For you gun owners

[A Snake]

Please send this to everybody on your list... this is Obama gun control by secrecy.
Very Important for you to be aware of a new bill HR 45 introduced into the House.
This is the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sale Act of 2009....
We just learned yesterday about this on the Peter Boyles radio program.
Even gun shop owners didn't know about this because it is flying under the radar.
To find out about this - go to any government website and type in HR 45 or Google HR 45 Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sales Act of 2009. You will get all the information.
Basically this would make it illegal to own a firearm - any rifle with a clip or ANY pistol unless:
It is registered, You are fingerprinted, You supply a current Driver's License
You supply your Social Security #
You will submit to a physical & mental evaluation at any time of their choosing
Each update - change or ownership through private or public sale must be reported and costs $25 - Failure to do so you automatically lose the right to own a firearm and are subject up to a year in jail.
There is a child provision clause on page 16 section 305 stating a child-access provision. Gun must be locked and inaccessible to any child under 18.
They would have the right to come and inspect that you are storing your gun safely away from accessibility to children and fine is punishable for up to 5 yrs. in prison.
If you think this is a joke - go to the website and take your pick of many options to read this It is long and lengthy. But, more and more people are becoming aware of this. Pass the word along. Any hunters in your family - pass this along.
Peter Boyles is on this and having guests. Listen to him on KHOW 630 a.m. in the morning. He suggests the best way to fight this is to tell all your friends about it and "spring into action". Also he suggests we all join a pro-gun group like the Colorado Rifle Association, hunting associations, gun clubs and especially the NRA.
This is just a "termite" approach to complete confiscation of guns and disarming of our society to the point we have no defense - chip away a little here and there until the goal is accomplished before anyone realizes it. (Did Obama promise transparency? It seems his motives are more and more transparent while his methods are hidden in back rooms.)
This is one to act on whether you own a gun or not.
If you take my gun, only the criminals will have one to use against me. HR 45 only makes me/us less safe. After working with convicts for 26 years I know this bill, if passed, would make them happy and in less danger from their victims.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.45:
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/show
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-45
Please.. copy and send this out to EVERYONE in the USA .

 

[Tim M]

I don't agree with everything in this bill, I do however agree with the registration process. To be devil's advocate here, other than entertainment, what is the purpose of assault rifles? This question come's maybe from my misunderstanding which is totally from a hunter's point of view. I've hunted with many rifles, none of which contained a clip or was fully automatic. Pistols, I realize their value, so I agree with the current registration process, and if all that changes is fingrprinting and SSN, then so be it. BUT, searches of your home to see if you are safeguarding your weapons seems a little much (Kerry would be in a little trouble with that one, however, he doesn't have children in the house, so does it apply?) Everyone that I know that owns multiple guns, pistols or rifles, have them in a safe or gun cabinet. I see the point of the post, give an inch, they take a mile, and the law abiding gun owners are the one's that suffer. Call me clueless I guess.

 

[Kerry & Kathy]

Registration is only the first step to confiscation...

I don't agree with everything in this bill, I do however agree with the registration process. To be devil's advocate here, other than entertainment, what is the purpose of assault rifles? This question comes maybe from my misunderstanding which is totally from a hunter's point of view. I've hunted with many rifles, none of which contained a clip or was fully automatic. Call me clueless I guess.

Yes...sorry to say...and I say this as a friend…you are clueless. As is most of the American public.

An assault rifle is a medium powered round, magazine fed which is SELECT FIRE. This means it can fire one shot with one pull of the trigger...OR...it can fire multiple shots with one pull of the trigger. Most refer to this second trait as fully automatic fire. It is, as a result, classified as a machine gun.

Since 1934 there have been severe restrictions placed on civilian ownership of fully automatic weapons. As a result, there have been assault weapon "look alikes" sold by manufacturers which have the appearance of an assault rifle, but lack the key ingredient that makes a true assault rifle. To wit: the ability to fire multiple shots with one pull of the trigger. These rifles instead fire only ONE shot with ONE pull of the trigger. These are no different in function than any semi-automatic hunting rifle.

However liberals in the democratic and republican parties along with 99% of the news media fail to explain this distinct difference, choosing instead to refer to all of these legal semi-automatic rifles as "assault rifles" when they are NOT. They DO NOT function as assault rifles. They only share the outward physical appearance. The public has been lied to on this issue for so long that now...it is accepted as truth.

The media describes these evil black weapons as being much too powerful to be allowed in civilian hands. What they don't tell you is that most of these weapons shoot an intermediate power cartridge. For example the AK-47 shoots a 7.62 x 39 Russian round that is ballistically equivalent to a Winchester lever action 30-30. The most prolific hunting rifle and cartridge for the past 150 years.

A Winchester Lever Action , which at it’s introduction…was a MILITARY issued arm and later gravitated into civilian ownership. Not at all dissimilar to the military M16 and its civilian counterpart… the semi automatic AR15.

The news media also does not tell you that any 30-06 bolt action hunting rifle from Winchester or Remington is dramatically more powerful than an AK47 round or a .556mm round from a AR15. A .300 Winchester Magnum or 7mm Remington Magnum hunting cartridge is substantially more powerful with longer range lethality than ANY assault rifle cartridge or one of the semi automatic look alike rifles.

From a functional standpoint a semi automatic AK or AR15 is no different than a Browning or Remington or Ruger semi automatic hunting rifle. They ALL fire one shot with one pull of the trigger. They ALL have detachable magazines of multiple capacities. The difference is the AK and AR look alikes have "evil features" such as ergonomically improved "pistol grips" and muzzle brakes to better control recoil. The primary functional difference is that the Browning, Remington and Ruger can shoot far more powerful hunting rifle cartridges.

In addition, the second amendment, recently reaffirmed by the Supreme Court makes no reference to the right to bear "hunting " or "sporting" arms. It makes no such distinction because the intent was to allow normal citizens the capability to carry sufficient small arms to repel or replace an out of control government….by force , if necessary. In that role a true assault rifle has a very legitimate purpose in protecting individual citizen rights. It is a last resort solution when all other options have failed.

The current efforts to "register" weapons is purported to be a needed step to trace weapons in illegal activities. It is a dodge from the real purpose. History shows that firearms registration is rarely if ever successful in solving gun related crimes. Registration is nothing more than a first step to enable confiscation at a later date. Those who do not study history and appreciate this fact are asleep at the wheel.

A good article in the Washington Post recently pointed this out.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/13/39we-want-them-registered39/

An additional history lesson which outlines registration as a preparatory step to confiscation is here:

http://www.jpfo.org/pdf02/genocide-chart.pdf


Think long and hard before believing that gun registration is "acceptable" and that so called "assault rifles" are any different in function than the hunting rifles in your closet.

As an example….This is the rifle I used to kill an 8 pt. Buck this past season. It is a legal hunting rifle in the state of Missouri. It is semi-automatic...NOT fully automatic as is a true "assault rifle". Yet it is exactly the type of weapon some in our government want to register, control and ultimately confiscate.

In 2002 I shot at Camp Perry Ohio at the National Service Rifle Matches. I shot an AR15. Today it has become the #1 rifle in National Service Rifle Completion. In prepared condition it is more accurate than any past US Military service rifle.

I just returned from a Tactical Rifle Shooting Match in North Carolina where I successfully competed, using the rifle pictured above and one other, against a group of shooters that included current and ex US Ranger Special Forces personnel, Iraq and Afghanistan combat veterans and current SWAT law enforcement officers.

Note my five shot group from the 100yd prone position. How many of your off the shelf hunting rifles provide this level of accuracy with factory loaded ammunition? Not many. That is one of the major advantages of the AR platform over conventional rifles.

http://s157.photobucket.com/albums/t51/owenslee/68 Match/?albumview=slideshow

These types of AR15 "assault rifle" look alike firearms are the #1 selling firearm in the US. They are used in national competition all over the country. They are used for deer hunting, controlling varmints and predators, as well as home protection. They are popular because they are superior to conventional wood stocked rifles in ergonomics, accuracy potential, optic platforms and overall versatility and the ability to tailor a specific weapon to the needs of the shooter. They are a technological extension of past hunting rifles. Yet because of their appearance...not function...they are deemed "unnecessary"...or having no useful purpose. Those who make such claims have never owned, or hunted, or competed with such weapons. Were they to do so…their opinions would change….quickly.

I have weapons that are conventional wood stock semi automatic and bolt action rifles as well as ex military rifles going back to the 1870's. Yet the rifles I USE are "assault rifle" look alikes...for one basic reason. They are superior in nearly any judgment criteria and perform multiple functions more efficiently than more conventional rifles.

The best way to better understand...is to go shoot one. Become familiar with its features and benefits. The net result is you will become less willing to accept the misinformation and outright lies spread by politicians and our news media in their effort’s to neuter the American Public.

Just my $.02…

Kerry

 

[TOM KEISER]

Well said Kerry. Nice 100yd. group!

 

[Tim M]

That is an awesome 100yd group. Thanks for the info. I guess it's like anything else that you truely care about. Your platform is obviously gun control which you know a lot about and can educate clueless folks like me. I know little about it, because on the surface, it appears that it doesn't affect me personally. I guess, and my kid's tell me this all the time, that I trust government and the overseers to make the right judgements. I'm glad there are people like you to stand up for these rights. I've never taken an interest in law making because I don't know who to believe. Each side has it's own agenda. I know, I know, the best way to care for that confusion is to read it myself. I'm in the I'd rather listen club than read.

Again, thanks for the insight. And proves how little I do know about this subject matter. Keep up the good fight!

 

[Kerry & Kathy]

Tim,

I am very glad that you have a different viewpoint after being exposed to a little more detailed information. Unfortunately you epitomize a large number of shooters and sportsmen...even long time NRA members who do not appreciate how much their future gun rights are in jeopardy because they do not question what they are told by politicians and the mainstream media. They take what is posted in newspapers and stated on TV as fact...when it is often so far from factual that the only explanation is an active intent to mislead the public and redirect public opinion to support an agenda.

I used to believe what I heard on TV too...until I came home from VN on emergency leave in 1970 and heard Nixon say we were not conducting missions in Laos and Cambodia...after I had just reviewed after action photos from bombings we had conducted...in Laos. So much for any president telling the truth to the American public. I think I permanently lost my political naiveté...that day. Every president since has lied and every time I hear any politician...I take what is said with 98% critical cynicism. Not that I choose to or want to...but because there is no other realistic option.

The old joke of "how do you know a politician is lying....? His lips are moving..." is so close to reality today that the joke no longer carries any humor.

I wish I could return to an earlier time when I could trust our government and politicians to do the right thing...but experience will no longer allow it. Integrity and common sense in government has become an oxymoron.

All we can do as conscientious citizens is try to better inform others so that they don't drink the "koolaid" of populism and can make better informed decisions at the voting box.

Kerry

 

[A Snake]

Kerry the Laos/Cambodia bit caught my attention. In the fall of 1966 Operation Attleboro was conducted on the Cambodia border. We flew for an hour from our base camp to get there...flying in Huey's at 100knots for an hour + put us well into Cambodia. In the debriefing,we were told we weren't really there. Go figure.
Mike

 

[Tim M]

In regards to military ops, isn't it best that the less I know(general public) the better?

 

[Kerry & Kathy]

In regards to military ops, isn't it best that the less I know(general public) the better?

Before the OP...YES.
After the OP...NO

Case in Point: Re: Hostage Rescue of Ship Captain.

"Having spoken to some SEAL pals in Virginia Beach yesterday and asking why this thing dragged out for four days, I got the following:

1. The President wouldn't authorize the Development Group/Naval Surface Warfare Command SEAL teams on the scene for 36 hours which went directly against the On-Scene Commander's (OSC) recommendation.

2. Once they arrived, the President imposed restrictions on their Rules of Engagement (ROE) so they couldn't do anything unless the hostage's life was in "imminent" danger.

3. The first time the hostage jumped, the SEALS had the pirates all sighted in, but could not fire due to ROE restrictions.


4. When the navy Rubber Inflatable Boat (RIB) came under fire as it approached with supplies, no fire was returned due to ROE restrictions. As the pirates were shooting at the RIB, they were exposed and the SEALS had them all dialed in.


5. The President specifically denied two rescue plans developed by the Bainbridge Captain and SEAL teams.


6. Bainbridge Captain and SEAL team Commander finally decided that they have the Operational Area and OSC authority to solely determine risk to hostage. 4 hours later there were three dead pirates.


Philips' first leap into the warm, dark water of the Indian Ocean hadn't worked out as well. With the Bainbridge in range and a rescue by his country's Navy possible, Philips threw himself off of his lifeboat prison, enabling Navy shooters on board the destroyer a clear shot at his captors - and none was taken.

The guidance from National Command Authority - the president of the United States - had been clear: a peaceful solution was the only acceptable outcome to this standoff unless the hostage's life was in clear, extreme danger.

The next day, a small Navy boat approaching the floating raft was fired on by the Somali pirates - and again no fire was returned and no pirates killed. This was again due to the cautious stance assumed by Navy personnel thanks to the combination of a lack of clear guidance from Washington and a mandate from the commander in chief's staff that any outcome other than a "peaceful solution" would be acceptable.

After taking fire from the Somali kidnappers again Saturday night, the on-scene-commander decided he'd had enough.

Keeping his authority to act in the case of a clear and present danger to the hostage's life and having heard nothing from Washington since yet another request to mount a rescue operation had been denied the day before, the Navy officer - unnamed in all media reports to date - decided the AK47 one captor had leveled at Philips' back was a threat to the hostage's life and ordered the NSWC team to take their shots.

Three rounds downrange later, all three brigands became enemy KIA and Philips was safe.

There is upside, downside, and spin side to the series of events over the last week that culminated in yesterday's dramatic rescue of an American hostage.

Almost immediately following word of the rescue, the Obama administration and its supporters claimed victory against pirates in the Indian Ocean and [1] declared that the dramatic end to the standoff put paid to questions of the inexperienced president's toughness and decisiveness.

Despite the Obama administration's attempt to spin yesterday's success as a result of bold, decisive leadership by the inexperienced president, the reality is nothing of the sort.


What should have been a standoff lasting only hours - as long as it took the USS Bainbridge and its team of NSWC operators to steam to the location - became an embarrassing four day and counting standoff between a ragtag handful of criminals with rifles and a U.S. Navy warship."

This is a perfect example of a Spec Op that should be blasted in front of every American citizen to illustrate how our "commander in chief" is both incompetent yet willing to manipulate the facts to convince the public that he has superior leadership skills. When he hasn't a clue how to lead. Had it not been for the Bainbridge Captain and SEAL team Commander on site...who made the correct command decision...we would still be in a hostage situation or worse.

Kerry