems wouldn't try again. I told you that this bill would make it out of the committee. Y'all said I was making shit up and that there weren't enough votes. Well, now it's obvious that there are enough votes to send this to the floor for a vote. ' Write your reps on the committee if you feel the need, but I'm telling you that the ship has sailed on that. This bill is going to make it out of the Judiciary Committee. What you need to do is start writing your congressman now, regardless of whether or not they are on this committee. Educate them about the bill and tell then that you want them to vehemately oppose this bill. This is especially important for those of you have these new "pro-gun" democrats in congress. Also, a bill in the House is useless without a bill in the Senate to match. Watch for it!!! We all knew it was coming Nostradamus

IIRC Motown was told by multiple people it would happen and he shouldn't lose sleep over it.

Just sent a letter to Rep. David Dreier (R).

This damn thing is worse than the AWB we have in CA

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I really fuckin hate Democrats. I mean it. I do. I wish those traitorous cocksuckers would leave. Split the country up. Whatever. I dont give a shit, I just want the goddamned Democrats OUT. These fucksticks are going to start a civil war. If they do I hope they suffer before they die. And thats really the crutch of it. No, they wont. Did anyone pick up arms and march on the politico's in 94? Do you expect any different outcome this time around if a ban does pass?

No...

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I really fuckin hate Democrats. I mean it. I do. I wish those traitorous cocksuckers would leave. Split the country up. Whatever. I dont give a shit, I just want the goddamned Democrats OUT. These fucksticks are going to start a civil war. If they do I hope they suffer before they die. And thats really the crutch of it. No, they wont. Did anyone pick up arms and march on the politico's in 94? Do you expect any different outcome this time around if a ban does pass? No...

Now lets ask the important question.

Should we do anything beyond "put up a good fight"? When, and I do mean when, our letter writing and hand wringing fails should we just clap ourselves on the back and say "Well, we gave'm a good run" and walk into obscurity, or should we really pick up arms to try to change things?

OK, let's look at just the facts:

14 House Judiciary Committee members (including the Chairman) co-sponsored this exact same legislation in the last session of Congress.

Davis of AL is on record supporting the AWB (newspaper statements quoted in this thread), Wasserman-Schulz proposed a state AWB in FL, and Dan Lungren's role in the California AWB is pretty well known. That makes 17 votes out of 20 needed.

So how come there are zero co-sponsors?

In the 109th Congress, McCarthy introduced this same legislation (H.R. 1312) on March 15, 2005. She didn't have a single, solitary co-sponsor until April 14, 2005. She eventually ended up with 94 co-sponsors. Her original attempt in 2003 gathered 111 co-sponsors.

Yes; but that isn't enough votes to get it out of the House

In the 103rd Congress in 1994, Chuck Schumer (then a Rep. from NY) introduced H.R. 4296 - an AWB. He received only 61 co-sponsors; but when it went to a floor vote, the bill passed 216-214.

Look, I would love to be proven wrong and this bill goes nowhere; but let's play it on the safe side and do everything we can to make sure it goes nowhere.

Do NOT accept "grandfathering".  That is a ploy to get present owners to "go with the flow" and not oppose the bill.  It lets you keep your present guns, but it strips your children and grandchildren from having the same rights you now enjoy.

It also makes the gun grabbers consider that they will have to go door to door to collect these guns.

Finally, DO NOT REGISTER.

Quoted: Do NOT accept "grandfathering".  That is a ploy to get present owners to "go with the flow" and not oppose the bill.  It lets you keep your present guns, but it strips your children and grandchildren from having the same rights you now enjoy. It also makes the gun grabbers consider that they will have to go door to door to collect these guns. Finally, DO NOT REGISTER.

And you won't be able to leave (will) your "bad" guns to anybody...when you die, they die too..

durn Libtards are just losing it already...

Well, NRA-ILA finally got on the ball...

NRA-ILA Grassroots Alert Vol. 14, No. 8 02/23/07

States with updates this issue: Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming.


THE MOST SWEEPING GUN BAN EVER INTRODUCED IN CONGRESS;
McCarthy Bill Bans Millions More Guns Than The Clinton Gun Ban

On Feb. 14, 2007, Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) introduced H.R. 1022, a bill with the stated purpose, "to reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes."

McCarthy's verbiage warrants explanation. Presumably, what she means by "assault weapons ban" is the Clinton Gun Ban of 1994. Congress allowed the ban to expire in 2004 for multiple reasons, including the fact that federal, state and local law enforcement agency studies showed that guns affected by the ban had been used in only a small percentage of crime, before and after the ban was imposed.

With the nation's murder rate 43% lower than in 1991, and the re-legalized guns still used in only a small percentage of crime, reauthorizing the Clinton Gun Ban would be objectionable enough. But McCarthy's "other purposes" would make matters even worse. H.R. 1022 would ban every gun banned by the Clinton ban, plus millions more guns, including:

. Every gun made to comply with the Clinton ban. (The Clinton ban dictated the kinds of grips, stocks and attachments new guns could have. Manufacturers modified new guns to the Clinton requirements. H.R. 1022 would ban the modified guns too.)

. Guns exempted by the Clinton ban. (Ruger Mini-14s and -30s and Ranch Rifles; .30 cal. carbines; and fixed-magazine, semi-automatic, center-fire rifles that hold more than 10 rounds.)

. All semi-automatic shotguns. (E.g., Remington, Winchester, Beretta and Benelli, used for hunting, sport shooting, and self-defense. H.R. 1022 would ban them because they have "any characteristic that can function as a grip," and would also ban their main component, called the "receiver.")

. All detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles-including, for example, the ubiquitous Ruger 10/22 .22 rimfire-because they have "any characteristic that can function as a grip."

. Target shooting rifles. (E.g., the three centerfire rifles most popular for marksmanship competitions: the Colt AR-15, the Springfield M1A and the M1 "Garand.")

. Any semi-automatic shotgun or rifle an Attorney General one day claims isn't "sporting," even though the constitutions of the U.S. and 44 states, and the laws of all 50 states, recognize the right to use guns for defense.

. 65 named guns (the Clinton law banned 19 by name); semi-auto fixed-magazine pistols of over 10 rounds capacity; and frames, receivers and parts used to repair or refurbish guns.

H.R. 1022 would also ban the importation of magazines exempted by the Clinton ban, ban the sale of a legally-owned "assault weapon" with a magazine of over 10 rounds capacity, and begin backdoor registration of guns, by requiring private sales of banned guns, frames, receivers and parts to be conducted through licensed dealers. Finally, whereas the Clinton Gun Ban was imposed for a 10-year trial period, H.R. 1022 would be a permanent ban.

Please be sure to contact your U.S. Representative and urge him or her to oppose
H.R. 1022!

You can call your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121.

tag

yeah, but we sure showed them Republicans.

fred

"I am worried about house bill 1022. As your constituent, I am writing you regarding HR 1022, currently being phased through committee. As an avid gun enthusiast, target shooter, law student at Western Washington University, I find this bill offensive. It effects legal firearm owners quite profoundly. I am for a stoppage of violent crime, but this is not the way. There are other issues that must be tackled in the United States that will aid more in that arena than HR 1022.  

Please consider those who do not commit violent crimes when you look at this bill. Legal firearm owners are law abiding citizens and deserve not to be punished for the actions of those who are not."

its not exactly a blank one, but I sent that to my congressman

My letter. Let me know what you think

Dear Mr Walz,

I am contacting you to urge you to oppose HR 1022, which would reauthorize the assault weapons ban and is currently referred to the House Judiciary Committee. This bill does not only reauthorize the 1994 gun ban but also bans virtually every semiautomatic firearm ever made. This includes semi-auto shotguns that are used by trap and skeet shooting and countless hunters, but also classic historical firearms including the M1 carbine, and the M1 Garand which are more then just firearms, but pieces of history to many Americans. Aside from the immediate effects of the bill it would destroy an entire American industry overnight, putting thousands of Americans out of work. This bill effects Hunters, target and recreational shooters, historical reenactors as well as many hard working Americans who find themselves unemployed  if this bill were to pass. As one of your constituents, I strongly urge you to oppose HR 1022 and fight for the rights of millions of Americans.

Team,
Of course all of you remember the way you responded to the remarks left by Jim Zumbo.

Well, I really hope that all of you attack this cancer with a zeal that makes that look childs play.

This bill was introduced because the Libs feel that it will pass. They believe that you're a bunch of pussified wimpy gun happy couch potatoes who will sit back and take anything that's shoved up your a** without so much as a whimper.

Can you say "squeal like a pig".

Not a single one of you should sit back and allow the other guy to take action - we should all bombard our government represenatives with our steadfast opposition to this trash legislation. You should cover my back - I'll cover yours...count on it.

Aren't you a little tired of being treated like you're an incompetent, mindless slug? If you haven't already done so, stand up and act like a man and let your voice be heard.

Right now join the JFPO, GOA, NRA or all three.

ETA: Yeah, I'm ticked off

Quoted: Hon. John Conyers, Jr. (D) Michigan, 14th F-

Lucky me, he's my congressman

I sent him a letter anyway, and forwarded the info on to my friends to do the same.

I'm in Taiwan right now but when I get back to Texas on Tuesday I'm going to join the NRA/GOA and start writing!

I sent my rep an email asking her NOT to support the assault weapon ban renewal and this is what I got in return.


Dear Mr. Smith:



Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control. I appreciate hearing from you on this important matter.



Without question, guns present a clear and present danger to our nation's children. According to the Children's Defense Fund, gunfire in America takes the lives of nearly 13 children each day, as firearms are the second-leading cause of death for young people 19 and under. Even more alarming, the rate of firearm death of children under 14 is nearly 12 times higher in the U.S. than in 25 other industrialized countries combined.



I believe there is a need for further legislation pertaining to firearms. Groups such as the National Rifle Association would have you believe that gun control legislation is ultimately not enforceable and ineffective. Such a statement is simply untrue. In fact, the Brady Bill has blocked the sale of more than 400,000 illegal firearms. Additionally, gun manufacturers must take responsibility when they are found to be negligent.



I am a firm believer in gun safety and gun control and have been a staunch advocate for stricter gun control throughout my career. I will remain supportive of gun safety and gun control laws. It is my hope that Congress will pass meaningful gun control legislation in the upcoming year. Our children's lives are at stake.



Please know I will keep your concerns in mind and continue to keep you updated on this and other pressing issues of the 110th Congress. Thank you for contacting my office, and please do not hesitate to do so again regarding this or any other matter. I also invite you to visit my Web site at <a href="http://www.house.gov/schultz">www.house.gov/schultz</a> for additional information and legislative issue updates.



Sincerely,





Debbie Wasserman Schultz

Member of Congress

DWS\sr

sent my emails and donated to the NRA-IRA

Quoted: I sent my rep an email asking her NOT to support the assault weapon ban renewal and this is what I got in return. Dear Mr. Smith: Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control. I appreciate hearing from you on this important matter. Without question, guns present a clear and present danger to our nation's children. According to the Children's Defense Fund, gunfire in America takes the lives of nearly 13 children each day, as firearms are the second-leading cause of death for young people 19 and under. Even more alarming, the rate of firearm death of children under 14 is nearly 12 times higher in the U.S. than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. I believe there is a need for further legislation pertaining to firearms. Groups such as the National Rifle Association would have you believe that gun control legislation is ultimately not enforceable and ineffective. Such a statement is simply untrue. In fact, the Brady Bill has blocked the sale of more than 400,000 illegal firearms. Additionally, gun manufacturers must take responsibility when they are found to be negligent. I am a firm believer in gun safety and gun control and have been a staunch advocate for stricter gun control throughout my career. I will remain supportive of gun safety and gun control laws. It is my hope that Congress will pass meaningful gun control legislation in the upcoming year. Our children's lives are at stake. Please know I will keep your concerns in mind and continue to keep you updated on this and other pressing issues of the 110th Congress. Thank you for contacting my office, and please do not hesitate to do so again regarding this or any other matter. I also invite you to visit my Web site at <a href="http://www.house.gov/schultz">www.house.gov/schultz</a> for additional information and legislative issue updates. Sincerely, Debbie Wasserman Schultz Member of Congress DWS\sr

What is her e-mail address?

Quoted: Quoted: I sent my rep an email asking her NOT to support the assault weapon ban renewal and this is what I got in return. Dear Mr. Smith: Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control. I appreciate hearing from you on this important matter. Without question, guns present a clear and present danger to our nation's children. According to the Children's Defense Fund, gunfire in America takes the lives of nearly 13 children each day, as firearms are the second-leading cause of death for young people 19 and under. Even more alarming, the rate of firearm death of children under 14 is nearly 12 times higher in the U.S. than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. I believe there is a need for further legislation pertaining to firearms. Groups such as the National Rifle Association would have you believe that gun control legislation is ultimately not enforceable and ineffective. Such a statement is simply untrue. In fact, the Brady Bill has blocked the sale of more than 400,000 illegal firearms. Additionally, gun manufacturers must take responsibility when they are found to be negligent. I am a firm believer in gun safety and gun control and have been a staunch advocate for stricter gun control throughout my career. I will remain supportive of gun safety and gun control laws. It is my hope that Congress will pass meaningful gun control legislation in the upcoming year. Our children's lives are at stake. Please know I will keep your concerns in mind and continue to keep you updated on this and other pressing issues of the 110th Congress. Thank you for contacting my office, and please do not hesitate to do so again regarding this or any other matter. I also invite you to visit my Web site at <a href="http://www.house.gov/schultz">www.house.gov/schultz</a> for additional information and legislative issue updates. Sincerely, Debbie Wasserman Schultz Member of Congress DWS\sr What is her e-mail address?

Durn she needs to hear about Jews for the Preservation of Firearms

(sounds like a jewish maiden name)

fred

Quoted: Quoted: I sent my rep an email asking her NOT to support the assault weapon ban renewal and this is what I got in return. Dear Mr. Smith: Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control. I appreciate hearing from you on this important matter. Without question, guns present a clear and present danger to our nation's children. According to the Children's Defense Fund, gunfire in America takes the lives of nearly 13 children each day, as firearms are the second-leading cause of death for young people 19 and under. Even more alarming, the rate of firearm death of children under 14 is nearly 12 times higher in the U.S. than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. I believe there is a need for further legislation pertaining to firearms. Groups such as the National Rifle Association would have you believe that gun control legislation is ultimately not enforceable and ineffective. Such a statement is simply untrue. In fact, the Brady Bill has blocked the sale of more than 400,000 illegal firearms. Additionally, gun manufacturers must take responsibility when they are found to be negligent. I am a firm believer in gun safety and gun control and have been a staunch advocate for stricter gun control throughout my career. I will remain supportive of gun safety and gun control laws. It is my hope that Congress will pass meaningful gun control legislation in the upcoming year. Our children's lives are at stake. Please know I will keep your concerns in mind and continue to keep you updated on this and other pressing issues of the 110th Congress. Thank you for contacting my office, and please do not hesitate to do so again regarding this or any other matter. I also invite you to visit my Web site at <a href="http://www.house.gov/schultz">www.house.gov/schultz</a> for additional information and legislative issue updates. Sincerely, Debbie Wasserman Schultz Member of Congress DWS\sr What is her e-mail address?

[email protected]

Quoted: I sent my rep an email asking her NOT to support the assault weapon ban renewal and this is what I got in return. Dear Mr. Smith: Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control. I appreciate hearing from you on this important matter. Without question, guns present a clear and present danger to our nation's children. According to the Children's Defense Fund, gunfire in America takes the lives of nearly 13 children each day, as firearms are the second-leading cause of death for young people 19 and under. Even more alarming, the rate of firearm death of children under 14 is nearly 12 times higher in the U.S. than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. I believe there is a need for further legislation pertaining to firearms. Groups such as the National Rifle Association would have you believe that gun control legislation is ultimately not enforceable and ineffective. Such a statement is simply untrue. In fact, the Brady Bill has blocked the sale of more than 400,000 illegal firearms. Additionally, gun manufacturers must take responsibility when they are found to be negligent. I am a firm believer in gun safety and gun control and have been a staunch advocate for stricter gun control throughout my career. I will remain supportive of gun safety and gun control laws. It is my hope that Congress will pass meaningful gun control legislation in the upcoming year. Our children's lives are at stake. Please know I will keep your concerns in mind and continue to keep you updated on this and other pressing issues of the 110th Congress. Thank you for contacting my office, and please do not hesitate to do so again regarding this or any other matter. I also invite you to visit my Web site at <a href="http://www.house.gov/schultz">www.house.gov/schultz</a> for additional information and legislative issue updates. Sincerely, Debbie Wasserman Schultz Member of Congress DWS\sr

"Such a statement is simply untrue. In fact, the Brady Bill has blocked the sale of more than 400,000 illegal firearms"???????????  If they were illegal firearms, the Brady bunch would have never known anything about it.

If she meant 400,000 denials, that means that those 400,000 lied on the 4473.  The reason I say they lied is that if any of the answers were disqualifying answers, the FFL would have never called it in.

How many of those 400,000 were prosecuted?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears that this bill will allow future "AW's" to be transferable as per:

SEC. 6. REQUIRING BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR THE TRANSFER OF LAWFULLY POSSESSED SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS. Section 922(v) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following: `(5) It shall be unlawful for any person to transfer a semiautomatic assault weapon to which paragraph (1) does not apply, except through-- `(A) a licensed dealer, and for purposes of subsection (t) in the case of such a transfer, the weapon shall be considered to be transferred from the business inventory of the licensed dealer and the dealer shall be considered to be the transferor; or `(B) a State or local law enforcement agency if the transfer is made in accordance with the procedures provided for in subsection (t) of this section and section 923(g). `(6) The Attorney General shall establish and maintain, in a timely manner, a record of the make, model, and date of manufacture of any semiautomatic assault weapon which the Attorney General is made aware has been used in relation to a crime under Federal or State law, and the nature and circumstances of the crime involved, including the outcome of relevant criminal investigations and proceedings. The Attorney General shall annually submit the record to the Congress and make the record available to the general public.'.

To me, this brings up a situation like the '86 MG ban. Imagine the value of an AR in a decade.

I see this as something to be invested in.