Is H.R. 1022 Gaining Traction?

Over the weekend, Sebastian commented on a PA legislator who had signed onto H.R. 1022, a new assault weapons ban introduced by Carolyn McCarthy. Pat Murphy Jumps on Gun Banning Bandwagon is the post by Sebastian that caught my eye and caused me to look and see if there was any new activity on H.R. 1022.

It seems that H.R. 1022 has gained a few new cosponsors since my last check. H.R. 1022 now has 66 cosponsors. The most recent 6 have signed on in just the last couple of weeks. Someone is stirring the pot and pushing this horrendous piece of legislation. More than 15% of the House are now signed onto this bill as cosponsors. Not bad for a bill that everyone insists is dead in the water.

For more on H.R. 1022, including images of firearms that it seeks to ban, click here and scroll down.

H.R. 1022 is Still Alive and Well

Last time I commented on H.R. 1022, the bill had 49 cosponsors. I had not been keeping much of an eye on it as the general consensus amongst those who have more experience in these issues than I consider it a non issue.

A quick check today (prompted by 45superman's report "More about Biden's "Crime Control and Prevention Act of 2007" ) found that there are now 59 cosponsors to H.R. 1022. 59 is a good percentage of the 435 members of our House of Representatives, and 4 of the cosponsors are on the sub committee where the bill currently resides.

H.R. 1022 has 59 cosponsors, two of which signed on just this past week. Representative Hastings signed on the 22nd, and Kucinich on the 25th.

So here we have Biden introducing a bill in the Senate that would "simply" renew the '94 AWB on one hand, and H.R. 1022 in the House on the other.

Gun control is still a very high priority for the Democrat Party.

For more on H.R. 1022, go here.

Update on H.R. 1022

It has been awhile since I have posted anything on H.R. 1022, The Federal Assault on Our Firearms. Most folks who keep an eye on anti-gun legislation seem to think that this bill is a non-issue, that it will not make it to the house floor. I hope these folks are correct.

I am still concerned about the potential of this bill being passed out of committee. H.R. 1022 currently has 49 cosponsors. The last two signed as cosponsors on June 6th, just two days ago. The bill has moved from The House Judiciary Committee to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. I honestly do not know what this move signifies, or how it affects the odds of the bill making it to the house floor. I do know that four of the sixteen members of this subcommittee are cosigners of the bill.

These are the committee members who also cosigned H.R. 1022:

Representative William Delahunt
(D) Massachusetts, 10th

Representative Sheilia Jackson Lee
(D) Texas, 18th

Representative Martin Meehan
(D) Massachusetts, 5th

Representative Jerrold Nadler
(D) New York, 8th

This committee is made up of 10 Dems and 6 Republicans. If the Democrats decide to push H.R. 1022, it would make it out of committee very easily.

This has just been a friendly reminder that H.R. 1022 is not dead. If you have a spare moment to send an email or a fax to your representative concerning this bill, it would be appreciated.

The text of H.R. 1022

More on H.R. 1022 here.

More Guns Banned by HR 1022

The most recent issue of American Rifleman has an article titled "Show Me What's New in '07". A good bit of "What's New in '07" could become "What's Banned in '07" should HR 1022 be passed.

Here are the firearms from the April edition of the American Rifleman that would be banned under HR 1022:

From Auto-Ordnance -

The Thompson 1927, The Thompson M1, and the Thompson 1927 Commando are banned by name in HR 1022. Auto-Ordnance is pretty much SOL if this becomes law.

From Berretta -

Beretta lists this as "The Beretta Rx4 Storm is the most advanced semiautomatic rifle ever designed. This .223 special purpose rifle emphasizes individual performance with ergonomic adjustment and ambidextrous controls." Well that barrel shroud would make this a banned firearm under HR 1022.

From Cobb Manufacturing -

I honestly do not know how badly Cobb Manufacturing would be hurt by a loss of pretty much all civilian sales due to the passage of HR 1022, but I think it would be a significant hit. Cobb had invested a lot of R@D dollars to perfect their MCR's, money down the drain if HR 1022 becomes law.

From D.P.M.S. -

DPMS is another company that will be severely affected if it loses civilian sales due to HR 1022.

From FNH-USA -

This beautiful semiautomatic shotgun has a fixed magazine capacity greater than 5 rounds. This is way too much firepower for a free citizen to handle.

Barrel shroud, thumb hole grip, forward grip... All banned attributes of a firearm by HR 1022.

There you have it. Some of the best new firearms of the year would be banned if HR 1022 is allowed to go forward. These companies spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on research and development to improve upon firearm platforms, they need the civilian market sales to keep this research going. Why is this research important? It is important because our soldiers will benefit from improved small arms. Remove the civilian money from the small arms industry, our military will suffer.

Here is the full text of HR 1022

Edit to add: I just checked, and there are now 33 cosponsors to this bill. I guess it is a good thing that "Gun control is a dead issue".

Gun Control a Dead Issue?

Yesterday while on the way home from work, I heard Sean Hannity mention something that made my jaw drop. It was during his daily apologetics for Rudy Giuliani. A caller had mentioned something about Rudy and gun control, and in Sean's answer he stated "Gun control is a dead issue" and continued with something along the lines of "The Liberals know better than to bring it up".

Well Sean, if gun control is such a dead issue why does HR 1022 (To reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes) have 30 cosponsors? If gun control is such a dead issue for the Liberals, why did Representative Castle introduce HR 96 (A Bill to Close Gun Shows)?

Add to this list HR 203, HR 256, HR 297, HR 354, HR 428, HR 880, and the various Senate bills (The GOA has a short summery of these and other bills here).

It does not appear to me that the anti's see gun control as a "dead issue".

One more point - Why do the "conservative" talking heads and pundits consider the Second Amendment to be a "social" issue? They place gun rights on the same level as gay rights and welfare. Do they really not understand that the Second Amendment is the bedrock of our liberty, that it is the guarantee that the .gov will not significantly overstep it's bounds without our permission? Don't they know that it is the Second Amendment that makes us free men and women, and not servants? Even the old school liberals understand that fact.

I am just sometimes amazed by what I read and hear by the "Conservative" front men that are supposedly uniting the conservative base.

An Interview With Duncan Hunter

Representative Duncan Hunter sparked my interest when he announced that he was throwing his hat into the ring and run for president on the GOP ticket. The Duncan Hunter '08 website did an excellent job of defining his core values and beliefs in the areas of the war in Iraq, terrorism, taxes, abortion and the like, but had scant information on his views of gun rights and the Second Amendment.

So what's a blogger to do other than get in contact with his campaign staff and request an interview?

After correspondence back and forth, and a bit of time to allow Representative Hunter's staff to vet both myself and my blog, he agreed.

An interview (via email) with presidential candidate Duncan Hunter.

Thank you for taking the time to answer the following firearm related questions. The Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms, and firearms issues in general are not addressed on your campaign web site so folks are interested in your views on these issues.

“Thank you for the opportunity to address these vital issues of liberty with you. Our website was put together piece by piece and the Second Amendment statement was one of the later things added. That does not reflect the slightest lack of commitment on my part regarding Second Amendment rights. My record over 26 years in Congress is absolutely clear.”

1. Please state, in your own words, what the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States means to you. Do you understand the right to keep and bear arms to be an individual or a collective right?

“The right to keep and bear arms is an absolute right of Americans to protect their families and their communities and their nation with firearms. In this age of post-911, Americans, I believe are comforted by the fact that our ability to resist terrorism is not limited to law enforcement or defense agencies but is also within the ability of all gun-owning Americans.”


2. There has been a lot of discussion in the media and in the legislature about “Closing the Gun Show Loophole.” What is your definition of a “Gun Show Loophole”, and how would you address this issue?

“I reject the term ‘loophole’. It is a clever verbal device of the left to restrict the rights of Americans. Constitutional rights are not loopholes in governmental regulations. As President, I would veto legislation that would require a background check on private firearms transactions at gun shows or any other bill that restricts the Second Amendment Rights of American.”


3. Representative Carolyn McCarthy has introduced H.B. 1022, the Assault Weapons Ban and law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007. Do you believe that Americans have the right to own, use and carry weapons of military pattern? Do you support restricting a citizen’s access to firearms based upon cosmetics or ease of function?

“As President, I would veto any bill that reauthorizes the semi-auto ban that was sunset in 2004. These types of bills represent “feel good” measures that impede the rights of law-abiding citizens by banning guns based not on facts but based largely upon how scary they look.”

4. In Congress, you represent the great state of California, a state applauded by some and demonized by others for having extremely restrictive gun control laws. Do you understand California’s gun control laws to be a necessary and effective deterrent to violent crime?

“Gun control laws directed at law-abiding citizens are not a crime deterrent. In fact, studies show that private ownership of firearms by Americans reduces crime. You and I both know that the one thing criminals prefer more than any other is unarmed victims.”

5. If you are elected President of the United States, how would your presidency affect firearm owners?

“As President, I will not sign any treaty that impedes, in any way, the Second Amendment rights of Americans.

Only judges who have a demonstrated commitment to interpret the Constitution as our founders intended will be nominated to the federal bench.

I would ask Congress to send me for my signature, legislation to repeal the D.C. gun ban, legislation to allow reciprocity among states with concealed carry rights and other pieces of legislation to restore rights that prior administrations have eroded.

In fact, I authored the Hunter amendment, Rol call 241 in 1999, to allow DC residents to keep and bear arms.”

Representative Hunter; thank you again for taking time out of your busy day to answer these questions and address issues that many Americans see as important. Your voting history on Second Amendment issues is appreciated.

Respectfully,

JR

There it is, Duncan Hunter on the Second Amendment. Since this was an interview, I'll leave my thoughts to myself for the time being.

I am very thankful to Representative Hunter for taking the time to answer these questions. I hope the questions were sufficient to give you information you can use in making a decision in the Republican primaries.

Firearms Banned by H.R. 1022

Thought I would post a couple images of firearms considered "assault weapons" by the anti's.

Banned Specifically by Name

Mini-14® Ranch Rifle



M1 Carbine

Kel-Tec Sub Rifle (I assume they mean both)

One Banned by Attributes

Remington Model 11-87™ SP-T Thumbhole



Thumbhole stock, a big no-can-do.

And, One That Many Have Not Thought About

That is correct, from the bill:

...a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.'.

Who did John Browing develop the 1911 for?

H.R. 1022, Assault Weapon Ban Update

The push to pass H.R. 1022, the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007, is gaining momentum with each passing day. In an earlier posting I asked if the bill was:

...a trial balloon, or is it a serious effort by the Dems to launch a new AWB? A nod to the trial balloon folks would be the fact that this bill currently has no co-sponsors. If it were a serious piece of legislation, the Dems would be crawling all over each other to get their names on it.

Well guess what, H.R. 1022 now has 26 cosponsors. That means 26 more congress critters are giving their active support to this bill. Below is the list of the so called representatives of the people who have signed on to this bill.

Rep Ackerman, Gary L. [NY-5]

Rep Berman, Howard L. [CA-28]

Rep Capps, Lois [CA-23]

Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1]

Rep Crowley, Joseph [NY-7]

Rep DeGette, Diana [CO-1]

Rep Delahunt, William D. [MA-10]

Rep Eshoo, Anna G. [CA-14]

Rep Fattah, Chaka [PA-2]

Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51]

Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4]

Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-7]

Rep Hirono, Mazie K. [HI-2]

Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18]

Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. [NY-14]

Rep Markey, Edward J. [MA-7]

Rep McGovern, James P. [MA-3]

Rep Meehan, Martin T. [MA-5]

Rep Miller, Brad [NC-13]

Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8]

Rep Pascrell, Bill, Jr. [NJ-8]

Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9]

Rep Schiff, Adam B. [CA-29]

Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [NY-28]

Rep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8]

Rep Wexler, Robert [FL-19]

It looks to me like they are starting to get serious. We also need to get serious. We need to respond to this attack against our freedom right now. We can not wait until this bill gains even more momentum. Once it gets out of committee, the Dems will push it forward. They have a sitting president who has stated that he will sign an AWB, they have the majority, and they need a victory on a bill like this to bolster their candidates in the '08 elections.

I added a button on the top of my side bar that helps to make it easy to contact your congress critter. At the minimum, you should write, fax, email and call your representative and let them know that legislation such as this will not be tolerated.

For extra credit, contact the House Judiciary Committee and ask them to prevent this bill for going forward.

Gun Law News has a good synopsis of the bill here.

Easy Way to Contact the House Judiciary Committee

Okay, contacting each and every one of the House Judiciary Committee members is to time consuming/expensive to accomplish quickly (they really do make it hard for out of district folks to contact them), here is one link that will reach the committee itself:

Contact Judiciary

Just click it and let them know how you feel about H.R. 1022. This is important folks, most definitely worth the five minutes of your time to get it done.

As a bonus, here is the phone number: 202-225-3951

I have not been able to come up with a fax number. If one of you have it, please pass it along.

Thanks

2008 Elections and the Assault Weapon Ban

Is H.R. 1022 (Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007) a trial balloon, or is it a serious effort by the Dems to launch a new AWB? A nod to the trial balloon folks would be the fact that this bill currently has no co-sponsors. If it were a serious piece of legislation, the Dems would be crawling all over each other to get their names on it. I wonder why they would need to send up a trial balloon. The Dems have the majority in both the House and the Senate, plus they have a president who stated that he would sign an AWB if it crossed his desk. As I see it, there is no need for trial balloons, unless of course this is not the legislation that they intend to pass.

H.R. 1022 is another time limited law. It would only be in effect for 10 years. It is probable that this bill will not get any traction with the Dems because it is not permanent. H.R. 1022 also includes a grandfather clause which would exempt firearms owned prior to the ban going into effect. The anti's don't want to just ban new "evil black rifles", they want to take them all.

So maybe the "real" AWB will not be introduced until after the 2008 elections. How would our front-runner GOP candidates react to Evil Black Rifle restrictions crossing their desks in the Oval Office? Can we count upon them to stand up for our rights?

How about Giuliani? Where does he stand on gun control, supposed assault weapons in particular?

“We need a federal law that bans all assault weapons..."

“The more guns you take out of society, the more you are going to reduce murder. The less you take out of society, the more it is going to go up.”

“Someone who now voted to roll back the assault-weapons ban would really be demonstrating that special interest politics mean more to them than life-or-death issues.”

“I’m in favor of gun control.”

I don't know, it sure looks like Rudy would be advocating for some very restrictive gun control if he were at the helm.

Okay, let's look at Mitt Romney, where does he stand?

Governor Mitt Romney has signed into law a permanent assault weapons ban that he says will make it harder for criminals to get their hands on these guns.

“Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts,” Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony on July 1 with legislators, sportsmen’s groups and gun safety advocates. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”

Geez, isn't this the same guy who had his picture taken at SHOT Show 2007 with Wayne LaPierre? Maybe Wayne was just trying to convert him, yeah, that's the ticket...

Last, but not least of the front runners is John McCain.

On the plus side, John McCain voted against the original AWB and it's renewal. He also voted against the Brady Bill. On the negative side McCain authored the Gun Show Loophole Closing and Gun Law Enforcement Act of 2001. I understand that he has come out against inexpensive firearms but is for concealed carry.

The best I can say for McCain is that he is wishy washy at best on gun control issues.

I am not a one issue voter, there are quite a few issues that are very important to me. This is basically a gun blog, so I am looking at these folks from a RKBA view. You can learn a lot about a candidate by looking at his views on the Second Amendment. If a politician can easily dismiss the Second Amendment, what does that say about his or her attitude about the entire Bill of Rights? If a politician feels that the populace can not be entrusted with firearms, what else will they take away "for our own good"?

These are the contenders according to the news media and major pundits, are any of them acceptable to you?

Hat tip to Irons in the Fire for Giuliani quotes,

iBerkshires.com for the Mitt Romney article,

and OnTheIssues for information on John McCain.

The Federal Assault on Our Weapons

After it was obvious that Nancy Pelosi was to be our new majority leader in the House, I penned the commentary "Consequences of Yesterday's Elections ". My opinion at the time was that with the Democrats back in power, there would be a push for a new Assault Weapon Ban and then they would propose legislation to close the imaginary "Gun Show Loophole". It turns out I was wrong, they went after the Gun Show Loophole first. Michael Castle of Delaware introduced H.R. 96, the Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2007 in January. It took Carolyn McCarthy all the way to mid February to get H.R. 1022 introduced.

H.R. 1022 is the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007. This bill is currently in the Judiciary Committee. Others mentioned that an AWB would not be proposed until after 2008. Now that one has been introduced, I have seen it stated that the Dems are just testing the waters, that it is just a trial balloon. H.R. 1022 is in committee, so it is serious.

These past couple of days have seen firearm owners and advocates band together and strike against a Quisling in our own ranks. We need to put forth even more effort in getting these two pieces of anti gun legislation stopped in their tracks. Even if H.R. 1022 is just a "trial balloon", we should do everything we can to deflate that balloon right now, we need to keep it from gaining any altitude at all.

Contact your congress critter and let them know that you are opposed to both H.R. 96 and H.R. 1022. Write the members of the House Judiciary Committee and inform them that an AWB has no effect on violent crime and that H.B. 1022 should not be allowed to reach the House Floor. Write letters to the editor of your local papers speaking out against H.B. 96 and H.B. 1022. Fight for your rights, and the rights of your children (I had to throw in a "do it for the children" quote, seems to work so well for the anti's). There is a cultural war going on in America and on Capitol Hill, it is a war between freedom and servitude. It is a soft war that must be fought with the same fervor and intensity as any battlefield conflict.

To help get you started, here is a list of the members of the House Judiciary Committee. Contact information can be found by clicking on the name:


Hon. Conyers Jr. Chairman (D) Michigan, 14th

Hon. Berman (D) California, 28th

Hon. Boucher (D) Virginia, 9th

Hon. Nadler (D) New York, 8th

Hon. Scott (D) Virginia, 3rd

Hon. Watt (D) North Carolina, 12th

Hon. Lofgren (D) California, 16th

Hon. Jackson Lee (D) Texas, 18th

Hon. Waters (D) California, 35th

Hon. Meehan (D) Massachusetts, 5th

Hon. Delahunt (D) Massachusetts, 10th

Hon. Wexler (D) Florida, 19th

Hon. Sánchez (D) California, 39th

Hon. Cohen (D) Tennessee, 9th

Hon. Johnson (D) Georgia, 4th

Hon. Gutierrez (D) Illinois, 4th

Hon. Sherman (D) California, 27

Hon. Weiner (D) New York, 9th

Hon. Schiff (D) California, 29th

Hon. Davis (D) Alabama , 7th

Hon. Wasserman Schultz (D) Florida, 20th

Hon. Ellison (D) Minnesota, 5th


Hon. Smith Ranking Member (R) Texas, 21st

Hon. Sensenbrenner Jr. (R) Wisconsin, 5th

Hon. Coble (R) North Carolina, 6th

Hon. Gallegly (R) California, 24th

Hon. Goodlatte (R) Virginia, 6th

Hon. Chabot (R) Ohio, 1st

Hon. Lungren (R) California, 3rd

Hon. Cannon (R) Utah, 3rd

Hon. Keller (R) Florida, 8th

Hon. Issa (R) California, 49th

Hon. Pence (R) Indiana, 6th

Hon. Forbes (R) Virginia, 4th

Hon. King (R) Iowa, 5th

Hon. Feeney (R) Florida, 24th

Hon. Franks (R) Arizona, 2nd

Hon. Gohmert (R) Texas, 1st

Hon. Jordan (R) Ohio, 4th

Have at it folks, let these "representativs of the people" know what "the people" want.