TacticalResponse 0 Posted March 15, 2007 Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:hr01022:@@@p Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Deamon 0 Posted March 15, 2007 Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 Craptacular............ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TacticalResponse 0 Posted March 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 Police organizations that now support H.R. 1022 International brotherhood of police officers National sherrifs association National fraternal order of police Major cities chiefs association Police executive reasearch forum police foundation National association of school resourse officers Major counties serrifs association National association of woman law enforcement executives Hispanic American police command officers association National organization of black law enforcement executives National black police association Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Deamon 0 Posted March 15, 2007 Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 So when do we need to start really worrying about the number of cosponsors? I mean I worry now, I right every other day. But is 26 a big number, half of all reps, or is it a drop in the bucket? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Deamon 0 Posted March 15, 2007 Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 Of course the police organisations support this. When this country completes the transformation to a fascist police state it will make it easier to stamp out La Resistance'. Viva La Resistance'!!! OK, all jokes aside, I'm sure there are a lot of really pissed of cops about this. I know a lot of police officers with personal weapons that this would ban. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rocinante 100 Posted March 15, 2007 Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 (edited) you must be thinking Senate when you say 26 is half of all reps since there are two senators per state. I think there are about 400 representatives in the house. probably more since it is based on population. If it ever reaches the floor then we (honest, responsible, patriotic, rights not privilege loving AMERICANS) are screwed. So when do we need to start really worrying about the number of cosponsors? I mean I worry now, I right every other day. But is 26 a big number, half of all reps, or is it a drop in the bucket? Edited March 15, 2007 by rocinante Quote Link to post Share on other sites
marvin42 2 Posted March 15, 2007 Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 wonder how much funding they got for being co sponsors? ... My thoughts on this go along the lines of alcohol, tobacco, & pot. If the govt really wanted to do something healthy/productive ... they have two choices: destroy totally & no tolerance or legallize. Cigarettes are the easiest example. If most people really quit smoking think of the revenue the govt would lose. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Deamon 0 Posted March 15, 2007 Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 you must be thinking Senate when you say 26 is half of all reps since there are two senators per state. I think there are about 400 representatives in the house. probably more since it is based on population. If it ever reaches the floor then we (honest, responsible, patriotic, rights not privilege loving AMERICANS) are screwed. No I was thinking of the house, I just didn't know there were 400. I'm relatively new to being political, and I usually slept in social studies. LOL Quote Link to post Share on other sites
305diver 2 Posted March 15, 2007 Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 (edited) Bath tubs, kill more people annually than Illegal assult riffles. Imagine if the number were ever compared to the numbers of cigarette attributed deaths it would soon seem nigligable... My Reps from Florida Claim to be Against this BS perpretration of rigth violations.. Come on guys, we need to make it known in no uncertain terms that 1022= political Sepuku(suicide) I have a feeling if this thing actually makes it anywhere many innocent freedom loving americans will chose the ultimate sacrifice rather than hand over one of the principals this country was built on.. Are there any letters being written to the co-sponsors (LEO Agencies) we could adapt and send. Or maybe even better a clear, simple, concisse statement consisting of no more than a short paragraph te be delivered via telephone so the tone is not left to speculation and maybe get some fear of backlash into these morons... what say ye LEOs? I salute you and implore youre help!!! It seems to me to be an insult, to allthose who figth to protect what this country stands for, to throw the ideals we revere out the window while they are over seas giving it all, and in no position to even give an opinion since all these highly suspect transactions are conducted in a sneeky manner. Edited March 15, 2007 by 305diver Quote Link to post Share on other sites
greatmoose 4 Posted March 15, 2007 Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 One quick tip, don't bother emailing your reps about this. They treat email from "citizens" as spam. My cousin works for a rep, and she told me the best way to get thier attention is a HANDWRITTEN letter. Just FYI. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Deamon 0 Posted March 15, 2007 Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 I actually had John Cornyn reply to one of my emails. Says he's on our side! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TacticalResponse 0 Posted March 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 (edited) This is 1994 all over again. Most of all the police organizations back then were also supporting the assault weapons ban. I believe that before it left committee in 94 that it had slightly over 100 co-sponsors. Every week the number of democratic co-sponsors grows and with it the number of new anti-gun organizations. When it has enough co-sponsors and organizations behind it, then other politicians outside of congress will step in to support it, including the sections of the media. Edited March 15, 2007 by TacticalResponse Quote Link to post Share on other sites
XD45 7,124 Posted March 15, 2007 Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 It must be remembered that most police chiefs and heads of police organizations are political appointees. That the "organization" or "department" supports the bill only means that a few politicians with badges support it. I have seen several surveys of LEOs that show most guys on the street support gun ownership by law-abiding citizens. That's because they understand that criminals will have guns no matter how many bs laws are passed, so the laws only disarm potential victims. That said... Letters Letters Letters!!!!! Bury every congresscritter in letters! The police organizations don't get to vote on the bill, so don't worry about them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TacticalResponse 0 Posted March 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 I realize that most rank and file police officers do not support H.R. 1022. However much of the public is not aware of that and the media will run crazy with the fact that almost all of the police organizations are behind it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SinistralRifleman 0 Posted March 15, 2007 Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 Call the NRA-ILA. This is the "lobbying arm" of the NRA...they say so on their website. Currently, they have a press release about this bill, with the usual writing about how bad it is, etc. It ends with the standard "contact your Congressman or Congresswoman" line. Nothing, however, about what it is, or is not, doing to help defeat this. Since this may partly/mostly be explained by not wanting to advertise its strategy, it's not surprising. However, in addition to contacting your congressperson, heat needs to be applied to the NRA-ILA to make sure they know that members ARE concerned over this, and you want to know what they are doing about it, etc. NRA-ILA 11250 Waples Mill Road Fairfax, Virginia 22030 800-392-8683 - Grassroots Hotline Unleash the Hounds. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Azrial 1,091 Posted March 15, 2007 Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 The last time the FOP pulled this stuff a lot of the nationals lost their jobs. It is a power play on their parts. The locals will have none of it and protest. Contrary to what most of the Cop Haters think, most police do not want to live in a Police State! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TacticalResponse 0 Posted March 16, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 This countries police unions and organizations supporting H.R. 1022, make our LEO's look as if their against the Second Amendment to America's gun owners. I believe that the rank and file need to do a little house cleaning regarding who their leaders support. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SinistralRifleman 0 Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 HR1022 has 30 Co-sponsors now, 7 of whom are on the House Judiciary Committee where the bill will first be heard. There are 38 Members on the House Judiciary Committee. 22 of them are Democrats. If they vote party line, this thing is getting out of comittee. http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMembership.aspx Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TacticalResponse 0 Posted March 16, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 HR1022 has 30 Co-sponsors now, 7 of whom are on the House Judiciary Committee where the bill will first be heard. There are 38 Members on the House Judiciary Committee. 22 of them are Democrats. If they vote party line, this thing is getting out of comittee. http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMembership.aspx It's only logical that it's going to leave committee for a House vote. When it does if the democrats vote party line it will pass in the House and so much for the new democratic congressmen that said they were pro-gun. When it goes to the Senate it will be interesting to see if those democrats that claimed to be pro-gun before the Fall elections there will vote for it, or wether republicans will filibuster it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GENFOX 0 Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 As a deputy sheriff in V.A. I don`t support this bill in fact quite the opposite I support the right to keep and bear arms. I for one will be contacting my reps in congress and the various organizations to let them know how I feel. I`ve been in law enforcement for ten years(8 in illinois & 2 in virginia) and I`ve never felt more threatened by democRATS than I feel now. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrTuffPaws 2 Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Of course the ones that would fear an armed populace would support this bill. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrTuffPaws 2 Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 It's only logical that it's going to leave committee for a House vote. When it does if the democrats vote party line it will pass in the House and so much for the new democratic congressmen that said they were pro-gun. When it goes to the Senate it will be interesting to see if those democrats that claimed to be pro-gun before the Fall elections there will vote for it, or wether republicans will filibuster it. Let me just say that if this lands on Bush's desk, I have no faith that he will veto it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
beerslurpy 1 Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 No, it's going out of that committee into the rules committee which is not stacked full of anti-gunners but instead stacked full of rural pro gun democrats. You have to understand that: 25 members is still only 1/17th of the house. This even close to ten percent yet. Certainly not a majority. The judiciary committee will pass out any anti-gun bill. It is composed of half anti-gun democrats and half pro-gun republicans. There are 1-2 pro-gun dems on the judiciary committee and 1-2 anti-gun republicans. Basically the anti-gunners have a 1 seat majority on the judiciary comittee. The judiciary is not the only comittee that it can get stuck in, merely the first. Controlling the judiciary is a lot easier than controlling the entire house, which the antigunners certainly do not do. The antigunners also dont control enough seats to stop a progun filibuster in the senate. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TacticalResponse 0 Posted March 16, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 It's only logical that it's going to leave committee for a House vote. When it does if the democrats vote party line it will pass in the House and so much for the new democratic congressmen that said they were pro-gun. When it goes to the Senate it will be interesting to see if those democrats that claimed to be pro-gun before the Fall elections there will vote for it, or wether republicans will filibuster it. Let me just say that if this lands on Bush's desk, I have no faith that he will veto it. When Bush made that statement in 2004 he had a republican congress and not a democratic one. He also had a republican congress that he knew would never send him a 94 AWB reauthorization bill. He said it for political reasons only. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MAAnew 162 Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 lets hope. only time will tell. if this bill doesn't get signed now, it will be signed by the president elected in 08. They are all anti-gun. Our only options now are to buy what we can now before they aren't available. The DC gun case will have a lot to say about future rights of gun owners, but I have very little faith in the USCT. It's only logical that it's going to leave committee for a House vote. When it does if the democrats vote party line it will pass in the House and so much for the new democratic congressmen that said they were pro-gun. When it goes to the Senate it will be interesting to see if those democrats that claimed to be pro-gun before the Fall elections there will vote for it, or wether republicans will filibuster it. Let me just say that if this lands on Bush's desk, I have no faith that he will veto it. When Bush made that statement in 2004 he had a republican congress and not a democratic one. He also had a republican congress that he knew would never send him a 94 AWB reauthorization bill. He said it for political reasons only. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TacticalResponse 0 Posted March 17, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 lets hope. only time will tell. if this bill doesn't get signed now, it will be signed by the president elected in 08. They are all anti-gun. Our only options now are to buy what we can now before they aren't available. The DC gun case will have a lot to say about future rights of gun owners, but I have very little faith in the USCT. It's only logical that it's going to leave committee for a House vote. When it does if the democrats vote party line it will pass in the House and so much for the new democratic congressmen that said they were pro-gun. When it goes to the Senate it will be interesting to see if those democrats that claimed to be pro-gun before the Fall elections there will vote for it, or wether republicans will filibuster it. Let me just say that if this lands on Bush's desk, I have no faith that he will veto it. When Bush made that statement in 2004 he had a republican congress and not a democratic one. He also had a republican congress that he knew would never send him a 94 AWB reauthorization bill. He said it for political reasons only. I have a hard time seeing the SCOTUS giving us back our gun rights that they've been taking from us for over 70 years overnight. Once our government takes our Second Amendment rights away, we don't ever seem to have them returned. The government allowing the 94 AWB to expire was extremely unusual. We can only hope for the best in upcoming court battles concerning this case. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AKOK 4 Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 Police organizations that now support H.R. 1022 International brotherhood of police officers National sherrifs association National fraternal order of police Major cities chiefs association Police executive reasearch forum police foundation National association of school resourse officers Major counties serrifs association National association of woman law enforcement executives Hispanic American police command officers association National organization of black law enforcement executives National black police association Ive supported the National sherrifs association for the past several years with donations , but they will get no more donations from me. I am also writting my local Sheriff explaining as much. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
uzitiger 193 Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 These police organizations sound like DemocRat allies who don't care about the rank and file police officer. When the FOP call me for a donation they'll get an earful from me about their support of this disgusting bill. The minority police organizations only care about 'affirmative action' for their members and will walk in goose steps with other leftist organizations. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
romeo1oscar 1 Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 These police organizations sound like DemocRat allies who don't care about the rank and file police officer. When the FOP call me for a donation they'll get an earful from me about their support of this disgusting bill. The minority police organizations only care about 'affirmative action' for their members and will walk in goose steps with other leftist organizations. It is not wise to support national police organizations, most are anti-gun, especially northern based organizations. It is best to find out what your local police organizations stand for and if beneficial, support them. Most LEO's that I know are pro second ammendment. But, I'm also from the south. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AKOK 4 Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 These police organizations sound like DemocRat allies who don't care about the rank and file police officer. When the FOP call me for a donation they'll get an earful from me about their support of this disgusting bill. The minority police organizations only care about 'affirmative action' for their members and will walk in goose steps with other leftist organizations. It is not wise to support national police organizations, most are anti-gun, especially northern based organizations. It is best to find out what your local police organizations stand for and if beneficial, support them. Most LEO's that I know are pro second ammendment. But, I'm also from the south. The letter of solicitation for the NSA came from my local Sheriff.....To his credit he did sign off on my SBR. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.