Month: January 2013

Uncategorized

Rep. Meadows’ Response Is Good

January 24, 2013 by 1 Comment

I got the following response to a letter sent to Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC-11) who is my Congressman. Unlike some letters I’ve seen which speak of not wanting to “unnecessarily” infringing upon the Second Amendment, Meadows doesn’t believe additional laws will help. Moreover, he is pushing firearms training which I endorse.

Dear Mr. Richardson:


Thank you for contacting my office regarding your concerns over the possibility of increased gun regulation in light of the recent tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut. Your views are very important, and I appreciate you taking the time to share them with me.


When I heard about the tragedy that took place in Connecticut on December 14, 2012, I was shocked and deeply saddened over this senseless attack on innocent children, teachers and school administrators. As a father, I cannot begin to imagine the horror that those families are going through, as they grieve the loss of their children and loved ones. My thoughts and prayers are with all of them during this difficult time.


Like most Americans, I am horrified by these crimes. The tragedy in Newtown has, once again, brought the debate over our Second Amendment rights to the forefront and has renewed assertions that more restrictive guns laws would have prevented the tragedy in Newtown and other violent crimes.


As a strong defender of the Second Amendment, I will always fight to secure the right of law-abiding citizens to purchase and bear personal firearms. I believe that the best way to prevent acts of violence is to resolutely enforce our criminal laws and to give our citizens proper guidance and training so that they are familiar with firearms and prepared to defend themselves should the need arise. I am working hard with local school officials and sheriff’s departments to figure out what additional measures we can take to ensure that our schools are as safe as possible.


The bottom line is that criminals and individuals who intend to do harm to others are not deterred by additional rules and regulations prohibiting gun ownership. Restricting the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves and their families against harm by enacting strict gun-control laws would only further expose the innocent to violent crime.


Again, thank you for contacting my office. Your feedback and suggestions are always welcome. It is an honor to serve as your United States Congressman. If you have not done so already, please visit my website – www.meadows.house.gov – and sign up for my eNewsletter.


Sincerely,
Mark Meadows
Member of Congress


MM/pf

Uncategorized

Wouldn’t This Make Them “In Common Use”?

January 24, 2013 by

The Fontana School District is buying 14 Colt Model LE6490 AR-15s to equip school police officers. They will be stored at school police headquarters to be used in case of an active shooter situation.

I won’t even touch up on the level of firearms ignorance espoused by the opponents of the police being armed with AR-15s.

However, as SayUncle pointed out yesterday, he doubted that the most popular rifle type in America is “unusual” taken in the context of the Heller decision. Sebastian takes this a step further.

I’ve also advocated that the courts should consider police use when
making a determination about “common use.” If a type of weapon is part
of ordinary police equipment, it can’t be dangerous and unusual, and
ought to be defined as in common use, even if it’s only in common police
use.

I agree with both SayUncle and Sebastian that the AR-15 is in common use. One could argue that the move by the Fontana School District and their police force puts the “normal” AR-15 into common use in California. There is no mention of the police having to have bullet buttons or reduced capacity magazines in the report from CBS Los Angeles. This is something to bear in mind if the California Assembly tries to adopt even more draconian gun laws.

Uncategorized

Sounds Like Someone Is Taking Re-Election Seriously

January 23, 2013 by 5 Comments

Sen. Kay Hagan (D-NC) is one of those Senate Democrats who is expected to be at serious risk for losing here seat in 2014. Indeed, Moe Lane of Redstate.Com said on her chances, “Kay Hagan is likewise well-advised to start planning for her retirement.” When Hagan was first elected in 2008 she rode the coattails of Barack Obama to the Senate. Fast forward four years and North Carolina is solidly a red state again.

It was against this backdrop that I read the announcement from Hagan’s office that she has been named a co-chair of the Congressional Sportsman’s Caucus.

Working to Support North Carolina’s
Sportsmen and Women

This week I announced that I have been named Co-Chair of the bipartisan Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus, which includes more than 300 members of Congress from all 50 states. After serving as Vice-Chair since January 2011, I’m proud to become the Co-Chair with my colleague from South Dakota,Republican Senator John Thune.

The Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus was established in 1989 and works to protect the interests of America’s hunters, anglers and trappers. Approximately 1.4 million sportsmen call North Carolina home, and hunting, fishing and wildlife viewing are economic drivers in our state.

In fact, the Outdoor Industry Association found that outdoor recreation contributes more than $7.5 billion annually to North Carolina’s economy, supports 95,000 jobs across in the state, generates $430 million in annual state tax revenue, and produces $6.1 billion annually in retail sales and services across North Carolina.

It’s evident that North Carolina is among the best places to hunt and fish in the country, and I’m honored to continue working to protect our rich outdoor heritage in my leadership role with the Sportsmen’s Caucus. I grew up in a family of lifelong hunters, and some of my favorite activities are hiking and fishing with my family across our state.

I’m excited to co-chair the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus, and I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides the aisle to advance policies important to sportsmen and women.

Given that Sen. Hagan is now the Co-Chair of the Congressional Sportsman’s Caucus, there are a number of bills that I think she should be supporting or sponsoring on topics like shooting ranges, the EPA and lead, and the like.  Conversely, I think if she wants to get re-elected she needs to realize that sportsmen and women care about the Second Amendment and encroachments upon it. One needs only look at the blowback that Reed Exhibitions has gotten from hunters over their decision to ban modern sporting rifles at the Eastern Sports and Outdoor Show to see this confirmed. I hope she and her staff are listening.

Uncategorized

House Legislation Filed On Jan. 22nd

January 23, 2013 by

Three more bills dealing with firearms were filed in the House of Representatives yesterday. The first from Pennsylvania Republican Mike Fitzpatrick encourages state’s to provide better records for the NICS system, the second from California Democrat Adam Schiff is an attack on the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, and finally, the third is from Georgia Republican Phil Gingrey which would mandate that the BATFE videotape their tests of firearms and ammunition.

HR 329 – Rep. Michael Fitzpatrick (R-PA)
To amend the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 to encourage
States to provide records to the National Instant Background Check
System.
Referred to the House Judiciary Committee


HR 332 – Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA)
Co-Sponsors:
Rep Cartwright, Matthew A. [D-PA] – 1/22/2013
Rep Cicilline, David N. [D-RI] – 1/22/2013
Rep Ellison, Keith [D-MN] – 1/22/2013
Rep Honda, Michael M. [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Rep McGovern, James P. [D-MA] – 1/22/2013
Rep Meeks, Gregory W. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Rep Moran, James P. [D-VA] – 1/22/2013
Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC] – 1/22/2013
Rep Serrano, Jose E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Rep Van Hollen, Chris [D-MD] – 1/22/2013
To provide victims of gun violence access to the same civil remedies as are available to those injured through other means.
Referred to the House Judiciary Committee

HR 339 – Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA)
Co-Sponsors:
Rep Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN] – 1/22/2013
Rep Roe, David P. [R-TN] – 1/22/2013
Rep Stockman, Steve [R-TX] – 1/22/2013
Rep Westmoreland, Lynn A. [R-GA] – 1/22/2013
To require the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to
make video recordings of the examination and testing of firearms and
ammunition, and for other purposes. 

Referred to the House Judiciary Committee and to the House Ways and Means Committee

Uncategorized

Have You Done This Yet?

January 23, 2013 by 10 Comments

Have you made use of the tool that Ruger is making available to send a message to elected representatives? If not, why not? It is quick, easy, and a way to build the numbers of pro-gun messages that our elected representatives are receiving. So far, over 688,000 messages have been sent in about a week. This needs to be more.

The link to their tool is here. Use it and then share it with friends, family, co-workers, and everyone else you know who is a gun owner or who believes in gun rights.

The message being sent is short, sweet, and to the point:

Dear (Recipient),

I am a law-abiding citizen and responsible gun owner.

I am saddened by the tragic events in Newtown, Connecticut, but I believe that efforts to impose new restrictions on me and other lawful and responsible owners like me are misguided. Did you know that violent crime with firearms has declined since the Federal “assault weapons ban” expired in 2004?

Your focus should be on strengthening mental health care and improving the quality of data supporting NICs checks (National Instant Criminal Background Check System). Do NOT pass more gun laws; instead, work to enforce the more than 20,000 gun laws already on the books.

I am your constituent and I vote. Please represent me.

Sincerely,
(Your Contact Information)

Uncategorized

HR 321 — Firearm Safety and Public Health Research Act of 2013

January 23, 2013 by 3 Comments

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) introduced HR 321 – Firearm Safety and Public Health Research Act of 2013 – last Friday. As of today, it has 32 co-sponsors. The intent of the bill is to get around the restrictions in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012 on the promotion of gun control by National Institutes for Health and the Center for Disease Control.

HR 321 would provide the funding for the implementation of President Barack Obama’s Presidential Memorandum issued on January 16th which directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct research into the causes of “gun violence” (sic) and ways to prevent it.

Therefore, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby direct the following:

Section 1. Research. The Secretary of Health and Human Services (Secretary), through the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other scientific agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services, shall conduct or sponsor research into the causes of gun violence and the ways to prevent it. The Secretary shall begin by identifying the most pressing research questions with the greatest potential public health impact, and by assessing existing public health interventions being implemented across the Nation to prevent gun violence.

Sec. 2. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this memorandum shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

The text of HR 321 is rather simple as might be expected of a bill that amends one section of an appropriations bill.

To amend the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2013 (Public Law 112-175) to permit research on firearms safety and gun violence.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

The Act may be cited as the `Firearm Safety and Public Health Research Act of 2013′.

SEC. 2. PERMITTING THE USE OF FEDERAL FUNDS FOR RESEARCH ON FIREARMS SAFETY AND GUN VIOLENCE.

The Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2013 (Public Law 112-175) is amended by inserting after section 155 the following:

`Sec. 156. Notwithstanding section 101, sections 218 and 503(c) of division F of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 (Public Law 112-74) shall not apply to amounts made available by this joint resolution insofar as such sections relate to any activity to conduct research on firearms safety or gun violence.’.

This bill’s sole intention is to subsidize with our tax dollars junk research that will be used to promote more gun control. In my opinion there is no such thing as “gun violence”. There is violence and the tool chosen is immaterial when you are looking for the causal factors. We don’t speak of “hammer violence”, “blunt object violence”, or “fist violence”, so why should speak of “gun violence” as if it is some weird permutation of a violent act.

Uncategorized

And Now The Senate Gets Into The Act

January 23, 2013 by

Yesterday was the first day that the Senate leadership would allow new bills to be introduced in the 113th Congress. So far five gun control bills have been introduced as well as a stealth bill from Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) that may or may not be a gun control bill. It is my understanding that Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) plans to introduce her ban on firearms with cosmetic features she doesn’t like on Thursday.

The text of all of these bills has not been received by the Government Printing Office.

S.2 – Harry Reid (D-NV)
Co-Sponsors:
Sen Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT] – 1/22/2013
Sen Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Brown, Sherrod [D-OH] – 1/22/2013
Sen Cantwell, Maria [D-WA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE] – 1/22/2013
Sen Durbin, Richard [D-IL] – 1/22/2013
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Hirono, Mazie K. [D-HI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [D-NJ] – 1/22/2013
Sen Levin, Carl [D-MI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Menendez, Robert [D-NJ] – 1/22/2013
Sen Murphy, Christopher S. [D-CT] – 1/22/2013
Sen Rockefeller, John D., IV [D-WV] – 1/22/2013
Sen Schatz, Brian [D-HI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
A bill to reduce violence and protect the citizens of the United States. 


Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee

S.22 – Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Co-Sponsors:
Sen Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT] – 1/22/2013
Sen Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Cardin, Benjamin L. [D-MD] – 1/22/2013
Sen Carper, Thomas R. [D-DE] – 1/22/2013
Sen Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE] – 1/22/2013
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Sen Levin, Carl [D-MI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Menendez, Robert [D-NJ] – 1/22/2013
Sen Reed, Jack [D-RI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Wyden, Ron [D-OR] – 1/22/2013
A bill to establish background check procedures for gun shows
Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee

S.33 – Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Co-Sponsors:
Sen Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT] – 1/22/2013
Sen Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Cardin, Benjamin L. [D-MD] – 1/22/2013
Sen Carper, Thomas R. [D-DE] – 1/22/2013
Sen Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE] – 1/22/2013
Sen Durbin, Richard [D-IL] – 1/22/2013
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Franken, Al [D-MN] – 1/22/2013
Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Sen Harkin, Tom [D-IA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Levin, Carl [D-MI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Menendez, Robert [D-NJ] – 1/22/2013
Sen Murphy, Christopher S. [D-CT] – 1/22/2013
Sen Reed, Jack [D-RI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI] – 1/22/2013
A bill to prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes.
Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee

S.34 – Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Co-Sponsors:
Sen Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT] – 1/22/2013
Sen Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Durbin, Richard [D-IL] – 1/22/2013
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Sen Levin, Carl [D-MI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Menendez, Robert [D-NJ] – 1/22/2013
Sen Reed, Jack [D-RI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI] – 1/22/2013
A bill to increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of firearms or the issuance of firearms and explosives licenses to known or suspected dangerous terrorists.
Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee

S.35 – Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Co-Sponsors:
Sen Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT] – 1/22/2013
Sen Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Sen Reed, Jack [D-RI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
A bill to require face to face purchases of ammunition, to require licensing of ammunition dealers, and to require reporting regarding bulk purchases of ammunition.
Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee

S.54 – Patrick Leahy (D-VT)
Co-Sponsor:
Sen Durbin, Richard [D-IL] – 1/22/2013
A bill to increase public safety by punishing and deterring firearms trafficking. 
 Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee

Uncategorized

Lautenberg Introduces Mag Ban To Senate

January 22, 2013 by 3 Comments

Today is the first day that Senators can introduce bills and Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) has wasted no time. I am presuming that Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) likewise has introduced her new “assault weapon” (sic) ban. The Library of Congress’ Thomas page has not been updated to reflect any bills introduced into the Senate.

While the exact wording of Lautenberg’s bill is not absolutely know, I am presuming that it will be identical to that of Rep. Carolyn McCarthy’s HR 138.

In the release below I find a couple of things interesting. First, Lautenberg implies that former President George W. Bush is in support of his bill. Second, that Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) is a co-sponsor of the bill. Franken has been a little wishy-washy in the last few weeks on guns as he looks to the 2014 election cycle.

From Lautenberg’s press release:


WASHINGTON, DC—On the first day for bills to be introduced in the 113th Congress, U.S. Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) today introduced his bill to ban high-capacity ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds. The proposal—which Lautenberg first introduced in January 2011—is a major component of the gun safety plan President Obama announced last week.

“The latest tragedy in Newtown was a wake up call for our nation, and now we must now turn our grief into action to reduce further tragedies. It is clearer than ever that there is no place in our communities for military-style supersized magazines like those used inside Sandy Hook Elementary School, in Aurora, and in Tucson, and I will keep working to reinstate the ban on them,” said Senator Lautenberg. “President Obama’s bold plan to address gun violence included my common-sense proposal to ban high-capacity magazines holding more than 10 rounds, and we will get to work in Congress to pass this bill and other reasonable reforms that protect children and families. This is the kind of sensible reform that has the support of Democrats and Republicans, hunters and responsible gun owners, and it is time for Congress to listen to the American people and put this ban back in place.”

A companion bill has been introduced in the House of Representatives by Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy and has the support of 48 cosponsors.

“Senator Lautenberg and I have reintroduced the bill to ban high-capacity ammunition magazines because they’re the common thread in every major mass shooting in recent history and taking them off the market can have a major impact on saving lives in America. The horrific murders in Newtown have shown how our nation’s lax attitude towards gun violence has gone too far and we must take action to save lives,” said Rep. McCarthy

Senator Lautenberg’s “Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act” would prohibit the manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that have a capacity of, or could be readily converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition. From 1994 to 2004, these high-capacity ammunition magazines were illegal as part of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004. Since that time, high-capacity clips (holding more than 10 rounds at a time) have been legal to manufacture and sell under federal law.

Senator Lautenberg first introduced his bill after a high-capacity ammunition magazine was used to carry out the shooting spree in Tucson, allowing the shooter to fire off 31 bullets in just 15 seconds. The shooter was subdued when he stopped to reload. In addition to the Tucson tragedy, high-capacity magazines were used in mass shootings at Virginia Tech, Fort Hood, Aurora, Oak Creek, and Newtown.

The bill is co-sponsored by Senators Charles E. Schumer (D-NY), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Tom Carper (D-DE), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Jack Reed (D-RI), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Chris Coons (D-DE), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Carl Levin (D-MI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Al Franken (D-MN), Chris Murphy (D-CT), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY).

Former President George W. Bush and former Vice President Dick Cheney have expressed support for reinstating the ban on high-capacity magazines in the past, and polls show that 65 percent of Americans support such a ban.

UPDATE: Lautenberg’s bill is S.33. It currently has 16 co-sponsors as mentioned above in his press release.

Uncategorized

Sweet Baby James On Gun Control

January 22, 2013 by 5 Comments

Nicholas Ballasy of The Daily Caller caught up with singer-songwriter James Taylor after he performed at the inaugural ceremonies yesterday. One of the questions asked of Taylor was about gun control.

“I think the nation is very divided on gun control,” Taylor told TheDC, “but I think the majority of us feel strongly — even the majority of gun owners feel strongly — that we need to make some sacrifice[s] to our freedoms, if that’s the way to put it. We need to make some sacrifices to what we might want to have, in order to safeguard our children.”

“I think there’s a limit to how much — I think the founding fathers wanted us to be able to arm ourselves, but I don’t think that they would have agreed that we should have the capacity to do the damage that we do have. And we just can’t afford it.”

James Taylor may have seen fire and rain but I doubt he’s actually seen the wrath of those of us who he thinks should make some sacrifices. As it is, given his own mental health past which includes being rejected by the Selective Service on psychological grounds, it is doubtful that he could truthfully answer “No” to question 11f on the Form 4473. I’d put him in the maybe yes, maybe no category.

Uncategorized

Bob Schieffer And Godwin’s Law

January 22, 2013 by 3 Comments

Cam Edwards of NRA News fisks Bob Schieffer of CBS News and his attempt to invoke Godwin’s law with regard to the NRA. Godwin’s Law states that the longer an online discussion goes on that the likelihood of someone invoking Hitler or the Nazis approaches one.

Schieffer said that if we could find and kill Osama bin Laden, pass civil rights, and defeat the Nazis then America surely could take on the easier task of defeating the gun lobby. The only problem is that as Cam points out the gun lobby isn’t a bunch of gun manufacturers – it is you and me. So what Bob Schieffer really wants to do is to take away the civil rights of gun owning Americans just like that other group did in 1930s Germany.