Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: WND: 'It's a trap!' Watch out for 'gun safety' bill. Mike Hammond, GOA Chief Counsel

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,148

    WND: 'It's a trap!' Watch out for 'gun safety' bill. Mike Hammond, GOA Chief Counsel

    http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/its-a-tra...n-safety-bill/
    “It’s a trap! It’s a non-event. What’s going to happen is they’re going to take another bill, and that could be the veterans’ gun ban and then bring that to the floor,” said Mike Hammond, chief counsel at Gun Owners of America, a pro-Second Amendment group. Hammond said bringing a less controversial bill to the floor will make it easier to find the 60 votes needed to open debate.
    Reid and FineSwine are going down on the elephant to eat it one bite - PTSD, magazines, lists, - at a time rather than in one swallow.
    Last edited by Nightmare; 03-20-2013 at 08:42 AM.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Remember, Reid told her she could offer it as an amendment. He did not limit her as to which bill she could offer it as an amendment.

    We need to check every piece of proposed legislation to make sure she does not sneak it in something like the proclamation declaring National Wear Your Pants Pulled Up Where They Belong Day. (What do you mean there is no such day? There ought to be! I'm going to call my Congresscritters right now and demand they declare one.)

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  4. #4
    Regular Member Batousaii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Kitsap Co., Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,234

    ... Force then to stay relative ...

    What we need to do is introduce a bill, that forces these "law makers" to keep amendments and additions relative to the original bill. So if the Original bill is about seatbelt safety in cars, then their amendments have to be directly related to the seatbelts of a car, or how it provides safety... No more serving us fish and liver on a chocolate ice cream sunday.
    ~ ENCLAVE vmc ~
    The Enclave is looking for patriotic motorcycle riders in Washington State who support liberty and freedom for all. ~ Check us out!
    ~
    * " To be swayed neither by the opponent nor by his sword is the essence of swordsmanship." - Miyamoto Musashi.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    391
    Quote Originally Posted by Batousaii View Post
    What we need to do is introduce a bill, that forces these "law makers" to keep amendments and additions relative to the original bill.
    Three words: Gut and Amend. Also, it's longstanding law that a past Congress cannot tie the hands of a future Congress. Even if such a law were to pass, it can always be repealed or amended, or another law explicitly stated to be exempt.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Batousaii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Kitsap Co., Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,234
    I suppose my basic thoughts are that these bastards have WAY to much freedom to rule and lord themselves over us, they just pile more laws, rules and regulations on us every year (hell every month really). Something needs o be done to rope them back into the fence and regain control of the government, as they are supposed to belong to the people, not the other way around. It is supposed to be the land of the free and the home of the brave. Not "we will keep you managed and protect you from yourself".
    ~ ENCLAVE vmc ~
    The Enclave is looking for patriotic motorcycle riders in Washington State who support liberty and freedom for all. ~ Check us out!
    ~
    * " To be swayed neither by the opponent nor by his sword is the essence of swordsmanship." - Miyamoto Musashi.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Raleigh
    Posts
    149
    Quote Originally Posted by Batousaii View Post
    I suppose my basic thoughts are that these bastards have WAY to much freedom to rule and lord themselves over us, they just pile more laws, rules and regulations on us every year (hell every month really). Something needs o be done to rope them back into the fence and regain control of the government, as they are supposed to belong to the people, not the other way around. It is supposed to be the land of the free and the home of the brave. Not "we will keep you managed and protect you from yourself".
    *builds a 3,000 mile long bar and slides you a beer*

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Virginia, USA
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by Batousaii View Post
    What we need to do is...
    What we need to do is introduce a bill that will help, for example, eliminating gun free zones.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

    WND: 'It's a trap!' Watch out for 'gun safety' bill. Mike Hammond, GOA Chief C

    Quote Originally Posted by Forty-five View Post
    What we need to do is introduce a bill that will help, for example, eliminating gun free zones.
    Seriously. We seem to have a lot of success at the State level getting offensive laws fixed. Where is our champion in the House or the Senate introducing bills to fix offensive federal law. Now that this has been mentioned, I am hard-pressed to come up with a single federal legislator who has actually introduced legislation to lessen the infringements on the RKBA. They all seem to try to earn their "A" ratings by doing nothing or by voting against new infringements.

    It is high time we expected supporters of the RKBA in Congress to get the ball rolling on the removal of offensive law!


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

    <o>

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by randian View Post
    Three words: Gut and Amend. Also, it's longstanding law that a past Congress cannot tie the hands of a future Congress. Even if such a law were to pass, it can always be repealed or amended, or another law explicitly stated to be exempt.
    But a Constitutional amendment to how they can pass laws could tie the hands of future congresses. Not that I think they would be willing to actually pass such a thing, but it is possible to tie the hands of a future Congress.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Batousaii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Kitsap Co., Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,234
    For the topic of firearms itself, I still say exempt the second amendment from regulation via the commerce clause and you will have demolished the foundation of modern gun control.
    ~ ENCLAVE vmc ~
    The Enclave is looking for patriotic motorcycle riders in Washington State who support liberty and freedom for all. ~ Check us out!
    ~
    * " To be swayed neither by the opponent nor by his sword is the essence of swordsmanship." - Miyamoto Musashi.

  12. #12
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Aknazer View Post
    But a Constitutional amendment to how they can pass laws could tie the hands of future congresses. Not that I think they would be willing to actually pass such a thing, but it is possible to tie the hands of a future Congress.
    That would not be a current congress tying the hands of a future congress, it would be the "several states" tying the hands of the federal government.....big difference.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  13. #13
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Batousaii View Post
    For the topic of firearms itself, I still say exempt the second amendment from regulation via the commerce clause and you will have demolished the foundation of modern gun control.
    Only at the federal level. Illinois could still place millions of "reasonable" restrictions upon the citizenry.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  14. #14
    Regular Member Batousaii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Kitsap Co., Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,234
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Only at the federal level. Illinois could still place millions of "reasonable" restrictions upon the citizenry.
    - While true, I think that most states are much more supportive of gun owners than their federal counterparts, and also, we as citizens have a much stronger pull and affect on our local representatives. The end result is that we have a much better chance of changing state laws than federal laws, and really puts the ball in our court. Our ability to tell the federal government what to do seems to be slipping into oblivion, and thus, I'd prefer the federal government has little to no regulatory power over firearms, something about "shall not be infringed"... We can handle the states, so let the states handle firearms laws as per their constitutions, and as their citizens allow them to. We don't like what they are doing, we vote them out etc.
    ~ ENCLAVE vmc ~
    The Enclave is looking for patriotic motorcycle riders in Washington State who support liberty and freedom for all. ~ Check us out!
    ~
    * " To be swayed neither by the opponent nor by his sword is the essence of swordsmanship." - Miyamoto Musashi.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    That would not be a current congress tying the hands of a future congress, it would be the "several states" tying the hands of the federal government.....big difference.
    There's two different ways to amend the Constitution and the only one that has been used so far is where Congress first passes the amendment, and then the states ratify the amendment. So it would still be the current Congress tying the hands of a future Congress as the amendment would originate in Congress.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Batousaii View Post
    For the topic of firearms itself, I still say exempt the second amendment from regulation via the commerce clause and you will have demolished the foundation of modern gun control.
    Well I would say that most of the Commerce Clause laws are extremely flimsy and only really stand up in court because you have the fox guarding the hen house and because the courts automatically assume any law passed is Constitutional by default instead of forcing the government to prove that the law is Constitutional.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •