Let's Remove ALL Gun Control from S. 397

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by pickenup, Aug 12, 2005.

  1. pickenup

    pickenup Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2002
    Messages:
    6,858
    Location:
    Colorado Rocky Mountains
    Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
    8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
    Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
    http://www.gunowners.org

    Thursday, August 11, 2005


    "We're going to hit them right where it hurts -- in their bank
    accounts -- and we won't stop hitting until they stop flooding our
    streets with guns." -- Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, a leading
    proponent of the "bankrupt the gun industry" movement

    This quote demonstrates the rabid zealotry that exists in the
    anti-gun community. It also shows why it's so important for Congress
    to enact good legislation that will put an end to the dozens of
    frivolous lawsuits that have been launched against the gun industry.

    At least two gun makers -- Bryco and Navegar -- have already been put
    out of business. And many other gun makers have been forced to dole
    out millions of dollars to protect themselves from these unscrupulous
    attorneys.

    If we want to continue enjoying our Second Amendment rights, it is
    imperative that we work through the Congress to put a halt to these
    injurious attacks.

    Rep. Marilyn Musgrave has taken up the cause in the House. She wants
    the Congress to send the President a CLEAN bill that will protect gun
    makers and sellers, without punishing gun owners in any way. The
    House bill (H.R. 800) is much better than the Senate version (S.
    397), since the former is free and clear of all gun control.


    As introduced, S. 397 would have been a good first step towards
    curtailing anti-gun lawsuits. Unfortunately, Senator Frist allowed
    two anti-gun amendments to be offered, and they turned a marginally
    beneficial bill into a huge albatross.

    The first amendment -- offered by Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI) -- requires
    gun dealers to include a "lock-up-your-safety" device with every
    handgun sold. In addition to imposing a "gun tax" on every
    handgun
    buyer, this amendment paves the way for future legislation mandating
    that gun owners use those trigger locks.

    The second provision -- offered by Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) -- amended
    the armor-piercing bullet provisions of federal law. At its core,
    the Craig language did two things:

    * It gave impetus to adopting a "penetration standard" for armor
    piercing bullets by commissioning a Justice Department study of the
    issue. If a "penetration standard" were adopted, a gun-adverse
    administration could probably use it to ban virtually all ammunition.

    * It established a fifteen year MANDATORY MINIMUM PRISON SENTENCE for
    anyone who carries a single armor piercing bullet during the
    commission of a "crime of violence" -- or who
    "possesses" such a
    bullet "in furtherance of... such crime..."

    It is significant that "crime of violence" is defined in 18
    U.S.C.
    924(c)(3) to mean a felony that (1) involves the actual, attempted,
    or threatened use of force against person or property, or (2)
    involves a "substantial risk" of force against person or property.

    Hence, if a concealed carry permit holder opens his coat to display a
    firearm in order to thwart an assault -- and such an action is
    prohibited by a state's anti-self defense law and therefore
    constitutes a felony of "criminal threatening" -- then the
    court must
    sentence the concealed carry permit holder to a fifteen year
    mandatory minimum sentence if he is carrying an "armor piercing
    bullet." The judge has no discretion.

    The only "good news" in regard to the Craig language is that the 18
    U.S.C. 921 definition of "armor piercing ammunition" was not
    affected. The definition is fairly restricted and limited to:

    * A handgun projectile wholly made of tungsten alloys, steel, iron,
    brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium, or

    * A handgun projectile larger than .22 caliber with a jacket weighing
    more than 25% of the total weight of the projectile.

    Thankfully, Rep. Musgrave is pushing the House leadership to get real
    lawsuit protection enacted, without endangering the Second Amendment
    rights of gun owners in any way.

    ACTION: Please ask your Representative to sign onto the Musgrave
    letter opposing the anti-gun amendments in S. 397. And then, forward
    this alert to your pro-gun friends and family. Even if you have
    already contacted your Rep., please consider doing so again.
    Rep.
    Musgrave needs a huge outpouring of support if she is to convince the
    House leadership that they should push H.R. 800, rather than just
    taking the Senate version at face value.

    You can visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
    http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Representative a
    pre-written e-mail message such as the one below.

    Or, you can call your Representative toll-free at 877-762-8762.

    --- Pre-written letter ---

    Dear Representative:

    As you know, the Senate recently passed much-needed lawsuit
    protection for the gun industry (S. 397). But this bill passed with
    some unwanted baggage -- specifically, two amendments that chip away
    at the Second Amendment rights of all Americans.

    One amendment imposes a handgun tax and paves the way for future
    requirements that gun owners lock up their guns, thus rendering them
    unavailable for self-defense. The second provision -- the armor
    piercing ammunition language -- would also pave the way for future
    restrictions, as explained in detail at www.gunowners.org/a081105.htm
    on the Gun Owners of America website.

    For these reasons, I urge you to sign onto a letter being circulated
    by Rep. Marilyn Musgrave which deals with real efforts to gain
    lawsuit protection for gun makers and gun dealers, without
    endangering ordinary gun owners.

    The letter asks the House leadership to push H.R. 800, a lawsuit
    protection bill that contains no gun control, rather than its Senate
    counterpart. H.R. 800 has been well received in the House, as it
    currently has 257 cosponsors.

    America deserves a CLEAN bill which offers real protection for gun
    makers and dealers. Thank you very much.

    Sincerely,
  2. inplanotx

    inplanotx New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2002
    Messages:
    8,889
    Location:
    Texas
  3. Shooter45

    Shooter45 *Administrator* Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2001
    Messages:
    10,013
  4. LIKTOSHOOT

    LIKTOSHOOT Advanced Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    Messages:
    9,367
    Where is the NRA on this????????????????????????




    LTS
  5. Gunfyter

    Gunfyter New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2003
    Messages:
    1,956
    Location:
    Western Maryland
    Yep, I'm in.
  6. Marlin

    Marlin *TFF Admin Staff Chief Counselor*

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Messages:
    13,856
    Location:
    At SouthernMoss' side forever!
    Done, in both states, as usual.
  7. pickenup

    pickenup Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2002
    Messages:
    6,858
    Location:
    Colorado Rocky Mountains
    I have asked that very same question.

    I have NOT received anything from them.....yet.
    Was wondering if anyone had?

    Not holding my breath either. ;)
  8. berto64

    berto64 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2001
    Messages:
    7,512
    Location:
    Owyhee County, Idaho
  9. HiPowerKid

    HiPowerKid New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2005
    Messages:
    202
    Location:
    NW FL
    Gee, it's awfully funny how the NRA doesn't mention the need to strip any gun control provisions from the bill. Read it and weep. Methinks the NRA needs some GOA style leadership, what say ye?

    Attend Town Hall Meetings And
    Urge Passage Of S. 397 In U.S. House​

    Sunday, August 14, 2005

    As you know, the U.S. Senate recently passed S. 397--the "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act"--by a strong bipartisan vote of 65-31! This action represents a great victory and a vitally important first step toward ending the anti-gun lobby's shameless attempts to bankrupt the firearm industry through reckless, predatory lawsuits. It also represents a crucial step forward for law-abiding firearm manufacturers, retailers and owners in this country.

    As we reported last week, there has been some discussion of late concerning two amendments to S. 397. The first, by Senator Herb Kohl (D-Wisc.), requires federally licensed dealers to provide a "secure gun storage or safety device" with the sale/transfer of every handgun (it does not apply to long guns). The measure, which passed by a vote of 70-30, does not require gun owners to use the device, does not apply to private transfers, and does not create any new civil liability for gun owners who choose not to use these storage devices. Virtually all new handguns today are sold with some type of secure storage or safety device. The amendment has no significant impact on current law.

    The second measure--an amendment by Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho)--was passed by an overwhelming margin of 87-11, and was offered this year (as it was in 2004) in a successful attempt to defeat Senator Edward Kennedy's "armor piercing" ammunition amendment that would have banned all centerfire rifle ammunition. By providing an alternative to Senator Kennedy's amendment, pro-gun senators were able to marshal the votes to defeat the Kennedy amendment.

    The amendment only restates the existing prohibition on manufacture, or on sale by manufacturers, of "armor piercing ammunition," except for government use, for export, or for use in testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney General. This law has been in effect for nearly two decades. It increases the mandatory minimum sentence for the use of "armor piercing ammunition" in a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime. Use of armor piercing ammunition in a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime is already a federal offense punishable by 5 years in prison; the amendment increases the penalty to 15 years, and authorizes the death penalty if the ammunition is used in a murder. It also directs the Attorney General to conduct a study "to determine whether a uniform standard for the testing of projectiles against Body Armor is feasible." In fact, we know such a standard is "feasible" because the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) has been testing projectiles against body armor since the early 1970s, and has regularly written and updated the standards for testing projectiles against armor. NIJ's research has saved lives by improving the design and manufacture of body armor.

    The amendment does not give the Attorney General (or anyone else) any new authority to ban ammunition, nor does it change the definition of "armor piercing ammunition." Under current law, ammunition is only "armor piercing" if it has a bullet that "may be used in a handgun" and that is made entirely from certain hard metals such as tungsten, steel, bronze or depleted uranium; or if the bullet is "designed and intended for use in a handgun" and has a jacket that weighs more than 25% of the weight of the projectile. The current definition has been in place for more than 12 years. And finally, the amendment does not create any kind of new ammunition ban. The only ammunition that is banned as "armor piercing" is ammunition that fits the current definition, and neither the amendment nor the study would change the definition.

    As the battle now moves to the U.S. House of Representatives, it is critical that you once again contact your U.S. Representative and urge him/her to pass S. 397, as passed by the Senate!

    With Congress out for its "Summer District Work Period" (through September 5), your Senators and Representative will be back home in their respective states and districts. Many lawmakers use this time to hold town hall meetings, where they can report on what they've been doing in Washington, and take questions from their constituents. Now is the time for you to personally voice your strong support for S. 397 (in addition to S. 1082 and H.R. 1288--the Senate and House versions of the "District of Columbia Personal Protection Act"). Please contact your lawmakers' district offices and ask when they plan to hold their town hall meetings during the break. If you do not know the number for your lawmakers' district offices, you can use the "Write Your Representatives" tool at www.NRAILA.org, or call the NRA-ILA Grassroots Division at (800) 392-8683.

    If you get a chance to meet with your lawmakers, be sure to: Urge Your U.S. Representative To Support S. 397; And Urge Your U.S. Senators And Representative To Cosponsor And Support S. 1082/H.R. 1288.

    In addition to attending meetings and speaking out in support of our Right to Keep and Bear Arms, please forward the dates, times, and locations of any town hall meetings to your family, friends, and fellow firearm owners, and to the NRA-ILA Grassroots Division, so we may compile this information and share it with the pro-gun community. Please forward this information to the Grassroots Division by calling (800) 392-8683, by faxing to (703) 267-3918, or by sending an e-mail to townhall@nrahq.org.

    We can and will achieve our mutual goal of finally enacting this common sense law, but only with your continued assistance. Please help us finish the job once and for all by contacting your U.S. Representative and urging him/her to support the "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act," and send the bill to President Bush.





    NRA-ILA Speakers Bureau

    Help Spread The Truth and Promote Activism -
    Identify "Second Amendment Activist Centers"

    NRA-ILA Grassroots Workshop, Pittsburgh, PA
    April 17, 2004
  10. pickenup

    pickenup Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2002
    Messages:
    6,858
    Location:
    Colorado Rocky Mountains
    HiPowerKid,
    I would have to agree.
  11. Deputy Dawg

    Deputy Dawg Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,376
    Location:
    Central Texas Gulf Coast
    Count me in.Ithink any new gun control laws are bad news for law abiding gun owners
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
General Discussion Let's Riot Nov 23, 2014
General Discussion Let's wish this guy lots of luck Mar 26, 2013
General Discussion Let's feed the starving rats Feb 14, 2013
General Discussion Let's go viral Oct 23, 2012
General Discussion Let's do our own poll.... Sep 15, 2012

Share This Page