Post by: wingnutx on February 15, 2007, 12:44:32 PM
Quote
Yesterday we learned of more unnecessary deaths from gun violence in Philadelphia, PA and Salt Lake City, UT. I am saddened to hear of these events and have introduced legislation that if enacted will prevent further violence.
In Philadelphia, a gunman opened fire on his colleagues using an AK-47 assault rifle he legally purchased. These dangerous weapons, which are intended to hit multiple targets in a short period of time, were allowed back on our streets when the federal ban on assault weapons expired in 2004. The deaths in Philadelphia could have been prevented if Congress had done its job of protecting the homeland and renewed the assault weapons ban.
I have again introduced legislation to permanently ban assault weapons. These weapons have no practical use. They are not used by hunters for sport or by individuals for self-defense. They are intended to kill as many individuals as possible in a short amount of time and have no place on our streets. The unfortunate situation in Philadelphia could have been avoided if Congress stood up to the gun lobby in 2004.
http://carolynmccarthy.house.gov/index.cfm?ContentID=686&ParentID=0&SectionID=32&SectionTree=32&lnk=b&ItemID=675
In Philadelphia, a gunman opened fire on his colleagues using an AK-47 assault rifle he legally purchased. These dangerous weapons, which are intended to hit multiple targets in a short period of time, were allowed back on our streets when the federal ban on assault weapons expired in 2004. The deaths in Philadelphia could have been prevented if Congress had done its job of protecting the homeland and renewed the assault weapons ban.
I have again introduced legislation to permanently ban assault weapons. These weapons have no practical use. They are not used by hunters for sport or by individuals for self-defense. They are intended to kill as many individuals as possible in a short amount of time and have no place on our streets. The unfortunate situation in Philadelphia could have been avoided if Congress stood up to the gun lobby in 2004.
http://carolynmccarthy.house.gov/index.cfm?ContentID=686&ParentID=0&SectionID=32&SectionTree=32&lnk=b&ItemID=675
Post by: 280plus on February 15, 2007, 01:08:59 PM
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on February 15, 2007, 01:29:36 PM
Oh, wait...
Post by: drewtam on February 15, 2007, 01:59:47 PM
Oh, wait...
Post by: mustanger98 on February 15, 2007, 03:00:30 PM
Instead of banning guns, we need to ban politicians.
Post by: Cosmoline on February 15, 2007, 03:34:51 PM
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d110:9:./temp/~bdki8n:
/bss/d110query.html|Post by: The Rabbi on February 15, 2007, 04:25:52 PM
Post by: Manedwolf on February 15, 2007, 04:35:34 PM
Either the DLC will tell her to shut the hell up and knock it off, or it's a good tool to pop the Obama/Hillary bubble.
Post by: mustanger98 on February 15, 2007, 05:29:22 PM
Quote
the proverbial snowball.
The one in hell? Yeah.
Post by: RocketMan on February 15, 2007, 06:46:11 PM
Post by: French G. on February 15, 2007, 07:13:00 PM
Post by: Manedwolf on February 16, 2007, 04:23:03 AM
Don't be surprised if this bill grows some legs. I don't subscribe to the theory that the Democrat party still believes gun control is the third rail of politics. They are in power, and IMO they will exercise that power, to our detriment.
If it goes any farther, we CAN use it as a tool. If it goes farther, shout it from the rooftops, print up pamplets that are easy to read and leave them at gun shops, ranges, hunting weigh-in stations, community centers and houses of worship (that are not soccer-parent-anti sorts), and LET PEOPLE KNOW. With the reminder that if Obama or Hillary get in, they'll have carte blanche to do just that.
Be reasonable in your composition. Come off as "these rifles saved peoples' lives after Katrina", not all "Turner diaries".
Post by: The Rabbi on February 16, 2007, 04:25:24 AM
Don't be surprised if this bill grows some legs. I don't subscribe to the theory that the Democrat party still believes gun control is the third rail of politics. They are in power, and IMO they will exercise that power, to our detriment.
I believe she introduces this every session. It will get nowhere, as the lack of co-sponsors indicates. Just something for her to bring home to show she is "serious about crime."
Oddly the bill is getting publicity by all the nonsense on gun boards. I'd suggest we just STFU and let it die, like all the other bills she's introduced.
Post by: Manedwolf on February 16, 2007, 04:34:55 AM
Don't be surprised if this bill grows some legs. I don't subscribe to the theory that the Democrat party still believes gun control is the third rail of politics. They are in power, and IMO they will exercise that power, to our detriment.
I believe she introduces this every session. It will get nowhere, as the lack of co-sponsors indicates. Just something for her to bring home to show she is "serious about crime."
Oddly the bill is getting publicity by all the nonsense on gun boards. I'd suggest we just STFU and let it die, like all the other bills she's introduced.
Even if it can be leveraged into a way to help kill the Obama-mania among the "mainstream"? I agree, if it goes no further, ignore it. But if it DOES get out of committee...
Post by: denfoote1 on February 16, 2007, 08:14:16 PM
My Congress Critter has been e-mailed.
Post by: El Tejon on February 17, 2007, 07:12:50 AM
However, I concur that this is an Awkward Stage.
Post by: wmenorr67 on February 19, 2007, 10:04:03 AM
Post by: cosine on February 19, 2007, 10:09:19 AM
I just looked at the bill as it was introduced. There is nothing about banning anything in there. All the bill is messing with is changing the NICS. Main think is making sure that records are updated quicker from state and local levels.
Correct, but she also sponsored a bill (H.R. 1022) about the same time to essentially re-authorize the Federal AWB, except this time with a few more restrictions. http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=256516
Post by: wmenorr67 on February 19, 2007, 10:48:09 AM
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:1:./temp/~c110NKTBhv::
Goes as far to spell out certain individual models that would be wrong to purchase and even transfer.
Post by: cosine on February 19, 2007, 10:50:14 AM
Cosine you are correct and here is a link to the full text of the bill as it is now written
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:1:./temp/~c110NKTBhv::
Goes as far to spell out certain individual models that would be wrong to purchase and even transfer.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:1:./temp/~c110NKTBhv::
Goes as far to spell out certain individual models that would be wrong to purchase and even transfer.
Here's the long thread on THR about it: http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=255366
Post by: Manedwolf on February 19, 2007, 01:13:32 PM
Cosine you are correct and here is a link to the full text of the bill as it is now written
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:1:./temp/~c110NKTBhv::
Goes as far to spell out certain individual models that would be wrong to purchase and even transfer.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:1:./temp/~c110NKTBhv::
Goes as far to spell out certain individual models that would be wrong to purchase and even transfer.
Looks like they cribbed the Cook County list. I notice my Kel-Tec on there, even though it's a pistol-calber carbine. Whee.