PDA

View Full Version : NRA H.R.1022 Alert


whitetiger7654
02-19-2007, 05:11 PM
With this recent Zumbo incident most if not all gun owners are strongly united. We need to seize the day and stop a future AWB. The government is trying to pass this new ban by piggy backing it in with a bill to research near earth objects. The time is now write your government leaders and make them stop this. The bill is H.R.1022. I urge you to research this yourself then start mailing letters. I also urge you to spread the word post this on all gun forums you are a member of. Don't forget to inform your friends and family as well.

Here are a few links with information:
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=6408&sequence=0
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1022
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1022

btown02
02-19-2007, 05:12 PM
Wrong forum. I'll move it to the proper place.

whitetiger7654
02-19-2007, 06:19 PM
I just received this in my NSSF email. Fight now or suffer later.

CONNECTICUT EYES ONE GUN A MONTH . . . Following a public hearing held last week, proposed legislation that would ban law-abiding citizens from purchasing more than one handgun a month has been set for a final committee vote on March 8. If passed out of the Public Safety Committee, the bill, sponsored by Sens. Martin Looney (D-11) and Toni Harp (D-10), would be sent for a vote on the Senate floor. Please contact your legislators immediately and respectfully urge them to oppose SB 938.

Ginnunggap
02-19-2007, 07:52 PM
E-mails and letters out to my rep and senators regarding H.R. 1022. :SS

Megatron
02-19-2007, 07:56 PM
I've already contacted my rep and senators about H.R. 1022.

jmz5
02-19-2007, 07:59 PM
Same here.

Ginnunggap
02-19-2007, 08:09 PM
Isn't it ironic, by the way, that HR1022 has the same number as the most popular .22 rifle on the market? Bitter irony, no? :rolleyes:

GV00
02-21-2007, 04:46 AM
There REALLY needs to be some reform on this whole 'piggybacking' business.

Please, someone tell me what firearm control has to do with NEO's. Bonus points if you connect it to Kevin Bacon within six degrees.

Sniperjoe
02-23-2007, 08:35 PM
I receved an email from the NRA which is posted below



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.



what the hell is that!!!, are they realy serious about this, if this thing gets passed i dont know what ill do , and this ones a perminate ban also, which means that it cant be changed back. This will end almost all gun ownership throught the US. Anyone who knows what we can do, or just wants to post their thoughts is more then welcome

Sniperjoe
02-23-2007, 09:51 PM
i doubt the bill will be passed being that it not only bans Assault rifles but all detachable mag rifles and semi auto shotguns but with this whole democratic takeover anythings possible, thus i am extreamly worried about this

p99guy
02-25-2007, 12:21 AM
NRA is now awake :)




NRA Email Alert~

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.

btown02
02-25-2007, 06:52 AM
A day late again. :) The three threads about this are now one. :D

FNPfan
02-25-2007, 11:59 PM
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/409898348?ltl=1172465871

Spread the word if you think this is a good site. :)

kbi
02-26-2007, 12:09 AM
I just signed the petition and let's get more people invloved please . Get your friend's and anybody else you can think of that belive's in the costitution .

Signed #592



C mon people hop to it .

wetwrks
02-26-2007, 12:10 AM
I hope it will accomplish some good. I signed.

Megatron
02-26-2007, 12:24 AM
The word's been spread!

jmz5
02-26-2007, 12:30 AM
I merged the fourth one into this one as well. :)

Ginnunggap
02-26-2007, 01:51 AM
Signed it, #734. Sent e-mails to several friends and posted on my lj.

Medula Oblongata
02-26-2007, 02:34 AM
#807...

We need MORE signatures...

BTW, who else saw that this site was hosted by the ACLU??

FNPfan
02-26-2007, 03:06 AM
#807...

We need MORE signatures...

BTW, who else saw that this site was hosted by the ACLU??

I didn't notice it.

One person didn't like the way the Petition was worded. I don't have a problem with it though, and I hope no one here has a problem with how it is worded either. I did not create the petition. Some one posted a link to it on XD Talk.

I hope they get their 1,000,000 signatures. That's quite a goal. Hope they reach it. Better yet, hope they exceed it.

btown02
02-26-2007, 06:35 AM
I merged the fourth one into this one as well. :)
No one bothers to check. :)

Ginnunggap
02-26-2007, 08:05 AM
I noticed it was an ACLU site and enjoyed the irony. They seem to appreciate all civil liberties, real and imagined, except for 2A rights--why not use their own mechanisms to support us when they'd just as soon see us rot:)

jmz5
02-26-2007, 08:54 AM
#1,107

Megatron
02-26-2007, 09:10 PM
Right now, there's 4,502 signatures at this time.

panzermk2
02-27-2007, 11:55 PM
A day late again. :) The three threads about this are now one. :D


yep I signed after following a link from 10mm talk, then I came here and thought it would be good to post it here. The I used this thing called search and realized starting a thread about it would result in it be deleted as a multipul posting

jmz5
02-28-2007, 12:01 AM
9,419 signatures as of now, not bad since it more than doubled from yesterday.

Megatron
02-28-2007, 10:19 AM
10,235 signatures as of now.

Keep those signatures coming!

susan28
02-28-2007, 09:42 PM
i contacted Rep Ron Klein about it today and told him i and others will be following his votes on this, we'll see what he says.

susan28
02-28-2007, 11:38 PM
it was just over 12k when i signed. note that although i'm a registered Dem i will not vote for any anti-gun candidates, ever, and i *do* do my research. i'm a Libertarian but register Dem so i can vote in their primaries, and will vote Libertarian whenever we have a candidate fielded, and when i do it shows up as a registered Dem voting Libertarian, in the hopes of showing the Democratic party that some of their members hold Libertarian values.

my petition comment:

Card-carrying liberal, registered Democrat, and believe that the lives of civilians are every bit as precious as the lives of our heroic police and soldiers and warrant equal protection. the latter use the weapons they do because their lives depend on them; that law-abiding citizens should be robbed of that same protection is not just unfair, it's criminal, and the notion that we're held in such contempt by those who represent us undermines the whole Democratic process. please don't let our party's proud civil rights heritage be tarnished by these extremists.

Sniperjoe
03-08-2007, 02:53 PM
I was checking out this website for the progress of the new communist anti gun bill and while i was reading the comments i saw this




Mark
This Bill just gained 12 Co-Sponsors yesterday! Go call them and tell them and inform them of their rape of the Constitution.

Rep Ackerman, Gary L. [NY-5] - 3/7/2007
Rep Crowley, Joseph [NY-7] - 3/7/2007
Rep Fattah, Chaka [PA-2] - 3/7/2007
Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51] - 3/7/2007
Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] - 3/7/2007
Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] - 3/7/2007
Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. [NY-14] - 3/7/2007
Rep Meehan, Martin T. [MA-5] - 3/7/2007
Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 3/7/2007
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] - 3/7/2007
Rep Schiff, Adam B. [CA-29] - 3/7/2007
Rep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8] - 3/7/2007



here is the websites link

http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_HR_1022.html

btown02
03-08-2007, 02:57 PM
Sniper, there is no need to start a new thread everytime you have an update. Just add it to the sticky thread about it that's already there. Thanks.

FNPfan
04-11-2007, 10:24 PM
Is it dead? What's going on?

Megatron
04-13-2007, 11:38 PM
Most likely, it's still in committee.

FNPfan
04-14-2007, 04:26 AM
Most likely dead, or most likely in committee which means it will be dead?

Ginnunggap
04-14-2007, 11:13 AM
It's been sitting in committee for a while and it hasn't gotten much press and no one is mentioning it... that tends to mean it's been pidgeon-holed. We're fairly safe for the moment. :flag:

FNPfan
04-14-2007, 01:13 PM
Well that's good news. :)

Megatron
04-14-2007, 06:38 PM
It's been sitting in committee for a while and it hasn't gotten much press and no one is mentioning it... that tends to mean it's been pidgeon-holed. We're fairly safe for the moment. :flag:

Being safe for the moment may seem good, but that doesn't mean that we gun owners should get complacent. As soon as we get complacent, that's when the anti-gunners will make their move.

FNPfan
04-15-2007, 02:44 AM
^That's very true. The anti's will never let up. Neither should we. Otherwise, we're sunk.

Ginnunggap
04-15-2007, 11:24 AM
Oh, I agree. I already have letters out to my senators in case it manages to crawl on it's belly out of committee and passes through that collection of lobotomites in the house. One of them has already written back promising to vote against it should it happen :)