Tell me again how they don't want to come for our guns

Source; https://www.jbs.org/federal-legislative-action-alerts?vvsrc=%2fCamp...

On March 20, 2018, H.R. 5087, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2018, was referred to the House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations. Congressman David Cicilline (D-R.I.) introduced the House AWB bill along with 164 original cosponsors, on February 26, 2018. As of Tuesday, March 27, 2018, the bill boasts a total of 174 cosponsors plus Congressman Cicilline. Like Cicilline, the 174 cosponsors are all Democrats.

Concurrently, a Senate version of the AWB, S.2095, introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), is pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee. As of March 27, Senator Feinstein's AWB bill has 29 cosponsors, all of whom are also Democrats. 

Senator Feinstein's AWB bill would legally define a "semiautomatic assault weapon" as:

A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:

(i) A pistol grip.
(ii) A forward grip.
(iii) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.
(iv) A grenade launcher or rocket launcher.
(v) A barrel shroud.
(vi) A threaded barrel.


The proposed AWB would also make it illegal to manufacture or sell many semiautomatic pistols, semiautomatic shotguns, all shotguns with revolving cylinders, all Kalashnikov or "AK" rifles, various AK pistols, all AR type rifles, and a host of other firearms named in the bill, for private use. 

Furthermore, the bill, like its 1994 predecessor, would also ban all magazines, belts, drums, feed strips, and similar devices that carry more than 10 rounds. It would grandfather existing semiautomatic assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition feeding devices, however with strict regulations as to their storage and transfer. 

It is debated whether the 1994 AWB succeeded in reducing mass shootings for the 10 years that it was in effect, and such a bill, if enacted into law, would constitute a severe infringement on Americans' constitutional right to "keep and bear arms" under the Second Amendment and would lead to more deaths of Americans, not less.

The National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Centers of Disease Control - anti-gun groups - set out to find the most useful gun-control measures by scrutinizing the world's gun-control laws. Both came to the same conclusion: Not one gun-control measure in the world actually reduced violent crime and murders. The National Academy of Sciences issued a 328-page report entitled Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review on gun-control laws in December 2004, with its findings. And across the world, including in this country, when gun-control laws have been passed, violence of all types has gone up. This has been true even in countries where gun ownership has been largely eliminated, including in England and Australia, where crimes such as robberies, rape, and murder climbed precipitously after guns were taken. Too, passing such feel-good measures would almost assuredly mean that measures that would actually help reduce mass shooters, such as allowing school staff to be armed, would likely not be passed, leaving students and others in virtual shooting galleries.

Recognizing the dangers an AWB poses to the Constitution and the adverse affects the bill would have in likely facilitating more of the very types of mass shootings that the bill's proponents seek to prevent, please contact Congress as requested below.

Phone your representative / s (See; 
http://clerk.house.gov/member_info/mcapdir.aspx) and your two senators (See; https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfmand ask them to stand for the Second Amendment by opposing the passage of the Assault Weapons Ban, both H.R. 5087 and S.2095, as well as any other related bills banning any firearms deemed as "assault weapons." It's not too ;late to get them to reverse course on this.
Our rights are being shredded by back stabbing politicians for their benefit not ours. They are negating the Second Amendment and ignoring all the other ones if it suits their agendas. We must do everything in our power to unite against the democrats in November to insure we retain control of Congress, then in the next two years we will need to primary all the RINO's and vote against all the Democrats runninjg in the 2020 elections.

Views: 24

Comment

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

LIGHTER SIDE

 

ALERT ALERT

 Judge Orders Mueller To Prove  Russia Meddled In Election 

Judge Dabney L. Friedrich

A Washington federal judge on Thursday ordered special counsel Robert Mueller’s team to clarify election meddling claims lodged against a Russian company operated by Yevgeny Prigozhin, an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to Bloomberg.

Concord Management and Consulting, LLC. – one of three businesses indicted by Mueller in February along with 13 individuals for election meddling, surprised the special counsel in April when they actually showed up in court to fight the charges. Mueller’s team tried to delay Concord from entering the case, arguing that thee Russian company not been properly served, however Judge Dabney Friedrich denied the request – effectively telling prosecutors ‘well, they’re here.’

Concord was accused in the indictment of supporting the Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian ‘troll farm’ accused of trying to influence the 2016 US election.

On Thursday, Judge Freidrich asked Mueller’s prosecutors if she should assume they aren’t accusing Concord of violating US laws applicable to election expenditures and failure to register as a foreign agent.

Concord has asked Dabney to throw out the charges – claiming that Mueller’s office fabricated a crime, and that there is no law against interfering in elections.

According to the judge’s request for clarification, the Justice Department has argued that it doesn’t have to show that Concord had a legal duty to report its expenditures to the Federal Election Commission. Rather, the allegation is that the company knowingly engaged in deceptive acts that precluded the FEC, or the Justice Department, from ascertaining whether they had broken the law. -Bloomberg

On Monday, Friedrich raised questions over whether the special counsel’s office could prove a key element of their case – saying that it was “hard to see” how allegations of Russian influence were intended to interfere with US government operations vs. simply “confusing voters,” reports law.com.

During a 90-minute hearing, Friedrich questioned prosecutor Jonathan Kravis about how the government would be able to show the Russian defendants were aware of the Justice Department and FEC’s functions and then deliberately sought to skirt them.

“You still have to show knowledge of the agencies and what they do. How do you do that?” Friedrich asked.

Kravis, a prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, argued that the government needed only to show that Concord Management and the other defendants were generally aware that the U.S. government “regulates and monitors” foreign participation in American politics. That awareness, Kravis said, could be inferred from the Russians’ alleged creation of fake social media accounts that appeared to be run by U.S. citizens and “computer infrastructure” intended to mask the Russian origin of the influence operation.

“That is deception that is directed at a higher level,” Kravis said. Kravis appeared in court with Michael Dreeben, a top Justice Department appellate lawyer on detail to the special counsel’s office. -law.com

Concord pleaded not guilty in May. Their attorney, Eric Dubelier – a partner at Reed Smith, has described the election meddling charges as “make believe,” arguing on Monday that Mueller’s indictment against Concord “doesn’t charge a crime.”

“There is no statute of interfering with an election. There just isn’t,” said Dubelier, who added that Mueller’s office alleged a “made-up crime to fit the facts they have.”

Dubelier added that the case against Concord Management is the first in US history “where anyone has ever been charged with defrauding the Justice Department” through their failure to register under FARA.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service