Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: TwentyFo on June 03, 2008, 05:50:07 PM
-
As I've mentioned in posts before, the NRA is a worthless organization. They claim to stand for second ammendment rights, but all they seem to do is make compormises (mainly with democrats in Washington). We need to pull our support from the NRA and switch it to the Gun Owners of America.
Gun Owners of America have proven over the years to not take no for an answer on 2nd ammendment rights. They have been highly critical of some NRA pracitices, and rightfully so. Ron Paul has endorsed this organization as being one of the only no-comprommise gun lobby organizations in Washington. I'm really tired of seeing our 2nd ammendment rights being chipped at year after year. We need to do something now. Let me know what you think about this.
-
(http://www.wortfilter.de/kurios/0701/troll-ex/index-Dateien/troll_spray.jpg)
-
Or you could support both.
-
Let me know what you think about this.
(http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q37/acfireguy26/11986033501.jpg)
-
See Rule #5
-
(http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q37/acfireguy26/11986033501.jpg)
:lol :lol :lol :lol
-
I keep my 2nd Amendment Rights in my house...armed and loaded.
Mac
-
We should be looking for ways to unite more then were looking for ways to split.
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rule #5
-
So we know what we're discussing, this is the legislation in question. It looks sensible to me. Seems to actually improve things by addressing some loose ends. I do understand any suspicion toward anything Schumer and McCarthy are associated with, but can't find hidden agenda with this. I believe for the most part such fears are unfounded concerning this particular legislation.
Les
Background Checks/ NICS
H.R. 2640, the "NICS Improvement Amendments Act"
The NICS Improvement Amendments Act (H.R. 2640) would require federal agencies to provide relevant records for use in NICS. It would also provide financial incentives to states to do the same, by rewarding states that provide records to NICS and penalizing those that refuse to do so over an extended period of time.
Some pro-gun groups have claimed that H.R. 2640 would “prohibit” thousands of people from owning guns. This is not true; these bills would only enforce current prohibitions. In fact, H.R. 2640 would allow some people now unfairly prohibited from owning guns to have their rights restored, and to have their names removed from the instant check system.
The following are the key provisions of H.R. 2640, introduced by Reps. John Dingell (D-Mich.), Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) and Rick Boucher (D-Va.), which passed the House of Representatives by a voice vote on June 13, 2007.
Key Provisions of H.R. 2640
* H.R. 2640 would prevent use of federal “adjudications” that consist only of medical diagnoses without findings that the people involved are dangerous or mentally incompetent. This would ensure that purely medical records are never used in NICS. Gun ownership rights would only be lost as a result of a finding that the person is a danger to himself or others, or lacks the capacity to manage his own affairs.
* H.R. 2640 would require all federal agencies that impose mental health adjudications or commitments (such as the VA) to provide a process for “relief from disabilities.” The bill allows de novo judicial review when an agency denies relief—that is, the court would look at the application on its merits, rather than deferring to the agency’s earlier decision.
* As a practical matter, the mental health disability is the only firearm disqualifier that can never be removed. Criminal records can be expunged or pardoned, but mental records cannot.
* While BATFE used to have the ability to accept applications to remove individuals’ prohibited status, appropriations riders every year since 1992 have barred it from doing so. Allowing this process through H.R. 2640 would be an improvement over the current law.
* Under H.R. 2640, even if a person is inappropriately committed or declared incompetent by a federal agency, the person would have an opportunity to correct the error—either through the agency or in court.
* H.R. 2640 would prevent reporting of mental adjudications or commitments by federal agencies when those adjudications or commitments have been removed.
* H.R. 2640 would also make clear that if a federal adjudication or commitment has expired or been removed, it would no longer bar a person from possessing or receiving firearms under the Gun Control Act.
* This actually restores the person’s rights, as well as deleting the record from NICS—a significant improvement over current law.
* States that receive funding would also need to have a relief from disabilities program for mental adjudications and commitments. State relief programs would have to provide for de novo judicial review, as in the federal programs.
* Relief granted by a state program would remove the federal prohibition on the person possessing or receiving a firearm under the Gun Control Act—again, an improvement over current law.
* Many states have processes for temporary emergency commitments that allow a short-term commitment based only on affidavits from police, doctors or family members, without opportunity for a hearing. Because federal law prohibits gun possession by a person who “has been” committed, a person committed under such a process can’t possess a gun even after full release from the temporary order. By requiring participating states to have a relief program that actually removes the disability, H.R. 2640 would be a significant improvement over current law.
* The legislation would improve the accuracy and completeness of NICS by requiring federal agencies and participating states to provide relevant records. For instance, it would give states an incentive to report people such as Virginia Tech murderer Seung-Hui Cho—that is, people who were found after a full court hearing to be a danger to themselves or others, but not reported to NICS due to lack of funding or contrary state laws.
* The legislation requires removal of expired, incorrect or otherwise irrelevant records. Today, totally innocent people (e.g., individuals with arrest records, who were never convicted of the crime charged) are sometimes subject to delayed or denied firearm purchases because of incomplete records in the system.
* The legislation prohibits federal fees for NICS checks. Under current law, only annual appropriations riders prohibit the FBI from trying to impose fees by regulation (as the Clinton Administration proposed in 1998). A permanent ban on such a “gun tax” has been an NRA priority for nearly a decade.
* The legislation requires an audit by the Government Accountability Office of funds already spent for criminal history improvements. There has only been limited documentation of how hundreds of millions of dollars intended for NICS were spent on non-NICS programs such as automated fingerprint systems.
Voluntary Psychological Treatment
Neither current federal law, nor H.R. 2640, would prohibit gun possession by people who have voluntarily sought psychological counseling or checked themselves into a hospital:
* Current law only prohibits gun possession by people who have been “adjudicated as a mental defective” or “committed to any mental institution.” Current BATFE regulations specifically exclude commitments for observation and voluntary commitments. Records of voluntary treatment also would not be available under federal and state health privacy laws.
* Similarly, voluntary drug or alcohol treatment would not be reported to NICS. First, voluntary treatment is not a “commitment.” Second, current federal law on gun possession by drug users, as applied in BATFE regulations, only prohibits gun ownership by those whose “unlawful [drug] use has occurred recently enough to indicate that the individual is actively engaged in such conduct.”
* In short, neither current law nor this legislation would affect those who voluntarily get psychological help. No person who needs help for a mental health or substance abuse problem should be deterred from seeking that help due to fear of losing Second Amendment rights.
-
If that means you like to pointlessly troll then yes, you are.
Did you think anyone would mistake this for anything more than it is on face value?
I don't understand what you are talking about. How does one troll his/her own post. I just wish you guys would tackle this issue. In my mind, you are the one trolling. Go away.
-
I keep my 2nd Amendment Rights in my house...armed and loaded.
Mac
Mine gets to ride around in a holster with me. I call her Gertrude.
:D
-
Mine gets to ride around in a holster with me. I call her Gertrude.
:D
Mine too, her name is Maggie and her 3 kids (mag1, mag2 and mag3). She is about 40(SW)
hehehehe
-
Save the whales..............and end world trolling now.
-
*sniff sniff*
Not ripe enough yet
-
Mine gets to ride around in a holster with me. I call her Gertrude.
:D
My god...do you hate your gun that much???
-
twenty fo.. you did get answered by nelson.. You can support both..
surely the lousy $35 a year to the NRA will not break you? If you look at all the great things they have done for gun owners over even the last year you would see that it is worth 10 times that much or more.
Not to mention.. ya get a free monthly gun magazine with every membership to the NRA.. One of the better gun mags out there.
I do know that you are filled with bitter hate for everything second amendment and are all atwitter and wet over the possibility of the first almost african pres.. you take his words to heart and come here.. you.. like him see a bunch of old white guys clinging to religion and guns as an obstacle to be overcome.. to be crushed.. in order to build a socialist utopia where.. dare I say it? The oceans themselves will stop rising!!!
lazs
-
I didnt read the link. what did the NRA do that is bad?
-
Nothing. He is just trying to sling poo. If he actually cared about the 2nd he would have said something other than "Down with the NRA!"
-
twenty fo.. you did get answered by nelson.. You can support both..
surely the lousy $35 a year to the NRA will not break you? If you look at all the great things they have done for gun owners over even the last year you would see that it is worth 10 times that much or more.
Not to mention.. ya get a free monthly gun magazine with every membership to the NRA.. One of the better gun mags out there.
I do know that you are filled with bitter hate for everything second amendment and are all atwitter and wet over the possibility of the first almost african pres.. you take his words to heart and come here.. you.. like him see a bunch of old white guys clinging to religion and guns as an obstacle to be overcome.. to be crushed.. in order to build a socialist utopia where.. dare I say it? The oceans themselves will stop rising!!!
lazs
Laz I'm glad you posted this. I will be humble enough to say that over the last few months of reading posts about 2nd amendment rights I have changed my stance on it. I am conservative when it comes to protecting 2nd amendment rights. However, as far as social issues I remain somewhat liberal. I love guns, but I also love people.
The reason for not supporting the NRA is the fact that they don't really take a stand like the Gun Owners of America do. Unfortunately, the NRA is at the forefront of their supposed support for 2nd amendment rights. We need new leadership in order to make change in Washington. As far as John McCain goes, the Gun Owners of America give him an F when it comes to 2nd amendment issues. Ron Paul gets an A.
-
twenty fo.. excuse me if I am a bit dubious of your newfound conversion to the cause of our fundamental right to keep and bear arms...
If it is genuine tho.. I must say that I am pleased and you are welcome. The problem tho..even if true..is that you seem to be at cross purposes and confused. osama is your man..the democrats are your party.. they are the people and the party of squashing individual gun rights. This would make you confused to say the least but.. add that to the fact that now you don't think the NRA is doing enough? very strange.
You can't support osama and still claim that the NRA endangers your rights don't you see? Gun owners of America is a good group but it doesn't have the clout of the NRA.. If you listen to your democrat buddies they will tell you that the NRA is evil incarnate.. wanting to hand out machine guns to school kids . They do not agree with your assesment of the NRA.. they constantly look for "unreasonable" positions the NRA might take.. It would be childs play to make gun owners of America's organization seem radical and marginalize them.
My solution is to support both.. the NRA for their clout and the Gun Owners of America for their ideals.. one thing about it.. most gun groups stick together in the end.
lazs
-
The reason for not supporting the NRA is the fact that they don't really take a stand like the Gun Owners of America do. Unfortunately, the NRA is at the forefront of their supposed support for 2nd amendment rights. We need new leadership in order to make change in Washington. As far as John McCain goes, the Gun Owners of America give him an F when it comes to 2nd amendment issues. Ron Paul gets an A.
NRA is the lobbying force in Washington, and they have more of a voice and more influence than a group like GOA could imagine. It can, and often has, been argued that NRA compromises too much and is more interested in the status quo and defense than proactive action. There is likely some degree of truth to that. Big truth or little truth? IMO probably more moderate. It should be noted that NRA was well behind the curve on the Heller suit, brought by the Cato Institute. We will soon see if they were being too conservative or if they were correct in not wanting to push that through SCOUTS.
GOA can, frankly, be a bunch of nuts. They are certainly radical, but they seem to bend the truth to try and steal attention from NRA. Frankly, arriving where we are at with gun control has been an incremental process and reversing the tide will be incremental. GOA often seems to have some very unrealistic expectations and criticizes NRA for common sense at times. My preferred radical organization of choice is Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership (JPFO)which actually produces some good educational materials and is non denominational, by and large. They also help provide a counter voice for firearm ownership within the Jewish community which can also be home to some of the more radical gun control leadership.
Be sure to support you local state organizations as well. The biggest threats today are at the state level.
What's exciting is the extent to which the Internet and grassroots activism has bypassed groups like the NRA in so many areas. Using hubs like The High Road ( www.thehighroad.org ) we can respond to negative print articles letters to the editor, online feedback, media gun control polls, plan marches and be there for counter protests, calls to legislators, etc. immediately and without any centralized guidance. Any of the organizations -- national or state can note something and the community immediately responds. We actually are a huge grassroots operation, and not a handful of professional gun control hacks promoted by the Joyce Foundation (Obama was on the board, btw).
Currently, there is apparently going to be a rally at the Daley center in Chicago on Friday next week -- according to a post in activism at THR. I'll take the half day off work to be there. Similarly, I will not attend a counter demonstration against a Jesse Jackson portest at DSA Arms that Saturday because the company has decided to just ignore jackson and his 20 or so bussed in Operation PUSH lackeys (and Father Phlager, no doubt.) BTW, Father Phlager, yes THAT Phlager, called for legislators voting against gun control and a local gunshop owner to be "snuffed out" at one of the last Jackson rqallys on gun control in Chicago.
We could easily outnumber the Jackson crowd 5 - 1 if we wanted to, just like we did the Calif. -based Lawyers Against Gun Violence group "town hall meeting" in the local community of Naperville a month or so ago :) That was actually pretty funny. Grassroots vs. propaganda and a friendly media is how the battle is waged. The anti's just don't have the grassroots support becasue, well, we just don't really have a non criminal vs criminal firearm violence problem to the extent that most would really care about it. Even in the poorest communities the people realize the problems are far deeper than the murder tool. That's why the mayors really like to keep the attention focused on the tool instead of the real problems.
And, on boards like this we can express a pro gun position to a fairly large audience that otherwise would have to rely on the balance (or lack there of) in the media for such discussions. The post readers still get to decide for themselves, but at least they hear a debate.
-
charon.. the JPFO is one of my favorite radical organizations too... it is just toooooo neato.
I mean, they are radical (right tho) but... who can say anything against em? that would be anti semite right?
You can say whatever you want about a bunch of white guys but... it must really broil the liberals to see a jewish organization that believes in the right to keep and bear arms so strongly.
I also agree, and have said so in the past, that this board is a great place to get out the message. Well thought out and documented posts like yours and some of the others have probly changed a lot of minds.
I also think that the very best thing any of us gun owners can do is to invite as many people as we can to go shooting with us. Let them fire our guns and show them what the shooting community is really like. I have never seen anyone who went shooting that didn't lose at least half their former animostity to the second.
lazs
-
I also think that the very best thing any of us gun owners can do is to invite as many people as we can to go shooting with us. Let them fire our guns and show them what the shooting community is really like. I have never seen anyone who went shooting that didn't lose at least half their former animostity to the second.
Yeah, that is a powerful and fun way to promote the cause. You can go to the range and see a father and his young daughters shooting, perhaps the 10-year old practicing for a 4-H marksmanship competition. You see former Veterans enjoying the hobby, People are friendly and willing to talk and share.
I took a friend shooting for the first time who is a very socially liberal suburban school teacher. People engaged him in conversation. I went away for a restroom break and came back to find him shooting someone's Ruger .22 whom he had met while I was gone :) My friend actually turned out to be a natural shot and got bored with the .22 browing semi automatic rifle pretty quickly, loved the carbine and the 91/30. Lots of normal, non stereotypical people around. A really fun day. He was truly excited and toyed with the idea of getting his own gun, but the wife shot him down.
As for the JPFO, that came into play too. My friend is Jewish and at our holiday party much later in the year, he admitted that while he enjoying shooting just he couldn't fully get rid of the anti indoctrination -- even though he admitted it was emotional and not logical. In his profession, and in the northern suburbs of chicago and the attitudes of the urban/suburban Jewish community there is a lot of resistance to firearm ownership. I mentioned the JPFO as a group with a particularly Jewish perspective he might connect with and he was really surprised and interested that there are organized Jews who have another perspective on the issue.
Even more oddly, considering stereotypes... The last time I was at the range the only "Bubba" in camouflage was a young man in Israeli fatigues with a Mossad Hit Squad T-Shirt. Mall Ninja or not, ya gotta love it :)
Charon
-
yep.. I have never met such polite and generous people as a whole than at ranges and in the shooting sports. especially it seems.. at outdoor ranges. People willing to allow you to shoot $5 or more of their ammo out of their $1000 guns. Eager to talk and cheerful.
Contrast that with a gathering of parents at a sporting event like kids soccer where their are often heated arguements and even fights.
While shooting or at ranges...I have met people with thick accents from countries that never allowed them to own firearms.. they all appreciate our freedoms more than we do. Anyone who doubts that an armed society is a polite society needs only spend a pleasant afternoon at a range.. preferably during the week when it is not too crowded. In my experience.. everyone is more than willing to share whatever they have including expertise.
The NRA is responsible for a lot of this. they are the ones with the marksmanship programs and the ones that will give free plans and packages for anyone wanting to start a range and will train rangemasters.
We owe the NRA a lot.
lazs
-
the originator of this post is truly a clueless dolt...
only beef with NRA is they support more of the $2,ooo Over Under Shotgun old man crowd then the Evil Black rifle crews....
I still pay as long as the limp wristed linguini spinned liberals squeal and pee there pants when the NRA talks...its a good thing
Maybe this poster should join the www.pinkpistols.org
-
Al Gore invented "Global Trolling".
:P