Senate Bill 34 and the NRA

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by Juker, Apr 11, 2011.

  1. Juker

    Juker New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,872
    Location:
    Land of Lincoln
    Just got a call from the NRA regarding Senate Bill 34. Hadn't heard of this.

    Found the text of the bill online:

    Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2011 - Amends the federal criminal code to authorize the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of a firearms or explosives license or permit (or revoke such license or permit) if the Attorney General: (1) determines that the transferee is known (or appropriately suspected) to be engaged in terrorism or has provided material support or resources for terrorism; and (2) has a reasonable belief that the transferee may use a firearm in connection with terrorism. Allows any individual whose firearms or explosives license application has been denied to bring legal action to challenge the denial. Extends the prohibition against the sale or distribution of firearms or explosives to include individuals whom the Attorney General has determined to be engaged in terrorist activities. Imposes criminal penalties on individuals engaged in terrorist activities who smuggle or knowingly bring firearms into the United States.Authorizes the Attorney General to withhold information in firearms and explosives license denial revocation lawsuits and from employers if the Attorney General determines that the disclosure of such information would likely compromise national security.

    SPONSORS:
    Sen Boxer, Barbara
    Sen Durbin, Richard
    Sen Lautenberg, Frank R.
    Sen Levin, Carl
    Sen Lieberman, Joseph I.
    Sen Menendez, Robert
    Sen Schumer, Charles E.
    Sen Feinstein, Dianne
    Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E.
    Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon
    Sen Reed, Jack

    http://e-lobbyist.com/gaits/view/248498

    (Sponsor list reads like a "Who's Who Among Left-Wing Village Idiots")

    Concerns: Obama's Attorney General given the right to determine who is a terrorist. Sound familiar? Napolitano and Holder, what a pair - and we know who's on their "terrorist" list. We're fighting terrorism. It's illegal. So guess who this broad measure is really aimed at?
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2011
  2. rentalguy1

    rentalguy1 Former Guest

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    884
    Location:
    The mountains of NE TN.
    [sarcasm]Imagine that...dems wrapping themselves in the flag in a ttempt to grab guns. Never saw that one coming...[/sarcasm]
  3. henry77

    henry77 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    202
    Location:
    Wiggins, MS
    If that bunch of dummycraps are for it, the bill must be wrong for the citizens.
  4. redwing carson

    redwing carson Former Guest

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    Messages:
    734
    Location:
    western wyoming
    The last part says they don't have to tell you who or why the law picks you out. Wanna bet that belonging to the NRA wouldn't become a target for this law.:eek:Good luck

    RC
  5. Juker

    Juker New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,872
    Location:
    Land of Lincoln
    Here are excerpts from The Washington Times two years ago, in an article exposing the Homeland Security report. It is a stark reminder of how this administration views just about anyone who doesn't have the Obozo logo on their car.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/16/napolitano-stands-rightwing-extremism/

    ... Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Wednesday that she was briefed before the release of a controversial intelligence assessment and that she stands by the report, which lists returning veterans among terrorist risks to the U.S.

    ... In her statement Wednesday, Ms. Napolitano defended the report, which says “rightwing extremism” may include groups opposed to abortion and immigration, as merely one among several threat assessments.

    ... “Rightwing extremism,” the report said in a footnote on Page 2, goes beyond religious and racial hate groups and extends to “those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely.”

    ... “It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,” said the report, which also listed gun owners and veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as potential risks.


    There was a lot of backtracking and waffling after this report came out - but when a politician apologizes, it only means to me that they got caught; it doesn't mean they changed their mind.

    Soooo... tie this report and this mindset together with S.B. 34, and who do you think they're referring to? Hmmm.....

    We went deep sea fishing again last night, and took all our guns and ammo in case of pirates. A big wave hit the boat and all our guns and ammo fell overboard. Oh well.
  6. jim brady

    jim brady Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,308
    I read that list of supporters of that idiotic bill and was amazed! JOE LIEBERMAN is an INDEPENDANT??!!!!! How could anyone as Liberal (Socialist) as he claim to be anything other than a full-blown (?) Leftist Democrat?

    Speaking of "Blown", notice the usual crowd "Chuckey" Schumer, Frankie ("Keep your hand on your wallet") Lautenberg and Dick ("Little Dickie") Durbin. Can't forget my lovely ladies of the D.C. evening Fienstien and Boxer. What a hand to draw to....... Of course we already have a Joker in the White House.
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2011
  7. Juker

    Juker New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,872
    Location:
    Land of Lincoln
    Yup, good ol' Wee Dickie Durbin - he of the "our soldiers are like Nazis" comment and the Moozlim Civil Rights Hearing. Methinks ol' Dickie is gettin' himself some serious support from some bad influences. And this guy is supposed to know what a terrorist is?

    What a winner.
  8. rentalguy1

    rentalguy1 Former Guest

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    884
    Location:
    The mountains of NE TN.
    He lost the primary election a couple of years ago, because the Dem party bailed on him. He ran as a independent and won.
  9. hogger129

    hogger129 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    4,125
    So what exactly defines someone as a "terrorist?"

    Aren't they just going to find other ways to carry out their evil deeds even if there's a law denying them firearms and explosives?

    I don't know how many times we have to say it before they begin to get it - criminals do not follow the law. A law is not going to stop people from doing something.

    We already have a law where they can classify someone as a terrorist, and search and seize their property without a warrant. (USA PATRIOT Act).

    Who knows... Maybe they won't take our guns away... But the thing I'm afraid of is giving them the opportunity.
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2011
  10. shorter260513

    shorter260513 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2010
    Messages:
    262
    Location:
    Tennessee
  11. jack404

    jack404 Former Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    17,607
    Location:
    Australia
    if you think they wont try to take your guns off you , take a look at Australia

    learn folks , learn

    trust in God your guns and your constitution , and defend them all ..

    shoot UN lovers on sight .. they are truly evil and will disarm you first chance they get
  12. Brisk44

    Brisk44 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2011
    Messages:
    1,747
    Location:
    Iowa
    Going by their definition all the leaders of our revolution were terrorists and should have been jailed or hung. Well lets see .....thats how the British felt at the time, they feel the same as the British so doesn't that make THEM the anti-American ones?
  13. bamashooter

    bamashooter New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2010
    Messages:
    55
    Location:
    north alabama
    '' Maybe they wont take my guns away.'' Are you serious? If they said you had to turn them in, would you?
    I took an oath a long time ago and as far as im concerned im still under oath. The government will never take my firearms. Period. Anyone who comes to get them cant be american becouse we have a constitution that gives free men the right to bear arms, so I know an american government will not do that.
  14. graehaven

    graehaven Active Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,943
    Location:
    Upstate NY
    The infrastructure for our present government power grab was put in place by.......... a republican, let's not forget that.

    It's not just the Dems.

    The "wonderful" repubs (sarcasm), just sold us out AGAIN, but turning tail and running during the budget negotiations. There are a joke. And they are NOT conservative.

    Get THIS and get it good:

    If your gun rights aren't taken away under a Democrat administration, they will be taken away under a Republican one.

    It's the SAME game folks - they have the power and they are going to use it - against us - it matters not whether they have D or an R in front of their name.

    All they want you doing is arguing over the D and the R, rather than pay attention to all the rights we've lost.
  15. jack404

    jack404 Former Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    17,607
    Location:
    Australia
    you cant go by party's any more , its personal history and research that counts

    if people had looked at obozo hard would they have voted for him ??

    i think not ..

    and on the other side of the house ( in the US) there are many who wear the opposition badge, but are tarred by the same brush
  16. redwing carson

    redwing carson Former Guest

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    Messages:
    734
    Location:
    western wyoming
    I don't know how you can defend the Democrats on gun control. The idea that the Repubs did not win in a budget battle leads to gun control??? The most radical anti-gunners have been and are Dems. In 1968 the Dems led by LBJ came closed to disarming the U.S. They tried to ban Ammo and scopes as well as firearms. In the end we got the 1968 Gun Control act. This was the largest loss of firearms rights in U.S. history. In order to enforce this law they gave us the BATF. These old "revanooers" became the Dems police force to control those awful armed U.S. citizens.:eek:
  17. graehaven

    graehaven Active Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,943
    Location:
    Upstate NY
    That is an interesting leap that was not suggested in anything I wrote.

    The infrastructure of control - the Patriot Act, and Homeland Security - were instituted under a republican controlled administration.

    If you believe that may lead to more gun control or confiscation, then that's fine. I'd have a hard time arguing the point.

    There are also plenty of wishy washy republicans on the gun issue.

    INACTION on the part of republicans to do anything to reign in federal spending, to reign in homeland sec., to reign in the BATFE, etc. is troublesome beyond understanding. Their inaction, is action - action to remove your rights.
  18. Old Grump

    Old Grump New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2010
    Messages:
    2,320
    Location:
    Little hut in the woods near Blue River Wisconsin
    That was a rhetorical question right?

    Are you a conservative, a gun owner, Christian, On more than one gun board, listen to conservative radio, ever said anything derogatory against anybody who wants to take your guns away for your own good. do you belong to NRA, JPFO, RKBA, GOA, Constitution Party, Libertarian Party, American Legion, VFW, SAF, etc. etc. etc.

    Worse yet do you speak and understand English and do you think 'Shall not be infringed', means the same today as it did in 1788 when the Constitution was ratified. If you are so deranged that you think like that then stand by to have your rights taken from you and to have your grandmother and your little children patted down like any other bomb throwing radical. Shame on you for shame. Now drink the Kool Aid and stand silently by while our government rapes you and be sure to smile like you really appreciate the honor.

    Excuse me while I go out and buy some more ammo while I still can.
  19. hogger129

    hogger129 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    4,125
  20. hogger129

    hogger129 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    4,125
    I have to agree with you on the "wishy washy" Republicans part... I mean look at Mitt Romney. Or idk if anybody here is from NY -- Rudy Guliani. I forget who, but there was a picture someone posted of him at a rally with Jim Brady.

    I thought Reagan signed some big piece of gun control legislation too back in 1986. I thought it was the law that required background checks... Not sure on that one though, so don't quote me on that.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Idaho : Bill to punish gun-seizing cops passes with full senate support Feb 20, 2014
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Senate Gun Bill May 9, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Senate Judiciary Committee Begins Consideration of Feinstein's "Assault Weapons" Bill Mar 10, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Alabama Bill Passes Senate Committee Mar 6, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Bills Before the CO Senate Mar 3, 2013