A 10-year extension of the assault weapons ban.

[mitommy]

I saw this on Glock Talk and thought to pass it on.

RKBA Alert - new AWB legislation in the Senate

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:s.02498:

Clinton gun ban extension bill S. 2498.

She's trying to slip this in, it didn't have to go through committee, and it is on the senate calendar.

Contact your Senators about this today.

[goldwing2000]

Lenin is a co-sponsor. Imagine that. :roll:

[45 acp]

Contact your Senators about this today.

Michigan Senators are
Carl Levin and Deborah A. Stabenow

Why waste our time they both know how we feel about this and neither one of them give a $hit Hell Levin is even a co sponser of this bill.

We need to do everything we can to get these two out of there.

[goldwing2000]

Yep. You're right.

But I sent my letter anyway.

[Dan]

Levin's office is run by a bunch of jerks. Anytime I call, they don't even ask where I'm from.

And Stab's office isn't much better.

[45 acp]

Yep. You're right.

But I sent my letter anyway.

Ok I sent one also but I dont think even 2 million letters would do and good with Levin but I do feel better after writing it :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[Jim Simmons]

Does anybody know if/when committee hearings or floor debates are scheduled on this bill?

Is there a house version? If so, is it scheduled for action?

[Divegeek]

Jim, there will not be any comittee meetings. Fienstien used some special rule to by pass the comittee process because she knew the thing would be delayed in comittee for months and might not ever get out. So we have to count on the pro-gun senators to either kill it or fillibuster it.

[45 acp]

Jim, there will not be any comittee meetings. Fienstien used some special rule to by pass the comittee process because she knew the thing would be delayed in comittee for months and might not ever get out. So we have to count on the pro-gun senators to either kill it or fillibuster it.

Here is the rule ..........................

6/7/04: AWB renewal now on Senate calendar.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) has once again introduced legislation to renew the so-called "assault weapons" ban. S.2498 was introduced last week, and, by using a "nuclear option" referred to as Rule XIV, has gotten the bill placed on the Senate calendar.

As a Senate educational article on the subject puts it,

"Most bills are routinely referred to the committee with appropriate jurisdiction as soon as they are introduced. But if a Senator plans to introduce a bill and believes that the committee to which it would be referred will be unsympathetic, Rule XIV permits the Senator to bypass the standing committee system altogether and have the bill placed directly on the Calendar of Business, with exactly the same formal status the bill would have if it had been the subject of extensive hearings and exhaustive mark-up meetings in committee."

The article goes on to say that this option is considered a last resort by Senators, because it "undermines the committee system as a whole and because they do not wish to encourage a practice that can be used against their own committees."

So, Sen. Feinstein and her 11 co-sponsors (the usual suspects) have thrown down the gauntlet, and a true showdown is shaping up. Once again, we must contact our Senators, ESPECIALLY those who voted against the AWB renewal amendment several months ago, to stand firm in their opposition to this ill-conceived and proven ineffective idea. Because the AWB renewal has enough votes in the Senate to pass, a filibuster is likely the only way it can be stopped there

The Senators who voted against the recent amendment renewing the ban need our support and encouragement to stand their ground, as it the rhetoric put forth by the anti-gun side will undoubtedly be intense and viscous.

It is unclear when S.2498 will come up for consideration, so let's get busy NOW. You can see how your Senators voted recently on the AWB here. www.awbansunset.com/senate.html You can find your Senators' contact info here. www.senate.gov

www.awbansunset.com/index.html

[Dan]

HR 3831 is the house version. RINO Mike Castle wrote it.

The house version is stuck in committee.

[goldwing2000]

Yep. You're right.

But I sent my letter anyway.
Thank you . . .

. . for contacting me regarding the renewal of the federal assault weapons ban. I appreciate you taking the time to communicate your views with me.

As you know, the assault weapons ban of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 will expire in September, 2004. Senator Dianne Feinstein has introduced the Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act (S.1034), which would reauthorize the ban for 10 more years.

Similarly, Senator Frank Lautenberg has introduced the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003 (S.1431) which would increase the scope of firearms defined as assault weapons, and prevent the federal assault weapons ban from expiring.

Currently, both these bills are pending in the Judiciary Committee, of which I am not a member. I share your concern about protecting second amendment rights and assure you that I will keep your strong views in mind if this important matter should come before the Senate for consideration.

Thank you again for contacting me. Please feel free to do so again if I may ever be of assistance in the future.


Sincerely,
Debbie Stabenow
United States Senator
And my reply:
Senator Stabenow,

Thank you for your reply. While I can appreciate the presence of S.1034 and S.1431, of more immediate concern is S.2498.
S.2498 was introduced last week, and, by using a "nuclear option" referred to as Rule XIV, Senator Feinstein has gotten the bill placed on the Senate calendar.

To reiterate my position, the Federal Assault Weapons ban has done nothing to solve or prevent even a single crime. If an extension is authorized, it will only continue to erode the constitutional rights of American citizens.

Thank you for your diligence.

Kane Vincent
Dearborn Heights, MI

[BigDaddy40]

Contact your Senators about this today.

Michigan Senators are
Carl Levin and Deborah A. Stabenow

Why waste our time they both know how we feel about this and neither one of them give a $hit Hell Levin is even a co sponser of this bill.

We need to do everything we can to get these two out of there.




the liberal bush will sign it also

[sprink]

FWIW, I sent a letter to both Senators.


edit to add: IMNSHO, this will be the barometer to measure the little george and the entire Republican Party by. If the little george puts this off until after the election, he is the &@$t@rd you've been warned about.

[goldwing2000]

Response from Lenin:
Dear Mrs. Vincent:

Thank you for contacting me about the reauthorization of the federal assault weapons ban. I appreciate hearing your views on this matter.

As you know, in 1994, President Bill Clinton signed the Assault Weapons Ban into law. This law banned 19 specific weapons, as well as a number of other weapons incorporating certain design characteristics, including pistol grips, folding stocks, bayonet mounts, and flash suppressors. The law also prohibited the manufacture of semiautomatic weapons that incorporate at least two of these military features and accept a detachable magazine. This law is scheduled to expire on September 13, 2004.

I am a cosponsor of the Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act (S.1034), introduced by Senator Feinstein (D-CA) on May 8, 2003. This bill would reauthorize this critical piece of gun safety legislation. If the law is not reauthorized, the production of assault weapons in the U.S. could legally resume. Restarting the production of these weapons will increase their number and availability, and I believe lead to an increase in gun crimes committed with assault weapons. Despite both the support of President Bush and a bipartisan majority of the Senate, the House has not yet taken any action to reauthorize the assault weapons ban.

Thanks again for writing.

Sincerely,
Carl Levin

I'm not going to bother with a rebuttal.

[BigDaddy40]

Response from Lenin:
Dear Mrs. Vincent:

Thank you for contacting me about the reauthorization of the federal assault weapons ban. I appreciate hearing your views on this matter.

As you know, in 1994, President Bill Clinton signed the Assault Weapons Ban into law. This law banned 19 specific weapons, as well as a number of other weapons incorporating certain design characteristics, including pistol grips, folding stocks, bayonet mounts, and flash suppressors. The law also prohibited the manufacture of semiautomatic weapons that incorporate at least two of these military features and accept a detachable magazine. This law is scheduled to expire on September 13, 2004.

I am a cosponsor of the Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act (S.1034), introduced by Senator Feinstein (D-CA) on May 8, 2003. This bill would reauthorize this critical piece of gun safety legislation. If the law is not reauthorized, the production of assault weapons in the U.S. could legally resume. Restarting the production of these weapons will increase their number and availability, and I believe lead to an increase in gun crimes committed with assault weapons. Despite both the support of President Bush and a bipartisan majority of the Senate, the House has not yet taken any action to reauthorize the assault weapons ban.

Thanks again for writing.

Sincerely,
Carl Levin

I'm not going to bother with a rebuttal.




it's amazing that there are people who've actually voted for this retard

[keyjockey]

it's amazing that there are people who've actually voted for this retard


And continue to vote for him.....again and again and again..... :evil:

[Dan]

At least you got a response. Lenin doesn't send me anything.

I wish that jerk would retire.

[bluethunder]

Yep,. a very nice reply you got from Lennin, Mrs. Vincent :roll: What a f*cking idiot!

[AimHigh]

As far as Bush signing the legislation, let's remember that 63% of GUN OWNERS favor the AWB, according to polls. So, if the number of GOs want this legislation to pass, what's a president to do. He won't sign it, I don't believe. The House will stall it. It won't get to his desk. That's my prediction.

[Fred Mager]

I rather doubt this will get to Bush's desk and if it does he will find some public excuse not to sign it. Reason...Bush is in a tough fight to keep his job. Those who favor the extension of the AWB wont vote for Bush to begin with so there's nothing to lose here. Those who want the AWB to sunset, us, are going to be very angry if he does sign the bill and he really needs our votes. If he were way ahead of Kerry and could afford to lose our votes and win there might be some danger he might sign it but such is not the case. If the bill can be stalled until after the election or if it is reintroduced then there is cause for worry. If the bill sunsets and there are no "drive by bayonettings" for about 5 months or so I believe the public will lose interest in any extension.

[BigDaddy40]

As far as Bush signing the legislation, let's remember that 63% of GUN OWNERS favor the AWB, according to polls. So, if the number of GOs want this legislation to pass, what's a president to do. He won't sign it, I don't believe. The House will stall it. It won't get to his desk. That's my prediction.



what's a president to do??????? uphold his oath of office and actually follow the damn constitution!

who cares what the polls say? you actually believe any of them are accurate?

this is why we have a constitution. to limit the reach of the government

[AimHigh]

Well , gee, why don't 63% of GUN OWNERS know we have a constitution?

[WhoIsJohnGalt]

Because the N.E.A. and their handiwork is paying off.
Ask your kid what they learned in History class.
There ARE NO History classes any longer.
Besides, most people are too godamm lazy to bother to learn anything on their own.
Who won the game? Get me another beer. Life is great. :x

[M1911A1]

Besides, most people are too godamm lazy to bother to learn anything on their own.
Who won the game? Get me another beer. Life is great. :x

Bread and Circuses...

[BigDaddy40]

Well , gee, why don't 63% of GUN OWNERS know we have a constitution?



how do you know they don't know?

my point was, that it doesn't matter what 63% of ANY group says, it's what the constitution says that matters.

you'd do well to note that we live in a republic, not a democracy

[WhoIsJohnGalt]

"you'd do well to note that we live in a republic, not a democracy"

Yeah, I'd like to see the poll results of how many know THAT! :?

[SteveS]

Because the N.E.A. and their handiwork is paying off.
Ask your kid what they learned in History class.
There ARE NO History classes any longer.
Besides, most people are too godamm lazy to bother to learn anything on their own.

As much as I don't like the NEA, I wouldn't blame them for the lack of history classes, since they don't mandate what classes are taught, but rahter the state does. The last part of your quate says it all. Not many people are interested in learning history. Ask most kids what their least favorite subject is and they will say history.

[goldwing2000]

That's true. I've learned more history as an adult than I ever did as a kid.

[Jim Simmons]

Actually, the fault belongs to those (on ALL sides of the political spectrum) who want history books to comply with their political views on history. The biggest offenders are the state history curriculum committees of the states of Texas and California.

Texicans want their history books to include inspiring stories of What Made America Great. Manifest Destiny, Leadership in a Free World; The Aresenal of Democracy; all that stuff.

Californian want their history books to be politically correct, and examine all the ills of American life. The ill-treatment (and illegal abuse of) Indian rights, and American violation of treaties. American Imperialism. The Abuses of Capitalism. The shortcomings of the civil rights struggles, and How Far We Have to Go. Handwringing over the Internment of Americans of Japanese descent during WWII. How we should never have been involved in Vietnam. How wrong our decision-making has been in the Middle East.

When history text writers finish with books that satisfy all these folks, the books say nothing, and what they say, is so vague and so cursory, that it is meaningless. The learn that the Constitution was signed in 1787; but very little about what took place between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. They learn the names of some of the battles of the Civil War, but history teachers are loath to discuss the causes of the civil war (and when they do, there's only one: slavery.) I have recently read an American history book from one of the premiere publishers of schoolbooks, and it's scandelous. As a historian myself, I'd be embarrassed to put my name to some of the drivel that passes for primary school history.

History is about what IS, about what WAS, and to a lesser extent, about WHY it was the way it was. I can't abide by folks who disapprove of history that doesn't jibe with their political outlook, or who allow contemporary sensibilities to prevent examination of historical issues. And I'm talking about all sides of the spectrum.

Conservatives don't want to address the question of whether Truman had alternatives other than dropping the Hiroshima/Nagasaki atom bombs. (He did; but estimates say an invasion of Japan a la D-Day could have cost another 100,000 Allied casualties). They don't want to address whether the US violated treaties it signed with various Indian nations (It did, and there's no getting around it.) Liberals want to focus on the "evils" of American society -- capitalism; freedom of expression, including intolerant expression, violence, imperialism, without exploring the sweep and grandeur of what has been accomplished.

When my Derek starts learning history, it will be at home, long before they touch on it at school. And when the history at school doesn't mesh with what he'll learn from his mother and me, we'll explain his duty to regurgitate what he's learned at school, and then allow him the freedom to explore what -- if anything -- he wants to explore, on his own.

Okay, I'm getting off my soap box now.

[keyjockey]

And a fine soap box it is.

Well written.

[WhoIsJohnGalt]

Don't underestimate the reach and control of that UNION. The Monolithic N.E.A. plays a key role in making and carrying out our national and state educational policies. The N.E.A. actually employs more full time, paid political operatives than the Democratic and Republican parties combined.

http://www.heartland.org/pdf/21804t.pdf

[SteveS]

I would never underestimate the NEA, or any other large union or lobbying group. OTOH, I would still place the blame on state history curriculum committees and local curriculum committees, since these are the people that pick the books and decide what is taught. Most local committees are made up of teachers, administrators and parents. The NEA certainly has a presence, but not all teachers support the NEA's positions. My wife, as a teacher, gets the NEA magazine and I can tell you that she has never read it. It goes directly from the mailbox to the garbage. She has never promoted NEA doctrine on any of the committees she has sat on.

As for what happens on the state level, I don't honestly know. Parents who want to influence the history book selection should get involved in the process. Unfortunately, most textbooks I have seen are not very good.

History is large and complicated subject and classes have to prioritize what they want to teach. I love history and, despite having read hundreds of books on all sorts of areas, know that there is a lot I do not know. I don't know how I would develop a curriculum and what I would include.

[Jim Simmons]

I don't know how I would develop a curriculum and what I would include.

Here's part of the syllabus for Jim Simmons' 7th grade American History class. This is off the cuff, and I invite suggestion. Let's do this! :D

I. Prelude to Liberty

Readings include PARTS OF
Locke, 2 Treatises of Government; Tom Paine, Common Sense. Virginia Declarations of Liberties. Various broadheads of Benjamin Franklin and the brothers Adams (John and especially Samuel.)

George Washington, A Call to Arms; Longfellow, the Midnight Ride of Paul Revere; The Declaration of Independence

II. The birth of our American Nation

Articles of Confederation
Rosemary Vest's Essay on Shay's Rebellion
Thomas Jefferson's Letters: four that he sent during the deliberations of the Constitutional convention.
Federalist Papers #13, 46.
One or two of the Anti-Federalist Papers.

The Anti-Sedition Act
Marbury v. Madison (yes, I kow some of you don't like it; deal with it. It's part of the fabric of our society.)
Washington's Farewell Address

Benjamin Franklin's letters regarding the Louisiana purchase.
Essays on the growth of the nation.

The War of 1812. I don't know any good texts on that subject.

III. Prelude to Civil War

Calhoun: A Disquisition on Government
The Lincoln/Stephens debates
Essays on admission of western states.
The Dred Scott decision

IV. Civil War

V. The Aftermath of the War: Healing a Broken Nation

VI. Western Expansion and Manifest Destiny

VII. American "Imperialism" Relations with the Outside World

VIII. Industry, Technology, and the Rise of Capitalism

IX. The New Century: Prelude to Global Conflict
[to be continued.]

[WhoIsJohnGalt]

I'd be willing to wager that a good 80%+ of today's public school graduates are clueless regarding those works and events. :cry:
The result of a coordinated informational blackout effort by local school boards nationwide?

[Kimber45]

I would include de Tocqueville's Democracy in America

[taurus92]

Add the "Savage wars of peace"

All those nation builing conflicts that have never been discussed in history class. Barbarry pirates, central america, hawaii, south pacific and so on. Amazing how many times we have been in these places and yet students never hear of them.

[yengese]

as far as the war of 1812 in the syllabus, didn't Teddy Roosevelt write a huge book on the subject?
Perhaps excerpts from John Lehman's "On Seas of Glory" also
Just my 2 cents :D

[J 92 Brigadier]

Big Daddy 40 said: it's amazing that there are people who've actually voted for this retard These are not normal people, they're mind numb, robotic, flock of sheep like, Michael Moore loving, Bush hating, Democrats.

[WhoIsJohnGalt]

The are "Hateriots"

[Godfather JAM]

you got that right !


Because the N.E.A. and their handiwork is paying off.
Ask your kid what they learned in History class.
There ARE NO History classes any longer.
Besides, most people are too godamm lazy to bother to learn anything on their own.
Who won the game? Get me another beer. Life is great. :x

[BigDaddy40]

Big Daddy 40 said: it's amazing that there are people who've actually voted for this retard These are not normal people, they're mind numb, robotic, flock of sheep like, Michael Moore loving, Bush hating, Democrats.




i agree with all of it except the bush hating thing being equated to demonrats.

i don't like bush and i'm as far to the right of a demonrat that you can get :)