# Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007



## tgridley (Sep 28, 2005)

Ears need to burn and phone lines need to be jammed with pissed off gun owners (but be polite).

If you aren't angry yet then you had better find that place because what is coming isn't pretty. 

Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)

HR 1022 IH


110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 1022
To reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 13, 2007
Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A BILL
To reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007'.

SEC. 2. REINSTATEMENT FOR 10 YEARS OF REPEALED CRIMINAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO ASSAULT WEAPONS AND LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES.

(a) Reinstatement of Provisions Wholly Repealed- Paragraphs (30) and (31) of section 921(a), subsections (v) and (w) and Appendix A of section 922, and the last 2 sentences of section 923(i) of title 18, United States Code, as in effect just before the repeal made by section 110105(2) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, are hereby enacted into law.

(b) Reinstatement of Provisions Partially Repealed- Section 924 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the following:

`(B) knowingly violates subsection (a)(4), (f), (k), (r), (v), or (w) of section 922;'; and

(2) in subsection (c)(1)(B), by striking clause (i) and inserting the following:

`(i) is a short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, or semiautomatic assault weapon, the person shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than 10 years; or'.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

(a) In General- Section 921(a)(30) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended to read as follows:

`(30) The term `semiautomatic assault weapon' means any of the following:

`(A) The following rifles or copies or duplicates thereof:

`(i) AK, AKM, AKS, AK-47, AK-74, ARM, MAK90, Misr, NHM 90, NHM 91, SA 85, SA 93, VEPR;

`(ii) AR-10;

`(iii) AR-15, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, or Olympic Arms PCR;

`(iv) AR70;

`(v) Calico Liberty;

`(vi) Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU;

`(vii) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FNC;

`(viii) Hi-Point Carbine;

`(ix) HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, or HK-PSG-1;

`(x) Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;

`(xi) M1 Carbine;

`(xii) Saiga;

`(xiii) SAR-8, SAR-4800;

`(xiv) SKS with detachable magazine;

`(xv) SLG 95;

`(xvi) SLR 95 or 96;

`(xvii) Steyr AUG;

`(xviii) Sturm, Ruger Mini-14;

`(xix) Tavor;

`(xx) Thompson 1927, Thompson M1, or Thompson 1927 Commando; or

`(xxi) Uzi, Galil and Uzi Sporter, Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle (Galatz).

`(B) The following pistols or copies or duplicates thereof:

`(i) Calico M-110;

`(ii) MAC-10, MAC-11, or MPA3;

`(iii) Olympic Arms OA;

`(iv) TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10; or

`(v) Uzi.

`(C) The following shotguns or copies or duplicates thereof:

`(i) Armscor 30 BG;

`(ii) SPAS 12 or LAW 12;

`(iii) Striker 12; or

`(iv) Streetsweeper.

`(D) A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine, and that has--

`(i) a folding or telescoping stock;

`(ii) a threaded barrel;

`(iii) a pistol grip;

`(iv) a forward grip; or

`(v) a barrel shroud.

`(E)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), a semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

`(ii) Clause (i) shall not apply to an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

`(F) A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has--

`(i) a second pistol grip;

`(ii) a threaded barrel;

`(iii) a barrel shroud; or

`(iv) the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at a location outside of the pistol grip.

`(G) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

`(H) A semiautomatic shotgun that has--

`(i) a folding or telescoping stock;

`(ii) a pistol grip;

`(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine; or

`(iv) a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds.

`(I) A shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

`(J) A frame or receiver that is identical to, or based substantially on the frame or receiver of, a firearm described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (I) or (L).

`(K) A conversion kit.

`(L) A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.'.

(b) Related Definitions- Section 921(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(36) Barrel Shroud- The term `barrel shroud' means a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel of a firearm so that the shroud protects the user of the firearm from heat generated by the barrel, but does not include a slide that encloses the barrel, and does not include an extension of the stock along the bottom of the barrel which does not encircle or substantially encircle the barrel.

`(37) Conversion Kit- The term `conversion kit' means any part or combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a firearm into a semiautomatic assault weapon, and any combination of parts from which a semiautomatic assault weapon can be assembled if the parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.

`(38) Detachable Magazine- The term `detachable magazine' means an ammunition feeding device that can readily be inserted into a firearm.

`(39) Fixed Magazine- The term `fixed magazine' means an ammunition feeding device contained in, or permanently attached to, a firearm.

`(40) Folding or Telescoping Stock- The term `folding or telescoping stock' means a stock that folds, telescopes, or otherwise operates to reduce the length, size, or any other dimension, or otherwise enhances the concealability, of a firearm.

`(41) Forward Grip- The term `forward grip' means a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip.

`(42) Pistol Grip- The term `pistol grip' means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.

`(43) Threaded Barrel- The term `threaded barrel' means a feature or characteristic that is designed in such a manner to allow for the attachment of a firearm as defined in section 5845(a) of the National Firearms Act (26 U.S.C. 5845(a)).'.

SEC. 4. GRANDFATHER PROVISION.

Section 922(v)(2) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended--

(1) by inserting `(A)' after `(2)'; and

(2) by adding after and below the end the following:

`(B) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any firearm the possession or transfer of which would (but for this subparagraph) be unlawful by reason of this subsection, and which is otherwise lawfully possessed on the date of the enactment of this subparagraph.'.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEC. 5. REPEAL OF CERTAIN EXEMPTIONS.

Section 922(v)(3) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended by striking `(3)' and all that follows through the 1st sentence and inserting the following:

`(3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any firearm that--

`(A) is manually operated by bolt, pump, level, or slide action;

`(B) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or

`(C) is an antique firearm.'.

SEC. 6. REQUIRING BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR THE TRANSFER OF LAWFULLY POSSESSED SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS.

Section 922(v) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(5) It shall be unlawful for any person to transfer a semiautomatic assault weapon to which paragraph (1) does not apply, except through--

`(A) a licensed dealer, and for purposes of subsection (t) in the case of such a transfer, the weapon shall be considered to be transferred from the business inventory of the licensed dealer and the dealer shall be considered to be the transferor; or

`(B) a State or local law enforcement agency if the transfer is made in accordance with the procedures provided for in subsection (t) of this section and section 923(g).

`(6) The Attorney General shall establish and maintain, in a timely manner, a record of the make, model, and date of manufacture of any semiautomatic assault weapon which the Attorney General is made aware has been used in relation to a crime under Federal or State law, and the nature and circumstances of the crime involved, including the outcome of relevant criminal investigations and proceedings. The Attorney General shall annually submit the record to the Congress and make the record available to the general public.'.

SEC. 7. STRENGTHENING THE BAN ON THE POSSESSION OR TRANSFER OF A LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICE.

(a) Ban on Transfer of Semiautomatic Assault Weapon With Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device-

(1) IN GENERAL- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after subsection  the following:

`(z) It shall be unlawful for any person to transfer any assault weapon with a large capacity ammunition feeding device.'.

(2) PENALTIES- Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(8) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(z) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.'.

(b) Certification Requirement-

(1) IN GENERAL- Section 922(w) of such title, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended--

(A) in paragraph (3)--

(i) by adding `or' at the end of subparagraph (B); and

(ii) by striking subparagraph (C) and redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (C); and

(B) by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following:

`(4) It shall be unlawful for a licensed manufacturer, licensed importer, or licensed dealer who transfers a large capacity ammunition feeding device that was manufactured on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection, to fail to certify to the Attorney General before the end of the 60-day period that begins with the date of the transfer, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Attorney General, that the device was manufactured on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection.'.

(2) PENALTIES- Section 924(a) of such title, as amended by subsection (a)(2) of this section, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(9) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(w)(4) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.'.

SEC. 8. UNLAWFUL WEAPONS TRANSFERS TO JUVENILES.

Section 922(x) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in paragraph (1)--

(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period and inserting a semicolon; and

(B) by adding at the end the following:

`(C) a semiautomatic assault weapon; or

`(D) a large capacity ammunition feeding device.'; and

(2) in paragraph (2)--

(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period and inserting a semicolon; and

(B) by adding at the end the following:

`(C) a semiautomatic assault weapon; or

`(D) a large capacity ammunition feeding device.'.

SEC. 9. BAN ON IMPORTATION OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICE.

(a) In General- Section 922(w) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended--

(1) in paragraph (1), by striking `(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2)' and inserting `(1)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B)';

(2) in paragraph (2), by striking `(2) Paragraph (1)' and inserting `(B) Subparagraph (A)'; and

(3) by inserting before paragraph (3) the following:

`(2) It shall be unlawful for any person to import or bring into the United States a large capacity ammunition feeding device.'.

(b) Conforming Amendment- Section 921(a)(31)(A) of such title, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended by striking `manufactured after the date of enactment of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.



We are all responsible and these are our rights to lose!


----------



## tgridley (Sep 28, 2005)

Contact info for your congressmen:

here are all of congress'
phone numbers..... the last 4 digits are the number dial 202-225 and the last 4 digits after their name

this did not format as well as i would have liked and I dont want to correct 435 of them


last name + First name + state +district + last 4 digits of phone number

202-225-XXXX (xxxx= last 4 digits)

Young, Don AK, A/L 5765
Bonner, Jo AL, 1 4931
Everett, Terry AL, 2 2901
Rogers, Michael AL, 3 3261
Aderholt, Robert AL, 4 4876
Cramer, Robert AL, 5 4801
Bachus, Spencer AL, 6 4921
Davis, Artur AL, 7 2665
Berry, Marion AR, 1 4076
Snyder, Vic AR, 2 2506
Boozman, John AR, 3 4301
Ross, Mike AR, 4 3772
Faleomavaega, Eni AS, 8577
Renzi, Rick AZ, 1 2315
Franks, Trent AZ, 2 4576
Shadegg, John AZ, 3 3361
Pastor, Ed AZ, 4 4065
Mitchell, Harry AZ, 5 2190
Flake, Jeff AZ, 6 2635
Grijalva, Raul AZ, 7 2435
Giffords, Gabrielle AZ, 8 2542
Thompson, Mike CA, 1 3311
Herger, Wally CA, 2 3076
Lungren, Dan CA, 3 5716
Doolittle, John CA, 4 2511
Matsui, Doris CA, 5 7163
Woolsey, Lynn CA, 6 5161
Miller, George CA, 7 2095
Pelosi, Nancy CA, 8 4965
Lee, Barbara CA, 9 2661
Tauscher, Ellen CA, 10 1880
McNerney, Jerry CA, 11 1947
Lantos, Tom CA, 12 3531
Stark, Fortney CA, 13 5065
Eshoo, Anna CA, 14 8104
Honda, Michael CA, 15 2631
Lofgren, Zoe CA, 16 3072
Farr, Sam CA, 17 2861
Cardoza, Dennis CA, 18 6131
Radanovich,George CA, 19 4540
Costa, Jim CA, 20 3341
Nunes, Devin CA, 21 2523
McCarthy, Kevin CA, 22 2915
Capps, Lois CA, 23 3601
Gallegly, Elton CA, 24 5811
McKeon, Howard CA, 25 1956
Dreier, Davis CA, 26 2305
Sherman, Brad CA, 27 5911
Berman, Howard CA, 28 4695
Schiff, Adam CA, 29 4176
Waxman, Henry CA, 30 3976
Becerra, Xavier CA, 31 6235
Solis,Hilda CA, 32 5464
Watson, Diane CA, 33 7084
Roybal-Allard, Lucille CA, 34 1766
Waters, Maxine CA, 35 2201
Harman, Jane CA, 36 8220
Millender-Mcdonald Juanita CA, 37 7924
Napolitano, Grace CA, 38 5256
Sanchez, Linda CA, 39 6676
Royce, Ed CA, 40 4111
Lewis, Jerry CA, 41 5861
Miller, Gary CA, 42 3201
Baca, Joe CA, 43 6161
Calvert, Ken CA, 44 1986
Bono, Mary CA, 45 5330
Rohrabacher, Dana CA, 46 2415
Sanchez, Loretta CA, 47 2965
Campbell, John CA, 48 5611
Issa, Darrell CA, 49 3906
Bilbray, Brian CA, 50 5452
Filner, Bob CA, 51 8045
Hunter, Duncan CA, 52 5672
Davis, Susan CA, 53 2040
DeGette, Diana CO, 1 4431
Udall, Mark CO, 2 2161
Salazar, John CO, 3 4761
Musgrave, Marilyn CO, 4 4676
Lamborn, Doug CO, 5 4422
Tancredo, Thomas CO, 6 7882
Perlmutter, Edward CO, 7 2645
Larson, John CT, 1 2265
Courtney, Joseph CT, 2 2076
DeLauro, Rosa CT, 3 3661
Shays, Christopher CT, 4 5541
Murphy, Christopher CT, 5 4476
Norton, Eleanor Holmes DC, 8050
Castle, Michael DE, A/L 4165
Miller, Jeff FL, 1 4136
Boyd, F. Allen FL, 2 5235
Brown, Corrine FL, 3 0123
Crenshaw, Ander FL, 4 2501
Brown-Waite, Ginny FL, 5 1002
Stearns, Cliff FL, 6 5744
Mica, John FL, 7 4035
Keller, Ric FL, 8 2176
Bilirakis, Michael FL, 9 5755
Young, C.W. Bill, FL, 10 5961
Castor, Kathy FL, 11 3376
Putnam, Adam FL, 12 1252
Buchanan, Vernon FL, 13 5015
Mack, Connie Fl, 14 2536
Weldon, Dave FL, 15 3671
Mahoney, Tim FL, 16 5792
Meek, Kendrick FL, 17 4506
Ros-lehtinen, Ileana FL, 18 3931
Wexler, Robert FL, 19 3001
Wasserman Shultz, Debbie FL, 20 7931
Diaz-Balart, Lincoln FL, 21 4211
Klein, Ron FL, 22 3026
Hastings, Alcee FL, 23 1313
Feeny, Tom FL, 24 2706
Diaz-Balart, Mario FL, 25 2778
Kingston, Jack GA, 1 5831
Bishop, Sanford GA, 2 3631
Westmorland, Lynn GA, 3 5901
McKinney, Cynthia GA, 4 1605
Lewis, John GA, 5 3801
Price, Tom GA, 6 4501
Linder, John GA, 7 4272
Marshall, Jim GA, 8 6531
Norwood, Charles GA, 9 4101
Deal, Nathan GA, 10 5211
Gingrey, Phil GA, 11 2931
Barrow, John GA, 12 2823
Scott, David GA, 13 2939
Bordallo, Madeline GU, 1188
Abercrombie, Neil HI, 1 2726
Hirono, Mazie HI, 2 4906
Braley, Bruce IA, 1 2911
Loebsack, David IA, 2 6576
Boswell, Leonard IA, 3 3806
Latham, Tom IA, 4 5476
King, Steve IA, 5 4426
Sail, William ID, 1 6611
Simpson, Mike ID, 2 5531
Rush, Bobby IL, 1 4372
Jackson, Jesse IL, 2 0773
Lipinski, Dan IL, 3 5701
Gutierrez, Luis IL, 4 8203
Emanual, Rahm IL, 5 4061
Roskam, Peter IL, 6 4561
Davis, Danny IL, 7 5006
Bean, Melissa IL, 8 3711
Schakowsky, Janice IL, 9 2111
Kirk, Mark IL, 10 4835
Weller, Jerry IL, 11 3635
Costello, Jerry IL, 12 5661
Biggert, Judy IL, 13 3515
Hastert, Dennis IL, 14 2976
Johnson, Timothy IL, 15 2371
Manzullo, Donald IL, 16 5676
Hare, Philip IL, 17 5905
Lahood, Ray IL, 18 6201
Shimkus, John IL, 19 5271
Visclosky, Peter IN, 1 2461
Donnelly, Joe IN, 2 3915
Souder, Mark IN, 3 4436
Buyer, Steve IN, 4 5037
Burton, Dan IN, 5 2276
Pence, Mike IN, 6 3021
Carson, Julia IN, 7 4011
Ellsworth, Brad IN, 8 4636
Hill, Baron IN, 9 5315
Moran, Jerry KS, 1 2715
Boyda, Nancy KS, 2 6601
Moore, Dennis KS, 3 2865
Tiahrt, Todd KS, 4 6216
Whitfield, Edward KY, 1 3115
Lewis, Ron KY, 2 3501
Yarmuth, John KY, 3 5401
Davis, Geoff KY, 4 3465
Rogers, Harold KY, 5 4601
Chandler, Ben KY, 6 4706
Jindal, Bobby LA, 1 3015
TBD LA, 2 6636
Melancon, Charlie LA, 3 4031
McCrery, Jim LA, 4 2777
Alexander, Rodney LA, 5 8490
Baker, Richard LA, 6 3901
Boustany, Charles LA, 7 2031
Olver, John MA, 1 5335
Neal, Richard MA, 2 5601
McGoveren, Jim MA, 3 6101
Frank, Barney MA, 4 5931
Meehan, Marty MA, 5 3411
Tierney, John MA, 6 8020
Markey, Edward MA, 7 2836
Capuano, Michael MA, 8 5111
Lynch, Stephen MA, 9 8273
DeLahunt, William MA, 10 3111
Gilchrest, Wayne MD, 1 5311
Ruppersberger, C.A. MD, 2 3061
Sarbanes, John MD, 3 4016
Wynn, Albert MD, 4 8699
Hoyer, Steny MD, 5 4131
Bartlett, Roscoe MD, 6 2721
Cummings, Elijah MD, 7 4741
Van Hollen, Chris MD, 8 5341
Allen, Thomas ME, 1 6116
Michaud, Michael ME, 2 6306
Stupak, Bart MI, 1 4735
Rogers, Michael MI, 8 4872
Knollenberg, Joseph MI, 9 5802
Hoekstra, Peter MI, 2 4401
Ehlers, Vernon MI, 3 3831
Camp, Dave MI, 4 3561
Kildee, Dale MI, 5 3611
Upton, Fred MI, 6 3761
Walberg, Tim MI, 7 6276
Miller, Candice MI, 10 2106
McCotter, Thaddeus MI, 11 8171
Levin, Sander MI, 12 4961
Kilpatric, Carolyn MI, 13 2261
Conyers, John MI, 14 5126
Dingell, John MI, 15 4071
Walz, Tim MN, 1 2472
Kline, John MN, 2 2271
Ramstad, Jim MN, 3 2871
McCollum, Betty MN, 4 6631
Ellison, Keith MN, 5 4755
Bachman, Michele MN, 6 2331
Peterson, Collin MN, 7 2165
Oberstar, James MN, 8 6211
Clay Wm. Lacy MO, 1 2406
Akin, Todd MO, 2 2561
Carnahan, Russ MO, 3 2671
Skelton, Ike MO, 4 2876
Cleaver, Emanual MO, 5 4535
Graves, Sam MO, 6 7041
Blunt, Roy MO, 7 6536
Emerson, Jo Ann MO, 8 4404
Hulshof, Kenny MO, 9 2956
Wicker, Roger MS, 1 4306
Thompson, Bennie MS, 2 5876
Pickering, Charles MS, 3 5031
Taylor, Gene MS, 4 5772
Rehberg, Dennis MT, A/L 3211
Butterfield, G.K. NC, 1 3101
Etherridge, Bob NC, 2 4531
Jones, Walter NC, 3 3415
Price, David NC, 4 1784
Foxx, Virginia NC, 5 2071
Coble, Howard NC, 6 3065
McIntyre, Mike NC, 7 2731
TBD NC, 8 3715
Myrick, Sue NC, 9 1976
McHenry, Patrick NC, 10th 2576
Shuler, Heath NC, 11 6401
Watt, Melvin NC, 12 1510
Miller, Brad NC, 13 3032
Pomerroy, Earl ND, A/L 2611
Fortenberry, Jeff NE, 1 4806
Terry, Lee NE, 2 4155
Smith, Adrian NE, 3 6435
Shea-Porter, Carol NH, 1 5456
Hodes, Paul NH, 2 5206
Andrews, Robert NJ, 1 6501
LoBiondo, Frank NJ, 2 6572
Saxton, Jim NJ, 3 4765
Smith, Christopher NJ, 4 3765
Garrett, Scott NJ, 5 4465
Pallone, Frank NJ, 6 4671
Ferguson, Michal NJ, 7 5361
Pascrell, Bill NJ, 8 5751
Rothman, Streven NJ, 9 5061
Payne, Donald NJ, 10 3436
Frelinghuysen, Rodney NJ, 11 5034
Holt, Rush NJ, 12 5801
Sires, Albio NJ, 13 7919
Wilson, Heather NM, 1 6316
Pearce, Steve NM, 2 2365
Udall, Tom NM, 3 6190
Berkley, Shelly NV, 1 5965
Heller, Dean NV, 2 6155
Porter, Jon NV, 3 3252
Bishop, Tim NY, 1 3826
Israel, Steve NY, 2 3335
King, Peter NY, 3 7896
McCarthy, Carolyn NY, 4 5516
Ackerman, Gary NY, 5 2601
Meeks, Gregory NY, 6 3461
Crowley, Joseph NY, 7 3965
Nadler, Jerrold NY, 8 5635
Weiner, Anthony NY, 9 6616
Towns, Edolphus NY, 10 5936
Clark, Yvette NY, 11 6231
Valazquez, Nydia NY, 12 2361
Fossella, Vito NY, 13 3371
Maloney, Carolyn NY, 14 7944
Rangel, Charles NY, 15 4365
Serrano, Jose NY, 16 4361
Engel, Eliot NY, 17 2464
Lowey, Nita NY, 18 6506
Hall, John NY, 19 5441
Gillibrand, Kirsten NY, 20 5614
McNulty, Michael NY, 21 5076
Hinchey, Maurice NY, 22 6335
McHugh, John NY, 23 4611
Arcuri, Michael NY, 24 3665
Walsh, James NY, 25 3701
Reynolds, Thomas NY, 26 5265
Higgins, Brian NY, 27 3306
Slaughter,Louise-McIntosh NY, 28 3615
Kuhl, Randy NY, 29 3161
Chabot, Steve OH, 1 2216
Schmidt, Jean OH, 2 3164
Turner, Michael OH, 3 6465
Jordan, Jim OH, 4 2676
Gilmor, Paul OH, 5 6405
Wilson, Charlie OH, 6 5705
Hobson, Davis OH, 7 4324
Boehner, John OH, 8 6205
Kaptur, Marcy OH, 9 4146
Kucinich, Dennis OH, 10 5871
Tubbs Jones, Stephanie OH, 11 7032
Tiberi, Patrick Oh, 12 5355
Sutton, Betty OH, 13 3401
LaTourette, Steven OH, 14 5731
TBD OH, 15 2015
Regula, Ralph OH, 16 3876
Ryan, Tim OH, 17 5261
Space, Zack OH, 18 6265
Sullivan, John OK, 1 2211
Boren, Dan OK, 2 2701
lucas, Frank OK, 3 5565
Cole, Tom OK, 4 6165
Fallin, Mary OK, 5 2132
Wu, David OR, 1 O855
Walden, Greg OR, 2 6730
Blumenauer, Earl OR, 3 4811
DeFazio, Peter OR, 4 6416
Hooley, Darlene OR, 5 5711
Brady, Robert PA, 1 4731
Fattah, Chaka PA, 2 4001
English, Philip PA, 3 5406
Atmire, Jason PA, 4 2565
Peterson, John PA, 5 5121
Gerlach, Jim PA, 6 4315
Sestak, Joe PA, 7 2011
Murphy, Patrick PA, 8 4276
Shuster, Bill PA, 9 2431
Carney, Chris PA, 10 3731
Kanjorski, Paul PA, 11 6511
Murtha, John PA, 12 2065
Schwartz, Allyson PA, 13 6111
Doyle, Mike PA, 14 2135
Dent, Charles PA, 15 6411
Pitts, Joseph PA, 16 2411
Holden,Tim PA, 17 5546
Murphy, Timothy PA, 18 2301
Platts, Todd PA, 19 5836
Fortuno, Luis PR, 2615
Kennedy, Patrick RI, 1 4911
Langevin, James RI, 2 2735
Brown, Henry SC, 1 3176
Wilson, Joe SC, 2 2452
Barrett, Gresham SC, 3 5301
Inglis, Bob SC, 4 6030
Spratt, John SC, 5 5501
Clyburn, James SC, 6 3315
Herseth, Stephanie SD, A/L 2801
Davis, David TN, 1 6356
Duncan, John TN, 2 5435
Wamp, Zach TN, 3 3271
Davis, Lincoln TN, 4 6831
Cooper, Jim TN, 5 4311
Gordon, Bart TN, 6 4231
Blackburn, Marsha TN, 7 2811
Tanner, John TN, 8 4714
Cohen, Steve TN, 9 3265
Gohmert, Louie TX, 1 3035
Poe, Ted TX, 2 6565
Johnson, Sam TX, 3 4201
Hall, Ralph TX, 4 6673
Hensarling, Jeb TX, 5 3484
Barton, Joe TX, 6 2002
Culberson, John TX, 7 2571
Brady, Kevin TX, 8 4901
Green, Al TX, 9 7508
McCaul, Michael TX, 10 2401
Conaway, Mike TX, 11 3605
Granger, Kay TX, 12 5071
Thornberry, William TX, 13 3706
Paul, Ron TX, 14 2831
Hinojosa, Ruben TX, 15 2531
Reyes, Silvestre TX, 16 4831
Edwards, Chet TX, 17 6105
Jackson Lee, Shelia TX, 18 3816
Neugebauer, Randy TX, 19 4005
Gonzalez, Charles TX, 20 3236
Smith, lamar TX, 21 4236
Lampson, Nick TX, 22 5951
TBD TX, 23 4511
Marchant, Kenny TX, 24 6605
Doggett, Lloyd TX, 25 4865
Ortiz, Solomon TX, 27 7742
Cueller, Henry TX, 28 1640
Green, Gene TX, 29 1688
Johnson, Eddie TX, 30 8885
Carter, John TX, 31 3864
Sessions, Pete TX, 32 2231
Burgess, Michael TX,26 7772
Bishop, Rob UT, 1 0453
Matheson, Jim UT, 2 3011
Cannon, Chris UT, 3 7751
Davis, Jo Ann VA, 1 4261
Drake, Thelma VA, 2 4215
Scott, Bobby VA, 3 8351
Forbes, Randy VA, 4 6365
Goode, Virgil VA, 5 4711
Goodlatte, Bob VA, 6 5431
Cantor, Eric VA, 7 2815
Moran, James VA, 8 4376
Boucher, Rick VA, 9 3861
Wolf, Frank VA, 10 5136
Davis, Thomas VA, 11 1492
Christinsen, Donna VI, 1790
Welch, Peter VT, A/L 4115
Inslee, Jay WA, 1 6311
Larsen, Rick WA, 2 2605
Baird, Brian WA, 3 3536
Hastings, Doc WA, 4 5816
McMorris, Cathy WA, 5 2006
Dicks, Norman WA, 6 5916
McDermott, Jim WA, 7 3106
Reichert, Dave WA, 8 7761
Smith, Adam WA, 9 8901
Ryan, Paul WI, 1 3031
Baldwin, Tammy WI, 2 2906
Kind, Ron WI, 3 5506
Moore, Gwen WI, 4 4572
Sensenbrenner, F. James WI, 5 5101
Petri, Thomas WI, 6 2476
Obey, David WI, 7 3365
Kagen, Steve WI, 8 5665
Mollohan, Allan WV, 1 4172
Capito, Shelly WV, 2 2711
Rahal, Nick WV, 3 3452
Cubin, Barbara WY, A/L 2311

We are all responsible and these are our rights to lose!


----------



## StrutStopper (Sep 3, 2003)

Here's a link to an online petition to sign against this ban:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/409898348


----------



## 20ftup (Mar 19, 2007)

*Thanks*

The Petition takes less than 5 minutes to do,no excuse to not do it


----------



## NRen2k5 (Mar 30, 2007)

Yeah, because MAC10s are great for hunting and home defence.


----------



## StrutStopper (Sep 3, 2003)

NRen2k5 said:


> Yeah, because MAC10s are great for hunting and home defence.


Just vote for Hillary. You won't have to worry about hunting or home defense because both would probably be illegal if she had anything to say about it. Maybe since you spell defense with a "c" you can't vote in the USA anyway??? I don't know about you, but if you can put a MAC10 and a semi-auto shotgun with a thumbhole stock in the same catagory, then maybe you too can be a democratic leader of our society.


----------



## rapidrick (May 6, 2006)

Every hunter & shooter needs to speak up. Look at Australia & England. This is not about "assault weapons", it's about all weapons. I wonder how many turkey hunters will be upset when they realize their pistol grip Benelli's would be illegal?? This is not the only fight on the horizon. The UN is trying to ban small arms world wide. Make the calls, write the letters, continue the fight. It's not over & never will be.


----------



## NH Guy (Jul 28, 2006)

Well, our new D. Congressman stated he is pro-2nd ammendment. So I will call him on Monday and see what he says when I ask him to not vote for the ban. 

Question: I recall Bush saying (when the ban was lifted) that he would not veto the AWB if it came to his desk. Does anyone know if he would veto it or would he let it go through and be law again?

I will call my congressmen. Thanks.


----------



## kraven (Jan 25, 2006)

Thanks for posting so much comprehensive info. 

Hopefully, we're all in this together.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Isn't it interesting that the US government-when the DCM was a government run organization-distributed thousands and thousands of MI carbines and garands to non police civilians (YES PEOPLE COPS ARE CIVILIANS AND IF A GOVERNMENT CALLS SAY A 17 SHOT GLOCK A WEAPON OF WAR ASK A POLITICIAN WHY COPS ARE BEING ISSUED WEAPONS OF WAR) and now wants to ban them

the person sponsoring this legislation is a hysterical psychotic soccermon-her husband was murdered by the infamous long island gunman-Colin Fergunson and she thinks that if those nasty guns were banned he wouldn't have killed her man

she is a disgusting menace and completely beyond any rational limit


----------



## PMantle (Feb 15, 2004)

I have not looked at this closely, so I have one question. Anything here not covered here?

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=360848&highlight=guns+legislature


----------



## NRen2k5 (Mar 30, 2007)

StrutStopper said:


> Just vote for Hillary. You won't have to worry about hunting or home defense because both would probably be illegal if she had anything to say about it. Maybe since you spell defense with a "c" you can't vote in the USA anyway??? I don't know about you, but if you can put a MAC10 and a semi-auto shotgun with a thumbhole stock in the same catagory, then maybe you too can be a democratic leader of our society.


Well, you're right about me not being American.

Good point on the shotguns though. I only read so far down the text of the bill. Now that I go through it in depth I see some really stupid things. So many shotguns. So many odd properties of any firearm that could make it illegal. And magazine capacity restrictions. Yeesh.

Which reminds me... here in Canada the law on magazine capacities is really stupid. A rifle magazine cannot exceed something like 5 rounds, but a handgun magazine cannot exceed something like 10. But there's no restriction against using a rifle that uses handgun mags like the Berette CX4 Storm.

But back to the bill in question... does anybody ever wonder about the need for such firearms? I mean, if you're living in a very dangerous neighbourhood where a very typical shotgun won't cut it for home defence, you might wanna move. If you're the type who wants to protect himself against the government, you ought to know that nothing short of a nuke can do that.


----------



## NRen2k5 (Mar 30, 2007)

rapidrick said:


> The UN is trying to ban small arms world wide. Make the calls, write the letters, continue the fight. It's not over & never will be.


I call bull****. UN is trying to stop _trafficking_ of arms.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

NRen2k5 said:


> Well, you're right about me not being American.
> 
> Good point on the shotguns though. I only read so far down the text of the bill. Now that I go through it in depth I see some really stupid things. So many shotguns. So many odd properties of any firearm that could make it illegal. And magazine capacity restrictions. Yeesh.
> 
> ...



we have a bill of rights not a bill of needs

municipal and state governments-as well as the feds-have decreed that for self defense in urban environments high capacity semi auto pistols are appropriate for their CIVILIAN employees. Given that determination by the all knowing governmental units, I submit that such a weapon is equally appropriate for me to use as a civilian in an urban environment for self defense. BTW I am a better shot and more competent to handle a pistol than 99% of the police in this country and most recreational pistol shooters are far more skilled in pistolcraft than most cops


----------



## NRen2k5 (Mar 30, 2007)

Jim C said:


> we have a bill of rights not a bill of needs
> 
> municipal and state governments-as well as the feds-have decreed that for self defense in urban environments high capacity semi auto pistols are appropriate for their CIVILIAN employees. Given that determination by the all knowing governmental units, I submit that such a weapon is equally appropriate for me to use as a civilian in an urban environment for self defense. BTW I am a better shot and more competent to handle a pistol than 99% of the police in this country and most recreational pistol shooters are far more skilled in pistolcraft than most cops


All irrelevant. If you're even half as good a marksman as you say you have no real reason to want or need high capacity.

And where do you draw the line? If I attain american citizenship, should I be allowed to stockpile weaponized anthrax?


----------



## pmontanye (Mar 24, 2007)

*Oh Canada!!*

The 2nd amendment to OUR constitution doesn't say anything about need or want!!! It says we have the right!!!!


----------



## NRen2k5 (Mar 30, 2007)

So where do you draw the line? You don't complain about not being allowed to keep an artillery piece in your back yard, do you?

Simple question. Are you are you a reasonable man, or not?

And actually, no, it doesn't necessarily say you have the right. It's debatable that it actually may say _militias_ have the right to bear arms.

_“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”_


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

NRen2k5 said:


> All irrelevant. If you're even half as good a marksman as you say you have no real reason to want or need high capacity.
> 
> And where do you draw the line? If I attain american citizenship, should I be allowed to stockpile weaponized anthrax?



You are being silly-I guess you have never heard of multiple attackers

any weapon civilian police officers can use I should be able to own

once that is agreed to then we can start with what the BOR really means-that we all should be able to own the common infantry weapons which right now would mean fragmentation grenades, M16 rifles etc. But right now the anti gun ARC's want to draw the line far lower than what any reasonable interpretation of the second amendment contemplates


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

NRen2k5 said:


> So where do you draw the line? You don't complain about not being allowed to keep an artillery piece in your back yard, do you?
> 
> Simple question. Are you are you a reasonable man, or not?
> 
> ...


the militia nonsense is crap created by ARC's through outcome based "scholarshp" in order to justify their anti gun bs. No one seriously believes that and if you hooked the people who say that up to a set of jumper cables they would admit there is no support for that in either the intent of the founders or any of the documents generated at that time. The militia was all free men of certain ages

if the 2nd is limited to the "national guard" as statist ARC 's claim then you still have two major problems

1) the ninth amendment protects other natural rights and no one with a brain denies that being armed was not considered a natural right

2) there is absolutely no authority for the federal government to ban guns and even FDR realized it-its why they used the commerce clause to justify their idiotic taxes on automatic weapons


----------



## Silver Pine (Dec 9, 2005)

NRen2k5 said:


> And actually, no, it doesn't necessarily say you have the right. It's debatable that it actually may say _militias_ have the right to bear arms.
> 
> _“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”_



Now you've painted yourself into a corner. 

What was the definition of "militia" during the 1st Continental Congress - 1774? That's when the Continental Congress told people to arm themselves and form militias. Whom did they mean? They meant the same "THE PEOPLE" who are repeatedly mentioned in the Bill of Rights by the 2nd Continental Congress.

OR

you can use the modern version

U.S. Code as of: 01/19/04

Section 311 of US Code Title 10, entitled, "Militia: composition and classes" in its entirety:

"(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard. 

(b) The classes of the militia are — 

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and 

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia." 



*It was the unorganized militia that brought down United Airlines Flight 93 in a Pennsylvania field on September 11 and prevented it from reaching it's target. *


----------



## rapidrick (May 6, 2006)

It has been ruled on in the past by the Supreme Court that the phrase, " the right of the people", in other amendments pertains to an individual right, not a collective right. The 2nd amendment has never been review by the Supreme Court, but it could be reviewed sooner than we think. Also, the 2nd amendment is there to protect all citizens from one thing in particular, our own government. Thus the phrase, "to the security of a free State". Why should I have to give up my AR15 or my Glock with hi cap mags? I have never broken the law. The US has hundreds of gun laws on the books. Prosecute the idiots, put them in jail, & keep them there. What happens in Canada, I could really care less. You'll either fight for you rights, or roll over & play dead. The US gun owners will choose to not play dead.


----------



## NRen2k5 (Mar 30, 2007)

Now I think I'll stand down. It's nice to see an actual concrete definition of what arms citizens should be allowed to bear.

Everything the standard infantry uses sounds like a damned good definition at that.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

I see no point to assault weapons though. In a home invasion/attack a shotgun is the most deadly weapon in the world. Fully automatic weapon or semi-automatic handgun serve little point to the average hunter. An old "cowboy gun" is enough to stop "mutiple atackers".

But in all honesty, where would it stop? Obviously we need an ammendment defining what is a "hunting implement" and what is a "weapon of war" before we retract any rights. A shotgun with a thumb hole? How is that anyhting like an uzi? Come on now! 

An besides, a 30# bow made from an old tree limb and dowel rod arrows can kill a man, and can only be used for target shooting, not hunting. Where would it fall?

Our forefathers of American archery made their own bows, of weights strong enough to efficiently kill elephant. They can never take weapons away. They should REALIZE THAT!


----------



## rapidrick (May 6, 2006)

The 2nd amendment isn't about hunting weapons or assault weapons. It's about our right to keep & bear arms. Maybe I don't really need my AR, but I want one. I like it, it's fun to shoot. Sort of liking owning a Corvette that will run 150 mph. Who needs one? No one. But people want one, they get it. Look at the details of the proposed ban. One noteable characteristic is a pistol grip stock. What does that do to promote the killing aspect of a weapon? It will ban plenty of Benelli turkey shotguns. Not really a typical assault weapon now is it? What would be next after this? How about a scoped "sniper rifle"? Now just about every deer rifle in America would be banned. This is merely a stepping stone to more bans & regulations against honest citizens. It doesn't affect the criminal element one bit. They don't walk into Gander Mtn & make their purchase. We don't have to agree on every aspect. This is just my honest opinion. I feel, we don't give an inch. Prosecute them, put them in jail, keep them there. Make criminals pay for the illegal doings. Not the honest citizens. I agree a AR15 is not the best home defense weapon. For me, I'll take my Glock 19 w/nite sites or my Springfield Compact 45
It's what I compete with & with what I am most proficient. Thanks for letting me rant. Have a great evening.


----------



## StrutStopper (Sep 3, 2003)

kegan said:


> But in all honesty, where would it stop? Obviously we need an ammendment defining what is a "hunting implement" and what is a "weapon of war" before we retract any rights. A shotgun with a thumb hole? How is that anyhting like an uzi? Come on now!



I don't know about you, but I don't want any of my Guaranteed rights retracted...


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

rapidrick said:


> The 2nd amendment isn't about hunting weapons or assault weapons. It's about our right to keep & bear arms. Maybe I don't really need my AR, but I want one. I like it, it's fun to shoot. Sort of liking owning a Corvette that will run 150 mph. Who needs one? No one. But people want one, they get it. Look at the details of the proposed ban. One noteable characteristic is a pistol grip stock. What does that do to promote the killing aspect of a weapon? It will ban plenty of Benelli turkey shotguns. Not really a typical assault weapon now is it? What would be next after this? How about a scoped "sniper rifle"? Now just about every deer rifle in America would be banned. This is merely a stepping stone to more bans & regulations against honest citizens. It doesn't affect the criminal element one bit. They don't walk into Gander Mtn & make their purchase. We don't have to agree on every aspect. This is just my honest opinion. I feel, we don't give an inch. Prosecute them, put them in jail, keep them there. Make criminals pay for the illegal doings. Not the honest citizens. I agree a AR15 is not the best home defense weapon. For me, I'll take my Glock 19 w/nite sites or my Springfield Compact 45
> It's what I compete with & with what I am most proficient. Thanks for letting me rant. Have a great evening.


Exactly. Like I said, the need to determine what is, and what is not, a "human killer".

Can't a kitchen knife kill some one too?

It's like trying to run to Alaska before running to the end of the block.


----------



## rapidrick (May 6, 2006)

kegan said:


> Exactly. Like I said, the need to determine what is, and what is not, a "human killer".
> 
> Can't a kitchen knife kill some one too?
> 
> It's like trying to run to Alaska before running to the end of the block.


It definitely is a complicated issue. No real simple answer. In my eyes, the only human killer is, generally, another human. I feel the tool is irrelevant.


----------



## rdneckhntr (Oct 23, 2005)

rapidrick said:


> It definitely is a complicated issue. No real simple answer. In my eyes, the only human killer is, generally, another human. I feel the tool is irrelevant.


The real simple answer to it all is to punish the criminals and not the innocent people....


----------



## rapidrick (May 6, 2006)

rdneckhntr said:


> The real simple answer to it all is to punish the criminals and not the innocent people....


Agree with that!! Put them in jail & keep them locked up.


----------



## KAWABOY-ZX11 (Feb 22, 2004)

Question: I recall Bush saying (when the ban was lifted) that he would not veto the AWB if it came to his desk. Does anyone know if he would veto it or would he let it go through and be law again?

Thats what i remember Bush saying, i sure hope he remembers it! its crazy that infringing on my right to bare arms could even be considered an option by ANYONE!


----------



## Matatazela (Mar 1, 2005)

I know that many Americans are not terribly concerned about many of the things that happen outside their country, but please read this post carefully. 

South Africa, much like America, was founded by fiercely independent frontiersmen. They lived and died in accordance with their ability to firearms. Sadly, the frontiersman philosophy has largely been undermined and lost.

In the modern South African context:

The fact is, gun restrictions always start with military weapons, and always end up disarming the law-abiding citizenry. 

The next to go will be semi-automatics, and then handguns, because the authorities can conclusively prove that most crime is commited with handguns. 

It is a very sad state of affairs when I may only have one handgun OR shotgun for self / home defence after motivating strongly why I need such things. To own a hunting rifle, I need to prove that I do indeed hunt. I will then have my fingerprints taken (again) and have to pay a licence fee and renew my licence every 5 years. The police will visit my home to take a look at where I keep my weapons, interview my wife and neighbours (whether I want them to know I own a weapon or not) and they will check my entire criminal history. I have to write a theoretical exam on the Firearm Control Act, and Regulations and if it is a new application, take a practical examination as well. 

If I don't comply with all of these requirements, I become a criminal! 

What really gets to me is that if I need an illegal weapon, a 5km drive and a bit of cash is all it takes! I use the weapon and ditch it, and there is no trace that can link me and the weapon. The FCA is only a means to get weapons out of the hands of civilians and to manage the section of the population that presents a threat to the governments authority, and not to criminals. 

Anyone who says that such firearm control is good needs to come and live in South Africa. We do have rampant firearm related crime, but controlling the criminal is the real answer, and not the law abiding citizen. The police in SA are not responsible for preventing crime, or protecting citizens. Their mandate is to investigate crime and bring the criminals to book. This is often far too late to keep the victims alive. 

There are countries that are far worse off than us, but I know that when draconian restrictions on private firearm ownership start to be introduced, there is no turning them back.


----------



## Yellowfin (Mar 6, 2007)

I wonder if those responsible for attempting to pass anti-gun legislation could be considered an accomplice to threats upon my safety and can be sued out of existance accordingly. Undoubtedly their goal is to eventually remove my ability to protect myself, thus exposing me to the predations of criminals. Can this place them as an accomplice to crime? I say we use some of their own tools against them.


----------



## Yellowfin (Mar 6, 2007)

Jim C said:


> You are being silly-I guess you have never heard of multiple attackers
> 
> any weapon civilian police officers can use I should be able to own
> 
> once that is agreed to then we can start with what the BOR really means-that we all should be able to own the common infantry weapons which right now would mean fragmentation grenades, M16 rifles etc. But right now the anti gun ARC's want to draw the line far lower than what any reasonable interpretation of the second amendment contemplates


Reasonableness isn't even a criterion for them. It's whatever they can stack onto the list and get passed, taking away every firearm possible that they can get away with. If they could take them all, they would. Any way they can classify and specify to divide in order to get ANYONE to say "Oh well, I can live without that one..." is a victory for them.


----------



## Stink Foot (Dec 10, 2006)

NRen2k5 said:


> But back to the bill in question... does anybody ever wonder about the need for such firearms? I mean, if you're living in a very dangerous neighbourhood where a very typical shotgun won't cut it for home defence, you might wanna move. If you're the type who wants to protect himself against the government, you ought to know that nothing short of a nuke can do that.


The need for such fire arms ? L.A. 1992 . I sat and watched my Sister's end of town burn and worried about her as I watched that truck driver get pulled from his truck and beaten almost to death. Howd she do ? Just fine. Her and her hubby watched there neighbors house burn over the sights of a Ruger mini 30 that I left there a year before with 12 30 round mags and his bushmaster AR-15 that my brother in law bought. A shot gun could have done the job but then so could the cops right ? or how about when those two freaks robbed a bank and went nuts shooting evrything in sight back in 93 or 94 ? if it had not been for the gun shop that stocked "assult weapons the cop's would not have been able to shut them down until they ran out of ammo.They live in the house I grew up in, And they should not have to leave when dirt bags want to riot and act like fools. Had I had to get out of there I would have apreceated a Mac-10 and a few 30 round mags, Just as my family members apreceated there "assult weapons" and the High capicety mags they had.


----------



## Ed Bock (Apr 1, 2006)

*Canada - Ban the Hockey Stick!!!!!*

Why not? Certainly dangerous. And, by the way, some countries in Europe have banned the baseball bat. So, Canada, take the lead.

We are on a dangerous slipery slope - wish we could do the obvious. Ban the "true assault weapon" - the two legged variety. Another point, in my area, more than 90% of gun related crimes are directly related to drug usage. So, we just pass another "good fuzzy feeling" law and expect rosey results.


----------



## Suscrofa (Oct 9, 2005)

England has one of the worst crime rate in Europe despite a ban on handguns and virtually long guns !
As a result, now they ban toy guns and are talking about banning pointed knifes !!!
I wonder how they forgot about bows ?

And geee, no effect on crime rate !!! One wonder why isn't ?

Strict regulations are being pushed in most of Europe and unfortunatly no much opposition even by target shooters or hunters. In France most don't even dare to speak about politics on target shooting or bowhunting forums and take a firm position.

The "socialists" aka liberals in the US are the most eager to restrict gun rights AND hunting rights. If they win in France, we are simply doomed. Anyway the country will financially collapse so I don't give a rat ass and I will leave like many others.

For good analysis about V Tech

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27972


----------



## Suscrofa (Oct 9, 2005)

double


----------



## Matatazela (Mar 1, 2005)

Suscrofa said:


> England has one of the worst crime rate in Europe despite a ban on handguns and virtually long guns !


 The UK target rifle team allegedly had to go to France to practice for the Olympics at Sydney, while criminals remained on English soil to ply their trade.


----------



## deadx (Aug 6, 2002)

NRen2k5 said:


> I call bull****. UN is trying to stop _trafficking_ of arms.


Go to the United Nations General Assembly building in NY City. Just outside the back door is a giant statue of a S&W .357 mag handgun..........with the barrel tied in a knot!!!!!!! The UN is most certainly trying to disarm Americans.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

*Consider the following.....please*

A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, *which would include their own government.* - George Washington

:darkbeer: :cocktail:


----------



## Dchiefransom (Jan 16, 2006)

Yellowfin said:


> I wonder if those responsible for attempting to pass anti-gun legislation could be considered an accomplice to threats upon my safety and can be sued out of existance accordingly. Undoubtedly their goal is to eventually remove my ability to protect myself, thus exposing me to the predations of criminals. Can this place them as an accomplice to crime? I say we use some of their own tools against them.


According to the Untied States Supreme Court, the government is not responsible for "your" safety, only the safety of the general public at large. So, you can't sue them, it's already been tried.


----------



## FallVitals (Nov 7, 2004)

*When is this going to go before congress?*


----------



## bdca (Apr 9, 2007)

rapidrick said:


> . Who needs one? No one. But people want one, they get it. .



When I lived in Florida I spent 3 weeks, with no electricity, guarding my company's property with my CAR and 5,000 rounds of ammo. I spent most of my time in a beach chair, CAR on my lap and visible to all the potential looters who came by. 

The owner of the local gun range and gun shop was across the parking lot doing the same thing. The police told us they couldn't protect us and to remain there if we wanted to prevent looting.

Another gunshop, a few miles up the coast, was left unattended and was totally ransacked. They got away with 100s of guns..

On the other hand, anyone who commits a crime with an assualt weapon needs immediate execution. I don't see that in the bill??!!

Cya


----------



## rutnstrut74 (Aug 15, 2006)

*Ban it all!*

I say they ban cars, they make people drive drunk and kill other people. While they are at it they should ban pencils, they make us misspell words. Heck, lets do away with doctors also, look at your odds of dying in the care of a doctor vs. dying by anything gun related. They just don't have a clue about the hard working values of the great law abiding, ARMED citizens of this great country. If they can't see that armed citizens are the reason we aren't overtaken by another country then God help them!! My 2 cents.


----------



## ban_t (Dec 27, 2005)

They cannot ban they guns we have, just what is sold. The best protest is too keep our arms then they will see the real uprising. People like Nancy Pukey: and Murtha and their defeat and surrender attitudes is what is really wrong. 
They want too give up our troops. I am not surprized they what us too give up our Arms.
The Left wing liberals are always trying too keep us down. They cannot enforce the laws we have on the books. 
As have seen so many times a person who comits a crime does not care about the laws. They do not buy @ Gander Mtn or any other leagal place. The laws are about taking things from us. Look @ the DIX Six they were busted trying too buy weapons illeagally. No law can stop that only Citizens with their eyes wide open and Armed. 
You know what would really scare congress is if all of us that have a weapon showed up for a rally carrying our weapons too the steps of the Capital. Think they would FREAK OUT with all that fire power It would wake them up:mg:


----------



## camotoe (Sep 19, 2006)

So...worst case scenario ...ALL firearms are banned...I'll be willing to bet that Congress would have armed people protecting them, while they went about their business. How is that different from me when I am doing stuff at my house and want to protect my family? Always a double standard for the damned politicians. Did you know they have their own retirement system, that's exempt from Social Security? Again double standard. I thought politicians were supposed to represent us, come from among us, and have our best interests at heart. Seems like once in office, politicians just want to line their own pockets and keep themselves in power. They make me ukey:


----------



## camotoe (Sep 19, 2006)

ban_t said:


> They cannot ban they guns we have, just what is sold.
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree...perhaps they'll try to get their foot in the door by "only banning new sales"...but it will be just like when the government eventually called for all gold coins to be recalled. Eventually their goal will be do do away with ALL firearms!


----------



## deadx (Aug 6, 2002)

It is long past time to " Refresh the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants". America has become the "land of the enslaved and the home of the intimidated". Let`s just talk some more about how the government is taking away our freedom. That always makes me feel better.


----------



## ban_t (Dec 27, 2005)

camotoe said:


> ban_t said:
> 
> 
> > They cannot ban they guns we have, just what is sold.
> ...


----------



## dbertram85 (Dec 6, 2006)

*guns*

All i can say is as soon as i hear that its definently going through i will be going get a good size loan and going buy as many guns and as much ammo as i can the nthey can come try get it from me if it goes that far.


----------



## ftshooter (Jul 26, 2003)

NRen2k5 said:


> Well, you're right about me not being American.
> 
> Good point on the shotguns though. I only read so far down the text of the bill. Now that I go through it in depth I see some really stupid things. So many shotguns. So many odd properties of any firearm that could make it illegal. And magazine capacity restrictions. Yeesh.
> 
> ...



one why would you wish to take our rights away ..?? Next you say this ..

"""" If you're the type who wants to protect himself against the government, you ought to know that nothing short of a nuke can do that"""

You do not understand ...It just takes enough people to stand up and say no ..not a nuke ...It may be different where you live..And a person should be able to live where ever they want .And have a right to self protection..I do not understand left wingers at all they make no sense ..


----------



## MrTwigg (Dec 3, 2005)

kegan said:


> I see no point to assault weapons though.



Ever hear of Jim Zumbo ? Google him and find out what happened to him nearly overnight when he said the same thing. 

Ever notice how the media calls every long arm an assault rifle ? 




kegan said:


> Our forefathers of American archery made their own bows, of weights strong enough to efficiently kill elephant. They can never take weapons away. They should REALIZE THAT!


Really ? Elephants ? In North America ? Perhaps you meant the wolly mammoth, which was hunted and kidded by being chased off cliffs or into pits then finished off with spears.


----------



## Anubis (May 24, 2007)

Hello All,

First post here... I have been reading these forums for weeks but I never posted anything (only reason why I was waiting for my bow to arrive and announce myself in the "new guys" section ), but this thread is extremely interesting.

I currently live in Switzerland, but I have been in other countries in Europe (Italy -I am Italian-, France, the Netherlands): gun-related laws are different from country to country.

Switzerland for example has an "open" approach: you are allowed to buy as many weapons as you like, either long or handguns, even replicas of assault weapons such as the same rifles (single-shot only) used by the Swiss Army. 

Italy is totally different. You are not allowed to buy anything unless you apply for a permit first and in order to own a weapon you have to have a solid reason, the only exception being Hunting or Competition rifles.

I believe in the Swiss model, which seems to me a good compromise. It does not allow you to own a full-auto Ingram, Uzi or M-16 of course, but you can buy a weapon and defend your home if you feel the need.

From that standpoint, the ban on Assault Weapon is, IMHO, correct, but way too restrictive.

Just my 0.05 EUR,

Anubis

p.s. my bow-to-be is a Bowtech Guardian


----------



## deadx (Aug 6, 2002)

Anubis said:


> Hello All,
> 
> First post here... I have been reading these forums for weeks but I never posted anything (only reason why I was waiting for my bow to arrive and announce myself in the "new guys" section ), but this thread is extremely interesting.
> 
> ...



OK..........that explains quite a bit......:wink:


----------



## Anubis (May 24, 2007)

deadx said:


> [/COLOR]
> 
> 
> OK..........that explains quite a bit......:wink:


Oh yes, I was expecting a punch line like that 

Anubis


----------

