Politics Gun laws and news around the world

Whelp, I've booked in to drop off my AR for destruction. Not happy about it, but it's too much hassle/risk not to. The Police have still not nominated authorised gunsmiths to modify firearms to make them legal and I only have until the 30th of this month to register it for destruction if I want to get compensation. And I'm going to use my Jacinda-bucks to buy something waaay more lethal anything - f*** you horseface.

Not worth the risk and legal issues that could come with it, sorry about your AR. I’m tempted to post obnoxious memes about your « feminist » PM posing with a headscarf but no need to turn this thread into a crap fest and upset people.
 
Op-Ed Notes Beto May Be Sinking Political Future In Texas
Beto O’Rourke’s hard-left turn on gun confiscation in the Democratic presidential primary may play well with liberal primary voters across the country – but the former congressman could also be hurting his political future in Texas should he someday choose to run statewide again.

O’Rourke, who nearly won a Senate seat in Texas in 2018 against incumbent Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, declared in a primary debate earlier this month, “Hell yes, we are going to take your AR-15.”

That’s in contrast to what O’Rourke’s said in the 2018 race, when the Democrat sought to appeal to the gun-friendly state by repeatedly telling Texans, “If you own an AR-15, keep it.” (He also said during that race that he didn’t want more such weapons sold.)

O’Rourke entered the Democratic race to great fanfare this year, but has struggled in the polls. Some Democrats have suggested he set his sights on a 2020 bid for the Senate, and not the White House.
Even some liberal writers have acknowledged that O’Rourke’s gun policies could hurt him in Texas.
“Beto is no longer a viable candidate for the Senate in Texas, thanks to his gun confiscation comment,” German Lopez, a writer for Vox, wrote on Twitter.
For his part, O’Rourke has been adamant that he no longer wants a Texas Senate seat, despite past pressure from some Texas Democrats and news outlets to drop his long-shot presidential bid and compete for Republican Sen. John Cornyn’s seat instead.
“There have even been some who have suggested that I stay in Texas and run for Senate,” O’Rourke said in an August speech. “But that would not be good enough for this community. That would not be good enough for El Paso. That would not be good enough for this country.”

He also voiced openness in the ban of all semi-auto firearms which was the final nail.
 
I am writing to you on the Government’s second tranche of firearms law changes – and I'm afraid I have bad news.

What the Bill does

The Arms Legislation Bill punishes law-abiding firearms owners, without targeting the criminals who will ignore the new laws anyway. For example, it introduces a costly, impractical, and ineffective register and will turn running a gun club into such a bureaucratic nightmare, it is likely some will be forced to close their doors.


The Bill introduces new rules about doctors reporting to the Police when a licence firearms owner presents with a mental health condition. This undermines the sanctity of the doctor-patient relationship — adding a new barrier for rural communities to access mental health services.


Worst of all, it's all planned to go through before the Royal Commission into Christchurch even reports back.

MPs trying to avoid proper public scrutiny

Yesterday afternoon, the Select Committee which has been allocated the Bill, issued draconian rules designed to prevent large volumes of submissions against the Bill.


First up, the process has been shortened. The Committee has only given us 26 days until submissions close on 23 October!


Unusually, Parliament has banned emailed submissions on this particular Bill. They are preventing grassroots groups like ours from creating online submission tools — like the one we built for the Royal Commission process.


It appears Government MPs don't want the public sending the MP messages they don’t want to hear!


But it gets worse. Officials have been instructed to count form submissions from different people as just one submission. If our supporters’ submissions are too similar, they will group them together and count them as just one submission.


And even the submissions made in person are being curtailed. The timeline means that everyone who wants to submit orally is unlikely to get the chance – so the Committee will just pick and choose who they want to hear from.


Usually, when a proposed law disproportionately affects rural communities, select committees travel and hold hearings around the country — but from everything we've seen, this particular Committee plans to stay in Wellington.

The Government is trying to screw the scrum

Jacinda Ardern and Stuart Nash have realised that the proposed law changes are not as popular as expected. It seems they now want to sneak the Bill through without groups like ours causing too much of a fuss. But with your help, we're not going to let them.


Last night I met with our lawyers who are currently working on a comprehensive submission on the Bill. They will have to us a submission guide at the end of next week


Even if these new restrictions mean flying people to Wellington, rather than the grassroots effort we initially planned, then so be it. We can't let the Government prevent the voices of firearms owners like you being heard.

We need your help not to let them

We can't take on Jacinda Ardern and Stuart Nash without your help. We are still $28,000 short of our original campaign budget to mount an effective opposition through the Select Committee process — and that was before the Committee tried these sneaky tactics. Will you chip-in to help us get there?


We have set up a page on our website with some materials we've pulled together on the Bill and we'll update the page as our lawyers complete the submission.


But all of this work is dependant on being able to continue to take on the Government, in the Committee, in the media, and (if necessary) the courts. Will you chip in $500, $250, $100, or even just $50 to the fighting fund?


Thank you for your support — we'll be in touch next week with our submission and a comprehensive guide on how we can defeat this Bill.
 
Fair and Reasonable should clarify that you can still submit electronically..... but you have to go through the online submission portal rather than just send an email.

Time to start the writing process again
 
Waiting till the lawyers come back with their submission.

Ruger 44, Browning Bar and Remington 7400 are iconic deer hunting rifles here for half a century. Lying polititians saying Semis aren't used for hunting.
Over 50 years. Where did they grow up. They aren't Kiwis. We should boot them out an the basis of stupidity.
 
Last edited:
Good thing Beto married well, 'cause he's dumber than a bag of hammers.




 
Good news in Pennsylvania:

Gun control advocates say Pa. legislator’s comments are ‘fighting words, not a final declaration’
Pennsylvania House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rob Kauffman’s declaration Tuesday that he will not take up a bill aimed at giving people a new way to get guns out of the hands of suicidal or judgement-impaired persons had two early effects at the state Capitol:

  • It undeniably has made it that much harder for gun control advocates to get one of their top priorities passed into law in Pennsylvania in the current legislative session.

Gun rights are safe in the state...for now.

Also:

Senate Republicans Shut Down ATF Nominee
Canterbury's nomination seemed in trouble during his July confirmation hearing when he frustrated Republican senators by refusing to deviate from the official positions of the FOP on gun control. He avoided answering questions about his views on the Second Amendment and even explicitly said he did not understand ATF regulations well enough to say what gun control policies he could or could not implement.


"If you're not familiar with the process running the ATF, then you are not qualified," Sen. John Kennedy (R., La.) told him at the time.


It was Canterbury's views on gun control, however, that sealed the deal. His past support for universal background check proposals and for President Obama’s attorney general Eric Holder were both major stumbling blocks, according to the second Senate source.


While head of the FOP, Canterbury explicitly supported background checks. In a 2013 letter, he told then-Senate Judiciary chairman Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.) that "expansion of background checks on firearm purchasers" was an "absolutely critical" element of "addressing gun violence."
 
The last thing the ATF needs is some asshat who doesn't know which end of the rifle to point down range. SMH.
 
He sounds like a simmering Democrat. Best removed before he goes all deep state..
 
20191001_110452.webp


Today is the day......
 
Iconic deer rifle the Browning Bar is relatively heavy and can't hold more than three and taxcinder baned it.
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Virginia Police Chief Advocates Ban on All Guns at U.S. House “Assault Weapons” Hearing
The most startling claim of the proceedings came when Dr. RaShall Brackney, Chief of the Charlottesville Police Department in Virginia responded to a question from Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) about whether she would support a ban on hunting rifles. “I believe any weapon that can be used to hunt individuals should be banned,” Brackney replied.
This admission seemed to indicate that Brackney would be open to the banning of any firearm – or even any weapon – whatsoever, since a criminal bent on “hunt[ing] individuals” could use virtually any firearm for that purpose.
Dr. Brackney was given two opportunities by pro-gun committee members to walk back or provide more context for that statement. Instead, she dug in and reiterated the statement.
Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) even asked her directly, “Okay, so you then stand for the proposition to ban any type of firearm, because any firearm can be used and misused to kill people.”
Rather than answering the question directly, Dr. Brackney began talking about police and the social contract. Rep. Steube tried asking again, only to be interrupted by an anti-gun committee member who tried to raise a point of order. She claimed that Rep. Steube was “attacking” the witness – when in fact he was merely trying to get a straight answer – and requested that he “tone down his words.” That exchange took up most of Steube’s remaining time for questioning, which was not reinstated.
Again, however, Rep. Steube tried, to clarify, asking, “Any type of weapon … that can be used to kill people should be banned?” “Sir,” Brackney replied, “you’re adding the word ‘type.’ I said ‘any weapons,’ so that’s my answer. Thank you.”
The entire exchange can be seen at this link.
Notably, none of the committee members or witnesses in favor of the ban attempted to distance themselves from Brackney’s push for a complete gun ban.


Well...ain’t that interesting.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

SF lost, predictable.

NRA PAC Funding Jumped in August
The NRA's political action committee, the National Rifle Association of America Political Victory Fund (PVF), hauled in $200,000 more in August than it did throughout July, its filings show. The PAC reported $939,951.27 in total contributions with an overwhelming majority of this amount—$751,114.61—making its way from small-dollar donors who gave $200 or less.
The amount the PAC collected in August is down $528,000 from the same time in 2018—not unusual given 2018 was an election year and 2019 is not. As with most political action committees, the NRA PVF tends to collect more money during election years. In August 2017, the last off year and a more even monthly comparison, the NRA's PAC received $767,934.59, which is $172,016.68 less than they took in last month.

It was a good month for the NRA, can’t say I’m happy about it.
 
Last edited:
Sent an email to the Taxcinder "most inclusive leader ever", regarding deer hunting semis of 4 capacity box mag and tube mag types... No reply from Taxcinder or her office.

The smiling thief could also be used.
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top