"Encoded Ammunition" (Bullet and Cartridge Case Serialization) Means:
* Forfeiture of Currently-Owned Ammunition
* A Separate Registration for Every Box of New Ammunition
* Outrageously Expensive Ammunition Costs for Police & Private Citizens Alike
*A Waste of Taxpayer Money, Better Spent on Traditional Police Programs
In 2007, the sponsor of "encoded ammunition" legislation in Maryland urged lawmakers across the country to introduce the same kind of legislation in their states. The bill would require ammunition manufacturers to engrave a serial number on "the base of the bullet and the inside of the cartridge casing of each round" of ammunition for popular sporting caliber center-fire rifles, all center-fire pistols, all .22 rimfire rifles and pistols, and all 12 gauge shotguns.
Reasons to Strenuously Oppose This Legislation:
People would be required to forfeit all personally-owned non-encoded ammunition. After a certain date, it would be illegal to possess non-encoded ammunition. Gun owners possess hundreds of millions of rounds of ammunition for target shooting, hunting and personal protection. Consider that American manufacturers produce 8 billion rounds each year.
Reloading (re-using cartridge cases multiple times) would be abolished. There would be no way to correspond serial numbers on cartridge cases, and different sets and quantities of bullets.
People would be required to separately register every box of "encoded ammunition." This information would be supplied to the police. Most states do not even require registration of guns. Each box of ammunition would have a unique serial number, thus a separate registration.
Private citizens would have to maintain records, if they sold ammunition to anyone, including family members or friends.
The cost of ammunition would soar, for police and private citizens alike. The Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturing Institute estimates it would take three weeks to produce ammunition currently produced in a single day. For reason of cost, manufacturers would produce only ultra-expensive encoded ammunition, which police would have to buy, just like everyone else.
A tax of five cents a round would be imposed on private citizens, not only upon initial sale, but every time the ammunition changes hands thereafter.
Shotgun ammunition cannot be engraved. Shotgun pellets are too small to be individually engraved. Shotgun cartridge cases are made of plastic, which would be difficult to engrave.
Criminals could beat the system. A large percentage of criminals' ammunition (and guns) is stolen. Criminals could also collect ammunition cases from shooting ranges, and reload them with molten lead bullets made without serial numbers.
Congress eliminated a similar requirement in the 1980s, because there was no law enforcement benefit. Federal law had required purchasers of handgun ammunition to sign a ledger, but Congress repealed that requirement in 1983 (.22 rimfire) and 1986 (center-fire handguns), because it burdened purchasers, vendors and police, with no law enforcement benefit.
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=227
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Statement By NRA Regarding the Organization of American States Treaty on Firearms Trafficking
The NRA is well aware of the proposed Organization of American States treaty on firearms trafficking, known by its Spanish initials as CIFTA. The NRA monitored the development of this treaty from its earliest days, but contrary to news reports today, the NRA did not "participate" at the meeting where the treaty was approved.
The treaty does include language suggesting that it is not intended to restrict "lawful ownership and use" of firearms.
Despite those words, the NRA knows that anti-gun advocates will still try to use this treaty to attack gun ownership in the U.S. Therefore, the NRA will continue to vigorously oppose any international effort to restrict the constitutional rights of law-abiding American gun owners.
The treaty does include language suggesting that it is not intended to restrict "lawful ownership and use" of firearms.
Despite those words, the NRA knows that anti-gun advocates will still try to use this treaty to attack gun ownership in the U.S. Therefore, the NRA will continue to vigorously oppose any international effort to restrict the constitutional rights of law-abiding American gun owners.
Big Brother's New Target: Tracking Firearms
U.S. Representative Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) recently sponsored H.R. 45, also known as "Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act." The bill is, at its core and as its name implies, a licensing and registration scheme.
The measure calls for all handgun owners to submit to the federal government an application that shall include, among many other things: a photo; an address; a thumbprint; a completed, written firearm safety test; private mental health records; and a fee. And those are only some of the requirements to be licensed!
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=4329
Additionally, the bill would make it illegal to transfer ownership of a "qualifying firearm" to anyone who is not a licensed gun dealer or collector (with very few exceptions), and would require "qualifying firearm" owners to report all transfers to the attorney general's database. It would also be illegal for a licensed gun owner to fail to record a gun loss or theft within 72 hours, or fail to report a change of address within 60 days. Further, if a minor obtains a firearm and injures someone with it, the owner of the firearm may face a multiple-year jail sentence.
H.R. 45 is essentially a reintroduction of H.R. 2666, which Rush introduced in 2007. H.R. 2666 contained much of the same language as H.R. 45, and was co-sponsored by several well-known anti-gun legislators--including Barack Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel. H.R. 45 currently has no co-sponsors.
Rest assured that NRA-ILA will continue to monitor this bill closely, and will keep you informed of any developments if they materialize.
Clearing Up the Rumors: The Truth About The "Gun Tax Bill"
Over the past few months, NRA-ILA has received hundreds of e-mails warning us about "SB-2099," a bill that would supposedly require you to report all your guns on your income tax return every April 15.
Like many rumors, there's just a grain of truth to this one. Someone's recycling an old alert, which wasn't even very accurate when it was new.
There actually was a U.S. Senate bill with that number that would have taxed handguns -- nine years ago. It was introduced by anti-gun Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), and it would have included handguns under the National Firearms Act's tax and registration scheme. This has nothing to do with anyone's Form 1040, of course.
Fortunately, S. 2099 disappeared without any action by the Senate, back when Bill Clinton was still in the White House. We reported about it back then, just as we report about new anti-gun bills every week. Now, it's time for gun owners to drop this old distraction and focus on the real threats at hand.
To read a story by NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox on this, please go to:
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=5098
Like many rumors, there's just a grain of truth to this one. Someone's recycling an old alert, which wasn't even very accurate when it was new.
There actually was a U.S. Senate bill with that number that would have taxed handguns -- nine years ago. It was introduced by anti-gun Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), and it would have included handguns under the National Firearms Act's tax and registration scheme. This has nothing to do with anyone's Form 1040, of course.
Fortunately, S. 2099 disappeared without any action by the Senate, back when Bill Clinton was still in the White House. We reported about it back then, just as we report about new anti-gun bills every week. Now, it's time for gun owners to drop this old distraction and focus on the real threats at hand.
To read a story by NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox on this, please go to:
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=5098
Monday, March 22, 2010
Hope and Change...
Soooo, how's that hopey, changie thing working out for ya NOW???
It's time that everyone asked themselves this question - "HOW FAR AM I WILLING TO GO TO PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION FROM ALL EMEMIES, FOREIGN AND "DOMESTIC"???? .............. AMERICA - If you aren't awake now, just keep sleeping, we don't want you voting in November anyhow!!!!
It's time that everyone asked themselves this question - "HOW FAR AM I WILLING TO GO TO PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION FROM ALL EMEMIES, FOREIGN AND "DOMESTIC"???? .............. AMERICA - If you aren't awake now, just keep sleeping, we don't want you voting in November anyhow!!!!
Dems fire on Ft. Sumter (OneNewsNow.com)
Dems fire on Ft. Sumter (OneNewsNow.com)
When the one time pro-life Democrat Bart Stupak was stammering through his bizarre press conference announcing that he and his cohorts would support ObamaCare, a friend texted me, "That's all she wrote." I fired back, "Hardly."
Here's why: if I asked you to name a famous battle of the American Civil War, what would you say? Most would name Gettysburg, some might mention Bull Run, Antietam, Shiloh, or even Sherman's March to the Sea. But left off most everyone's list would be the battle that started it all...the firing on Fort Sumter. That's primarily due to the fact that though it was the sparking event, the skirmish paled in comparison to the back-and-forth drama that would unfold over the next half a decade.
What happened Sunday in the House of Representatives was merely the opening skirmish of a coming war over not just healthcare in America, but abortion, states' rights, and the Constitution itself.
In the days leading up to the vote, several Democrats on Capitol Hill were heard remarking that they just wanted to get this vote behind them and move on with other business. That might have been possible if they would have voted to kill this unconstitutional monstrosity that is now poised to obliterate state economies. But they didn't. Instead, they fired on Fort Sumter.
So where will we see the next offensive in this unfolding war? Most likely the federal courts will take center stage as the embittered states fight back against the betrayal of their sovereignty and the shattering of their budgets.
Here in Indiana, for example, the state has reported that the enactment of ObamaCare will open up the government-subsidized Medicaid system to approximately 500,000 Hoosiers. That means half a million more citizens will be receiving taxpayer-funded healthcare. But who will pay for it? Well, in order to carry off their outrageous lie to the American people that ObamaCare is going to save us money (the hubris behind such a laughable suggestion is impossible to fully grasp), the Democrats have mandated that the states pick up the tab for this Medicaid stampede.
Someone should tell the teachers' unions who foam at the mouth anytime someone mentions funding cuts to the public school system that they ain't seen nothin' yet. When a state like Indiana has to pick up a tab that equals billions of dollars to fund the excessive doctor and hospital visits that will soon be "free" to 500,000 more citizens, does anyone expect not to see drastic cuts in other areas, as well as massive tax increases? Yet teachers unions' continue to support the very Democrats who are forcing this funding Armageddon.
So the states will undoubtedly sue – indeed somewhere between five to ten are already actively pursuing such a strategy. They will ask the federal courts to strike down multiple provisions of ObamaCare, including the blatantly unconstitutional federal mandate that all citizens purchase healthcare. (See related article: Lawsuit awaits Obama's signature on bill)
Even the most left-leaning constitutional law experts have had a hard time coming up with a defense of the individual mandate. About the best they've got is the silly suggestion that such a mandate is permissible under the Commerce Clause. But at the end of the day, they are forced to recognize that if that be the case, the Commerce Clause must be interpreted to give Congress the ability to force anyone to buy anything (next time GM is in trouble, they could just pass a law requiring you to buy a GM vehicle within a year) – a clearly untenable position to anyone who is sane.
A second battle will manifest at the ballot box as Congressional Democrats face the uncomfortable reality that their president and party leadership have made them walk the plank into a sea of furious, motivated citizens. In order to secure enough votes for passage, President Obama promised wary lawmakers that their constituents would forget about this issue come Election Day. That, of course, is preposterous. The vote Sunday only guaranteed an explosion of growth for the Tea Party movement. And it also demonstrated this crystal clear reality: there is a difference between the two political parties...a BIG difference.
Say what you will about past Republican Party indiscretions (and there have been many), but not a single Republican voted for this atrocity (see 219-212 Roll Call vote). In fact, Republicans led a courageous effort to thwart the authoritarian Democrats while offering common-sense alternatives that actually would help lower healthcare costs.
So that's what's coming next. From there, it's too early to tell. Millions of citizens are preparing to engage in civil disobedience to prevent their tax money from being used to pay for abortions (as ObamaCare did, does, and will always allow), several states are reviving the nullification theory, and Republicans are promising a fight to repeal the legislation.
But this much is clear: Sunday's vote was only the beginning. Things are about to get very interesting.
It's time that everyone asked themselves this question - "HOW FAR AM I WILLING TO GO TO PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION FROM ALL EMEMIES, FOREIGN AND "DOMESTIC"???? ..............
AMERICA - If you aren't awake now, just keep sleeping, we don't want you voting in November anyhow!!!!
When the one time pro-life Democrat Bart Stupak was stammering through his bizarre press conference announcing that he and his cohorts would support ObamaCare, a friend texted me, "That's all she wrote." I fired back, "Hardly."
Here's why: if I asked you to name a famous battle of the American Civil War, what would you say? Most would name Gettysburg, some might mention Bull Run, Antietam, Shiloh, or even Sherman's March to the Sea. But left off most everyone's list would be the battle that started it all...the firing on Fort Sumter. That's primarily due to the fact that though it was the sparking event, the skirmish paled in comparison to the back-and-forth drama that would unfold over the next half a decade.
What happened Sunday in the House of Representatives was merely the opening skirmish of a coming war over not just healthcare in America, but abortion, states' rights, and the Constitution itself.
In the days leading up to the vote, several Democrats on Capitol Hill were heard remarking that they just wanted to get this vote behind them and move on with other business. That might have been possible if they would have voted to kill this unconstitutional monstrosity that is now poised to obliterate state economies. But they didn't. Instead, they fired on Fort Sumter.
So where will we see the next offensive in this unfolding war? Most likely the federal courts will take center stage as the embittered states fight back against the betrayal of their sovereignty and the shattering of their budgets.
Here in Indiana, for example, the state has reported that the enactment of ObamaCare will open up the government-subsidized Medicaid system to approximately 500,000 Hoosiers. That means half a million more citizens will be receiving taxpayer-funded healthcare. But who will pay for it? Well, in order to carry off their outrageous lie to the American people that ObamaCare is going to save us money (the hubris behind such a laughable suggestion is impossible to fully grasp), the Democrats have mandated that the states pick up the tab for this Medicaid stampede.
Someone should tell the teachers' unions who foam at the mouth anytime someone mentions funding cuts to the public school system that they ain't seen nothin' yet. When a state like Indiana has to pick up a tab that equals billions of dollars to fund the excessive doctor and hospital visits that will soon be "free" to 500,000 more citizens, does anyone expect not to see drastic cuts in other areas, as well as massive tax increases? Yet teachers unions' continue to support the very Democrats who are forcing this funding Armageddon.
So the states will undoubtedly sue – indeed somewhere between five to ten are already actively pursuing such a strategy. They will ask the federal courts to strike down multiple provisions of ObamaCare, including the blatantly unconstitutional federal mandate that all citizens purchase healthcare. (See related article: Lawsuit awaits Obama's signature on bill)
Even the most left-leaning constitutional law experts have had a hard time coming up with a defense of the individual mandate. About the best they've got is the silly suggestion that such a mandate is permissible under the Commerce Clause. But at the end of the day, they are forced to recognize that if that be the case, the Commerce Clause must be interpreted to give Congress the ability to force anyone to buy anything (next time GM is in trouble, they could just pass a law requiring you to buy a GM vehicle within a year) – a clearly untenable position to anyone who is sane.
A second battle will manifest at the ballot box as Congressional Democrats face the uncomfortable reality that their president and party leadership have made them walk the plank into a sea of furious, motivated citizens. In order to secure enough votes for passage, President Obama promised wary lawmakers that their constituents would forget about this issue come Election Day. That, of course, is preposterous. The vote Sunday only guaranteed an explosion of growth for the Tea Party movement. And it also demonstrated this crystal clear reality: there is a difference between the two political parties...a BIG difference.
Say what you will about past Republican Party indiscretions (and there have been many), but not a single Republican voted for this atrocity (see 219-212 Roll Call vote). In fact, Republicans led a courageous effort to thwart the authoritarian Democrats while offering common-sense alternatives that actually would help lower healthcare costs.
So that's what's coming next. From there, it's too early to tell. Millions of citizens are preparing to engage in civil disobedience to prevent their tax money from being used to pay for abortions (as ObamaCare did, does, and will always allow), several states are reviving the nullification theory, and Republicans are promising a fight to repeal the legislation.
But this much is clear: Sunday's vote was only the beginning. Things are about to get very interesting.
It's time that everyone asked themselves this question - "HOW FAR AM I WILLING TO GO TO PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION FROM ALL EMEMIES, FOREIGN AND "DOMESTIC"???? ..............
AMERICA - If you aren't awake now, just keep sleeping, we don't want you voting in November anyhow!!!!
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
GOD HELP OUR COUNTRY
God help this country.
Let me get this straight......we're trying to pass a health care plan written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it but exempts themselves from it, to be signed by a president that also hasn't read it and who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that's broke. Look at how well the government has run the post office!
What the hell could possibly go wrong????
Let me get this straight......we're trying to pass a health care plan written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it but exempts themselves from it, to be signed by a president that also hasn't read it and who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that's broke. Look at how well the government has run the post office!
What the hell could possibly go wrong????
Friday, March 5, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
