HR1022

ismith

Very Active Member
Messages
1,307
"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."
 
Never fails, every time another GUN BAN bill comes up, wonder what party they represent?

Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.)

Brian
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-25-07 AT 06:29AM (MST)[p]McCarthy represents the people who elected him. Sure he claims to be a democrat, but this is a two party system, would you prefer a parliament?

Moreover, new york, like DC (only DC has no voting power) and a few other major cities have more aggressive gun policies for reasons not applicable to other areas. I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying they have their reasons.

But, to infer that all democrats are anti-gun is like calling all republicans anti first amendment because the leader of the nations wire taps to protect our nation, it like saying republicans are anti article I because Bush and the republicans suspended Habeas Corpus, it's like calling all republicans anti gay (Cheney), or anti womans right to choose, ie abortion, or anti education because some in the republican party want to eliminate publicly funded education, or anti human and civil rights, or anti social welfare, and if there's anything that has been proven true time and time again, especially during this administration and the past years of republican lead congress it's that republicans, as a block, vote for the largest social welfare programs in the nation. . . only, I think if you ask them individually, they would disagree with most social welfare programs.

I'm not defending either party, only pointing out that drawing that kind of parallel only is divisive. Democrats are NOT, as a rule, anti gun. Some democrats want limits, but some republicans have taken away your civil rights, and let me asked this questions of you Brian, how has gun control affected you?

I dont support large scale gun control, but I do think that some jurisdictions need to have options.
 
T-Final!!!

JIM ZUMBO JUST GOT THRASHED,YOU WANT A TURN???

YOU'RE EITHER WITH US OR AGAINST US!!!

I DON'T SUPPORT ANY TYPE OF NEW GUN CONTROL!!!

THEY'VE HAD LAWS FOR MANY YEARS SAYING THE CONVICTED FELONS & DRUG DEALERS CAN NOT HAVE IN POSSESSION ANY GUNS!!!

I'M ALL FOR IT BUT I'VE NEVER ONCE HEARD OF ONE OF THEM BEING ARRESTED AGAIN & AGAIN & AGAIN & AGAIN WITHOUT THEM NOT HAVING GUNS IN POSSESSION!!!

I GUESS YOU & THEM(ANTI'S) WOULDN'T LIKE MY 50-22???

HOW BOUT MY NEW 100-22???

DON'T TELL ME I AIN'T GOT THE RIGHT TO OWN THEM!!!

DON'T SEND SOMEBODY OVER THINKING THEY'RE GONNA TAKE THEM EITHER!!!

JUST RECENTLY WE HAD A SITUATION IN SLC!!!

THANK GOD THE OFF DUTY COP HAD HIS GUN ON HIM!!!

AND DON'T GIVE ME THIS CRAP THE SHOOTER WOULDN'T OF HAD A GUN WITH CERTAIN LAWS IN EFFECT!!!

THESE JOKERS ARE SITTING AROUND TICKING LIKE A TIME BOMB EVERYWHERE!!!

THERES A BUNCH OF THEM TOO!!!

I WAS HOPEING THE GUY THAT TOOK THE SHOOTER OUT WOULD OF BEEN AN AVERAGE PERSON WITH A CARRY PERMIT,JUST GLAD THEY PUT THE IDIOT DOWN QUICKLY!!!

IF YOU GIVE THEM ANY SLACK AT ALL T-Final THEY'LL GET THEIR FOOT IN THE DOOR,WE AIN'T LETTING THAT HAPPEN!!!

THE ONLY bobcat THINKING YOU'RE RIGHT ON ONE THING,THERE SHOULD BE OPTIONS,A ROPE & A BIG TALL TREE OR A FIRING SQUAD,ALOT OF THE CRAP WOULD STOP!!!
 
Bobcat obviously is the master of his own domain. Did you read my post bob cat? NO obviously you did not.

this is best thing ive read in a week.

"I DON'T SUPPORT ANY TYPE OF NEW GUN CONTROL!!!

THEY'VE HAD LAWS FOR MANY YEARS SAYING THE CONVICTED FELONS & DRUG DEALERS CAN NOT HAVE IN POSSESSION ANY GUNS!!!

I'M ALL FOR IT . .

- Bobcat Flipflopper Kerry. . .
 
T-FRICKEN-FINAL!!!

LET ME SPLAIN IT SO YOUR THICK HEAD MIGHT UNDERSTAND WHAT I JUST SAID!!!

AIN'T FLIPPEN NOWHERE!!!

WHY THE HELL WOULD YOU MAKE NEW LAWS WHEN IN GODS REALITY YOU CAN'T EVEN START ENFORCING THE LAWS YOU ALREADY HAVE???

YOU MUST NOT LIKE MY NEW 100-22 HUH???

TOO DAMN BAD!!!

YA I READ WHERE YOU SAID YOU WEREN'T IN FULL SUPPORT OF NEW GUN CONTROL BUT BSICALLY YOU SUPPORT SOME OF IT!!!

JIM ZUMBO DECIDED TO TRY THE SAME CRAP & BACKED OUT QUICK!!!

IT BOILS DOWN TO "THINK" BEFORE YOU "SPEAK"!!!

SOMETIMES THINK LONGER THAN 1 MINUTE!!!

SOMETIMES THINK IT OUT FOR A WEEK IF YOU HAVE TOO!!!

WTF???

I PROMISED FOUNDER I'D BE NICE,THIS IS AS NICE AS I COULD REPLY!!!

THE ONLY bobcat!!!
 
Read the whole text of the bill last week. The reinstatement and revisions of the '94 gun control law are tough to follow. The new stuff has a few ambiguities that seem to represent the best that the bill authors and the ATF can do to "team up to screw over".
By the by, what is (subsection G) an "autoloading pistol with a fixed magazine capable of accepting more than 10 rounds"? These would be restricted under the new bill. Anyone know of what they speak? An example?
Mizz McCarthy, as the sole sponsor, has little to gain or lose politically with this bill after reaction has weighed in. She's small potatoes in the realm of gun control politics--just a pinch-hitter.
When the heavy-hitters in the disarmament camp start stumping for it's passage, we'll know it's BOHICA time.
I think the House will likely pass it, party-line gap being too wide to bridge for any real strategy.
The Senate could come down to a 51-50 against in the best of situations, that is if any fence-sitters are not swayed towards the big pigs of anti-gundom like Schumer, Feinstein, Dodd, Kennedy and the like. I wouldn't count on it.
The veto from the White House is, I think, the best chance for the bill's failure, yet can that even be counted on?
Wonder if we'll hear anything from Clinton or Oh!bama on the issue--to see if they've got the balls to speak what they really desire as they're campaigning for '08. Or is the gun issue still taboo for Leftist hopefuls?
 
Stereo types are usually not accurate however if you look back at the history of the issue of gun control in America it has always came from democrats.

There may be many democrats that support the 2nd amendment but as a National Party they are the only party to have a plank to in their party platform to support a Gun Control piece of legislation. "The assault weapons ban"

T,
I said that local jurisdiction need to have a choice when it comes to gun control, do you feel the same way about local jurisdictions needing a choice to enforce limiting the First Amendment?

Nemont
 
I sent off letters to my Senator and Representative today, hopefully they get taken into consideration and Heller and Ensign vote AGAINST this ludicrus bill!

I too feel that we need no more gun control than we already have. The bearocrats are taking our rights away one piece at a time. That will leave more leverage for later for them to use against us. Then when we have no guns, we will not be citizens, but will be "subjects" and this may as well be a dicatorship than a democracy, because if our guns are taken away, then so stands the possibility of free speach, etc, and all the other amendments one by one.

Later,

Marcial
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom