Assault Weapons Ban Petition
Posted 20 August 2004 - 04:17 PM
Posted 20 August 2004 - 10:23 PM
But I don't know if I like the Gun Free home sticker.
Looks like they may be fence sitting.
On the other hand though, imagine the theif breaking into a home that has the sticker but is loaded with guns!
Posted 20 August 2004 - 10:55 PM
I agree Grey Crow- I vote to start a 2nd petition to change to window sticker to "Armed Sick Mind Inside-Enter At Your Own Risk"
I HATE lying! My house is my fortress, and I enjoy the ironic humor of giving anybody wanting to come in w/o my permission a warning they will ignore before they become fertilizer.
Posted 20 August 2004 - 11:26 PM
Posted 21 August 2004 - 04:09 AM
I blame our gun problems (the restrictions) on politics. As every American knows, politics comes from the latin suffix poli (meaning "many") and tics (meaning "tiny bloodsucking creatures")! Tongue planted slightly in cheek. :-) Regards, Walter
Posted 21 August 2004 - 08:02 AM
Posted 21 August 2004 - 12:50 PM
I to am proud of how secrue my house is including the german shepherd and using the meprolite night sights on my glock for a night light in the bedroom. The only problem is in MI if I let the air out of someone they better have a gun pointing at me or I may be going down for murder. I guess our Democratic Governor figures we should take are ass beating and hand over our property to the criminal element so not to trample on their rites and freedoms. So instead of being able to display my semi thompsons they stay locked in the safe (except for the one in CO now) with my other firearms so I am not prosecuted fora crime if someone breaks in my house and takes a nonsecured firearm and commits a crime with it.
Just got done signing the petition
Posted 21 August 2004 - 03:09 PM
***On Feinstein-Schumer gun-control -- just say "Nay"!
On the eve of the upcoming presidential election, Constitutional constructionists -- Patriot advocates of the liberty and freedom ordained by our Creator as framed in our Constitution -- were informed by the Bush administration that President George Bush will sign renewal of the 1994 Clinton-Feinstein-Schumer gun-control regulations scheduled to expire on 13 September, 2004 -- if Congress supports extending the measure.
It is understood that the administration's position on this legislation -- which is indistinguishable from that of John Kerry -- politically calculates that the measure will not get through Congress. This would prevent the legislation from becoming political fodder just prior to the presidential election.
However calculated, it is a stupefying example of bad judgment and timing -- arrogance in fact -- that President Bush's pragmatic handlers have taken a public stand on this legislation when the administration could have remained silent and waited for Congress to act one way or the other. In taking a position on the legislation now, the administration offended both the overwhelming majority of the President's constituency, and the constitutional foundational of our Republic -- a colossal blunder!
The Constitution's Second Amendment prohibition against government interference in the "right to keep and bear arms" is the one assurance that ensures all other rights. As noted by Justice Joseph Story, appointed to the Supreme Court by James Madison: "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."
Indeed, Madison himself wrote in Federalist No. 48, "The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any...." That is no less true today than it was in 1787.
Senators Dianne Feinstein and Charles Schumer were the original sponsors of this gun-control measure, which narrowly passed the Democrat-controlled House and Senate in 1994 and was signed into law by Bill Clinton. Though House Majority Leader Tom DeLay says that the votes in the House are not there to renew the measure, Feinstein and Schumer will press for a roll-call vote in order to politicize this legislation prior to the election.
Feinstein and Schumer even applauded the Bush administration's position on the measure, writing: "We welcome your support and look forward to working with you to gain swift passage of this legislation. With your assistance, we will be able to pass legislation to continue the ban and help make America's streets safer."
"Safer"? For whom?
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, firearms-related crime has declined 54 percent in the last decade. The number of violent crimes reported in 2002 was 980,000 fewer than in 2000. But a National Institute of Justice report (headed by Christopher Koper at the University of Pennsylvania) concludes, "We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation's recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence." Feinstein's own California Assistant Attorney General Patrick Kenady noted in an internal memo, "Information on [these guns] would not be sought from forensics laboratories as it was unlikely to support the theses on which the [Feinstein-Schumer gun-control] legislation would be based."
Even The Washington Post painfully admits, "[The banned guns] play a part in only a small percentage of crime."
Feinstein-Schumer, ostensibly, claims to protect law-abiding citizens. Of course, only law-abiding citizens comply with such restrictions -- and at their own peril. Criminals don't care whether the weapon they're using comports with the 23,000 federal, state and local gun restrictions already on the books. But they do care whether their intended victim has a firearm: Extensive interviews with violent felons make it clear that they prefer to prey on the victims who are least likely to possess a gun for self-defense.
In Commonplace Book, Thomas Jefferson quotes Cesare Beccaria from his seminal work, On Crimes and Punishment: "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. ... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." Again, no less true today than it has been throughout history.
For 30 years, the Left has used the "safety" claim as the foundation for its strategy of "incremental encroachment" on the Second Amendment to achieve its ultimate goal of gun confiscation. The Feinstein-Schumer legislation, which prevents law-abiding citizens from owning semi-automatic rifles (so-called and decidedly misnamed "assault weapons") for lawful purposes, is no exception. To wit, Feinstein said of the 1994 legislation, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate...for an outright ban, picking up every one of them -- Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in -- I would have done it!"
Other Congressional Leftists such as Sen. Frank Lautenberg and Reps. John Conyers and Carolyn McCarthy have drafted additional legislation to ban or confiscate millions of guns used for personal protection -- this despite the spirit and plain language of the Second Amendment. (Memo to Lautenberg, Conyers and McCarthy: What is it about "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed" that you don't understand?)
Our Republic's Founders had it right. "To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them," warned George Mason. Patrick Henry concurred, imploring future generations: "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined."
The Bush administration's calculation that the renewal of the Feinstein-Schumer legislation will never get to the President's desk because it won't make it through Congress is a dangerous gambit, and there is no excuse for the advance notice that Mr. Bush would sign the renewal, which served only to encourage Leftist gun confiscators. That encouragement just made re-election of conservatives in Congress -- and the White House -- more difficult and more expensive.
There are at least six bills reauthorizing Feinstein-Schumer pending in the Senate and House. Congress will return from its summer recess on 7 September and will be in session only four work-days before the sunset date. Fellow Patriots, let us urge our elected representatives to oppose H.R. 3831 and S. 2498 and any other legislation seeking to extend the so-called "assault-weapons" ban. And let us not underestimate the resolve of those who would infringe upon our Second Amendment rights: "I really believe passionately in this," said Senator Feinstein. "I'm not going to give up." (Memo to Senator Feinstein: Neither are we.)
Please act now -- join more than 60,000 fellow Patriots on the frontlines in defense of our Constitutional liberties who have already signed a petition against Feinstein-Schumer renewal. Link to -- http://patriotpetitions.us/nogunban/
(If you don't have Web access, please send a blank e-mail to: Each e-mail sent to this address will be counted as one signature for the petition. (No duplicate e-mail addresses are counted.)
Quote of the week...
"[R]especting the right to keep and bear arms is one of the best ways governments can reduce crime. Conversely, cities where the government imposes gun control have higher crime rates. Far from making people safer, gun control endangers innocent people by increasing the odds that they will be victimized! Gun control also increases the odds that people will lose their lives and liberties to power-hungry government officials. Tyrannical governments throughout the world kill approximately 2,000,000 people annually. Many of these victims of tyranny were first disarmed by their governments. ... I would remind my colleagues that policies prohibiting the private ownership of firearms were strongly supported by tyrants such as Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Mao Tse-Tung." --Rep. Ron Paul ***
SUBSCRIBE: FREE by E-mail! Get your own subscription to The
Link to -- http://FederalistPatriot.US/subscribe/
Posted 21 August 2004 - 10:01 PM
Fortunately Florida cares about its law abiding citizens. FSS 790.335
Enacted July 2004
(1) LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS AND INTENT.--
(a) The Legislature finds and declares that:
1. The right of individuals to keep and bear arms is guaranteed under both the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and s. 8, Art. I of the State Constitution.
2. A list, record, or registry of legally owned firearms or law-abiding firearm owners is not a law enforcement tool and can become an instrument for profiling, harassing, or abusing law-abiding citizens based on their choice to own a firearm and exercise their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed under the United States Constitution. Further, such a list, record, or registry has the potential to fall into the wrong hands and become a shopping list for thieves.
3. A list, record, or registry of legally owned firearms or law-abiding firearm owners is not a tool for fighting terrorism, but rather is an instrument that can be used as a means to profile innocent citizens and to harass and abuse American citizens based solely on their choice to own firearms and exercise their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed under the United States Constitution.
4. Law-abiding firearm owners whose names have been illegally recorded in a list, record, or registry are entitled to redress.
The Legislature intends through the provisions of this section to:
1. Protect the right of individuals to keep and bear arms as guaranteed under both the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and s. 8, Art. I of the State Constitution.
2. Protect the privacy rights of law-abiding firearm owners.
(2) PROHIBITIONS.--No state governmental agency or local government, special district, or other political subdivision or official, agent, or employee of such state or other governmental entity or any other person, public or private, shall knowingly and willfully keep or cause to be kept any list, record, or registry of privately owned firearms or any list, record, or registry of the owners of those firearms.
Is that just bitchin' or what?
Posted 22 August 2004 - 09:08 AM
Posted 24 August 2004 - 05:36 AM
I thought some of you might enjoy reading the response from her highness, feinswein. See way below.
This was not the 1st time I have written her and I will continue to write but I would point out that if not everyone (no matter what type of firearms you own) of us does the same and let's their own elected officials know their opinoin then eventually we are in trouble.
There was a chap attending the TCA event from the Army in England, sorry can't remember his name right now and he put it in excellent perspective something like this (in my own words).
In England they went to ban certain guns and the other gun owners had not come to assist them in the fight to prevent the ban before it happened. As the politicians got more comfortable they went to ban more weapons well the ones who did not help the 1st time did not help again because they were not trying to ban the guns that they had, THIS TIME. The ones who had had the previously banned weapons were not helping the next group of potentially banned gun owners, either because they already lost. So this process took years and eventually all the guns basically are now banned and now crime is up, go figure. This chap bascially said we should kick, spit, and scream and do whatever we can to let the politicians know our thoughts on the issue regardless of the type of weapon it is. There is something the NRA never did on our full automatics! I know I did a terrible job of trying to type this story I wish I recorded it and then could relate it better. Maybe he comes to this sight and can help me.
Feinswein letter. It is VERY clear where she stands on the matter all the more important that each of you get your opinion to your elected officials as I doubt her highness is going to budge.
Dear Mr. Sig:
Thank you for writing to me regarding the assault weapons ban. I
appreciate hearing from you and I welcome the opportunity to respond.
In 1994, Congress passed the Omnibus Crime Bill, which was
signed into law. One provision of this bill banned the manufacture,
transfer, or possession of semi-automatic assault weapons for a
preliminary period of ten years. Since 1994, it has become even clearer
through chilling examples, such as the 1999 shootings at Columbine High
School in Colorado and at the Jewish Community Center in Los Angeles,
that military-style assault weapons are a danger on our streets and to our
children. Semi-automatic assault weapons-which fire up to 250 rounds of
ammunition within seconds and without warning-are weapons of war that
do not belong on the streets of our communities.
Unless acted upon by the United States Congress and President
Bush, the assault weapons ban will expire, as scheduled, in September
2004. On March 2, 2004, I introduced an amendment to S.1805, the
"Lawful Protection of Commerce in Arms Act," to renew the assault
weapons ban for another ten years. Although the amendment passed by a
vote of 52-47, S.1805 ultimately did not pass by a vote of 90-8. Therefore,
the renewal of the assault weapons ban, which was amended to this bill,
did not pass either. The future success of the extension of the ban depends
on support of the House, the Senate, and the Administration. President
Bush and Attorney General Ashcroft have both publicly stated their
support for an extension of the ban, and I intend to hold them to their
Again, thank you for your letter. I hope you will keep in touch on
issues of importance to you. Should you have any further questions or
comments, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, D.C. office at
United States Senator
Further information about my position on issues of concern to California and the
Nation are available at my website http://feinstein.senate.gov. You can also
receive electronic e-mail updates by subscribing to my e-mail list at
Posted 24 August 2004 - 07:25 AM
Posted 24 August 2004 - 03:09 PM