|
Post by Old Ironsights on Jun 14, 2007 20:45:43 GMT -5
Historically blind cretins, collaborating and appeasing those who are intent on establishing Stalinist/Facist lists of honest citizens. Declaring them to be socially/politically undesireable and dangerous. It passed on a "whoever is present" voice vote, rather than a tallied vote (blame avoidance) after Carolyn "dance on their graves" McCarthy sent, at 8:30 in the morning, an email to House Republicans indicating that a gun control bill, was on the Suspension Calendar (normally reserved for "non-controversial" bills). Many Representatives didn't see that email until it was too late. Less than three hours later, the bill passed by a voice vote. H.R. 2640, is a massive expansion of the Brady Gun Control law, that will nothing about Gun crime" but DOES tattoo the names and addresses of honest Americans into a CRIMINAL database, pasting a big judenstern on anyone ever unfortunate enough to get sick or run afoul of an activist, wanna-be-pshrink judge. All this, and I had to find it out from the BBC. THE BBC! news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6750869.stmThe NRA has collaborated with people whowant an enemies list to scapegoat in the grand tradition of Goebbels and Goering. Is this the light in the north church steeple? Never again. THIS WILL NOT STAND! When in the course of human events...
|
|
|
Post by JohnSmiles on Jun 14, 2007 21:48:49 GMT -5
Historically blind cretins, collaborating and appeasing those who are intent on establishing Stalinist/Facist lists of honest citizens. Declaring them to be socially/politically undesireable and dangerous. It passed on a "whoever is present" voice vote, rather than a tallied vote (blame avoidance) after Carolyn "dance on their graves" McCarthy sent, at 8:30 in the morning, an email to House Republicans indicating that a gun control bill, was on the Suspension Calendar (normally reserved for "non-controversial" bills). Many Representatives didn't see that email until it was too late. Less than three hours later, the bill passed by a voice vote. H.R. 2640, is a massive expansion of the Brady Gun Control law, that will nothing about Gun crime" but DOES tattoo the names and addresses of honest Americans into a CRIMINAL database, pasting a big judenstern on anyone ever unfortunate enough to get sick or run afoul of an activist, wanna-be-pshrink judge. All this, and I had to find it out from the BBC. THE BBC! news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6750869.stmThe NRA has collaborated with people whowant an enemies list to scapegoat in the grand tradition of Goebbels and Goering. Is this the light in the north church steeple? Never again. THIS WILL NOT STAND! When in the course of human events... I agree. This is the absolute worst thing the NRA has ever supported. And they had the nerve to bash Zumbo? The greatest victory yet for Brady Co. www.bradycampaign.org/
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Jun 15, 2007 5:56:15 GMT -5
I was just reading the GOPA alert on it, shameful to say the least. I just renewed my membership yesterday, I may have to reconsider if they keep doing things like this.
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Jun 15, 2007 6:06:58 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2007 6:16:29 GMT -5
Good law.....as a gun dealer, I support it 100%. I don't want to sell a gun to someone who is not legally allowed to have one. This one is a no brainer and requires state courts to do what they should have been doing all along anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jun 15, 2007 7:17:15 GMT -5
A friend of mine is signed up at the Brady bunch's site to keep tabs on what goes on there.
Here is an email he got from them.. > VICTORY: BILL THAT STRENGTHENS BRADY BACKGROUNDS CHECKS > PASSES U.S. HOUSE > > Dear XXXXXX, > > That's right! You read it correctly. With your help, > we've been asking legislators, "What are YOU going to do > about gun violence?" > > And we got our first BIG answer yesterday, when, by a > voice vote, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. > 2640 to strengthen Brady background checks!! Click here > to read more about the bill: > www.bradynetwork.org/site/R?i=qZXmpW69q3ehZlwmQHNzOw.. > > The bill, introduced by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) > requires states to automate their lists of convicted > criminals and the mentally ill who are prohibited from > buying firearms. > > It also requires states to report those lists to the FBI's > National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) > that was enacted with passage of the Brady Law. > > And now this important bill is moving swiftly to the U.S. > Senate and we need your help today to make sure it gets > passed. > > Please make a generous contribution of $15.00 or more > today to help us make this happen. > www.bradynetwork.org/site/R?i=4IZXazLsFc2YSg7vWuOaMA.. > > Surprisingly, the NRA supports the bill. The Virginia > Tech shootings were a horrific reminder of the gaps in > U.S. gun laws. The gun lobby knew its usual opposition > to any and every solution we brought forward would be > unacceptable to the American public so it made this > concession. > > But we know we still have much more to do to keep guns > out of the wrong hands and that the gun lobby will oppose > us as we move forward with other sensible steps. We will > work to push Congress to extend Brady background checks > to all gun sales -- especially those at gun shows. > > To do the work ahead, we need your support today to sustain > this strong momentum. This is the BEST time for you to > make a contribution to help our fight to make Brady > background checks stronger ... step-by-step we are making > progress. Click here to donate: > www.bradynetwork.org/site/R?i=2XKc6q81zXAxxnT5DpycjA.. > > Show us what YOU'RE going to do to help stop gun violence > by making a contribution of $15.00 or more right now. > www.bradynetwork.org/site/R?i=mZw-vhSmAJUmY_u0w3lddA.. > > Thanks for your support! We'll keep you posted ... > > Sincerely, > > Sarah Brady, Chair
|
|
|
Post by Sasquatch on Jun 15, 2007 7:44:30 GMT -5
As I understand it, all this bill does is encourage states to better share thier "do not sell" list with the Federal Background check system, which we already have to pass to buy a firearm. Included in the agreement is the restoration of gun rights to some 80,000 vets denied the right to buy a firearm because of supposed mental problems. Also, this agreement gives the liberals something to crow about, but doesn't really mean anything more in terms of Joe citizen buying a gun. In addition, politically, This makes the likelyhood of "Brady II" seeing the light of day anytime soon virtually nill. THAT IS REALLY GOOD NEWS.
we already must submit to background checks, why would we care that nuts like Cho might actually be prevented from buying a gun?
As far as worrying that the Feds now have your name, don't kid yourself; any gun you buy in a store, they already know about. If big brother finally comes for your guns, this law isn't going to affect anything.
Laws are less restrictive than they were in the nineties, with the expansion of Castle laws, right to carry, and the death of the Brady bill. It could be a lot worse!
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jun 15, 2007 8:29:35 GMT -5
I think it is an excellent law ......
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on Jun 15, 2007 9:12:21 GMT -5
Good law.....as a gun dealer, I support it 100%. I don't want to sell a gun to someone who is not legally allowed to have one. This one is a no brainer and requires state courts to do what they should have been doing all along anyway. I wholeheartedly and passionately agree with OIS on this one, as everyone knows--I think this law, while seemingly well-intentioned, results in the discrimination of those who have treatable and TREATED mental health care needs due to the unclear and "permanent" definition of "mental incompetence" that will seemingly be used under this rule. As far as I know, under this rule, anyone that has ever sought mental health care treatment and has been given a psychiatric diagnosis will be "blacklisted" as "mentally incompetent" permanently, and will never be able to own a firearm for hobbies or self-protection. Furthermore, it seems that anyone who owns a gun and is in contact with someone who has been "blacklisted" can be considered an accessory to a crime if the "blacklisted" person uses the firearm. The legislators have not put forth a clear method of monitoring mental health status so that one's "blacklisted" status can be reversed when they complete treatment from their mental illness, recover, and are no longer a danger to themselves or others. If your wife developed a postpartum major depressive disorder, went into treatment and received this diagnosis, completed treatment, and was no longer a danger to herself or others, should she not be able to own a firearm for self-protection for the rest of her life just because she had a mental illness and sought treatment? Should you, as her husband, never be allowed to own a firearm as well because if you did and she used your firearm for any reason you would be considered "an accesory" to a crime? If your son was a college student who enjoyed hunting, developed an adjustment disorder with depressive features as a result of beginning college, entered and completed treatment, and was no longer (probably was never in the first place) a threat to himself or others, should he be permanently banned from owning a firearm and enjoying his hobby of hunting just because he developed an adjustment disorder and sought treatment? This is the face of mental illness--the sensationalized cases you hear as a result of tragic school shootings are only a teeny fraction of the tail end of the bell curve of all the millions of people in this country who have a mental illness and require treatment at one point in their lives. If someone wants to kill themselves or others, they will find a way regardless of whether they have access to guns, and mental health professionals can only do their best in monitoring suicidality and homicidality of any kind. It absolutely disgusts me that the NRA would support legislation that directly discriminates against those with treatable mental illnesses, and I fear that those who wish to own a firearm or enjoy hobbies involving firearms will not seek mental health care for themselves or their loved ones because of the now very real possibility of being permanently "blacklisted" as a result of seeking treatment and receiving a psychiatric diagnosis with no way to prove that they have successfully completed treatment and should no longer be "blacklisted". The stigma against having a mental illness has always been terrible in this country, and it's sad to see that it's getting worse. The majority of those battling a mental illness do not deserve the discrimination they face by society when they try to receive treatment. I am a firm believer in gun rights, but I will never support the NRA in any way, shape, or form as long as they support legislation that directly discriminates against the mentally ill, who need society's support to seek treatment perhaps more than any other vulnerable group in society. AAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jun 15, 2007 9:59:10 GMT -5
Perhaps I am misunderstanding something ..... isnt this law just enforcing regulations already on the books .... AND allowing for people who have been deemed "crazy" in the past to be deemed mentally competent now?
uumm ... if a mentally ill person avoids treatment solely because it *might* effect their ability to purchase a firearm ...... well, that person is possibly kookier than they realize. Keeping guns out of the hands of "crazy" people isnt discrimination ..... it is common sense.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Jun 15, 2007 10:02:27 GMT -5
Timex, Swilk, Henderson, what this bill does is set the groundwork for the confiscation of every firearm from every HOUSEHOLD where a "prohibited person" lives.
This is not speculation. I have friends in the BATFE who have stated categorically that that is how the information WILL be used - at least by those Section Chiefs who are Anti-Gun or those who are told by Anti Gun politicians (like in Illinois) that they MUST prosecute.
Right now there is no way for the Antis to know which homes have "prohibited persons". All they know is who has guns &/or CCWs.
With the implementation of this bill they will be able to cross-reference the two.
Simply being on the list is sufficient "probable cause" for a raid.
Honest people who happen to be sick will be charged with Felony Possession by a "Prohibited Person" - because someone else in the house owns a gun.
Honest gun owners will be charged with abbeting a Felony. They will lose their guns. Some will lose their lives in the BATFE raids.
Yeah. Really good law. Divide and conquer.
|
|
|
Post by racktracker on Jun 15, 2007 10:06:18 GMT -5
This does go to every home.
If my wife had mental problems and was institutionalizedat one point in her life I can not legally have guns in my home, even though they all belong to me.
She wouldn't be able to ever own a gun even though she was cured. Why? Because once you are on that list you'll play he!! getting off of it.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jun 15, 2007 10:11:43 GMT -5
I am curious as to what it takes to get on that "list" ..... and I have a very good reason for asking.
I know a person .... not going to say whom ..... who was willingly admitted to a psych ward for treatment of depression, suicidal actions, PTSD, drug addiction ...... basically was nuttier than a fruit cake. He is all better now ......
This person now holds an Indiana CC permit and has absolutely no problem buying a firearm.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Jun 15, 2007 10:18:25 GMT -5
He went willingly. He went to a Doctor.
What puts you on the list is some wanna-be shrink Judge who signs an order for psychiactric evaluation. It's not the evaluation, or even hospitalization that puts you on the list, the ORDER puts you on the list. This is ENTIRELY political.
While it is not (currently) the case in Indiana, in some States, anyone who self-admits also automatically gets "adjudicated".
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jun 15, 2007 10:25:59 GMT -5
What would a person have to do .... to be standing before a judge .... and ordered to undergo evaluation?
I assume they wouldnt just walk down the street and pick people out .... a person would have had to have broken the law and ended up in court?
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jun 15, 2007 10:29:16 GMT -5
Do you have a list of states that puts self admitted people on the "list"?
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Jun 15, 2007 10:30:52 GMT -5
No, all that has to happen is that your spouse/parent somebody decides you are depressed &/or suicidal and ask for it.
You don't have to commit any crime whatsoever. You only have to be unwilling to self-admit.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Jun 15, 2007 10:32:45 GMT -5
They would have to ask for it AND the judge would have to agree with them .......
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Jun 15, 2007 10:33:36 GMT -5
Do you have a list of states that puts self admitted people on the "list"? I don't have a complete list (yet) but IIRC Pensylvania is one. The reason they adjudicate all self-admits is to keep people from deciding they don't like the treatment and walking off the ward without a doctor's release.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on Jun 15, 2007 10:36:57 GMT -5
They would have to ask for it AND the judge would have to agree with them ....... And every judge who gets handed a request for adjudication signs it. Wouldn't you? Think about the Liability inherent in not signing. The point is, it doesn't matter if the person is really mentally ill or not. Or whether they are under situational stress. Or whether they are suffering from a short term biological problem (like Post Partum Depression). Or if someone is just PO'd at you. The Judge gets a request and he signs it. End of story, end of Rights - for that person AND EVERY PERSON IN THEIR HOUSEHOLD.
|
|