PDA

View Full Version : Common sense in the U.S. house, none for gun grabbers


Charliegone
06-28-2005, 12:06 AM
WASHINGTON -- The National Rifle Association and its allies in the House beat back an effort Thursday to restrict gun manufacturers' exports of high-powered, .50-caliber rifles that can bring down jet airliners from a mile away.

By a 278-149 vote, the House killed an amendment by Rep. James Moran to block .50-caliber exports to civilians. He said the guns are dream weapons for terrorists.

"These are unparalleled weapons, and I'm not trying to restrict them in the United States," said Moran, D-Va. "I just don't want them sold by arms dealers."
But gun rights advocates, with backing from the powerful NRA, turned aside the amendment.

The vote came as the House wrapped up a three-day debate and passed by 418-7 a $57.5 billion spending bill for NASA and the departments of Commerce, State and Justice for the budget year beginning Oct. 1.

The Senate has yet to act on the bill.

Supporters of gun rights said the government already has ample authority to block the export of .50-caliber weapons.

"This amendment is not going to address illegal sales," said Rep. Bart Gordon, D-Tenn.

The .50-caliber rifle is the most powerful firearm in wide circulation. It can penetrate thick steel used to armor personnel carriers and is accurate at distances greater than a mile. Moran said that if someone were to use the weapons from such distances, he easily would evade law enforcement.

The risks associated with .50-caliber weapons gained attention this year after CBS' "60 Minutes" aired a report demonstrating the ease with which .50-caliber rifles could be exported to overseas militias.

But the NRA said the amendment was an unnecessary infringement on gun rights and that existing laws provide penalties for smuggling the rifles.

"There are literally dozens of gun laws on the books with very severe implications and penalties that were violated on that ("60 Minutes) show," said Chris W. Cox, the top lobbyist for the NRA.

The underlying bill provides the full $16.5 billion request by Bush for NASA, an almost 2 percent increase over this year.

It increases the Justice Department's budget by $790 million over current levels, an almost 4 percent increase.

The measure rejects big cuts proposed by Bush to Justice Department grants programs for state and local law enforcement agencies, but still leaves those programs almost $400 million below current levels.

The bill cuts Bush's request for the State Department by $251 million to $9 billion. Lawmakers are moving to trim the president's requests for defense and foreign aid-related spending and restore Bush-proposed cuts in domestic programs.



".50-caliber rifles that can bring down jet airliners from a mile away."

WOW. Please someone show me evidence of this? Oh thats right it doesn't EXIST! Why? Because it is impossible!! God some people are stupid.

"These are unparalleled weapons, and I'm not trying to restrict them in the United States," said Moran, D-Va. "I just don't want them sold by arms dealers."

??Isn't that kind of a wierd statement, you don't want to restrict them, but you don't them to be sold to law-abiding citizens? Isn't that restriction! What an idiot.

"The risks associated with .50-caliber weapons gained attention this year after CBS' "60 Minutes" aired a report demonstrating the ease with which .50-caliber rifles could be exported to overseas militias. "

??Who ever wrote this article really needs to shoot a gun to see what it is like. I swear people like this say its "easy" or "simple" when in fact they have NO idea what it requires to be able to shoot a "far away" target. Ignorance maybe? Nah more like bias to me.

Spotted Owl
06-28-2005, 6:36 AM
".50-caliber rifles that can bring down jet airliners from a mile away."
WWII fighters were typically armed with 4-6 .50 caliber machine guns, and it often took several multi-second bursts to shoot down even the smallest fighter.

I suppose the people who write these articles have been watching too many movies, where gunfire of any caliber is capable of destroying airliners or causing cars to explode.

shecky
06-28-2005, 2:00 PM
All fine and dandy, but why the hell does the NRA give a damn about exports of .50 rifles? Why don't they concentrate on rights of citizens within the US? http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

Mssr. Eleganté
06-28-2005, 9:38 PM
Shecky,

The NRA cares about laws like this because they demonize certain firearms for no reason.

Also, if gun grabbers succeeded in banning the export of .50 caliber rifles, they would then turn around and scream, "The U.S. Government is willing to protect citizens of other countries from these dangerous weapons, but refuses to protect Americans here at home."

shecky
06-29-2005, 7:07 AM
The National Rifle Association isn't the International Rifle Association. If "the government already has ample authority to block the export of .50-caliber weapons", then this action was just a bunch of noisemaking by the NRA that has no impact on the gun rights of US citizens, or even the export of .50 rifles.

Why should anyone but international arms dealers care about what can be exported? And if a .50 rifle should actually turn up in the hands of a Iraqi insurgent, don't you think this would reflect poorly on the NRA and it's decision to advocate export of such weapons?

The decision to support arms exports does nothing to secure the right of arms ownership by actual American citizens here at home. Applauding the NRA's action in this case will get them a slap on the back from the NRA sheep for a pointless legal victory, while critics will simply write it off as the NRA as a organization seeking relevance and being out of touch with it's supposed constituents, American gun owners.

Mssr. Eleganté
06-30-2005, 10:13 PM
Having the authority to block the export of .50BMG rifles and actually banning the export of .50BMG rifles are two different things. In the first case, the State Department can make the descision to block exports on a case by case basis. In the second case, all exports to civilians are banned no matter what. So this action was not "just a bunch of noisemaking."

And if gun-grabbers used the tactic I mentioned above, then this law would have had an impact on the gun rights of U.S. citizens.

And in addition to international arms dealers, I think American arms manufacturers might care about what can be exported.

With more and more attacks on our 2nd Amendment rights now coming from the international community, the NRA might just have to become the International Rifle Association.

The NRA has full time lobbiests in Washington fighting to protect our gun rights. Since they are there anyway, why not let them fight EVERY anti-gun bill that comes along, even if it only effects American gun manufacturers?

Number 6
07-02-2005, 2:42 AM
I think American arms manufacturers might care about what can be exported.

I think this is probably what the NRA was most worried about. The NRA is supposed to protect the rights of the average citizen, and gun manufacturers as well. An undue limitation upon who a manufacturer can sell to will hurt business, thereby running the risk of putting the manufacturer out of business.

Also, with all of the press about .50 caliber rifles in the news, there is the danger that momentum could build against these rifles. The more legislation that gets past on a certain issue, there is the risk that it could become easier to push more legislation against these rifles through congress. One does not want to allow anymore rhetorical tools for those who want to ban .50 caliber rifles.

stator
07-20-2005, 5:29 AM
Originally posted by shecky:
Why should anyone but international arms dealers care about what can be exported? And if a .50 rifle should actually turn up in the hands of a Iraqi insurgent, don't you think this would reflect poorly on the NRA and it's decision to advocate export of such weapons?



It is not about international arms but preserving the right of 50cal rifle manufacturer's ability to make profits. Companies like Barrett. The intent of this legislation is to end our rights by putting manufacturers out of business.

That is why you should care about it.