Only one state, Vermont, does not participate in the instant-check system
I would have liked to see the NRA sqeeze the dems for national reciprosity on cc. I also heard there is no avenue setup for someone to be removed from the federal database once you are on it for a legitamate reason.
I admit that the article does not go into detail with regards to these provisions. I think further analysis is necessary. It would be nice to see the bill in existing form for public scrutiny.Individuals with minor infractions in their pasts could petition their states to have their names removed from the federal database, and about 83,000 military veterans, put into the system by the Department of Veterans Affairs in 2000 for alleged mental health reasons, would have a chance to clean their records.
I agree completely. The NRA is looking out for our interests in a strategic manner. There is nothing wrong with the bill's purpose and provisions (that could change, as Cox mentioned--in whichcase the NRA fights the proposal).There's a lot of disdain against the NRA for this bill, from what I read here and elsewhere. I have not seen the full text of the bill and know little in regards to it's provisions. So, the question I have for people is...
Why is this bill a bad bill? It seems to me a bill to keep firearms out of the hands of mentally unstable individuals, while not affecting the ability of another citizen to purchase firearms, and providing a provision to allow one to be removed from the NICS database would be a good thing. Is there something in this bill that I may be missing?
That, is an excellent question, sir. A most excellent question. I would be very interested in reading anyone's answer to it. It would make a very stimulating thread all by itself.How can we, the people, keep firearms out of the hands of mentally unstable individuals without affecting federal legislation?
What really ticks me off is the quarter billion dollars in incentives to the states. Where is that going to come from? I will give you three guesses the first two don't count. So besides being a waste of time it is one more giant waste of money.
And why is the NRA negotiating this compromise why didn't they ask me.
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, unless a compromise is struck with the NRA and gun grabbing democrats. :what:
I know, I know, it's how politics works doesn't mean I have to like it. :banghead:
Apparently my first instinct jives with that of VCDL's leadership, so I feel secure in my gut feeling about this.*******************************************
10. BREAKING: NRA joins hands with gun-hater Carolyn McCarthy :-(
*******************************************
Whenever the NRA cozies up to the anti-gun, victim disarmament
zealots, we have to wonder what the unintended consequences will be
on law abiding gun owners. The article fails to mention that
Congressman Dingell, leading the talks with the anti-gun zealots,
resigned from the NRA Board and then proceeded to vote for the
notorious Assault Weapons Ban.
The NRA has told its members in the past that Carolyn McCarthy is one
of the worst of the gun banners and now the NRA has crawled in bed
with her!
It's not just the NRA that's going to get a disease from this union.
We could all pay a price.
FLASH TO THE NRA: Carolyn McCarthy hates us and our guns. She will
NEVER do anything good for gun owners, never. And what are YOU, the
NRA, doing bringing us more gun control? Isn't that what Sarah Brady
specializes in?
What measures of this scheme are both parties (the anti-gun zealots
and the NRA) hiding and NOT telling us about? We'll have to watch
this one very, very closely.
http://tinyurl.com/2fhtyz
Whats not to like? This is a waste of money and time and in the process legitimizes restrictions on gun ownership and sets a precident of compromise.Meathook wrote:What really ticks me off is the quarter billion dollars in incentives to the states. Where is that going to come from? I will give you three guesses the first two don't count. So besides being a waste of time it is one more giant waste of money.
And why is the NRA negotiating this compromise why didn't they ask me.
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, unless a compromise is struck with the NRA and gun grabbing democrats. :what:
I know, I know, it's how politics works doesn't mean I have to like it. :banghead:
The NCIS is already in place,and Cho should have never been able to purchess a firearm.
The "compromise" that "ticks" you off now has a way of clearing your name off of the NCIS database( that wasn,t there before )
Will keep people like CHO from legally obtaining A firemarm,
And I wont have to pay the extra $2 every time I buy a gun :celebratewhats not to like
...Will keep people like CHO from legally obtaining A firearm,
I would have liked to see the NRA sqeeze the dems for national reciprosity on cc. I also heard there is no avenue setup for someone to be removed from the federal database once you are on it for a legitamate reason.
I'm not sure I like the NRA making deals.
Amen! Unfortunately, the NRA is more interested in public relations than civil rights.If someone is adjudicated mentally deficient and a danger to himself and others through legal due process then lock him up!
The article stated...kimbercarrier wrote:I would have liked to see the NRA sqeeze the dems for national reciprosity on cc. I also heard there is no avenue setup for someone to be removed from the federal database once you are on it for a legitamate reason.
I'm not sure I like the NRA making deals.
I agree, I did not see a way for someone who needed treatment to get off the list say 20 years later.
Anyone else notice?
I further admitted, above, that this was loosely worded and warranted more scrutiny of these provisions.Individuals with minor infractions in their pasts could petition their states to have their names removed from the federal database, and about 83,000 military veterans, put into the system by the Department of Veterans Affairs in 2000 for alleged mental health reasons, would have a chance to clean their records.
I would have liked to see the NRA sqeeze the dems for national reciprosity on cc. I also heard there is no avenue setup for someone to be removed from the federal database once you are on it for a legitamate reason.
I'm not sure I like the NRA making deals.
How would you propose keeping firearms out of the hands of the mentally unstable? This is what I am interested in knowing.