The short version is, Manchin-Toomey is going to be close. If Manchin-Toomey is going to be close, Schumer's legislation did not have a chance and Toomey should not have been suckered into playing the compromise game.Read the whole thing
if you want to know where things stand.
Write your Senators
. Tell them VOTE NO on Manchin-Toomey. Tell them VOTE NO on all gun control.
Then write your Representative
, because we can't trust the Senate.
Send email first, because it's easy and it gets your opinion through. Follow it up with a phone call, because that demonstrates that you really mean it.
Once you have contacted your own reps, Arma Borealis has a list of additional Senators to contact
. Don't be shy about calling outside your own state, you can be sure the other side is doing it.We can stop gun control in its tracks
But we have to make it clear to our Senators that no compromises are acceptable.
Talking points to hit on every communication:
- Oppose all gun control
- Oppose Manchin-Toomey specifically
- Oppose Schumer's legislation S.649 specifically
I would caution against statements supporting anything at this time.
If you're not convinced that Manchin-Toomey-Schumer is bad for gun rights, this post will help you.
UPDATE: No vote yet, but they are promising today or tomorrow. This means that Reid does NOT have the votes to pass Manchin-Toomey. KEEP CALLING!
UPDATE: No vote Tuesday. They promise a vote Wedsnesday
This is it, folks. This is the pressure point. Obama is flying Sandy Hook families to Washington to cry on command in front of Senators. We have to make sure that the Senate's phone banks and email servers melt down into a puddle that reads "VOTE NO ON GUN CONTROL". Contact your Senators
Get your friends and family to contact their Senators.
Do it every day until ALL the gun control legislation is voted down.
I know you support the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution, which protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and which the Supreme Court has affirmed in the Heller and McDonald cases.
As an elected official, you will occasionally be called upon to protect our Constitution with your vote as well as your voice. This week is one of those times.
Majority Leader Harry Reid has said he will bring Senator Schumer's gun control legislation (S 649) to the Senate floor for a vote. I urge you to vote NO on that legislation, and to vote NO on any other gun control legislation offered.
In fact, I urge you to filibuster any and ALL gun control legislation, including -- but not limited to -- a magazine ban, a semi-auto ban, a private transfer ban, and anything else related to gun control.
The Constitution demands a filibuster.
As your constituent and an American citizen, I demand a filibuster and a NO vote on ANY and ALL proposed gun control legislation.
Some Senators may approach you and suggest that they have negotiated a deal. Vote NO.
The president may pressure you and point to biased polls and the astroturf of paid "volunteers". Don't be fooled. Vote NO.
Vote NO on gun control. Period.
UPDATE: Reports are that the vote is scheduled for Thursday. Toomey and Manchin are supposed to announce some sort of deal
they have worked out between the two of them at 10am Wednesday. We'll see what comes out of that, but generally I'm not willing to accept any more "compromise" of my fundamental rights.
UPDATE: The first filibuster vote is likely to be today at 11am. There have been enough Republican defections that the vote will likely be very close. We'll see how it goes, but if the vote today succeeds it won't be the final vote.
On the Toomey-Manchin compromise
. I don't support it. It trades significantly expanded background check requirements -- banning almost all private transfers, with a "family and hunting trip" exemption -- for a bunch of minor improvements that are mostly present in existing law, and often already ignored in blue states that are hostile to gun rights. In particular, the prohibition on creating a firearms registration system is existing law. (The penalty for doing so might be new, I'm not sure, but what prosecutor would bring that case against the FBI or BATFE?)
So, it's still vote NO on everything, including the Toomey-Manchin compromise.
UPDATE: We lost the first vote
, 68 votes to proceed. As I understand it, amendments will be offered, and at least one final majority vote will take place. I do not know at this time whether we will get a second filibuster vote before the final vote can occur.
In other words, some of the Connecticut Republicans betrayed their constituents
Connecticut lawmakers reached a bipartisan deal Monday on what they consider some of the toughest gun laws in the country and hope will be a model for other capitals, pushing to expand the state's assault-weapons ban and impose new restrictions on high-capacity magazines.
Remember, Connecticut already had an assault weapons ban in place before Newtown. It didn't stop anyone.
The new law sets a 10 round maximum on new magazines in addition to banning a hundred new weapons within the state by name and moving to a "one-feature" test for assault weapons, presumably banning a lot more than the specific list. It does appear to grandfather existing magazines, though they must be registered (using what serial numbers?!) as must grandfathered weapons within the state. And, of course, you can't buy or sell a grandfathered weapon, and they ban private firearm and magazine transfers as well.
Note: They ban transfers
, not just sales, so letting a friend borrow your magazine at the range becomes a felony.
The law also requires an eligibility certificate to purchase a rifle or shotgun. To get the certificate, you have to take a training course, be fingerprinted, and have your mental health background checked for admissions... including voluntary ones.
Buying ammunition also requires a certificate and a background check at each purchase. (Go to the range and run out of ammo? Wait an hour for NICS).
The Democrats are calling it "the strongest... and the most comprehensive bill in the country"
. (Stronger than New York's SAFE Act? That's pretty strong, but they did take a lot longer to think about it...)
Discussion happens Wednesday. That's today. If you're in Connecticut, do your best to show up. If you can't show up, email or call. Preferably both.
I'll leave you with one final note. Remember how compromise works. They compromise with you now, to leave you half of your pie, then a quarter of your pie, then a single piece of your pie, and before you know it, you are staring at the crumbs you have left and they are coming back for more:
Ron Pinciaro, executive director of Connecticut Against Gun Violence, said his group will live with the lawmakers' decision not to ban them as other states have done. He said the leaders made their decision based on what was politically feasible.
"We have to be satisfied. There are still other things that we want, we'll be back for in later sessions," he said. "But for now, it's a good thing."
They get all that -- assuming the vote passes, in a Democrat-controlled legislature -- and they admit they will be back for more!
Six relatives of Newtown victims visited the Capitol on Monday, asking lawmakers to ban existing high-capacity magazines. Some handed out cards with photographs of their slain children.
That is a vile, despicable thing to do to your dead children.
The NRA has the details on how to oppose the bill
Pull out all the stops, people. The vote is TODAY (April 3, 2013).
Sebastian has more details
Yesterday, House Bill 35 passed in the House by a 24-17 vote.
Sponsored by state Representative Valerie Longhurst (D-15), HB 35 would
criminalize virtually all private transfers of firearms by requiring
that a criminal history background check be performed in connection with
the sale or transfer of all firearms. Background checks (subject to
fees) would be performed by licensed firearms dealers, who would be
required to maintain records of such background checks in accordance
with state and federal law.
House Bill 35 now goes to the state Senate. It is critical that
you contact your state Senator now and strongly urge him or her
to OPPOSE HB 35.
While there might be limited exceptions -- make no mistake -- HB 35 is
the first step toward the criminalization of all private firearm
transfers. This system can only be enforced with gun
registration. And, as we know from experiences
in California, Australia and Great Britain, gun registration enables gun
confiscation -- only from honest citizens -- since criminals don't register
their guns or submit to criminal investigations for firearms acquisition
Please contact your Senator and urge him or her to OPPOSE House Bill 35.
Contact information for your state legislators can be found here.
Gun control will be the first order of business in the Senate when lawmakers return in April from their two-week holiday break.
Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) formally moved a package of
gun-related bills onto the legislative calendar Thursday night, setting
up the most serious debate on gun control in Congress in more than a
"After the break" may well mean that your Senator will be coming back to their home state to
listen to their constituents. Make sure you fill their ears with the words "Vote NO on gun control" and especially "Vote NO on any ban on private transfers". We have time to make our message clear, and we need to use it. The assault weapons ban is bad law, but it's short of even 40 votes according to Reid. We can stop the ban on private transfers too, but we have to make it clear that we oppose that legislation too.
We need to flip three Senators, and we've got two expressing doubts. There's one persuadable
. Even if you're not in Colorado, a polite letter opposing gun control might make a difference.
Five Phone Calls for Freedom
On Feb. 25 & 26, make Five Phone Calls for Freedom
Friday, February 22, will witness an unprecedented attack on your
rights as Obama mobilizes his army of left-wing activists to push for
federal gun bans. "Roll Call" recently ran a piece entitled, "Organizing for America Plans 'National Day of Action' to Mobilize
Grass Roots on Guns." It went on to say:
"Organizing for Action is planning its first official mobilization in
support of President Barack Obama's proposals to curtail gun violence.
The nonprofit that inherited Obama's campaign infrastructure and 2
million strong volunteer army will hold a "national day of action" on
Feb. 22, officials said Tuesday."
If that doesn't scare you, it should
What you are seeing is "Barry the Community Organizer" doing what he
does best: Attacking your rights using millions of rabid radicals who
will stoop to any level of deceit in order to control you. The grass
roots initiative began with his State of the Union address, in which he
packed the house with families of victims of mass killings. Next, Obama
went on the road to sell his plan at schools in Atlanta and elsewhere.
Now MoveOn.org is joining the fray by running TV ads that proclaim, "The NRA doesn't speak for me." In case you didn't know it, these are
the same folks that you brought you "ACORN"; MoveOn.org is funded by
the left wing "Tides Foundation" which is itself funded by none other
than freedom-hating billionaire George Soros.
Your voice needed now more than ever
You have politicians scared. As a founding member of the Coalition to
Stop the Gun Ban, which now comprises 38 state and national
organizations, GRNC members have been blasting Congress with a
coordinated message that we will punish any legislator who supports gun
control. So to counter your influence, "Barry" plans to "out-grassroots" you. Will you let him?
IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED!
Make Five Phone Calls for Freedom
To fight back against this left wing attack, we are asking millions of
Second Amendment supporters, represented by the Coalition and others,
to deliver a loud and clear message to Congress by making 5 phone calls
on Monday and Tuesday (Feb. 25 & 26). Please note that we said
CALL, not email. We want millions of voices to ring through the
congressional switchboard, so please note that you might have to try
several times to get through.
Specifically, we are asking you to call:
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell at 202-224-2541
House Speaker John Boehner at 202-225-0600
Senator Richard Burr at 202-224-3154
Senator Kay Hagan at 202-224-6342
Your representative to the U.S. House. To identify your US House representative, go to: http://www.house.gov/representatives/ and then enter your zip code in the upper right corner of the page.
DELIVER THIS MESSAGE
Give congressional staff 3 simple talking points:
- Nothing about the federal proposals is acceptable -- not banning
semi-automatic firearms and magazines, not expanding the list of people
prohibited from owning guns, and not registering private gun sales via
the National Instant Check System;
- Because "compromise" means losing freedom, you will not "compromise" on this issue, including any "lite" version of registering
private sales through the National Instant Check System; and
- As a member of one of the organizations comprising the National
Coalition to Stop the Gun Ban, you will support coordinated Coalition
action against any legislator who supports gun control.
Hat tip to No Lawyers, Only Guns and Money
Chris at Armaborealis has a contact tool for Maryland legislators
and a sample letter.
The battle is going badly; write your senators NOW!
Sebastian has a status update
on the Senate gun control fight. It doesn't look good:
Every gun owner's voice must be heard -- STARTING WITH YOURS!!!
Call the Capitol Hill switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask for your Senators by name. Or, email your Senators by going to NRA-ILA's "Let Your Voice Be Heard" webpage.
Whether you call or email, make sure you tell your Senators to vote NO on any gun ban - NO on any magazine ban - NO on criminalizing private firearms transfers - and NO on any gun registration scheme.
Folks, whatever they pass this time around won't have an expiration date. When the NRA asks people to write, it's serious; they don't like to cry wolf. Write your representatives.
I am an NRA life member. I vote in general elections and in primaries. I vote on my right to keep and bear arms, and I vote for freedom.
I urge you to vote NO on magazine bans. I urge you to vote NO on firearm bans. I urge you to vote NO on gun registration. I urge you to vote NO on criminalizing private firearms transfers.
VOTE NO ON GUN CONTROL.
There are a lot of people out there, probably writing to you, who get all worked up about whatever the media storm of the day is. Yesterday they were writing about global warming. Today they are writing to demand gun control. Tomorrow they will be writing about windmills, or saving snails, or the avian flu.
I am not one of those people.
I was paying attention, and writing to Congress, when the so-called assault weapons ban expired in 2004. My firearms and politics blog followed that issue closely. My contribution to that debate, however small, helped block the renewal of that law.
I am paying attention today, when a gun-hating president calls upon Congress to ignore the 2nd Amendment and punish law abiding gun owners. I will publicly name and shame those who vote to infringe the right to keep and bear arms. I will praise those who vote to preserve it.
I will be paying attention tomorrow, when you are up for election again. I will remember then how you vote now, and I will make sure that my friends, neighbors, coworkers, customers, employers, service providers, aerial survey pilots, fellow gun show attendees, google earth users viewing satellite pictures of the sign on my roof, and anyone close enough to read my bumper stickers knows how you voted on this issue.
Vote the right way.
VOTE NO ON GUN CONTROL.
Legislator Contact Tool
One from Smith and Wesson
, another from Ruger
Two companies that have learned
not to collaborate
with the enemy. It's my understanding that both companies have come under new management and significantly improved their posture since those learning experiences. I mention them not to attack either company at this point, but to remind others who may be thinking of making deals with the administration that there is a price to pay for doing so.
And, of course, to remind you, gentle reader, to contact your representatives today. A personal note is best, but using either of the above tools will be better than nothing.
Pro-gun democratic senator being pressured by anti-gun groups
If you're in North Dakota, or just have a few minutes, you might want to offer some encouragement
for a Democrat willing to call the various gun control proposals being floated "way in the extreme".
Who you should contact TODAY
It's up to you to figure out how to reach your Representative
(Ruger has stepped up with contact forms if you are lazy
), but I will tell you what they need to hear about.
It's more effective to write for yourself, without using a form letter. Don't suggest compromises, even if you believe there are compromises you would be willing to make: lawmakers need to hear that we don't want these laws to keep their spines stiff. They will compromise if they think they have to, our job is to convince them that they don't have to.
First and foremost, BE POLITE! You can be firm, but don't be threatening or talk about how you won't comply. You are just telling your legislator how you want them to represent you. You want to be a rational, literate constituent whose letter represents thousands of other people who didn't take the time to write themselves, not the crazy homeless guy who talks like Rambo.
Second, tell them you OPPOSE all forms of gun control. Make that point straight off before you get to specifics. If something new comes up you may not get a chance to write before it is voted on.
Third, tell them your position on specific legislation that you know about.
For the House of Representatives, via A Keyboard and a .45
- HR 137: I OPPOSE this bill. This is effectively a national firearms registry.
- HR 138: I OPPOSE this bill. It bans standard capacity magazines used in modern sporting rifles and self-defense weapons by millions of law abiding (and voting) Americans.
- HR 141: I OPPOSE this bill. It requires background checks for all firearm sales at gun shows, which is nothing more than another registration scheme. All dealers at gun shows are required to perform their usual background checks on sales.
- HR 142: I OPPOSE this bill. It bans mail-order purchase of ammunition, requires licensing of ammunition dealers, and requires reporting of ammunition purchases in quantities that I use up in a single trip to a shooting range and would cost less than a good dinner on the way home.
- HR 34: I OPPOSE this bill. We do not license fundamental rights, and we do not register firearms.
- HR 117: I OPPOSE this bill. We do not license fundamental rights, and we do not register firearms. This applies to handguns as well as rifles and shotguns.
- HR 65: I OPPOSE this bill. It raises the age requirement for handguns to 21. If 18 is old enough to join the military and serve our country honorably by driving tanks or flying bombers, it's old enough to defend your own life.
- HR 21: I OPPOSE this bill. It is NOT supported by the NRA. It criminalizes the private sale of firearms, creates an effective firearms registration system, makes it a crime to have your own firearm stolen, and places inappropriate and unconstitutional requirements on states.
Our best bet to stop legislation is the House. Start with the Speaker of the House, then the Judiciary Committee, and then your own representative just in case.
Once you have demonstrated that you are paying attention (by listing the specific legislation) remind them that you have friends and you will be keeping your friends informed as well. Remember, you are just one person, but every one person who writes represents thousands more who did not.
Sebastian is reporting
on an effort in your state to ban "inherently dangerous firearms". As he says, you only get one chance to stop things like this
, it's very hard to repeal a law once passed.
The JPFO are asking for donations to help them boot the BATFE
It seems that USA 3000 Airline has banned guns in baggage, according to David Hardy at Of Arms and the Law
That's fairly silly; transport of firearms that way is extensively
regulated and quite safe when those regulations are followed. The
biggest risk is probably theft by a baggage handler.
I'm not sure what the airline thinks it has to gain from this, aside
from scoring political points with people flying on the airline, who
may not realize that transporting firearms that way is quite legal and
reasonably common. But in deciding to forbid the practice, it has
certainly made itself a target for a boycott from supporters of gun
I would be interested to know the economic outcome of the decision;
does it cost them more to ban the practice and suffer the boycott, or
do their other customers appreciate it enough to make up for the
We probably won't ever find out.
David's post, linked above, has contact info if you want to give them a piece of your mind.
Jerry the Geek
questions another Geek (with a .45)
about the injuries allegedly sustained by Patricia Konie when she was
recently jackbooted, noting that the woman on the video is able to lift
her dog into a vehicle, and questioning whether she could have been
injured as badly as claimed in the lawsuit.
I don't have any more information than what's in the lawsuit, but I do
understand a little bit about the nature of lawsuits. First, the
text quoted in my own post on the story
is from the complaint in the
lawsuit; that's important, because it means the account therein was
written by Konie's lawyer, and it was written to establish two things:
the legal basis for Konie's claim for damages, and the extent of those
Generally, courts do not issue awards randomly. They are usually
based some combination of actual damages (eg, costs incurred in healing
the injury, medical care, repairing or replacing property, etc),
punitive damages (awarded without a showing of cost, to discourage
violations), and legal fees (because the injured party should not have
to pay their lawyer if the other party is clearly in the wrong -- the
lawyer's fees are another cost to repair the original injury, except
that they are not always awarded).
So when you file your initial complaint, you are looking to establish from the beginning the extent
of the damages your client suffered, if not necessarily a precise
accounting at that stage. You're going to have a hard time
convincing the court to order damages for injuries that magically
appear later on in the case, so you include everything you think you
might claim eventually. Most likely that's all that's going on
here. If the complaint says the injuries "may" require surgery,
what he's really saying is that they haven't required surgery yet
, but that they might.
Since the complaint was filed towards the end of November, and the
press release is datelined mid-December, I'd say that the injuries did
in fact require surgery between the time the complaint was filed and
the press released issued. Since the press release is
considerably more detailed about those injuries than the complaint, I'd
say there are good odds that the medical care obtained in the meantime
helped to diagnose the injuries that had been inflicted.
I don't know anything about dislocated shoulders, never having had one,
but hypothetically, if I was being "evacuated" and one of my shoulders
was dislocated, I would be lifting animals with the other arm. Just something to bear in mind.
The Gun Owners of America
are urging us to support Kaloogian's campaign for Congress
, by way of a district in California. He's got good qualifications:
As a California Assemblyman from 1994-2000, Mr. Kaloogian
fought tenaciously against the most radical anti-gun agenda in the
country. Working with Gun Owners of America, Kaloogian lead the fight
against SB 23, the expansion of the ban on "so-called" Assault Weapons,
SB 15, the Safe Handgun laws that were really meant to ban
seat is currently open, and will be filled by special election within
the next few months. Since it's a special election with no
incumbent, there will likely be relatively small turnout, which means
that Kaloogian has a chance at winning if he can mobilize enough people
who care about the gun issue.
In any case, GOA says he's worth supporting, and that's good enough for me.
The Gun Owners of America are urging you to contact Congress regarding the Patriot Act renewal legislation
. Here's why:
Capitol Hill sources have told GOA there is a provision in this bill
(Section 215) which would allow the FBI to get a secret court order to
seize ANY business records it believes would be relevant to an
anti-terrorism investigation... without having to make the case that
the gun records they're confiscating have any connection to a suspected
215 is the same provision that allows for seizure of library records
(what you're reading about) and similar privacy threats. While
passing the Patriot Act in the wake of 9-11 could possibly be excused
as an emergency situation, it has now been over 4 years since that
event. How many terrorists -- real terrorists, not prostitutes or
drug users -- have been captured and convicted because of evidence
obtained through section 215?
The answer seems clear: not enough to justify abrogating our Constitutional rights.
Doctors against guns...
Sometimes, it's hard to give the proper response ("That's none of your
business!") to a doctor who wants to abuse his position of authority to
inquire about guns in your home. Doctors do have a lot of status
as an authority figure, and pediatricians in particular tap into the
parental instinct to protect their children. In order to make it
easier to make your point, without getting into an argument that might
distress your kids and offend your doctor, KeepAndBearArms.com
brings us the Firearms Safety Counseling Representation
form. Good work, guys. Hat tip to The War on Guns
for pointing it out.UPDATE: Fixed the link to War on Guns. No idea how that got messed up; sorry.
The Gun Owners of America
are calling for your help
in pressuring the public officials and military officers in charge of
investigating and prosecuting the confiscatory criminals of Katrina and
In light of this overwhelming evidence, GOA urged General Fine
to "investigate who are the guilty parties who need to be
accountable for perpetrating these harmful acts against
Get your letters out, folks
General Fine has the authority to investigate the criminal acts
federal officials and to refer them for
So far, it appears that General Fine has been dragging his feet on
this request -- which is why he may need to hear from folks
. If they can get away with confiscating firearms, they'll do it, whether it's "legal" or not.
... has passed the House
. Alphecca has a good description
of what it does (and what it doesn't). It's already passed the
Senate. There shouldn't be a problem with Bush signing it, after
which many of the lawsuits against firearms manufacturers will be
dismissed. The case that I have been following, DC v Beretta
, should be one of them.
UPDATE: Looks like the trigger lock requirement was included in this
version. That's disappointing, since the version without that
requirement could also have passed. The problem would have been
time; reconciling the bills between the House and the Senate would have
required more time, and more time means more legal costs defending the
suits already in motion.
While I think the trigger lock and "armor-piercing ammunition"
provisions are both silly and bad precedent, as a practical matter
their effect is small. The real risk is later laws requiring the
use of trigger locks, or lawsuits that make not using them subject to
significant risk of liability.
Massachussetts is determined to become a third-world country...
... by banning
.50 rifles and ammunition, confiscating them from their citizens
immediately (which prevents the citizens from selling them to someone
who could legally own them). For some reason they are also
banning "cop killer" handguns, whatever those are.
Thanks to Techno Gypsy
for spotting it. If you're in Massachussetts, you might want to
contact your legislature. It probably won't stop them, but it's
worth a try.
Mr. Completely has the scoop on a proposed hunting ban on Whidbey Island
. He's also got email addresses you can send your comments to.
Click the link above and show your support for the Libertarian candidate.
<-- Prev Displaying results 0 - 25 of 282 Next -->
Read this group via RSS or
Enter your email address to receive email updates for new entries in this group: