PDA

View Full Version : Ammo ban, AW ban/HR 45, new Brady effort, Whitehouse web site: the sky is NOT falling


Librarian
01-29-2009, 1:54 AM
Mods, please sticky - AngelDecoys is right, we have to try.

In the last 6 months we've seen multiple postings about

Ammunition serialization - claiming all ammo will have to have numbers, unnumbered ammo will be illegal
New Brady plans for its agenda, primarily via Alan Korwin
HR 45, a new AW ban and
the Whitehouse.gov page including support for an 'assault weapon' ban.
HR 2467, including Alcee Hasting's 'Hate Group' amendment

Yes.

We know about these.

Please don't post about them - at least, not about their existence. If some progress happens, add it to the bottom of this thread.

HR 2467 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:h.r.2467:) is known - see a calming analysis here (http://www.qando.net/?p=3497).

The Ammo Serialization bills have been proposed and defeated everywhere offered, even in California (in 2006). They're sponsored by the company that hopes to make money on it. It hasn't been introduced in California since 2006 - but it could be, and several of us are watching. You can, too - look at
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/index_assembly_bill_author_topic
and
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/index_senate_bill_author_topic
and search the files for 'ammunition' or 'firearms'

Mr Korwin's article on Brady plans is well known Gun Law Update by Alan Korwin,
Author Gun Laws of America Jan. 5, 2008

Gun-ban list proposed

Slipping below the radar (or under the short-term memory cap), the Democrats
have already leaked a gun-ban list, even under the Bush administration when
they knew full well it had no chance of passage (HR 1022, 110th Congress).
It serves as a framework for the new list the Brady's plan to introduce
shortly.Brady does this stuff all the time. It's certainly worth watching, but we'll need to see bills. Here's how to find the bills: go to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and enter "weapon" or "firearms" in the search box. January 29, that brings up 9 bills, including the next item.

Mr Rush's HR45 - "Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 " is available through thomas.gov.

He introduced it in 2007, too. It went nowhere. Again, it's worth watching, but until it moves out of the Judiciary Committee, it isn't interesting.

A renewal of the AW ban is a perennial action since the sunset in 2004; these are the easily found ones: 1 . [110th] Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)[H.R.1022.IH ]
2 . [107th] Assault Weapon Ban Enhancement Act of 2002 (Introduced in House)[H.R.3751.IH ]
3 . [109th] Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2005 (Introduced in Senate)[S.645.IS ]
4 . [110th] Anti-Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)[H.R.1859.IH ]
5 . [108th] Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003 (Introduced in Senate)[S.1431.IS ]
6 . [109th] Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2005 (Introduced in House)[H.R.1312.IH ]
7 . [108th] Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)[H.R.2038.IH ]
8 . [108th] Assault Weapon Ban Enhancement Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)[H.R.143.IH ]
12 . [110th] Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2008 (Introduced in House)[H.R.6257.IH]
17 . [109th] Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2005 (Introduced in Senate)[S.620.IS ]
18 . [108th] To reinstate the repealed criminal provisions relating to assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices. (Introduced in House)[H.R.5099.IH ]
Remember the Dems had a majority from the 2006 election - and the 2007 and 2008 versions did not pass.

The whitehouse.gov is just a copy of the Obama campaign web site. Address Gun Violence in Cities: Obama and Biden would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent.
It's no surprise - it's been up for months, and President Obama is unlikely to work against anything he's advocated.

UPDATE 5/8/09
HR 2159 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.2159:) see its thread http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=182061

There's probably 50 threads on all of these together, mostly because the older ones keep scrolling off the front page, and new members don't look any further, and the ways of describing each one are so varied that the 'search' function - in the third heavy blue bar, third from the right - doesn't necessarily pick up the words most important to the new poster.

We don't need 50 threads on this stuff.

The sky is NOT falling.

JeffM
01-29-2009, 2:08 AM
The sky is NOT falling.

But it never hurts to have a helmet and live in a cave.

Runitai
01-29-2009, 2:35 AM
You know, I wouldn't be surprised to see Obama fight AWB legislation. OK, I'd be surprised, but I wouldn't be floored. The words out of his mouth were "I'm not going to take away folks' guns." I'd imagine he's more cognizant of what he's saying than what his staffers put on his web site. Still, I'd love to corner him and ask him that question:

You've said that you're not going to "take away folks' guns," but whitehouse.gov claims you support banning of the most popular category of target rifle on the market today. So which is it?

818gtiguy
01-29-2009, 2:42 AM
You've said that you're not going to "take away folks' guns," but whitehouse.gov claims you support banning of the most popular category of target rifle on the market today. So which is it?

Yall know which is it....THE BLACK RIFLE!

FastFinger
01-29-2009, 5:03 AM
The words out of his mouth were "I'm not going to take away folks' guns."

Since we're quoting the anointed one....

"I believe we need to renew--not roll back--this common sense gun law," Obama said." - In reference to the 1994 AWB.

Do you support legislation to ban the manufacture, sale and possession of:
a. handguns?

"While a complete ban on handguns is not politically practicable, I believe reasonable restrictions on the sale and possession of handguns are necessary to protect the public safety. In the Illinois Senate last year, I supported a package of bills to limit individual Illinoisans to purchasing one handgun a month; require all promoters and sellers at firearms shows to carry a state license; allow civil liability for death or injuries caused by handguns; and require FOID applicants to apply in person. I would support similar efforts at the federal level, including retaining the Brady Law."

b. assault weapons?

"Yes."

c. ammunition for handguns and assault weapons?

"I would support banning the sale of ammunition for assault weapons and limiting the sale of ammunition for handguns."

Do you support legislation mandating background checks of purchasers of weapons at gun shows, through the internet and through print advertisements?

"Yes."

Those are the words of our "savior." Amen.

bassgruvn
01-29-2009, 5:51 AM
[QUOTE=

Those are the words of our "savior." Amen.[/QUOTE]

Not my savior, thank God.

Dr Rockso
01-29-2009, 7:50 AM
+1

Thank you Librarian.

tincan715
01-29-2009, 7:59 AM
Still, I'd love to corner him and ask him that question:

You've said that you're not going to "take away folks' guns," but whitehouse.gov claims you support banning of the most popular category of target rifle on the market today. So which is it?

I would imagine the true answer is "both", but he's way too smart to say that. I personally don't think Obama is at all likely to spend his political capital on taking away our guns - he has bigger fish to fry and it would be a huge fight without much upside. He is far too savvy a politician to make a rookie mistake like that. OTOH, he has to do something for the Brady types who think banning guns should be his top priority - those folks are politically important to him also. So the obvious solution is to give lip service to the anti-gun people while somehow never getting around to doing what they want. That's politics for you.

cortayack
01-29-2009, 8:49 AM
Thanks for posting Librarian. The sky might not be falling, yet! But its always good to stay informed of what is going on......Sleath politics are always being used......Time will only tell, and we need to be ready to fight.......

rayra
01-29-2009, 10:50 AM
In many ways, considering the marxists now in charge of both houses and the Oval office, being a pollyanna is even more pathetic than being a Chicken Little.

fairfaxjim
01-29-2009, 11:05 AM
In many ways, considering the marxists now in charge of both houses and the Oval office, being a pollyanna is even more pathetic than being a Chicken Little.

Unfortunately, neither stance will work. Those that say the white house and congress will be too busy dealing with the big issues better keep an eye on what gets tacked onto these outrageous and sweeping money give away's. These rat b*****ds will hide unimaginable bad news in there knowing that it will get by because we "need" this legislation so bad. It won't be the "gun" or "AW" bills that get us, it will be the ones that are to "save" us from financial colapse with the gotcha's attached.

yellowfin
01-29-2009, 11:42 AM
I'm very disturbed by the 600 page bill that's in the Senate now. 600 pages?!!?!?!? Who knows what's snuck in there. Of course, we should probably have some of our own stuff snuck in there too.

Gator Monroe
01-29-2009, 11:44 AM
End of Summer (Both The Fairness Doctrine & New Firearms restrictions WILL BE ON FRONT BURNER !)

Librarian
01-29-2009, 12:56 PM
End of Summer (Both The Fairness Doctrine & New Firearms restrictions WILL BE ON FRONT BURNER !)

You think it'll be that long? I guess Congress will be about done bankrupting our grandchildren about April and will be able to turn its efforts to Other Things.

As I said, it's a really good idea to watch the government web sites for bills as they are introduced. Then, we worry.

DDT
01-29-2009, 12:59 PM
You think it'll be that long? I guess Congress will be about done bankrupting our grandchildren about April and will be able to turn its efforts to Other Things.

I believe that April is reserved for bankrupting TAX payers. They'll have to wait until May to get the children.

eighteenninetytwo
01-29-2009, 2:46 PM
Somone said it above, its the additional clauses to Bills which are generally accepted as OK that we need to look out for. Not just in terms of weapons but general USA policy alterations. By the way you note that he said I will nto take your guns away, but he is in favor "of banning assault weapon ammunition" so how good will your rifle be without ammo. I watch the whole political thing very closely

Fjold
01-29-2009, 3:47 PM
But it never hurts to have a helmet tinfoil hat and live in a cave.

I fixed it for you.

Librarian
01-29-2009, 3:58 PM
this is great info, thanks for posting. Even though most the legislation cited has been killed, I will continue to call these criminals and let them know I vote and contribute to campaigns.
Until we get some specific targets, this is about all we can do.

Watch the Skies! Or, watch thomas.loc.gov, the Washington Post and the New York Times.

The sky may not be falling at the moment but I a convinced these marxist do want to drop the ceiling when people aren't paying attention.

attack,attack,attack,attack, run their liberal nonsense so far up their ***** they don't know what hit them.

So far, it looks like the only way to a politician's vote is through his/her campaign funding. It would take something remarkable to affect Feinstein, Boxer or Pelosi in that area.

But they are immune to logic and facts outside that very narrow application, so they are reliable supporters of things that make no sense whatever.

AngelDecoys
01-29-2009, 5:04 PM
Thanks Librarian. Hopefully a mod will sticky.

Nothing wrong with people having anxiety over a possible piece of legislation. Especially one that might be proposed at some unknown time in the future and containing unpredictable restrictions.

We do know that the current makeup of SCOTUS coupled with Heller, and possibly incorporation may have an effect and give the enemy pause.

What we can do is stay vigilant so that when it does come, we're ready to make phone calls, and write letters. Until that time, lets try to keep the speculation to a minimum. Better for us all to not be distracted by a lot of random threads and instead be ready for the one that actually calls us into action.

Dr Rockso
01-29-2009, 7:21 PM
Until that time, lets try to keep the speculation to a minimum. Better for us all to not be distracted by a lot of random threads and instead be ready for the one that actually calls us into action.
Yep, good idea.

The other thing that concerns me is with all the rampant speculation, some people seem to view a new AWB as a foregone conclusion. If the gun-owning population sees it as being inevitable (and many are spending big bucks stocking up on things to make a profit selling "pre-ban" items) they may not be inclined to fight what they view as a losing battle, especially if they can profit from it.

6172crew
01-29-2009, 9:28 PM
Stuck for my old neighbor and fellow gun owners.

DedEye
01-29-2009, 11:17 PM
Stuck for my old neighbor and fellow gun owners.

Thank you!

Likewise, thank you Librarian for writing this. With this stickied at the top of the page, maybe it will act as a roof for all the chicken littles below :p.

N6ATF
01-30-2009, 12:03 AM
http://www.michaelbarrier.com/Commentary/Chicken_Little/Chicken_Little.jpg

I nominate this as the official image for this thread. Notice the date at the bottom...

Librarian
01-30-2009, 12:53 AM
Still, we do have to remember - there is a certain segment of the population, well-loved by the political class, that cannot imagine anything positive about guns.

They and their political allies certainly will attempt more restrictions, more laws, more publicity campaigns.

It isn't that the sky cannot fall, it's that the four or five things we have seen over and over the last few months are not good evidence that the heavens are crumbling.

MudCamper
01-30-2009, 7:39 AM
Thank you Librarian.

I'd like to ask one more thing. Could we please not turn this thread into an Obama bash fest? Can people keep that to a thread that isn't a prominent sticky? (preferably in off-topic) It really undermines our ability to recruit new people to our cause.

Gator Monroe
01-30-2009, 12:02 PM
New people who will join our cause But when push comes to shove they will vote in people who are against our cause because our cause is not as important to them as it is to us ...

lioneaglegriffin
01-30-2009, 12:39 PM
New people who will join our cause But when push comes to shove they will vote in people who are against our cause because our cause is not as important to them as it is to us ...

that is why you convince them that it is important and educate them. they are mere padawan calgunners.

peepshowal
01-31-2009, 6:20 PM
Thank you Librarian.

I'd like to ask one more thing. Could we please not turn this thread into an Obama bash fest? Can people keep that to a thread that isn't a prominent sticky? (preferably in off-topic) It really undermines our ability to recruit new people to our cause.

A politician that deserves bashing will get bashed regardless. These new recruits you mention will just have to be smart enough to figure that out for themselves.

Gator Monroe
01-31-2009, 6:24 PM
that is why you convince them that it is important and educate them. they are mere padawan calgunners.

We can NOT convince them that Choice and Global warning and more GAY rights , and various other sundry Liberal Secular Progressive causes are not as Important as 2A !

DedEye
01-31-2009, 6:46 PM
We can NOT convince them that Choice and Global warning and more GAY rights , and various other sundry Liberal Secular Progressive causes are not as Important as 2A !

Then how about you stop trying to make those issues mutually exclusive :rolleyes:.

nat
01-31-2009, 6:48 PM
Great thread Librarian! I wholeheartedly agree.

rayra
01-31-2009, 10:54 PM
What Librarian and the other pollyannas in this topic massively fail at is that this is NOT last year. The bills might be the same, the same liberal-socialist cretins might be involved like always, but the major difference is that those self-same people are now FULLY IN CHARGE OF OUR GOVERNMENT, and in charge of ALL the branches and committees / offices required to foist passage on the most egregious of PERMANENT bans.

Thus I heap steaming scorn on top of the idea that folks should 'stay calm' and treat this like any other year / glacially-slow-moving NRA-ILA response campaign.
These folks are in power NOW. They've already in demonstrated their willingness to foist their Liberal-Progressive horse**** on every other aspect of govt policy over just their first 11 days. We're in it up to our necks, now, with next to no recourse. And we will not stave off any anti-gun measures by being sanguine or adotping a 'wait and see' attitude.
FFS, they've put an eco-marxist in charge of our Energy, the Chief of the second largest failing school district in charge of the Education Dept, a massive tax cheat in as the Treasury Sect, another tax cheat on the express to be HHS Sect, anti-gun guy as Atty Gen'l, and Obama's own lengthy list of anti-gun statements and bills as the man willing to sign it all.

When the '94 AWB was passed, it was signed and took effect that very same day. THis 111th Congress under Pelosi and Reid, in conjuction with Obama have apready demonstrated the willingness and ability to act this precipitously and have already amply demonstrated their willingness to give full rein to their ideological agenda in other aspects.
As well as the fresh Obama play to lure a Senate RINO to become the replacement Commerce Sec't designate - thus opening the seat for replacement by that state's Democrat Governor, who will surely choose a Democrat replacement - thus destroying any chance of a Republican Senate filibuster of ANY legislation, thus denying the people any chance of getting wind of or opposing any legislation...
Coupled with the proven propensity of Pelosi and Reid to both manipulate voting in both their houses by ilelgally holding votes open overtime while the Democrat Whips strongarm the votes on th floor - AND their prior deliberate violations of parliamentary procedure by foisting voice votes and gaveling closure over strongly voiced objections on the floor...
Coupled with Pelosi's House rules changes which essentially negate any method of amending or adding 'poison pills' to any legislation...
Coupled with the fresh demonstration of their late night / weekend passage of a major 'land reform' bill which sequestered millions of acres for use solely by tree-hugging DINKs for hiking (and nothing else)
Coupled with a wholly complicit Democrat press that won't even report major news to the US populace, much less give an unbiased account of anything...

Sure, sure, everything's FINE, remain calm, go back to sleep. Just pay your trillion-dollar bill for the Stimulus that isn't.

hoffmang
01-31-2009, 11:54 PM
Rayra,

It takes you 25 lines to say that simply because your party is so incompetent it can't get elected that we're doomed?

I'll remind you that Bush's Solicitor General attempted to torpedo Heller.

You are proving that you can't think for yourself unless the RNC Chair spoon fed you the line.

-Gene

Librarian
02-01-2009, 12:10 AM
What Librarian and the other pollyannas

When I start saying these bills CAN'T pass, you can accurately suggest the 'pollyanna' label.

Until I do that, you're mistaken.

Gator Monroe
02-01-2009, 9:16 AM
I realize these communist criminals that have all the power now could easily pass some nasty gun legislation in the dark of night on a weekend, for a Monday morning surprise. I think the *only* thing stopping them from doing it this weekend is the 2010 election, even then these communist may try anyway. These criminals are superb at building coalitions of power, in other words, masses of duped people. They are already using these hopenityzed groups to put pressure on the repubs to pass the "end of capitalism" package. Name me as you wish, but I know communism and subversion when I see it.

For posters here to NOT vote 2A is sad (End of Summer they will go after Firearms nationally) See CCW accidental Bathroom shootings splashed all over national media over last week alone (TheDrumbeat is growing) and it's not the weak GOP propagating it (It's Dem/Lib media types especially in Ca.)

nat
02-01-2009, 9:55 AM
Wow, I guess all I can do is shake my head.

DedEye
02-01-2009, 1:03 PM
Wow, I guess all I can do is shake my head.

All you can do in regards to what? Members who ignore the more educated and involved responses from people who know what they're talking about, and choose to spread FUD? Yeah, nothing can be done there but to shake your head.

If you're referring to shaking your head at the fight to protect the 2nd Amendment, there's lots you can do besides adopting a defeatist, Chicken Little attitude. You can donate your time and/or money to organizations like the NRA and CGF to help fight here in California and nationwide. You can write emails, letters and faxes (for what they're worth), you can phone bank, you can join pro-gun rights organizations. You CAN'T just give up though if you expect us to get anywhere.

Jim40
02-01-2009, 1:41 PM
Rayra,

It takes you 25 lines to say that simply because your party is so incompetent it can't get elected that we're doomed?

I'll remind you that Bush's Solicitor General attempted to torpedo Heller.

You are proving that you can't think for yourself unless the RNC Chair spoon fed you the line.

-Gene

I disagree. About 80% of what he wrote was cold hard fact; about 20% was debatable opinion.

But let's not get too defeatist. Sure, there were many who didn't vote for The Second Amendment (i.e. McCain) in the general election. They viewed other issues as more important. But now that Obama's in, and is addressing those other issues to their (presumable) satisfaction, many Obama voters should be open to pressuring him on 2A, if they are otherwise sympathetic to our cause.

Just because someone voted for Obama doesn't mean we should write them off forever. They can be our allies in fighting the 2A battles to come. And we'll need all of the allies we can get . . .

nat
02-01-2009, 1:52 PM
All you can do in regards to what? Members who ignore the more educated and involved responses from people who know what they're talking about, and choose to spread FUD? Yeah, nothing can be done there but to shake your head.

If you're referring to shaking your head at the fight to protect the 2nd Amendment, there's lots you can do besides adopting a defeatist, Chicken Little attitude. You can donate your time and/or money to organizations like the NRA and CGF to help fight here in California and nationwide. You can write emails, letters and faxes (for what they're worth), you can phone bank, you can join pro-gun rights organizations. You CAN'T just give up though if you expect us to get anywhere.


I was refering to your first statement.

In regards to your second statement, I am actually pretty optimistic about our 2nd ammendment rights. With potentially great outcomes from Nordyke, different cities giving up gun bans, etc., who wouldn't be cautiously optimistic. Should a bill look like its getting traction, I will make my voice heard. Until then, my friends know me as an outspoken proponent of second ammendment rights.

What I should have said, was being derogatory and painting people with broad brushes (ie liberals are commies, blah, blah) serves only to alienate groups of folks we need on our side...........liberal leaning gun lovers.

hoffmang
02-01-2009, 2:55 PM
I disagree. About 80% of what he wrote was cold hard fact; about 20% was debatable opinion.


Of 25 lines I found one fact in Rayra's screed. It is:
"When the '94 AWB was passed, it was signed and took effect that very same day."

When they taught me math that added up to 4% facts and 96% opinion.

I hope that others can keep their signal to noise ratio higher.

-Gene

tombinghamthegreat
02-01-2009, 3:01 PM
The sky is NOT fallingyet.

there fix it for you:TFH:

Librarian
02-01-2009, 3:50 PM
there fix it for you:TFH::)
Which is, of course, exactly what I said in post 25 (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=1968517&postcount=25) in this thread.

N6ATF
02-01-2009, 4:26 PM
I hope that others can keep their signal to noise ratio higher.

Unfortunately this would require lots of :ban:

AngelDecoys
02-01-2009, 4:47 PM
blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah........

Thus I heap steaming scorn on top of the idea that folks should 'stay calm' and treat this like any other year / glacially-slow-moving NRA-ILA response campaign.

blah, blah, blah, blah,blah, blah, blah, blah,blah, blah, blah, blah,blah, blah, blah, blah......

Thank you so much for the refined response to the thread topic. :rolleyes: I really needed to waste my time reading yet another rant espousing the same passionate gibberish found all over various gun forums, or in 50 other threads already on this forum. Obama is bad, Obama blah blah blah

Even if you, and others like you are 100% correct, there is zero we can do before it comes to committee, the floor, or up for a vote.

SO STOP SHARING YOUR SPECULATION AND ANXIETY

I think we all would benefit from having a thread where we can actually follow any developments, any updates, without the same endless noise.

Unfortunately this would require lots of :ban:

That, or maybe a mod could have a bunch of comments here deleted as many do not add actual information. (Just more noise) Then close the thread, but keep it stickied for when additional information comes around.

zoid52
02-01-2009, 4:48 PM
In the current state of Commiefornia and the fiscal crisis I see a use tax on firearms becoming law to "help the economy" $50 for each gun and increasing every year

trinydex
02-02-2009, 9:34 AM
i have a question. for these "disaster" legislations... is there some judicial standard they have to pass before becoming law?

like it'd appear that many of these would be struck down by heller, but does heller prevent any of these from going into effect?

if they did happen to pass somehow, how long would it take heller to strike them down?

Gator Monroe
02-02-2009, 9:34 AM
If push comes to shove on supporting 2A (SOME POSTERS HERE MAY HAVE TO VOTE GOP in their State & US congressional districts and for state & US Senate (IF THEIR AREA's Democrat candidates are ardant Anti's) That's all I'm saying ...

yellowfin
02-02-2009, 10:36 AM
What I'd like to know is who the highest ranking D's on our side are so we know who to ask for help.

Librarian
02-02-2009, 1:49 PM
i have a question. for these "disaster" legislations... is there some judicial standard they have to pass before becoming law?

like it'd appear that many of these would be struck down by heller, but does heller prevent any of these from going into effect?

if they did happen to pass somehow, how long would it take heller to strike them down?

Absolutely no standard at all. It seems common for legislators to be told 'unconstitutional' and reply 'let courts sort that out'.

Such laws would have to be challenged in Federal Court. That takes time, usually. No telling how much beyond 'months', I think.

hoffmang
02-02-2009, 1:52 PM
Such laws would have to be challenged in Federal Court. That takes time, usually. No telling how much beyond 'months', I think.

One of the major changes in our favor is that fundamental enumerated rights change the proof balance. Bad gun laws will start getting TRO's and Preliminary Injuctions where they don't go into effect until after the courts sort them out.

That's not what we've been accustomed to in the past but quite likely what would happen to any major Federal gun law from now forward.

-Gene

yellowfin
02-02-2009, 2:07 PM
^ Will that include taxes and regulatory obstructions?

Sutcliffe
02-03-2009, 2:11 PM
Otherwise there wouldn't be the need for mass mailers demanding cash from our various Lobby groups.

Backcountry
02-03-2009, 2:17 PM
Of 25 lines I found one fact in Rayra's screed. It is:
"When the '94 AWB was passed, it was signed and took effect that very same day."

When they taught me math that added up to 4% facts and 96% opinion.

I hope that others can keep their signal to noise ratio higher.

-Gene

pwned :thumbsup:

Cypren
02-03-2009, 3:07 PM
That's not what we've been accustomed to in the past but quite likely what would happen to any major Federal gun law from now forward.

Personally, I think my biggest worry is that Heller seemed to be reached by Scalia forming a very tenuous coalition to barely get the support needed to declare 2A an individual right. To do so, he had to allow for tremendous regulation (strangulation?) that we would consider unacceptable on any other enumerated right and the Heller decision includes lots of language that can be used and abused to prevent the overturn of, e.g. the Gun-Free School Zone act, NFA/Hughes, and reimposition of the Federal AWB, all under the justification that "t is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose."

I would fully expect that if a case came up challenging any of these, Kennedy for certain, and maybe even Scalia (due to his strong law-and-order tendencies, as we saw in [i]Raich) would break from the 5-vote Heller majority and find some thin thread of convoluted non-logic to approve any weapon licensing/regulation/taxation scheme to prevent civilians from having access to anything seen as "inappropriate" by the D.C. cognoscenti. (Just as they used the tortured circular logic that machine guns are not weapons "in common use" [maybe due to the long-standing restrictions of the NFA?] to justify the Constitutionality of the NFA in Heller.)

motorhead
02-03-2009, 3:47 PM
[QUOTE=Librarian;1966172]Until we get some specific targets, this is about all we can do.

Watch the Skies! Or, watch thomas.loc.gov, the Washington Post and the New York Times.



not arf.com and wnd!!! thank you sir for adding the voice of reason. i'm still buying stock in reynolds.

hoffmang
02-03-2009, 4:58 PM
"[i]t is not a right to speak any statement whatsoever in any time or manner

I think people over worry what Scalia was trying to say.

-Gene

Cypren
02-03-2009, 6:02 PM
I think people over worry what Scalia was trying to say.

I sincerely hope you're right. The 2A has a long history of being treated as the "bastard child" in the Bill of Rights with all kinds of farcical "logic" coming from people with impressive resumes and letters following their names. I'm just not convinced that Heller did as much to restore it to legitimacy as some people believe. I've read too many Supreme Court decisions to think that the law and Constitution mean much when stacked against Justices' policy preferences. Again, look at Raich, the case that marked the largest expansion of federal power in recent memory -- and brought to us courtesy of a self-proclaimed "originalist."

hoffmang
02-03-2009, 9:56 PM
Again, look at Raich, the case that marked the largest expansion of federal power in recent memory -- and brought to us courtesy of a self-proclaimed "originalist."

There are two important disctinctions, but I do agree that Raich is a cautionary tale.

1. The Commerce Clause had a long history of being very screwed up in lots and lots of court decisions. We have FDR to thank for that. FDR also got us our one odd 2A case - but at worst is was just odd.

2. We have 5 who really want the next case or two on our issue. They see what you see and know that if they can get the expansive and core rulings out of the way ASAP then the 2A will mean something real enough - worst case. The good news is that that may lead to it meaning something just slightly more regulated than speech.

Also, don't factor out the view history will take on Heller. Heller was decided and law after law was struck from the books (SFHA, Chicago suburbs, soon Chicago, soon Alameda gun shows.)

-Gene

Cypren
02-03-2009, 10:15 PM
We have 5 who really want the next case or two on our issue. They see what you see and know that if they can get the expansive and core rulings out of the way ASAP then the 2A will mean something real enough - worst case. The good news is that that may lead to it meaning something just slightly more regulated than speech.

Do you really feel that Kennedy can be relied upon in further 2A cases? I felt like the specific notes that Heller wouldn't invalidate the NFA or school prohibitions were probably put in to secure his critical vote for the majority. Maybe I'm mistaken, but while the other four seem reasonably reliable on individual rights issues (as long as they don't sacrifice conservative sacred cows like drug policy -- in which case only Thomas is really reliable), Kennedy strikes me as a very wobbly Justice who rules more on his personal preferences and less on principle.

hoffmang
02-03-2009, 10:21 PM
Do you really feel that Kennedy can be relied upon in further 2A cases? I felt like the specific notes that Heller wouldn't invalidate the NFA or school prohibitions were probably put in to secure his critical vote for the majority. Maybe I'm mistaken, but while the other four seem reasonably reliable on individual rights issues (as long as they don't sacrifice conservative sacred cows like drug policy -- in which case only Thomas is really reliable), Kennedy strikes me as a very wobbly Justice who rules more on his personal preferences and less on principle.

Kennedy is the weakest link. However, everyone overlooks that Kennedy was in the majority on Staples (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/92-1441.ZO.html) where Thomas wrote the majority opinion stating that AR-15's are such common weapons that they wouldn't inform their owner that there was a risk that they might be NFA machine guns.

Kennedy may go wobbly on carry on school property but I'll bet he'll say that 1000' around a school is called the world at large where you have the right to bear arms. If we hand him the right cases in the right order he's going to be our friend. I mean come on - he's mister Grizzly Bear.

-Gene

Cypren
02-03-2009, 10:26 PM
However, everyone overlooks that Kennedy was in the majority on Staples (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/92-1441.ZO.html) where Thomas wrote the majority opinion stating that AR-15's are such common weapons that they wouldn't inform their owner that there was a risk that they might be NFA machine guns.

You're right, I had overlooked that. Good food for thought, thank you.

stylett9
02-09-2009, 9:58 PM
Does anyone think banning "assault weapon ammunition" is really possible? What is to distinguish if a .223 round is for an assault weapon, or hunting weapon? Unless he plans to piss off EVERYONE, not just assault weapon owners.

I just spent nearly $3000.00 on my AR. It would really suck if I couldn't shoot it a few months from now.

trinydex
02-09-2009, 10:02 PM
well the point of banning ammunition would be to ban it all... they only want to pretend it's practical, just like the safe handgun list is a defacto ban on all new handguns.

don't think they're actually reasonable...

scr83jp
02-10-2009, 12:25 PM
Mods, please sticky - AngelDecoys is right, we have to try.

In the last 6 months we've seen multiple postings about

Ammunition serialization - claiming all ammo will have to have numbers, unnumbered ammo will be illegal
New Brady plans for its agenda, primarily via Alan Korwin
HR 45, a new AW ban and
the Whitehouse.gov page including support for an 'assault weapon' ban.

Yes.

We know about these.

Please don't post about them - at least, not about their existence. If some progress happens, add it to the bottom of this thread.

The Ammo Serialization bills have been proposed and defeated everywhere offered, even in California (in 2006). They're sponsored by the company that hopes to make money on it. It hasn't been introduced in California since 2006 - but it could be, and several of us are watching. You can, too - look at
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/index_assembly_bill_author_topic
and
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/index_senate_bill_author_topic
and search the files for 'ammunition' or 'firearms'

Mr Korwin's article on Brady plans is well known Brady does this stuff all the time. It's certainly worth watching, but we'll need to see bills. Here's how to find the bills: go to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and enter "weapon" or "firearms" in the search box. January 29, that brings up 9 bills, including the next item.

Mr Rush's HR45 - "Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 " is available through thomas.gov.

He introduced it in 2007, too. It went nowhere. Again, it's worth watching, but until it moves out of the Judiciary Committee, it isn't interesting.

A renewal of the AW ban is a perennial action since the sunset in 2004; these are the easily found ones: Remember the Dems had a majority from the 2006 election - and the 2007 and 2008 versions did not pass.

The whitehouse.gov is just a copy of the Obama campaign web site.
It's no surprise - it's been up for months, and President Obama is unlikely to work against anything he's advocated.

There's probably 50 threads on all of these together, mostly because the older ones keep scrolling off the front page, and new members don't look any further, and the ways of describing each one are so varied that the 'search' function - in the third heavy blue bar, third from the right - doesn't necessarily pick up the words most important to the new poster.

We don't need 50 threads on this stuff.

The sky is NOT falling.I'm waiting for the legislation he tried to push thru illinois giving state police officers the absolute right to conduct warrantless searches on any house at anytime,it was soundly defeated in Illinois.If he ever mobilzes his private goon squad or invites the UN into the USA we'll have martial law 24-7.

bwiese
02-10-2009, 1:20 PM
well the point of banning ammunition would be to ban it all... they only want to pretend it's practical, just like the safe handgun list is a defacto ban on all new handguns.

don't think they're actually reasonable...


Ordinary ball ammo is a key component of ordinary operational firearms, ones that that are not "dangerous and unusual" (italics are mine) per Heller decision.

trinydex
02-10-2009, 1:35 PM
i'm not saying they have any legitimate claim or ability to ban ammo, just that it's a given that they would try to ban it and all of it if they could.

Rico
02-13-2009, 8:44 AM
Here's another post on HR 45:

Are you ready for the House Bill titled 'HR 45, Blair Holt Licensing and Record Act of 2009'. It will make it illegal to own a firearm unless it is registered with the database in Washington D.C. As a gun owner you will have to be finger printed, you will be required to provide your DL#, SS#, you must maintain a valid address at all times, submit to mental and physical health records being put on file, you will also be required to file any address changes and any ownership changes even if private sale. Each update will cost $25 and if you fail to comply you will lose your right to own firearms. This bill and its language mirror almost completely one defeated last year in the House of Representatives by soon to be Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. Will the citizenry be as lucky this time?
Pass this on to everyone who believes in strict Constitutionalism and remember that laws only apply to those who obey them. Criminals by definition and nature do not abide by laws. New laws and restrictions only apply to the law abiding citizen and are not written with the criminal in mind. With guns, it is not abou t having laws on the books to prosecute individuals, it is about taking guns away from the people so that no one has them in the first place. One last item to note, when assuming power and creating a facist state, Hitler was a proponent of strong gun laws because a disarmed populace was much easier to control than an armed one. The Kings of old also outlawed weapons of any kind in any region that they conquered to quell the ability of the citizens to uprise against them.

The Founding Fathers of this Nation understood all of the above and because of this they included the Second Amendment in the Constitution. In fact, they knew that at some point in every society's life span that the need for the population to arise came about. To this end they made the right to keep and bear arms against a tyrannical state an absolute right that could not be revoked. They did this because the first thing tyrants and despots do is to remove a populations right to defend themselves. When this is done the tyrants have no problem with the destruction of society as we know it.

Note the last part of this bill.

TITLE VIII--INAPPLICABILITY SEC. 801. INAPPLICABILITY TO GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITIES.

This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall not apply to any department or agency of the United States, of a State, or of a political subdivision of a State, or to any official conduct of any officer or employee of such a department or agency.

Mikey
02-13-2009, 3:04 PM
I had Fox news on while in the other room, and someone mentioned that this POS is in the stimulus bill.
I can find no evidence anywhere, either way if this is true.

Anybody know if it is tucked in there with the other 200+ little amendments to it?
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:H.R.1:

TIA

Here's another post on HR 45:

Are you ready for the House Bill titled 'HR 45, Blair Holt Licensing and Record Act of 2009'. It will make it illegal to own a firearm unless it is registered with the database in Washington D.C. As a gun owner you will have to be finger printed, you will be required to provide your DL#, SS#, you must maintain a valid address at all times, submit to mental and physical health records being put on file, you will also be required to file any address changes and any ownership changes even if private sale. Each update will cost $25 and if you fail to comply you will lose your right to own firearms. This bill and its language mirror almost completely one defeated last year in the House of Representatives by soon to be Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. Will the citizenry be as lucky this time?
Pass this on to everyone who believes in strict Constitutionalism and remember that laws only apply to those who obey them. Criminals by definition and nature do not abide by laws. New laws and restrictions only apply to the law abiding citizen and are not written with the criminal in mind. With guns, it is not abou t having laws on the books to prosecute individuals, it is about taking guns away from the people so that no one has them in the first place. One last item to note, when assuming power and creating a facist state, Hitler was a proponent of strong gun laws because a disarmed populace was much easier to control than an armed one. The Kings of old also outlawed weapons of any kind in any region that they conquered to quell the ability of the citizens to uprise against them.

The Founding Fathers of this Nation understood all of the above and because of this they included the Second Amendment in the Constitution. In fact, they knew that at some point in every society's life span that the need for the population to arise came about. To this end they made the right to keep and bear arms against a tyrannical state an absolute right that could not be revoked. They did this because the first thing tyrants and despots do is to remove a populations right to defend themselves. When this is done the tyrants have no problem with the destruction of society as we know it.

Note the last part of this bill.

TITLE VIII--INAPPLICABILITY SEC. 801. INAPPLICABILITY TO GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITIES.

This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall not apply to any department or agency of the United States, of a State, or of a political subdivision of a State, or to any official conduct of any officer or employee of such a department or agency.

GaryPowersLives
02-13-2009, 3:38 PM
Not sure how truthful this is yet as it is fairly recent, but it seems the anti's are emboldened enough to try for a cross border ban.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=153881

GaryPowersLives
02-13-2009, 3:58 PM
Can't verify how truthful this is, but it seems the anti's are emboldened enough to consider cross border bans.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=153881

sorensen440
02-13-2009, 4:00 PM
Not sure how truthful this is yet as it is fairly recent, but it seems the anti's are emboldened enough to try for a cross border ban.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=153881

Can't verify how truthful this is, but it seems the anti's are emboldened enough to consider cross border bans.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=153881
What an odd duplicate post

motorhead
02-13-2009, 6:34 PM
thank you librarian!!! my brain is nearing critical mass. if i read many more of these rumor posts i'll detonate. i'm even getting this tripe in e-mail from my non gun friends now. these things are like chain letters, they've taken on an evil life of ther own. soon tinfoil will be as scarce as ammunition.
guys we need to debunk this garbage. start checking on new rumors before you carry on elsewhere. snopes, thomas, this board, discount ANYTHING that's based on "good authority" of "imformed sources", if it was real there would be sources cited. secret plots are not uncovered on internet gunboards.

Librarian
02-13-2009, 8:25 PM
if it was real there would be sources cited. secret plots are not uncovered on internet gunboards.

Boy, I hope not.

But do remember, that most of these things that are rumors or are not currently going anywhere doesn't mean that can't change. Congressional action on the 'stimulus' in the last week or so shows what they can do if they get the bit between their teeth... :(

escon1
02-13-2009, 8:42 PM
I welcome warrantless searches. I just won't guarantee a good outcome if this bill is ever pased in any shape or form.

motorhead
02-15-2009, 11:19 AM
very true librarian. many now are anticipating sweeping anti-gun legislation as part of the same stimulus (spelled P.O.R.K.) package. some have worked themselves into a frenzy waiting for the axe to fall. by all means, DO NOT trust the current administration, we know well o's voting record on the 2nd. and his motives. but we must remain rational in the interim. this sticky should go a long way towards that end. thank you for providing a voice of reason.

KylaGWolf
02-15-2009, 10:31 PM
OK thinking of that one as a savior makes me shudder and NOT in a good way.

motorhead
02-16-2009, 9:11 AM
creepy, aint it?

hotwls13
02-16-2009, 5:09 PM
So is HR45 worth contacting people yet??

Here is what it says over at Thomas:

Latest Major Action: 2/9/2009 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.


Should we be contacting the Subcomittee??

If so, any idea where to start? Don't want to sound like the sky is falling, but I don't want to be sleeping when I could be doing something. :)

hoffmang
02-16-2009, 5:43 PM
Don't use your powder too soon. Save your time, phone minutes, blood pressure, etc. unless and until HR 45 actually goes anywhere.

I don't think there has ever been a bill with only one sponsor that passed - ever.

-Gene

hotwls13
02-16-2009, 6:11 PM
Cool. It's hard to avoid hr45. It's popping up EVERYWHERE!!!

7x57
02-16-2009, 11:16 PM
I don't think there has ever been a bill with only one sponsor that passed - ever.


*EVER*??? You checked all the way back to the late eighteenth century? :eek:

I bet you didn't consider the 1794 bill, sponsored only by one Jeremiah Ichabod Spencer, regulating the length and stiffness of buggy whips...ah, OK, fine I admit it. I got nothing.

7x57, just wastin' your time with drivel

DDT
02-17-2009, 12:10 AM
*EVER*??? You checked all the way back to the late eighteenth century? :eek:

I bet you didn't consider the 1794 bill, sponsored only by one Jeremiah Ichabod Spencer, regulating the length and stiffness of ...

I read that far and got VERY scared. :D

scr83jp
02-17-2009, 8:47 AM
End of Summer (Both The Fairness Doctrine & New Firearms restrictions WILL BE ON FRONT BURNER !)Moonbeam just came out in favor of the fairness doctrine just like he did against prop 8,he wants to sit in the governors chair again.NO NO NO

motorhead
02-17-2009, 9:06 AM
just in case you still want to believe, hre's some b/g on the bill's esteemed sponsor. i can't imagine anyone wanting to sit next to him, much less cosponsor his bill

.http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1198

BobD
02-17-2009, 7:31 PM
Yeah, let's all wait until it's too late to do anything about it. That's the ticket. :thumbsup:

Mustn't let anyone think we're spreading FUD or wearing tinfoil hats!

hoffmang
02-17-2009, 7:33 PM
Yeah, let's all wait until it's too late to do anything about it. That's the ticket. :thumbsup:

Mustn't let anyone think we're spreading FUD or wearing tinfoil hats!

Bob,

If you have nothing better to do that waste your time on a bill that's not moving, be my guest.

Me, my time is valuable and can be used on more important things like calling Fish & Game in CA to stop a lead ammo ban statewide.

-Gene

N6ATF
02-17-2009, 9:25 PM
Saddens me to see all the people who seem to have quit their jobs and/or abandoned their familial responsibilities so they can spend every waking hour fighting for the 2A, whether extreme back burner issues, or immediate threats.

yellowfin
02-17-2009, 10:28 PM
Saddens me to see all the people who seem to have quit their jobs and/or abandoned their familial responsibilities so they can spend every waking hour fighting for the 2A, whether extreme back burner issues, or immediate threats.
What's worse is that the other side has had full time paid jobs doing nothing more than fight against our 2A rights. That's not sad, that's downright disgusting and hacks me off to no end. They don't buy any product, they don't produce a tangible good or beneficial service, they purely destroy. By right such people should be hanged.

nat
02-18-2009, 12:56 PM
What's worse is that the other side has had full time paid jobs doing nothing more than fight against our 2A rights. That's not sad, that's downright disgusting and hacks me off to no end. They don't buy any product, they don't produce a tangible good or beneficial service, they purely destroy. By right such people should be hanged.

You should feel as strongly about all the Bill of Rights.

BobD
02-20-2009, 6:55 AM
Bob,

If you have nothing better to do that waste your time on a bill that's not moving, be my guest.

Me, my time is valuable and can be used on more important things like calling Fish & Game in CA to stop a lead ammo ban statewide.

-Gene

Gene,

I said nothing about ignoring the lead ammo issue and I wouldn't think of
discouraging you from calling the F&G about it. Why don't you record one
of your calls to the F&G and post it here so we can hear it? I'm sure we'd
all find it very inspiring. :)

As for HR45, it is a threat and only a friend of the gun grabbers would
discourage anyone from speaking out against it. But, I'm sure you're not in
that camp, are you?

Librarian
02-20-2009, 7:09 AM
As for HR45, it is a threat

I disagree. It is a potential threat. It could become a threat, if it moves in the House. The last time it was introduced, the Democrats had substantially the same control of both houses of Congress, and it never got out of its first committee.

With a slightly more Democratic Congress, and a Democratic administration, its potential for action is probably higher.

But to whom would you address your 'speaking out'? Who is it who has influence over Representatives to discourage them from supporting the bill?

BobD
02-20-2009, 7:37 AM
I disagree. It is a potential threat. It could become a threat, if it moves in the House. The last time it was introduced, the Democrats had substantially the same control of both houses of Congress, and it never got out of its first committee.


All the more reason why it's important to let lawmakers know NOW how
unpopular it is. The longer we wait, the more momentum the bill may have
and the more effort will be required to stop it.

The logic that we should "wait until it becomes a problem" is counter-productive
and only helps the gun grabbers.

These motions should be shut down immediately if not sooner. Make it so
they wouldn't even think about restricting our rights. That's the only way
to stem the anti-gun tide.

Librarian
02-20-2009, 7:52 AM
A
These motions should be shut down immediately if not sooner. Make it so
they wouldn't even think about restricting our rights. That's the only way
to stem the anti-gun tide.

Again I must ask - who is it you will contact to create the effect that you and I both desire? Serious question.

Can you imagine anything you or I or any hundred thousand Californians could write to Boxer or Feinstein or Pelosi or George Miller that would cause them to vote against this bill?

BobD
02-20-2009, 7:56 AM
Again I must ask - who is it you will contact to create the effect that you and I both desire? Serious question.

Can you imagine anything you or I or any hundred thousand Californians could write to Boxer or Feinstein or Pelosi or George Miller that would cause them to vote against this bill?

Why do you spend the effort to discourage gun owners from taking action
to protect our gun rights?

Are you with us or against us? Serious question.

DedEye
02-20-2009, 8:06 AM
Why do you spend the effort to discourage gun owners from taking action
to protect our gun rights?

Are you with us or against us? Serious question.

He's not, he's trying to get gun owners to use their time EFFICIENTLY.

You aren't answering his question about who you'd contact, so I'll ask it again:

Who would you be directing your calls of opposition towards?

Mute
02-20-2009, 8:19 AM
They will also take you less seriously when you go on a rampage over something that isn't. If you're going to actively oppose certain legislation make sure it's real and not just rumor otherwise you're probably going to be counted among the reactionaries.

We need to be vigilant, but we also need to use our time and effort wisely and effectively. We can't get sidetracked by smoke and mirrors.

BobD
02-20-2009, 8:22 AM
He's not, he's trying to get gun owners to use their time EFFICIENTLY.

No one should ever be discouraged to take action against anti-gun legislation
EVER. Let people decide how they use their time. If an issue interests someone,
let them have at it. Who are you to decide how someone spends their time
"efficiently"?


You aren't answering his question about who you'd contact, so I'll ask it again:

Who would you be directing your calls of opposition towards?

The author of the bill has a name and an address and a phone number
and an email address. So do all the lawmakers that that person and that
bill will come into the sphere of. Any and every one of those persons can
be and should be contacted and informed how their constituents feel
about it. That is what democracy is supposed to be about. It's supposed
to be BY and FOR the people.

And now answer my question, please:
Why do you and your supporters on this forum spend so much time
discouraging gun owners from taking action against legal anti-gun bills,
motions and legislation?

Are you an efficiency expert on a mission to make gun owners "use
their time more efficiently"? If so, who elected you in charge of making
efficiency decisions for myself and others on this forum as to how we use
our time?

BobD
02-20-2009, 8:26 AM
They will also take you less seriously when you go on a rampage over something that isn't.

I have never encouraged anyone to engage in a "rampage" about anything.

I would take you more seriously if you learned how to read. :)

DedEye
02-20-2009, 8:26 AM
No one should ever be discouraged to take action against anti-gun legislation
EVER. Let people decide how they use their time. If an issue interests someone,
let them have at it. Who are you to decide how someone spends their time
"efficiently"?

Sure they should be discouraged if their time is better spent elsewhere.

And now answer my question, please:
Why do you and your supporters on this forum spend so much time
discouraging gun owners from taking action against legal anti-gun bills,
motions and legislation?

We want to see results and want to see action taken that gets results, not action that results in a self congratulatory pat on the back.

Are you an efficiency expert on a mission to make gun owners "use
their time more efficiently"? If so, who elected you in charge of making
efficiency decisions for myself and others on this forum as to how we use
our time?

No, the people here advising you not to waste your time are results oriented. I am but one voice echoing that call.

As Gene said, if you've got the free time and energy, by all means GO FOR IT. The rest of us will be busy over here getting things done.

pat4wd
02-20-2009, 8:29 AM
WOW, it is a threat now! you are only FOOLING YOURSELF if you think it is not.. right now in our country it has never been a worse time for 2A.. there is nothing wrong with us americans who want our rights to be left alone to speak up and be heard.. If you want to wait till later you will more than likely miss the boat.. Dont discourage people for sticking up for YOUR rights:thumbsup:

Librarian
02-20-2009, 8:37 AM
They will also take you less seriously when you go on a rampage over something that isn't. If you're going to actively oppose certain legislation make sure it's real and not just rumor otherwise you're probably going to be counted among the reactionaries.

We need to be vigilant, but we also need to use our time and effort wisely and effectively. We can't get sidetracked by smoke and mirrors.

Well, in this case HR 45 is certainly real. It has been introduced. At least putting together some arguments and getting ready to oppose it is reasonable - but not so much because this bill, in particular, is very likely, but because it has so much junk in it arguments against will be useful for just about any other bill as well.

We've had quite similar discussions about California bills; it turns out that (unless the Governor takes a position earlier) it is useless to write Arnold about a bill until it has passed both houses - his staff just isn't spending any time on it, and will not pay any attention.

So, too, with HR45. One could write to the House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security (http://judiciary.house.gov/about/subcrime.html) - where the bill now rests - but Zoe Lofgren? Sheila Jackson Lee? Maxine Waters? At least Lofgren, Waters and Lungren are from California and might - might - feel as if communication from a California voter might be interesting. If one feels the inspiration to contact the Committee, sure, why not? But until a hearing is scheduled, the committee really doesn't care. They haven't even updated all the committee web pages yet, from the last Congress.

I still write to Boxer and Feinstein and Pelosi. I just know it won't have any effect.

BobD
02-20-2009, 8:37 AM
Sure they should be discouraged if their time is better spent elsewhere.

Bull.

HR45 is a federal bill with serious consequences.



We want to see results and want to see action taken that gets results, not action that results in a self congratulatory pat on the back.

Bull again.


No, the people here advising you not to waste your time are results oriented. I am but one voice echoing that call.

As Gene said, if you've got the free time and energy, by all means GO FOR IT. The rest of us will be busy over here getting things done.

Let us decide how we spend our time. Shutting down a federal bill in
its infancy, a bill with serious ramifications, is not wasting our time.

But, listening to you and your friends sure is. :)

DDT
02-20-2009, 8:46 AM
Bull.

HR45 is a federal bill with serious consequences.



Which has been introduced before and died in committee and this year has been shuttled in the same way and hasn't had any hearings since.

If there are any hearings and if there is any movement we will all know and then can take action.

DedEye
02-20-2009, 9:02 AM
WOW, it is a threat now! you are only FOOLING YOURSELF if you think it is not.. right now in our country it has never been a worse time for 2A.. there is nothing wrong with us americans who want our rights to be left alone to speak up and be heard.. If you want to wait till later you will more than likely miss the boat.. Dont discourage people for sticking up for YOUR rights:thumbsup:

No, of course there's nothing wrong with wanting to protect our rights and be left alone. You are however mistaken that there's "never been a worse time for 2A" in this country.

The pendulum is swinging back in our direction.

Stick up for your rights, but do it wisely. The Second Amendment March, for example, is not such an intelligent defense of our rights.

Bull.

HR45 is a federal bill with serious consequences.

Yeah, if it had a snowball's chance in Hell of passing.

Let us decide how we spend our time. Shutting down a federal bill in
its infancy, a bill with serious ramifications, is not wasting our time.

But, listening to you and your friends sure is. :)

Like I said, knock yourself out calling and using all of your free time.

Let me put it another way: You could dedicate your time 50-50 to calling both the state DFG over the Lead Ammo Ban and the members of the committee about HR45, or you could spend 100% of your time calling about one bill or the other.

HR45 as it stands right now, has almost no shot of going anywhere.

The lead ammo ban poses a serious and immediate threat to gun owners in this state and has enough momentum that it deserves immediate attention.

If you spend half your free time calling disinterested congresspeople about a bill they probably don't even think about (or are going to support regardless of negative reaction), especially when you aren't in their district and aren't even one of their constituents, you will be wasting that free time.

If instead you devoted your energy to making useful calls that have a shot at preventing the expansion of the lead ammo ban, you would be using your time efficiently.

You're talking about shooting down the bill in its infancy. Let me make an analogy for you.

The expansion of the lead ammo ban is a B2 bomber crewed by highly skilled pilots headed to your city. HR45 is a two engine biplane with fires in both engines piloted by mentally challenged chimpanzees.

The B2 is carrying conventional two thousand pound bombs, while the biplane is inexplicably armed with a hydrogen bomb.

The B2 is a couple hundred miles off shore, while the biplane is several thousand miles away and just gaining altitude from its rickety takeoff.

You are the air defense commander for your city. Do you devote all of your fighters and AAA to the B2, or do you send all of your fighters off to chase down the biplane, which is likely to crash before they even reach it?

pat4wd
02-20-2009, 9:07 AM
[QUOTE=DedEye;2064293]No, of course there's nothing wrong with wanting to protect our rights and be left alone. You are however mistaken that there's "never been a worse time for 2A" in this country.

The pendulum is swinging back in our direction.

Stick up for your rights, but do it wisely. The Second Amendment March, for example, is not such an intelligent defense of our rights.

QUOTE]


If you think the pendulum is swinging back our directions you my friend are in a differant world.. Sad to say the least:(


With the power being shifted so liberal in every aspect of our goverment that is just a foolish statement..

hoffmang
02-20-2009, 9:10 AM
As for HR45, it is a threat and only a friend of the gun grabbers would
discourage anyone from speaking out against it. But, I'm sure you're not in
that camp, are you?

Bob,

Why are you insinuating that I'm anti-gun for simply saying you should be efficient?

I've done about 3 hours of work including part of a trip down to OC on lead ammo. Since your asking for my work log, what is yours?

-Gene

DedEye
02-20-2009, 9:20 AM
If you think the pendulum is swinging back our directions you my friend are in a differant world.. Sad to say the least:(


With the power being shifted so liberal in every aspect of our goverment that is just a foolish statement..

Ah yes, "the liberals."

Screw Heller, forget Nordyke, dismiss every single victory we've made in California. The fact that "the power is liberal" means that we're going to lose our 2nd Amendment rights tomorrow.

Have you been paying attention!?

BobD
02-20-2009, 9:51 AM
Which has been introduced before and died in committee and this year has been shuttled in the same way and hasn't had any hearings since.

And, they will continue to introduce such bills until they pass unless the
public outcry is such to discourage them from even thinking about it.


If there are any hearings and if there is any movement we will all know and then can take action.

Wrong. Take action NOW.

BobD
02-20-2009, 9:59 AM
The Second Amendment March, for example, is not such an intelligent defense of our rights.

I can't believe this! You're actually discouraging people from joining in a lawful protest against
a threat to our constitution?

Whose side are you on?



Yeah, if it had a snowball's chance in Hell of passing.



Like I said, knock yourself out calling and using all of your free time.

Let me put it another way: You could dedicate your time 50-50 to calling both the state DFG over the Lead Ammo Ban and the members of the committee about HR45, or you could spend 100% of your time calling about one bill or the other.

HR45 as it stands right now, has almost no shot of going anywhere.

The lead ammo ban poses a serious and immediate threat to gun owners in this state and has enough momentum that it deserves immediate attention.

If you spend half your free time calling disinterested congresspeople about a bill they probably don't even think about (or are going to support regardless of negative reaction), especially when you aren't in their district and aren't even one of their constituents, you will be wasting that free time.

If instead you devoted your energy to making useful calls that have a shot at preventing the expansion of the lead ammo ban, you would be using your time efficiently.

You're talking about shooting down the bill in its infancy. Let me make an analogy for you.

The expansion of the lead ammo ban is a B2 bomber crewed by highly skilled pilots headed to your city. HR45 is a two engine biplane with fires in both engines piloted by mentally challenged chimpanzees.

The B2 is carrying conventional two thousand pound bombs, while the biplane is inexplicably armed with a hydrogen bomb.

The B2 is a couple hundred miles off shore, while the biplane is several thousand miles away and just gaining altitude from its rickety takeoff.

You are the air defense commander for your city. Do you devote all of your fighters and AAA to the B2, or do you send all of your fighters off to chase down the biplane, which is likely to crash before they even reach it?

Let me decide how I use my time, OK?

Anti-gun legislation should be fought hard where ever it appears and in
what ever stage of development.

Who says a person can only protest about one thing at a time? Your
argument about "time efficiency" is a weak one to say the least.

How about YOU spend YOUR time more efficiently and stop discouraging
the members of this forum from exercising their constitutional rights?

I say, speak out about ALL anti-gun actions, all the time, every time.

Don't buy the bull about "use your time efficiently" and "don't spread
FUD" and "don't be a tinfoil hat."

pat4wd
02-20-2009, 10:13 AM
Ah yes, "the liberals."

Screw Heller, forget Nordyke, dismiss every single victory we've made in California. The fact that "the power is liberal" means that we're going to lose our 2nd Amendment rights tomorrow.

Have you been paying attention!?

I have been playing very close attention.. And yes there have been some small victories:thumbsup: Hopefully we can keep it up.. But we should not have had to have these small victories in the first place.. If you dont realize the potential right now for our rights to be lost then you are wearing some costly rose colored glasses..

The victories are small when compared to the loses and potential losses.. if you want to stand and wait for lawers and courts to decide your future that is sad.. Law abiding gun owners need to be outspoken. IMO most people are scared to say they are gun owners in a public forum being that the nation is so anti gun now.. that hurts all americans. People need to see the normal Joe, the guy next door as gun owners.. not the gang member or drug dealer as it is right now.. to tell people not to be worried, to not speak up and to wait to defend their rights is a foolish thing to do.. your opinion is differant, I see that...

We both want the same thing in the end I am sure.. But the sit around and wait attitude needs to stop..

BobD
02-20-2009, 10:13 AM
Bob,

Why are you insinuating that I'm anti-gun for simply saying you should be efficient?

Do me a favor, OK? Let me worry about the efficiency of my time. It's
a BS reason anyway. ALL attacks on our 2nd amendment should be
protested, ALL the time, EVERY time.

How long does it take to simply send an email to a lawmaker? To let
him/her know how you feel? To make a phone call?

Thirty seconds? A minute?

Your noble campaign to improve our time efficiency is ludicrous. Anyone
can can take some action about numerous gun issues without worrying
about "using their time more efficiently."


I've done about 3 hours of work including part of a trip down to OC on lead ammo.

Three hours of telling people to "use their time more efficiently" and to
take no action against HR45? Bully for you.


Since your asking for my work log, what is yours?

I didn't ask for your work log. There is no need. I can see right here your
repeated attempts to discourage gun owners from taking action against
anti-gun legislation.

I don't care how many trips you take anywhere. You are discouraging
gun owners from exercising their right to defend our 2nd amendment.
That tells me all I need to know.

And, how about dropping the "use your time more efficiently" bull? That
is the lamest excuse I've ever heard. It's just laughable.

Kestryll
02-20-2009, 11:16 AM
Okay, here we go again..

\\WARNING//

Keep it civil and on topic.
Do NOT resort to personal comments or snide remarks if you want to keep posting.

BobD
02-20-2009, 11:28 AM
^ Noted -- thank you. :)

Folks, my point is simply that it's never a waste of time to exercise your rights
and freedoms and engage in any lawful demonstration or protest whenever or
wherever those rights and freedoms are challenged.

Mute
02-20-2009, 11:50 AM
It is a waste of time when you devote that time to issues that aren't going anywhere instead of focusing on threats that do stand a chance of passing. What I'm saying is you need to prioritize your efforts. And I can read just fine. Perhaps you should learn to read.

6172crew
02-20-2009, 12:06 PM
It is a waste of time when you devote that time to issues that aren't going anywhere instead of focusing on threats that do stand a chance of passing. What I'm saying is you need to prioritize your efforts. And I can read just fine. Perhaps you should learn to read.

Or sometimes we need it to be a fire mission, where 500 calls in a 3 hour span gets the message across.

DDT
02-20-2009, 12:58 PM
^ Noted -- thank you. :)

Folks, my point is simply that it's never a waste of time to exercise your rights
and freedoms and engage in any lawful demonstration or protest whenever or
wherever those rights and freedoms are challenged.

You are right. If you personally are willing to fight this battle AND come out when there is a MORE pressing and immediate issue then great. Go out and tilt at this windmill.

However; experience has shown that MOST 2A supporters don't have the time nor inclination to write letters or call their representatives as often as you clearly will.

We KNOW there will be legislation and regulation coming down the pike with the current administration and the current legislative makeup.

We, the activists and our votes, are the weapons we need to fight bad legislation. We also need leaders to help identify and coordinate attacks, just like a military operation. It is incumbent upon those leaders to choose how and when to use their weapons. Since our ammo (in most cases) is not endless it is important to those leading to "keep their powder dry" until needed.

Now, if those leaders aren't doing their job effectively they will lose that position of leadership.

pat4wd
02-20-2009, 1:22 PM
However; experience has shown that MOST 2A supporters don't have the time nor inclination to write letters or call their representatives as often as you clearly will.



We, the activists and our votes, are the weapons we need to fight bad legislation.
Now, if those leaders aren't doing their job effectively they will lose that position of leadership.


What you wrote is well written:thumbsup: But we as law abiding gun owners also need to be more public... Our right, our hobbie, Our guns need to be seen as everyday items of a american as they were 200+ years ago.. There are so many people (and growing) who do not use, want or need guns.. they watch TV and see guns are bad.. from the movies to the news. Rarely do americans see gun shown in a good light, Rarely are they shown as a right of the american people..

We need to So that guns are a Great thing for any american again.. It seems like a almost impossible thing todo anymore to me but you do have to try and try in numbers

For these reasons plus many others gun owners need to be out and vocal setting a good example to help educate and bring back so much of what we have lost. We need to fight in the courts, we need to focus on the most important issue at hand first.. But please don't anybody think we should wait, Not say anything or be sheepal to a fast growing vocal press and anti-gun americans

BobD
02-20-2009, 3:02 PM
Now, if those leaders aren't doing their job effectively they will lose that position of leadership.

Well, I think GW Bush proved that that is not the case. :)

N6ATF
02-20-2009, 5:25 PM
http://hoboken411.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/please-do-not-feed-the-hoboken-trolls.jpg

Palindari
02-20-2009, 6:12 PM
Thanks Librarian!

That was well addressed and insightful.

Not to highjack the thread, but I'm with the moderates on this as well when it comes to biding your time.

If you want come across credible and not some frantic "chicken little" on the fringe type, relax and be vigilant.

HR45 is something of a concern, true. I've read it and what they are trying to accomplish seems a HUGE waste of taxpayers money and to be honest I can't see the President endorsing it now on that alone.

But we're talking about a man who happens to be a professor of the Constitution as well and to be the one to somehow hinder 2A doesn't seem likely IMHO.

Amendment 17 proved to most historians that abolishing something as "sinful" (lol) as "intoxicating beverages" led only to the criminalization of it and brought forth a whole new wave of criminal.

Repealing the right to bear arms would only do the same. And Amendment 21 repealed 17 so now we can drink and drive with greater ease now! lol

Inside joking, currently manning a DUI checkpoint atm - had to throw that in for the irony. ;)

But I know some of you have already fortified your bunkers and stocked up the ammo racks for such an occassion, lol... So be it, for me, I'll wait and see how much traction HR45 truly gets then I may start rustling up the kinfolk for the barn burning ;)

Now I return you to your thread already in progress... ;)

Rico
02-24-2009, 9:16 AM
HR 45 did not pass with Obama's "stimulus" package last week.

Let me repeat that to be clear: HR 45 is not the law of the land -- at least not yet.

And by no means are we out of danger -- not in the least.

After all, this was not how Congressman Rush intended on getting his police state bill passed.

We still have to defeat this bill the old fashioned way, and that means we need more signatures.

Sign NAGR's petition by clicking the link below -- and take a few seconds to forward this email to as many of your friends and family members as you can!

http://www.nationalgunrights.org/petition.htm


Sincerely,

Dudley Brown

Executive Director

National Association for Gun Rights

P.S. As you know, NAGR is completely dependent on the generosity of its members.

Few people can afford to donate every time I ask, and I wouldn't expect anything different.

Even so, your generosity keeps us rolling and allows our group to expand. If you'd like to contribute to NAGR today, simply click here.

Mikey
02-24-2009, 9:47 AM
HR 45 did not pass with Obama's "stimulus" package last week.


Thank you!

And yes I did take a minute to sign the petition
.

1BigPea
02-24-2009, 11:35 AM
HR 45 did not pass with Obama's "stimulus" package last week.

Signed and sent to everyone on my email list.

Thanks.

Librarian
03-01-2009, 11:59 AM
Even a few of our older members seem to misinterpret the purpose of this thread.

First, Welcome, new Calgunners!

It's clear that many of our new members are eager to help. There are obviously many Good Things that bring them here.


Somehow, they've become connected to a source of information about real and potential gun issues.

They actually read the information.

They correctly evaluate that the issues may be important.

They further conclude, correctly, that Something Should Be Done.

They come here and join.


And then some of them post the same darn thing
we've seen three times a week for the last three months.

It's not entirely their fault. Things come in under different titles, and people remember different key words, and posts scroll off the first page. And we know that our forum search isn't really good - especially if the searcher is looking for something different than what previous posters thought were the important words.

THIS THREAD is to catch and prevent most of the duplicates.

Some of the things in post 1 are real - HR 45, for example.

Some things are old and not active in California - the Ammunition Accountability Act cruft.

And some things are potential, but not yet. Bills have finally been submitted to the legislature here - and we're watching. Our new Attorney General and our favorite Senator Feinstein have both been rattling the 'assault weapon ban' saber - and we're watching.

It's always time to write your state and federal representatives, but without a specific bill to support or oppose, we're stuck with generalities. The 'elect' barely listen to specifics; without a bill and a committee assignment, they're not listening at all.

If someone suggests an action plan, go for it! But mere 'sound and fury' is confusing effort with work accomplished.

motorhead
03-23-2009, 8:31 AM
HR 45 is real, true. it has about as much chance of passing as i have of becoming pope. (see any white smoke?) the fears of it being included in the pork orgy are absolutely ridiculous. it has no support and the author is an ex black panther and congressional pariah.

simple schoolboy
04-24-2009, 10:55 AM
I would suggest that the authors of threads related to legislation update the title or opening post when certain thresholds are met, such as going into comittee, going into the floor, etc.

For instance, were I to call my representative right now about HR 45, that would be a bit premature as she is not in that particular comittee. I called my state representative yesterday about AB962 and felt rather silly because its nowhere near a floor vote yet.

Librarian
04-24-2009, 12:39 PM
I would suggest that the authors of threads related to legislation update the title or opening post when certain thresholds are met, such as going into comittee, going into the floor, etc.

For instance, were I to call my representative right now about HR 45, that would be a bit premature as she is not in that particular comittee. I called my state representative yesterday about AB962 and felt rather silly because its nowhere near a floor vote yet.

Changing the title doesn't get the thread updated as 'new'; we get the effect you seem to want by posting a 'reply' on the existing thread.

You can see the links to currently active bills in this thread -
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=161600

I try to update the status twice a week, more often if there's some information sooner. The NRA has been releasing updates a day or two sooner than the CA website info gets updated, and some members have been reporting directly on hearings and legislator contacts.

USAFTS
04-28-2009, 1:59 PM
HR 45 is real, true. it has about as much chance of passing as i have of becoming pope. (see any white smoke?) the fears of it being included in the pork orgy are absolutely ridiculous. it has no support and the author is an ex black panther and congressional pariah.

Motorhead-

I disagree. Does level of support or the background of the author really make any difference at all? It has already been clearly proven, that literally ANYTHING could be included in any bill at the last minute and be signed into law. Nobody will read the bills and the President will sign it...(also without reading it). Should the last 9,000+ pork additions have been passed? Should the AIG bonuses have been guaranteed by law. Of course not. The language that guaranteed those bonuses was intentionally inserted in the dark of night and quickly voted on. As long as there are no rules for our government to follow, HB45 and anything else these globalists want to pass...WILL pass.

I suggest that you go out and get fitted for a robe and a really big hat because the white smoke is everywhere. :)

Super Spy
05-08-2009, 2:18 PM
I'm gonna take a guess I'm not the only independent voter here. Many of us are consevative on one issue and liberal on the other. The biggest reason I could find to vote against Obama is gun control. Other than that the guy makes sense most of the time. Bush is the one that started bailing out the financial institutions, which was a HUGE mistake. Unfortunately once the flood gates open that seems to be the only answer our government can come up with. Spend more money we don't have. Even though that's how we ended up here in the first place.

I don't think Obama wants to piss off all the gun owners at one time.....unlike Hillary that could care less who she pisses off.

BobD
06-25-2009, 7:05 PM
HR45 has been introduced in the House:
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=302358&src=

Details on the bill:
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/show

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/text

Librarian
06-25-2009, 7:33 PM
HR45 has been introduced in the House:
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=302358&src=

Details on the bill:
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/show

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/text

The bill was introduced in January - it's in the title of the thread, and discussed in the original post, and it's in the summary thread here: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=184790

It has no co-sponsors, has not moved out of its subcommittee since February 9th, and is identical to a bill the same member introduced last session - which died a lonely, ignored, deserved death.

I check on it about once a month. That's all it deserves right now.

Bkims223
06-25-2009, 8:45 PM
My question is if they accomplish all these Anti Gun Bills, Then what? Whats next, do we get to keep the weapons we all ready own? Or will there be a national confiscation of all weapons? And if it leads to this, what are our options and what are our plans?

"The 2A aint about Hunting"

HondaMasterTech
06-25-2009, 8:58 PM
The element of surprise...

Librarian
06-25-2009, 9:17 PM
The element of surprise...
Which is why people watch it.

When it gets 50 co-sponsors, when the Kerrys and Kennedys and Feinsteins and Schumers and McCarthys and Waters and Lees come out for it, when it comes out of that committee in which it languishes now - - then we worry.

HondaMasterTech
06-25-2009, 10:11 PM
Why sit in the street watching the oncoming bus?

7x57
06-25-2009, 10:15 PM
Why sit in the street watching the oncoming bus?

Because if we pay too much attention to an otherwise forgotten bill, it can actually stir up interest and support based on the buzz we created. Seriously. We want to not say a word until they get the bill off dead-center on their own.

7x57

HondaMasterTech
06-25-2009, 10:18 PM
The element of surprise...

This was supposed to mean that it is not wise to reveal a plan to the enemy. In response to the then above post.

Fissssh
07-11-2009, 12:32 PM
What is the currant status of HR45?

chuckles48
07-11-2009, 1:06 PM
Nothing appears to have happened since February. ;>

motorhead
07-11-2009, 4:55 PM
i know i've posted this before but...
the noise in the closet is NOT the boogeyman! normal members in the house don't even want to sit by this piece of work, much less collaborate on legislation. BTW, hr45 was named for a dead baby in his district and written strictly as an attention getting/vote grabbing measure.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1198

Librarian
07-13-2009, 2:26 PM
btt

joepamjohn
08-19-2009, 7:47 PM
The words out of his mouth were "I'm not going to take away folks' guns." I'd imagine he's more cognizant of what he's saying than what his staffers put on his web site. Still, I'd love to corner him and ask him that question:

You've said that you're not going to "take away folks' guns," but whitehouse.gov claims you support banning of the most popular category of target rifle on the market today. So which is it?

He may not personaly be the one taking away the guns,it's the house and senate that will do it for him.

thempopresense
11-16-2009, 6:21 PM
any updates on HR45, it has been referred.

Dr Rockso
11-16-2009, 6:46 PM
any updates on HR45, it has been referred.
Nothing new since February, and still no co-sponsors. It's dead.

Librarian
11-16-2009, 6:47 PM
introduced in January, dumped to subcommittee in February; we're halfway through November and no movement at all.

AndrewMendez
11-16-2009, 7:48 PM
introduced in January, dumped to subcommittee in February; we're halfway through November and no movement at all.

yay

motorhead
11-17-2009, 9:40 AM
is santa claus coming at christmas?

Librarian
01-03-2010, 8:57 PM
Bump.

Since we seem to have a new spate of emails stimulating some new threads on old topics.