Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Gun Legislation' started by texasjohnboy, Jan 14, 2017.
Well you know how that OC staff is. The only thing rougher is the student body.
Oh yeah, and I kick puppies for no reason.
I have been known to put the recycle stuff in with the regular garbage. True story.
I guess I am old.
I only have garbage and non-garbage.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk
It's all trash to me.
Oh yeah, what trailer park do you represent?
Don't go ninja'n nobody don't need ninja'n.
Something is going on, seems something or other has a bee in the bonnet of the Horny Housewives....
TBH, I'm not a fan of adding unrelated riders to bills in order to get crap through. Lot of shit goes through the system that way.
But yeah, "mad bitches with no real problems to worry about" are full of shit in their description, just like all the other propaganda for brain dead bored housewives.
Scanned through the 2.5+ hour Committee hearing. Witnesses were made up of Safari Club Intl. representing hunters and also on the side of the firearms deregulation, An former ATF agent representing Whatever Gabby Gifford's anti gun organization is called this week, a Marine who runs a non-profit for disabled vets and mainly was concerned with their access to the NPS and Steven Halbrook, an attorney who has represented NRA led cases and other civil matters concerning the 2A.
Chairman McClintock was definitely in favor of passage of the SHARE Act, as it is, as were a few others as well. Others did not comment so I can't say where they are leaning, however the committee is 24 to 18 Republican if that matters at all.
The only open opposition on the act was senior member Hanabusa who seemed to try and nullify the use of suppressors as hearing protection since according to the Giffords spokesperson, hearing protection was still recommended by suppressor manufacturers when using them. However, at the same time they argued that suppressors will masked the sound of a firearm to the point of being unrecognizable as actual gunfire. To me that seems like somewhat of a conflicting argument.
Also, Junior Rep Gomez who only made a statement against the suppressor deregulation used the Christopher Dorner shooting as an example of what would happen if suppressors were easier to attain. It was very scripted and he never even looked up from the paper as he read the statement.
The bill was considered for markup and that process will resume tomorrow.
One highlight was one when one of the committee members (forgot name) corrected the 2nd hand account of the the Scalise shooting by the Giffords rep. He actually gave first hand account of his experience and said in fact that the sound of the first gunshot, which was argued that it was readily identifiable by the victims and therefore something that saved lives, was in fact not so to most, and only after one of the players on the field noticed the shot hitting the chain link fence was everyone aware it was in fact gunfire.
Here are the firearm related items in the bill in case it wasn't posted elsewhere:
Remove suppressors from the scope of the National Firearms Act (NFA), replacing the
outdated federal transfer process with an instantaneous National Instant Criminal
Reduces the cost of purchasing a suppressor by removing
$200 transfer tax.
LAWFUL PURPOSE AND SELF DEFENSE
Removes Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
authority to use the "sporting purposes" clauses in federal law in ways that could undermine the core
principles of the Second Amendment.
Eliminates ATF's authority to reclassify popular rifle ammunition as "armor piercing ammunition."
Provides for the lawful importation of any non-NFA firearm or ammunition that may
otherwise be lawfully possessed and sold within the United States
Protects shotguns, shotgun shells, and certain rifles from arbitrary classification as "destructive devices."