Posted on 08/14/2007 6:03:58 PM PDT by neverdem
HR 2640 motivated by psychopathic murderer
Calls for more "gun control" grow louder
No calls for gun-safety training or expanded carry rights can be heard
Dept. of Homeland Security to contribute to NICS database
GUN LAW UPDATE
June 15, 2007
NEW FEDERAL GUN LAW COMING
NEW FEDERAL GUN LAW COMING
NEW FEDERAL GUN LAW COMING
Dept. of Homeland Security to join in NICS database
Dept. of Homeland Security to join in NICS database
Rights restorations promised but fuzzy
by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America
Permission to circulate granted
The House of Representatives, with unusual backing from both the NRA and anti-gun activists in the Democrat party, just passed HR 2640 on an unrecorded voice vote. The "NICS Improvement Act" will greatly expand the list of people banned from buying or having firearms, and now goes to the Senate where it will likely be fast-tracked for approval.
Using "gun control" and murdered young students as a rallying cry, the federal government has moved another step closer to a national computerized system capable of screening the entire population.
If tied in to a national ID card being developed through linked state driver's licenses (the so-called "Real ID Act" passed in 2005), all significant activity in the nation could be monitored under the guise of crime control.
In typical fashion, the bill coerces states into cooperation with promises of grants and threats of withheld funding, depending on their degree of compliance. It is unlikely that states will be able to afford to resist, compromising any remaining sovereignty they have. The net effect will be to hasten centralized...
(Excerpt) Read more at gunlaws.com ...
The problem is how do you define “mentally incompetent?” This government will you that loop hole to ban 99% of the public. And should one minor bout of depression cause you to loose ALL your Continual rights?
Bit off topic but did Smith and Wesson ever renounce their agreement with Clintoon back in 2000? Is there still an ongoing boycott of S+M products?
The way things are looking now the chances of the next President being as arms rights friendly as the current one, such as he is, are slim and fading. All of the 'Rat cannidates are gun grabber, and about half the Pubbie ones have that in their record as well.
Even the Great White Hope, Fred Thompson, is squishy at best, probably about like the Presidents Bush, maybe a bit more like the son than the father (Governor Bush signed Texas' CHL law, just as he promised he would, but he also promised that as President, he would sign an extension of the Ugly Gun Ban). Mitt and Rudy are both old gun grabbers. Hunter is solid on the Second, as is Huckabee. If Gingrich steps in (unlikely, IMHO, but you never know until the fat lady sings), he's also solid, having rammed a repeal of the UGB through the House, only to have the RINO Senate sit on it.
I agree. I also have no problem with those to be judged intoxicated being barred from driving. I have no problem with those to be judged XXXX being barred from XXXX.
My problem exists in the Enforcement and meaning being the words.
What does Mentally Incompetent mean? Not what the dictionary says, or what you think it means, but in terms of the Legislation.
Say you get a Clear Cut Definition you are happy with. The legislation is enacted and becomes law. And now that it is In it's a relatively Easy process to Add things to the list of what is deemed Mentally Incompetent (MI). And to change the length of time a person can be deemed MI.
It might start out as: MI is decided after Independent Review by three Independent Qualified (define qualified) Persons. All three must agree. Their finding can be reviewed after 12 months.
Then it changes to Two independent people and a review after 24 months.
Then it changes to "Anything on the list" as diagnosed/determined by One person (Govt employee) and carries a Minimum 5 year ban.
Then what is on the list changes to ensnare More people and carries a 10 year ban.
Then the list changes again to ensnare even more people and carries a 20 year ban.
And you get the idea.
Once a List has been created, any dope is able to enforce the list and you cannot argue because it's on the list. And that's policy.
And to insure our mental competence, all school records will be reviewed (that fight in the 5th grade could mean you have violent tendencies and aren't mentally competent to be given access to a firearm) and workplace psychological profiles. And even then, you may need to be put through an Evaluation before being issued a Firearm License.
See how it can go.
In Australia they have ACTS of Parliament. This provides the overall rules. The Legislation provides the details. So an ACT might say an infringement is punishable by the paying of 20 units. The legislation, which can be changed without consultation by whomever is in power, determines how much a Unit is worth in today's terms.
So the ACT would say a person may not possess a firearm for X years when judged Mentally Incompetent. The legislation defines how many years X is and what is meant by Mentally Incompetent. The ACT requires consultation with all parties in the house and senate. The legislation does not.
But regardless of all this... if a nutbag wants to get a gun and go on a rampage, they will find a way. And once again, the honest citizen is punished in a so-called effort to get bad guys who ignore the rules anyway. And the scary thought... the politicians behind it know this and do it anyway. What's that tell you about them?
Thanks for the ping!
When did they ban S+M products? IIRC, new owners took over Smith and Wesson, and that agreement is kaput.
I think it was something of an unofficial gun buying boycott by gun owners in response to the company’s actions. Am somewhat fuzzy as to the details and am unaware that the agreement was rescinded. Am planning on purchasing a hand gun for personal defense hence my curiosity.
S&W story from last year
Thanks for the link! Somewhat ambiguous as to what the company’s policies are with regards to the 2000 agreement. Will continue to look for more info.
Fluke,
Well said. Kudos. We could go on and on...
I don't know about S+M products - I'm not aware of any ban on those...
S&W on the other hand, was boycotted for a period of some years while they negotiated with anti-gun xlintons, and were owned by a Brit consortium of anti-gunners.
Several years ago, they were bought by a group of former, patriotic S&W employees and have since turned around and are a company I'd buy products from.
Kit.
Let’s just be sure there isn’t any racial profiling going on... /sarc
The NRA seems to be supporting this legislation despite the fact that it usurps due process rights of individual gun owners. I have no idea why — perhaps they think it can be fixed before it’s passed. But, as written, it’s unacceptable.
they should repeal every law passed since 1935,and pass 1 more law making it aganist the law to pass any more laws.
So am I (Endowment level), and I do not support HR 2640.
Some of us believe NRA's Washington lobbyists have become entirely too friendly with their natural enemies in Washington--Congress and its staffs. When you attend the same parties and rub elbows in the same social environment, it becomes far easier to justify a "go along to get along" attitude when asked to support a bad bill that has been dressed up to look "reasonable".
This isn't the first time the NRA has found itself on the wrong side of a piece of flawed legislation. On this one, I'm very disappointed in the NRA. The GOA saw it for what it is.
No less than Bill Clinton credited NRA with Algore’s loss. He might still be president.
Something for which we shall always be grateful. But that doesn't mean they're perfect or beyond criticism when they blow one. And they blew it on HR 2640.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.