Indeed, I just got it from the horse's mouth. "Commenting on the passage of this landmark legislation, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said, 'This is an historic victory for the NRA. Freedom, truth and justice prevailed, and today S. 397 is one step closer to becoming the law of the land.'"
We'll have to take some solace in the fact that the NRA is still pushing for shall issue, concealed carry privileges, including Alaska's new concealed carry right, in all states, and uniform state law pre-emption over local gun control laws. Here are references about body armor standards which pertains to the other amendment in S. 397 to study ammo and LEO body armor.
A half step forward, politics prevailed.
Thanks for the ping! Good news!
On the bright side, perhaps someday the Supreme Court will find itself ruling that the trigger-lock provision is an infringement of the Second Amendment. One can hope.
During the voting they took a call from a woman in Houston (I believe), that set the record straight concerning "Armor Piercing" ammunition. She stated correctly that if the amendment passed it would've outlawed every "Hi-Powered" hunting rifle round currently in existence in this country.
Actually a half step forward for the industry, but a step onto the slippery slope towards mandatory trigger lock usage for us.
However there is a little bit more good news. From S 397 as passed.
(a) Findings- Congress finds the following:
(1) The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
(2) The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the rights of individuals, including those who are not members of a militia or engaged in military service or training, to keep and bear arms.
Now that doesn't carry any force of law, it's in the findings, not the parts that will make it into the US Code. However it is something to be cited the next time a law which violates the second amendment is challenged in court.
The down side is that darn trigger lock business, although since in this bill it's not mandatory to actually use them, I guess it doesn't infringe on the right to either keep or bear arms.