Amend/Repeal Class III Ban - A Stepping Stone To Total Gun Confiscation


Do you support the amendment/repeal of the 1986 Class III Weapons Ban?


  • Total voters
    211

Bohemian

New member
Im sure you sent them all letters and kept copies right? so post up yours as an inspiration to us all!

Stick together or hang separately

Benjamin Franklin's statement, "We must all hang together, gentlemen...else, we shall most assuredly hang separately" was made at the signing of the Declaration of Independence and meant that if they did not band together in the fight against the British, they would all be hanged separately.
 

Bohemian

New member
Im sure you sent them all letters and kept copies right? so post up yours as an inspiration to us all!

Actually, I do, most of the time I get an email response and a snail mailed response, looking in my email box right now I have literally hundreds of responses from Senators and Congressmen...

I will post a couple in the hopes that will it encourage others to do the same...

September 5th, 2007

Dear Mr. xxxxxx:

Thank you for contacting me about the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act (H.R. 1022). I appreciate hearing from you.

Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) re-introduced the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act on February 13, 2007. This legislation would ban the transfer, possession, or manufacture of semiautomatic assault weapons and high capacity ammunition feeding devices for a ten year period. It has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee for review.

I do not support the reauthorization of the assault weapons ban because studies have not demonstrated that it has any effect on reducing crime. I voted against the original assault weapons ban when it came before the Senate in 1993. I also voted against an effort to reauthorize the ban in 2004. Please be assured that I will keep your concerns in mind should I have the opportunity to review H.R. 1022 or related legislation in the Senate.

As a gun owner, I believe that law abiding citizens have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. We must work to protect this right by enforcing gun safety laws that keep guns away from terrorists and criminals. The rights of responsible gun owners should not be compromised by individuals who use firearms to commit crimes. The overwhelming majority of Nevadan gun owners use their guns safely, and you may be certain that I will use my leadership position to work in a bipartisan fashion to preserve their rights.

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT] Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. For more information about my work for Nevada, my role in the United States Senate Leadership, or to subscribe to regular e-mail updates on the issues that interest you, please visit my Web site at Link Removed. I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.

My best wishes to you.

Sincerely,

HARRY REID
United States Senator


HR:js
 

Bohemian

New member
The following was related to a FOPA 1986 Inquiry...


I never heard from the BATFE...



Dear Mr. xxxx:

Thank you for your recent inquiry. I appreciate knowing your views.

I have contacted the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives on your behalf and have brought this action to the attention of the appropriate officials. They have been asked to review your letter and provide a written response. In the meantime, if you feel that I can be of assistance in any other way, please let me know.

My best wishes to you.

Sincerely,

HARRY REID
United States Senator


HR:js
 

Bohemian

New member
and another...



Dear Mr. xxxx:

Thank you for contacting me to share your thoughts regarding the rights of gun owners. I appreciate hearing from you.

As you know, it has been unlawful since passage of The National Firearms Act of 1934 for civilians to own machine guns without special permission from the U.S. Treasury Department. Machine guns are subject to a $200 tax every time their ownership changes from one federally registered owner to another. Each new weapon is subject to a manufacturing tax when it is made, and it must be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) in its National Firearms Registry.

Since the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986, ownership of newly manufactured machine guns has been prohibited to civilians. Machine guns which were manufactured prior to the Act's passage are regulated under the National Firearms Act, but those manufactured after the ban cannot ordinarily be sold to or owned by civilians.

I noted your support for eliminating all restrictions on firearms ownership, including machine guns. I am currently unaware of any legislation that would do so. As a gun owner, I believe that law abiding citizens have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. We must work to protect this right by enforcing gun safety laws that keep guns away from terrorists and criminals. The rights of responsible gun owners should not be compromised by individuals who use firearms to commit crimes. The overwhelming majority of Nevadan gun owners use their guns safely, and you can be certain that I will work in a bipartisan fashion to protect their rights.





Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.

My best wishes to you.

Sincerely,

HARRY REID
United States Senator


HR:js
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
 

Bohemian

New member
Dear XXXX:

Thank you for writing to express your support for H.R. 6691, the Second Amendment Enforcement Act. I appreciate you taking the time to express your views on this important issue.

As you may know, my colleague, Representative Travis Childers (D-MS), introduced the Second Amendment Enforcement Act. This legislation seeks to overturn Washington, D.C.’s recently enacted emergency laws that defy the Supreme Court decision in D.C. v Heller to outlaw D.C.’s gun ban. The Second Amendment Enforcement Act will repeal the District's ban on semi-automatic handguns as well as the requirement that firearms be disassembled or secured with a trigger lock in the home. This legislation also repeals the current D.C. registration system that requires multiple visits to police headquarters, ballistics testing, passing a written test on D.C. gun laws, fingerprinting, and limiting registration to one handgun per 90 days.

Presently, the Second Amendment Enforcement Act is awaiting action in the House Committee on the Judiciary, of which I am not a member. Please know that I signed on to an amicus curia brief in favor of the repeal of the Washington D.C. gun ban that was ruled on in the Heller case and that I will continue to advocate for individuals being allowed to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights. I will be sure to keep your views in mind when this legislation is addressed by the full House of Representatives.

Again, thank you for writing. Please feel free to contact me in the future with any additional comments or concerns you may have.


Sincerely,

Jon C. Porter
Member of Congress

JCP/sm
 

Bohemian

New member
Dear Mr. XXXX:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the Second Amendment. I value the opinions of every Nevadan and am grateful to those who take the time to inform me of their views.

I believe that the Second Amendment to the Constitution must be protected. It is critical to ensuring that the rest of the Bill of Rights is protected. Nevadans have a long history of independence, and this independence is built on freedoms like the right to bear arms. Nevadans count on their Second Amendment freedoms to defend themselves and preserve their way of life.

I have consistently voted to protect the Second Amendment. For example, I voted against an amendment to the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act of 2005 that prohibits the sale of a handgun that is not equipped with a trigger lock or storage safety device. Currently, 90 percent of all firearms sold commercially are already sold with such devices. Further, most states already have penalties for reckless endangerment if an adult is found grossly negligent in the storage of a firearm. Thus, the provisions of this amendment are unnecessary and intrusive, as the federal government should not be telling people how to store their firearms.

I also voted for an amendment to the FY07 Homeland Security Appropriations bill that prohibits any entity representing the U.S. federal government, while acting in support of relief from a major disaster or emergency, from seizing any lawfully possessed firearm. This amendment also authorizes any individual aggrieved by a violation of this law to seek relief through civil action in U.S. district court and to seek the return of a wrongfully confiscated firearm. Finally, this amendment would not prevent law enforcement from confiscating guns from convicted felons or other persons not able to lawfully possess a firearm, nor would it have any effect on law enforcement outside of disaster relief situations. I trust that you will be pleased to learn that this amendment passed by a vote of 84-16, and that this provision was signed into law by the President on October 4, 2006.

I believe it unlikely that Congress will consider new legislation to further hinder gun owners' rights this year. Instead of passing new laws, we should first begin enforcing the laws that are already on the books. Please be assured that I will continue to support legislation that is consistent with your Second Amendment rights.

Once again, thank you for contacting me on this very important issue. Should you have any other questions or comments or would like to contact me in the future regarding another issue of importance to you, please do not hesitate to either write or e-mail me via my website at <a href="Link Removed">Link Removed</a>.


Sincerely,

JOHN ENSIGN
United States Senator

JE/u1
 

rockwerks

New member
I meant specific to this topic..............I to have sent out my share of letters, the machine gun fight is not one I feel I need to address. I did go to the machine gun shoot when I could in AZ. But dont feel the law there needs to be changed nor should it
 

Bohemian

New member
I meant specific to this topic..............I to have sent out my share of letters, the machine gun fight is not one I feel I need to address. I did go to the machine gun shoot when I could in AZ. But dont feel the law there needs to be changed nor should it

So if I understand you correctly, you instead of interpreting the Second Amendment as meaning "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"... and that you are entitled to be armed in equal or greater force then what may be brought against you, be it foreign or domestic, including but not limited to the TYRANNY OF YOUR OWN GOVERNMENT!
PERIOD! as the Founding Fathers Clearly Did...

YOU Instead believe that it means "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"... except if your zip code is x, or your firearm is capable of firing more then one bullet without being reloaded, which is actually one definition of a machine gun...

Or that when the shot that was heard around the world was fired because the British tried to take Cannons and powder away from the Colonists, that the British were well within their rights to do so as well...

NICE!

You are in good Company! HITLER, STALIN, LENIN AND GUN BAN OBAMA AND COMPANY FEEL THE SAME WAY!
 

rockwerks

New member
So if I understand you correctly, you instead of interpreting the Second Amendment as meaning "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"... and that you are entitled to be armed in equal or greater force then what may be brought against you, be it foreign or domestic, including but not limited to the TYRANNY OF YOUR OWN GOVERNMENT!
PERIOD! as the Founding Fathers Clearly Did...

YOU Instead believe that it means "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"... except if your zip code is x, or your firearm is capable of firing more then one bullet without being reloaded, which is actually one definition of a machine gun...

Or that when the shot that was heard around the world was fired because the British tried to take Cannons and powder away from the Colonists, that the British were well within their rights to do so as well...

NICE!

You are in good Company! HITLER, STALIN, LENIN AND GUN BAN OBAMA AND COMPANY FEEL THE SAME WAY!

That is not what I mean and anyone who thinks so is a total moron, No matter what you want or believe there are many millions who feel there should be some limitations. You do not need a class III machine gun. I may want one to play with. but we will never have that option. It is already starting to boil, the more the anti gun mob sees rants like yours the more they are able to exploit that as not being rational, as you being a scary person who needs to be controlled. The more People like you rant and wave your guns the more people switch to the other side. We will always be on the same side but different stance on how to get the job done.

I voted that yes it is an infringement on the second, so is not being able to post porn on national TV against the 1st. Those are items we are going to have to live with. I have seen it in the past and we will see it again our Zealot ways will cost us in the end. It is much wiser approach to work from within, to convert those afraid of guns to our side by taking one shooting by stating facts from legitimate sources, being out front in a calm stable format. When was the last time you took someone who does not understand shooting?

I admire your Zeal but I feel it in the long run it will do us more harm than good.

There are sites our there that monitor sites like this then use our own words against us as being unstable whack jobs and if you read some of these posts you can see why.

Take it to what ever level you wish but know this, this infringement will stay in place no way around it. that is a fact.
 

Bohemian

New member
That is not what I mean and anyone who thinks so is a total moron, No matter what you want or believe there are many millions who feel there should be some limitations. You do not need a class III machine gun. I may want one to play with. but we will never have that option. It is already starting to boil, the more the anti gun mob sees rants like yours the more they are able to exploit that as not being rational, as you being a scary person who needs to be controlled. The more People like you rant and wave your guns the more people switch to the other side. We will always be on the same side but different stance on how to get the job done.

I voted that yes it is an infringement on the second, so is not being able to post porn on national TV against the 1st. Those are items we are going to have to live with. I have seen it in the past and we will see it again our Zealot ways will cost us in the end. It is much wiser approach to work from within, to convert those afraid of guns to our side by taking one shooting by stating facts from legitimate sources, being out front in a calm stable format. When was the last time you took someone who does not understand shooting?

I admire your Zeal but I feel it in the long run it will do us more harm than good.

There are sites our there that monitor sites like this then use our own words against us as being unstable whack jobs and if you read some of these posts you can see why.

Take it to what ever level you wish but know this, this infringement will stay in place no way around it. that is a fact.

Spoken like a true Obama supporter!

Either the Constitution matters or it does not!

Just what part of "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" do you still not understand?

YouTube - Alan Keyes on the Second Amendment and gun rights
 

rockwerks

New member
Spoken like a true Obama supporter!

Either the Constitution matters or it does not!

Just what part of "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" do you still not understand?

I did not and dont support Obama but do you realize that there are about millions of Americans that do that also believe in the 2nd who do support Obama. I fight the good fights and understand the ones I can not win. Yes it is an infringement but that is the way it is, yes I know WHAT PART DONT YOU INDERSTAND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I understand but am a realist and know that we would only get maybe 10 votes in all of the house to get this repealed.

You do what you feel you need to do to keep the 2nd around and I will do what I do. good luck! I hope you do all you wish in your quest.
 
W

wolfhunter

Guest
~~~ You do not need a class III machine gun. ~~~

Not only do we NEED access to every form of weapon that COULD be used against us, but our founding fathers recognized that need. ANY law that limits the types or quantities of weapons we can own is an excercise in tyranny. The fact that you don't feel the need for the ability to protect your family from a possible tyrranical government at any time shows that the nanny state has properly educated you.
 

Bohemian

New member
Following the unconstitutional 1986 Class III weapons ban... AKA: Firearm Owners Protection ACT of 1986 (What a oxymoron)

Wayne LaPierre of the NRA stated, "Repealing the machine gun amendment...will be a high priority," and promised the NRA's members that the organization would "actively work toward the repeal of the recent machine gun ban and will take all necessary steps to educate the public on the sporting uses and legal ownership of automatic firearms."

I see no continuing efforts by Wayne and or the NRA challenging the
constitutionality or otherwise legality of this amendment...

Moreover, applicable public education aforesaid...

I ask that Wayne keep his word...

Further, your support thereof...

I personally have written every major gun magazine, the NRA, GOA, SAF and my representatives in Washington...

We must hang together or assuredly we shall hang separately. -- Benjamin Franklin .

If we do nothing, we can only say we did nothing -- George Washington

Its time we started giving the Second Amendment the same attention we give the First... Governor Mike Huckabee...
 

rockwerks

New member
~~~ You do not need a class III machine gun. ~~~

Not only do we NEED access to every form of weapon that COULD be used against us, but our founding fathers recognized that need. ANY law that limits the types or quantities of weapons we can own is an excercise in tyranny. The fact that you don't feel the need for the ability to protect your family from a possible tyrranical government at any time shows that the nanny state has properly educated you.

Because I can think for myself and am not paranoid about everything around me? LOL:no: I will protect my family as I always have.
 

rockwerks

New member
Following the unconstitutional 1986 Class III weapons ban... AKA: Firearm Owners Protection ACT of 1986 (What a oxymoron)

Wayne LaPierre of the NRA stated, "Repealing the machine gun amendment...will be a high priority," and promised the NRA's members that the organization would "actively work toward the repeal of the recent machine gun ban and will take all necessary steps to educate the public on the sporting uses and legal ownership of automatic firearms."

I see no continuing efforts by Wayne and or the NRA challenging the
constitutionality or otherwise legality of this amendment...

Moreover, applicable public education aforesaid...

I ask that Wayne keep his word...

Further, your support thereof...

I personally have written every major gun magazine, the NRA, GOA, SAF and my representatives in Washington...

We must hang together or assuredly we shall hang separately. -- Benjamin Franklin .

If we do nothing, we can only say we did nothing -- George Washington

Its time we started giving the Second Amendment the same attention we give the First... Governor Mike Huckabee...


Funny you have a quote here about the 1st, the most abridged amendment we have. LOL

We are hanging together, just separate routes to the same basic objective. You can rant and wave your banner in defiance and I will work to change the minds of others rather than scare them.

I believe my view is best defined by the president who did the most protect our country. Theodore Roosevelt, "walk softly and carry a big stick".......
 

Bohemian

New member
Funny you have a quote here about the 1st, the most abridged amendment we have. LOL

We are hanging together, just separate routes to the same basic objective. You can rant and wave your banner in defiance and I will work to change the minds of others rather than scare them.

I believe my view is best defined by the president who did the most protect our country. Theodore Roosevelt, "walk softly and carry a big stick".......

Interesting that you brought up the President that introduced us to Progressive Politics and the concept of a living Constitution...

I will stick with the ones that got us here...

Jefferson for example...

‘‘No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms"

You go ahead and bring your big stick, keep your head up Obama's keister, and go quietly to the government run indoctrination camps and I will bring my legally owned and obtained machine guns and copy of the Constitution, to the Revolution when WE THE PEOPLE, DECIDE ITS TIME FOR A NEW DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, A NEW AMERICAN TEA PARTY... AND FREEDOM FROM THE TYRANNY OF THE BANKRUPTING USURPER IN THE WHITE HOUSE
 

rockwerks

New member
Interesting that you brought up the President that introduced us to Progressive Politics and the concept of a living Constitution...

I will stick with the ones that got us here...

Jefferson for example...

‘‘No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms"

You go ahead and bring your big stick, keep your head up Obama's keister, and go quietly to the government run indoctrination camps and I will bring my legally owned and obtained machine guns and copy of the Constitution, to the Revolution when WE THE PEOPLE, DECIDE ITS TIME FOR A NEW DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, A NEW AMERICAN TEA PARTY... AND FREEDOM FROM THE BANKRUPTING USURPER IN THE WHITE HOUSE

LOL:no::biggrin::sarcastic:
 

Bohemian

New member
‘‘And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions.’’
— Samuel Adams
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,432
Messages
623,585
Members
74,268
Latest member
zyvaaprilia
Top