U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-19-2009, 04:59 PM
 
Location: In a house
5,230 posts, read 7,326,460 times
Reputation: 2558

Advertisements

Heres common sense gun law, bout time too!

Quote:
Gun Owners Are On The Verge Of A Huge, Legislative Victory
-- The next few days could see the end of the pernicious gun ban on NPS
lands

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

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Get ready to pinch yourself.

After eight years of clashing with anti-gun bureaucrats and
congressional leadership hostile to gun rights, we have never been
closer to victory in the battle to repeal the National Park Service
(NPS) gun ban.

As you are by now undoubtedly aware, NPS land is subject to a blanket
gun ban. A Bush administration regulation partially reversing the ban
was singlehandedly negated recently by an activist judge in Washington,
D.C.

Gun Owners of America reported last week about an amendment to repeal
the gun ban, sponsored by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), that passed by an
overwhelming 67-29 vote. Senator Coburn attached his amendment to a
fast-moving "must pass bill," H.R. 627, dealing with credit card
industry reform.

The Coburn amendment simply allows for state law -- not unelected
bureaucrats and activist judges -- to govern the carrying of firearms on
NPS land.

"Visitors to national parks also should have the right to defend
themselves in accordance with the laws of their states," Sen. Coburn
said.

The Senate wrapped up business on the underlying bill today, while the
House passed its version of the bill several weeks ago. The measure now
heads back to the House to be "reconciled" with the Senate bill.

The problem for anti-gun House leaders is that their priority bill, H.R.
627, now contains a pro-gun amendment. Speaker Nancy Pelosi is forced
to either delay the entire bill in order to try to strip the popular
pro-gun amendment out later in the year, or allow the underlying bill to
move through the House before Memorial Day with the Coburn amendment
intact.

Sources close to the situation tell GOA that the Democrat leadership,
which has opposed the NPS gun ban repeal at every turn, may have finally
run out of options. The enormous outpouring of grassroots activism from
GOA supporters may have at last convinced congressional leaders that if
they bury this measure yet again, the repercussions will reverberate
into the next election.

President Obama wants to sign this credit card legislation before
Memorial Day. So it is possible that there will be just one more vote
on this issue in the House this week. As of today, it appears the
leadership plans to bring the underlying bill to the floor in two pieces
for two separate votes -- one on the main bill and one on the Coburn
amendment.

If both pieces pass the House, then they can be combined together as one
bill and sent directly to the President without going to a House-Senate
conference committee. (There would be no need to iron out differences
in conference committee since the Senate would have already passed the
exact same version of the bill.)

Bottom line: we just need to make certain that the gun ban repeal
amendment passes in the House, after which it will be joined back up
with the main bill and signed into law. That's why the action item
below -- asking you to urge your Representative to vote for repealing
the NPS gun ban -- is so crucial.

This could be the last strike in a long battle, but even on the cusp of
winning GOA has also learned that some -- supposedly on the pro-gun side
-- are willing to compromise away this victory. Please be absolutely
sure to take the action below, and then forward this email to your
pro-gun friends.

And remember, the progress we have made on this issue would not be
possible without your support. GOA has been the lone voice fighting for
this gun ban repeal on Capitol Hill.

Action: Contact your Representative and urge that the Coburn amendment
remain attached to H.R. 627. The vote is scheduled to occur this week!

Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Rep. the pre-written
e-mail message below.

----- Pre-written letter -----

Dear Representative,

Last week, an amendment to repeal the National Park Service (NPS) gun
ban passed overwhelmingly in the Senate by a vote of 67-29 as part of
the credit card reform bill.

NPS land is subject to a blanket gun ban. Although a Bush
administration regulation partially reversed the ban, that reversal was
singlehandedly negated by an activist judge in Washington, D.C.

The pro-gun amendment, sponsored by Sen. Tom Coburn, prevents unelected
bureaucrats and activist judges from stripping me of my Second Amendment
rights on NPS land.

It appears that the leadership plans to bring the underlying bill to the
floor in two pieces for two separate votes -- one on the main bill and
one on the Coburn amendment.

I urge you to stand up for my Second Amendment rights and to support the
effort to keep the Coburn amendment attached to the underlying bill,
H.R. 627.

Gun Owners of America will score this vote in its congressional rating,
and will inform me of how you vote.


****************************

What's Your Current GOA Status?

Obviously, we now face years of invigorated attacks on our gun rights.
Shutting down gun shows, prohibitions on specific calibers, another
semi-auto ban, and the anti-gun extremists' Holy Grail of mandatory
federal licensing and registration of all gun owners -- these are just
some of the horrors that we already know we'll have to defeat head-on.
Meanwhile, we'll take every opportunity to go on offense and advance the
Second Amendment.

It can't be done without every single voice being counted. That's why we
are asking you to consider making the commitment of becoming a Gun
Owners of America Life Member. By doing so, you put the politicians on
notice that neither you nor GOA is going away -- that no matter who's in
the White House, there is always going to be a solid wall of resistance.

Now is a perfect time to become a Life Member. And if you aren't a GOA
member at all, isn't it time you became one?

Please go to Join GOA Online With our Secure Online Membership form. to upgrade your
participation in GOA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-19-2009, 05:04 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,638,476 times
Reputation: 35881
If you guys want Congress to pass a bill to allow you to carry loaded guns in Yellowstone Park or Fenway Park, why don't you just be a man and ask a congressman to introduce a bill to do that, and let the citizenry knowledgeably and openly advise and consent on it. Instead of sneakily attaching it to the Credit Card bill? If the gun lobby wants to be sneaky bastrads, I will call them sneaky batsards. And I will regard everything you ever propose or say as being an example of this kind of underhanded sneakiness that you are so good at and so willing to partake in. You say ylu have a majority on your side. OK, then, introduce the bill in broad daylight, the people will pass it, and everybody has what they want. No sneaky batsrads.

The Cynical Gun Debate | Joan McCarter | Politics | NewWest.Net
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2009, 05:50 PM
 
Location: In a house
5,230 posts, read 7,326,460 times
Reputation: 2558
Guess we are learning how to make progress in a Democratic congress.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2009, 10:27 PM
 
Location: vagabond
2,631 posts, read 4,835,130 times
Reputation: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
If you guys want Congress to pass a bill to allow you to carry loaded guns in Yellowstone Park or Fenway Park, why don't you just be a man and ask a congressman to introduce a bill to do that, and let the citizenry knowledgeably and openly advise and consent on it. Instead of sneakily attaching it to the Credit Card bill? If the gun lobby wants to be sneaky bastrads, I will call them sneaky batsards. And I will regard everything you ever propose or say as being an example of this kind of underhanded sneakiness that you are so good at and so willing to partake in. You say ylu have a majority on your side. OK, then, introduce the bill in broad daylight, the people will pass it, and everybody has what they want. No sneaky batsrads.

The Cynical Gun Debate | Joan McCarter | Politics | NewWest.Net
for some reason, this post looks strangely familiar, almost like it was copy-n-paste from another one...

...another one that sneakily ignored the sneaky underhanded dealings of its sneaky poster's own sneaky political party...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2009, 10:54 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,638,476 times
Reputation: 35881
Quote:
Originally Posted by stycotl View Post
for some reason, this post looks strangely familiar,...

So does this thread. If you guys want to keep several threads on the same subject going at the same time, I reserve the right to respond to any of them in which my response is not off-topic. Stop starting new threads on the same subject, and I wouldn't be tempted to do this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2009, 11:08 PM
 
Location: NW Nevada
13,340 posts, read 10,921,891 times
Reputation: 12291
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
So does this thread. If you guys want to keep several threads on the same subject going at the same time, I reserve the right to respond to any of them in which my response is not off-topic. Stop starting new threads on the same subject, and I wouldn't be tempted to do this.
This thread is about laws already on the books as opposed to what some people want to see on the books. If you have no REAL options to present for review or debate, and find the discussion redundant, don't post. Pretty simple. I didn't start this thread to get into arguments, I want to hear what 'common sense' means to different people. So please troll elsewhere. The fish ain't biting in this hole.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2009, 11:19 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,638,476 times
Reputation: 35881
Quote:
Originally Posted by NVplumber View Post
This thread is about laws already on the books as opposed to what some people want to see on the books. .
Read your own OP. You specifically exclude gun laws already on the books in the parameters that you set out yourself:


I hear this term a LOT from We Hate Guns Inc.. Would someone please outline what 'common sense' measures need to be implemented in regards to my firearms rights? When one examines all the EXISTING laws it seems that this has already been addressed. So, would someone please enlighten me as to what measures need to be put in place that will make a wisp of a difference in stopping criminals from obtaining and using firearms by and for illegal means?

My comment that you so strongly object to was addresses specifically to a new piece of gun legislation that is being debated at this very hour. Waaaay off toplc, right? We Love Guns Inc disapproves of my view, so the purpose of this thread is to line up all your gun buddies to shout me down.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2009, 12:04 AM
 
Location: vagabond
2,631 posts, read 4,835,130 times
Reputation: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
So does this thread.
as do all of them that are started by your antigun buddies that want to shout down the 2nd amendment. really, who cares–i mean, beside the mods anyway–if there are multiple threads with the same (or similar) topics?

i reserve the right to poke fun of copy-n-paste responses. if that hurts your feelings, maybe we can discuss it politely elsewhere. maybe we could even start a thread about that.

Quote:
If you guys want to keep several threads on the same subject going at the same time, I reserve the right to respond to any of them in which my response is not off-topic. Stop starting new threads on the same subject, and I wouldn't be tempted to do this.
Quote:
We Love Guns Inc disapproves of my view, so the purpose of this thread is to line up all your gun buddies to shout me down.
while i am now confused about the actual point to this thread too, i don't think that this claim is accurate, and i don't think that you believe it to be accurate either.

i think he started out with a legit question and then got bogged down when the thread turned toward the same thing that these threads always turn into–gun-vs-antigun threads.

that's just me though.

incidentally, no one is shouting....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2009, 12:04 AM
 
Location: NW Nevada
13,340 posts, read 10,921,891 times
Reputation: 12291
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Read your own OP. You specifically exclude gun laws already on the books in the parameters that you set out yourself:


I hear this term a LOT from We Hate Guns Inc.. Would someone please outline what 'common sense' measures need to be implemented in regards to my firearms rights? When one examines all the EXISTING laws it seems that this has already been addressed. So, would someone please enlighten me as to what measures need to be put in place that will make a wisp of a difference in stopping criminals from obtaining and using firearms by and for illegal means?

My comment that you so strongly object to was addresses specifically to a new piece of gun legislation that is being debated at this very hour. Waaaay off toplc, right? We Love Guns Inc disapproves of my view, so the purpose of this thread is to line up all your gun buddies to shout me down.
I intended to exclude nothing, and I'm certainly not 'lining up my buddy's' to shout anyone down. You are acting as if I aimed this thread specifically at you. Thats pretty arrogant. Please confine your posts to what you feel 'common sense gun control' to be, what it is you feel is lacking in that dept with existing laws etc. As I said, I'm not here to argue or refute opinions. Merely getting an inside look at what proponents of gun control feel 'common sense' means. I even admited my bias on the issue, but have not attacked ANYONES views here, nor will I. Funny how that would bother you so and make you feel singled out, you are a newbie on this thread, so, how is it that I have gathered my forces against you? I am genuianally bemused as to your angst. Wound a bit tight are you? Lol, you should try shooting, great stress reliever.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2009, 12:14 AM
 
Location: NW Nevada
13,340 posts, read 10,921,891 times
Reputation: 12291
Quote:
Originally Posted by stycotl View Post
as do all of them that are started by your antigun buddies that want to shout down the 2nd amendment. really, who cares–i mean, beside the mods anyway–if there are multiple threads with the same (or similar) topics?

i reserve the right to poke fun of copy-n-paste responses. if that hurts your feelings, maybe we can discuss it politely elsewhere. maybe we could even start a thread about that.

while i am now confused about the actual point to this thread too, i don't think that this claim is accurate, and i don't think that you believe it to be accurate either.

i think he started out with a legit question and then got bogged down when the thread turned toward the same thing that these threads always turn into–gun-vs-antigun threads.

that's just me though.

incidentally, no one is shouting....
Yes it has bogged down in the quagmire of pro/anti rhetoric, which I was studiously trying to avoid by not offering refute to posted opinion on proposed measures.. As close as I got there was stating that some of the proposals were already on the books. I would rather like to steer back in the intended direction, which was to hear the other sides proposals without firing back, and thus , perhaps, gain some insight into the mentality behind certain peoples fears about firearms and we who own and use them. I thought my intent was clear, but apparently, I was mistaken.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top