Posts Tagged ‘Politics’

Yet another obamanite failure: Eric Holder

November 23, 2009

While the nations eyes were seemingly glued to the health care debacle the ruptured ducks were hard at work insulting America, and Americans elsewhere.

I have written about Eric Holder before. He is a man who has no business in law period. Much less being the nations top attorney.

What follows pretty much made me sick. I didn’t lose kinsfolk in the attacks of September eleventh as the author did. However, those of us in emergency services are one big family,and yes, we lost a lot of our own that day.

By DAVID BEAMER

On Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee met to question Attorney General Eric Holder about his decision to prosecute Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four others in criminal courts rather than military tribunals. As the father of Todd Beamer, who died on United Airlines Flight 93, I was able to attend that hearing. What transpired caused me great concern and shook my confidence in our current administration.

~snip~

A final observation: During the proceedings a young lady, dutifully attentive, sat with a stack of paper about 15 inches high on her lap. The papers contained names, single spaced, of some 100,000 people who signed a letter in opposition to this decision. This young woman, Jill Regan, lost her dad, Donald J. Regan, FDNY of the Bronx, who died trying to save others on 9/11. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R., Al.) asked that those names be entered into the record at the end of the session. It was agreed, but by that time the chairmen and most of the Democrats were already gone. I grieved for her—and for all of us—anew.

Mr. Beamer is the father of Todd Beamer, who died on United Airlines Flight 93 on 9/11

Read this gut wrenching story of the treatment of the families of 9 /11 by the Senate, and Eric Holder HERE

Matt Mead rejected as governor: Wyoming does the right thing

November 21, 2009

When it comes to Governors never back an attorney for the office. To be blunt, they kiss butt way too much. Wyoming Gun Owners points out the obvious with a very informative piece that outlines the threat to states rights, as well as the federal mandate based in mysandry and ex post facto law.

While Wyoming did go a long way toward correcting a fundamentally flawed law it did not go nearly far enough. Nor do I see any way that the law that was passed could, or would, be recognized by other states. Or that a person that had been convicted in another state could use Wyoming residency to have their rights restored in Wyoming. Read on, and I hope that Wyoming Gun Owners start allowing comments at some point. At least from dues paying members such as myself.

By Anthony Bouchard
The headline should read “Gun owners beware of formers U.S Attorneys”. But it’s best that you decide…

In 2004, The Sovereign State of Wyoming enacted legislation that established a procedure to expunge misdemeanor convictions “for the purposes of restoring any firearm rights lost”.

This was specifically to aid Wyoming citizens in restoring gun rights if they had a misdemeanor such as domestic violence on their record. The NRA backed Lautenberg legislation bans gun ownership and use of guns or ammunition by individuals convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence. Wyoming legislators recognized there was nothing to protect individuals that were erroneously convicted.

Full Story HERE

Urgent Calls Needed Against ObamaCare‏

November 21, 2009

note: this is from yesterday, my net was down 😦

Urgent Calls Needed Against ObamaCare
— Vote is scheduled for tomorrow night

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://gunowners.org

Friday, November 20, 2009

Tomorrow will be as important a day as any in our lifetimes in determining whether the anti-gun health care bill moves forward.

The key vote will be on shutting down a Republican filibuster of the ObamaCare bill, HR 3590.  In the Senate, we are faced with a health care bill that:

* Costs $2.5 trillion during its first ten years of full implementation (2014-2023);

* Increases insurance premiums and imposes $376 billion in tax increases — many on the middle class; and

* Cuts Medicare by $465 billion, while increasing health costs by over $100 billion.

Fox News is reporting today that the word “tax” appears 183 times in the health care bill.  Is Obama serious?  Is that what he and Reid want to do to us in the midst of a recession?

Of course, all this increased spending — and taxes — means that you will have less money to spend on pursuing your real passions:  like providing for your family and purchasing guns and ammunition!

The strategy in the Senate is to cram this bill down the American people’s throats before we have a chance to fully read and evaluate it.  And the vote on Saturday at 8:00 p.m. will determine whether, at least initially, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will be able to get away with this.

Gun Owners of America has already gone into several states represented by key Democrats who will be central to the Saturday vote.  But this is sufficiently important that all 100 senators need to know where we stand.

Finally, as we have mentioned several times in the past, the mandates in the legislation will most likely dump your gun-related health data into a government database that was created in section 13001 of the stimulus bill.  This includes any firearms-related information your doctor has gleaned… or any determination of PTSD, or something similar, that can preclude you from owning firearms.

And, the special “wellness and prevention” programs (inserted by Section 1001 of the bill as part of a new Section 2717 in the Public Health Services Act) would allow the government to offer lower premiums to employers who bribe their employees to live healthier lifestyles — and nothing within the bill would prohibit rabidly anti-gun HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius from decreeing that “no guns” is somehow healthier.

We all need to contact our Senators right away.

Do you want left-wing bureaucrats appointed by Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid determining whether you should own a gun via the health care system?

If not, then you need to call right away.  Our gun rights — and the fate of our economy — are hanging in the balance.

ACTION: Call your two U.S. Senators.  Please urge them to vote against “cloture” on the “motion to proceed” to HR 3590.

You can call your Senators toll-free at 1-877-762-8762.  The phones are ringing off the hook right now on Capitol Hill.  More likely than not, you will have to try several times because the circuits have been overloaded.

But don’t be discouraged… keep calling!

Also, ask your wife, your relatives, your neighbors, your church — everyone, short of your dog — to do the same.  This is crunch time!

NOTE:  The alternate, non toll-free, number is 202-224-3121.

—– TALKING POINTS —–

1) Support the filibuster of HR 3590 by voting NO on cloture.

2) Socialized health care is too expensive.  I would rather spend my money the way I want to spend it!

3) Increasing my taxes during a recession is insane.

4) This bill will threaten to register me as a gun owner, because the mandates in this bill will force my medical information into the database that was created by the stimulus bill.

5) Vote NO on this bill!


A tale of a Congress that just is not happy

November 20, 2009

Yes, I about fell over when I read this. No, not about the content. But? The source!

Growing discontent over the economy and frustration with efforts to speed its recovery boiled over Thursday on Capitol Hill in a wave of criticism and outright anger directed at the Obama administration.

Episodes in both houses of Congress exposed the raw nerves of lawmakers flooded with stories of unemployment and economic hardship back home. They also underscored the stiff headwinds that the administration faces as it pushes to enact sweeping changes to the financial regulatory system while also trying to create jobs for ordinary Americans.

SOURCE

Mayhap’s  MSNBC  has grown tired of bottom feeding? Probably more along the lines of covering their butts because the backlash that is growing by leaps and bounds could cost them some pretty big nickles down the road. For, after all is said and done,  MSNBC is a capitalist organization dependent upon revenue generation.

I’m using MSNBC as a whipping boy here, however, this applies to the entire main stream media. You simply cannot go on forever bashing the beliefs of the people who you are dependent upon for your own survival. Be that anti-tax protesters, supporters of First or Second Amendment rights, people who prefer smaller less intrusive government, pro-life folks, and the list goes on.

Those are the people who pay the bills, including those of the mainstream media. They do not enjoy having their morning bowl of oatmeal being peed in repeatedly. People do not want government involved in their health care much beyond licensing and enforcement of drug policies. They don’t like being laid off from their jobs, yet being repeatedly told that trickle down economics are some sort of voodoo as they lose everything that they own, including any hope of comfortable retirement.

That’s right, stay out of my bedroom as well as my hospital room, leave me alone to pray as I choose to, or not. Leave my ability to properly and effectively defend what is mine alone, and don’t blame a failed state like Mexico’s problems on my freedoms. Don’t pass laws now that hold us accountable for things done years ago or that we had nothing at all to do with.

Don’t preach to we the people MSM, because we don’t like it, and you might just find yourself next to us commoners in the unemployment line.

Lies, and more lies…

November 20, 2009

So many things are going on at once that I think it’s a strategy of the left. Distract, and then slip things through that otherwise would not pass muster. Once again, The Patriot Post provides meaningful analysis.

The BIGGEST LIE Yet

“It is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth — and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. … For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it might cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.” –Patrick Henry

Sometimes the biggest lies come under cover of a truth.

Such was the case this week, when Barack Hussein Obama proffered this observation about deficits: “I think it is important, though, to recognize if we keep on adding to the debt, even in the midst of this recovery, that at some point, people could lose confidence in the U.S. economy in a way that could actually lead to a double-dip recession.”

“Keep on adding to the debt”? From this, one might conclude that Obama has never suggested such a thing, and is truly concerned about deficits.

His revelation came amid discussion of tax reductions engineered to increase employment, as if our Constitution has a provision for that, anymore than for Obama’s other proposals.

Obama is feigning concern about deficits now that there is discussion of tax cuts, which he concludes would increase deficits.

“At some point, people could lose confidence in the U.S. economy”? Like the Red Chinese, who hold more U.S. government debt than any other nation ($800 billion), and upon whom we are depending to fund more of our debt. No coincidence that Obama’s remarks were made while on his most recent appeasement tour in Beijing.

“Even in the midst of this recovery”? What recovery?

Oh, the one that his $787 billion “hope-n-change” big-government payout package was supposed to ensure?

At the time of that proposal, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office offered this summary: “In the longer run, the [Obama] legislation would result in a slight decrease in gross domestic product compared with CBO’s baseline economic forecast.” Put another way, the CBO static scoring projected that Obama’s big government pork giveaway would hinder economic recovery. Dynamic scoring by economists shows a much worse destiny.

But Obama warned, “If nothing is done, this recession might linger for years. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse.”

Now, after a quick assessment of the Obama Recovery through October, one is stuck with the conclusion that his spending spree has resulted in 10.2 percent unemployment — except, of course, in such places as Washington, DC, where government jobs are immune to recession.

That would be double-digit unemployment — so now you know why Obama cleverly framed his recovery program in terms of jobs “created or saved.” His administration announced that through October, the American Recovery Act had “created” or “saved” 640,329 jobs. However, a growing number of skeptics, even among his once-adoring media, found some very questionable accounting methods used to come up with that figure.

Asked about some of the discrepancies, Obama’s Recovery Czar, Ed Pound, responded, “Who knows, man, who really knows?”

Recovery reality check: Remember when Obama claimed, “This is our moment, this is our time to turn the page on the policies of the past, to offer a new direction”?

That is a reference to Obama’s v Reagan’s policies, big government solutions v. free enterprise solutions.

Ronald Reagan’s economic policies unleashed an unprecedented period of growth, which continued right up until the financial sector collapse in ’08, a calamity resulting from policies implemented during the Clinton years, which undermined the values of derivatives used as collateral due. Those policies, as we now know, gave license for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to back high-risk loans to unqualified buyers, thereby setting the stage for the subprime mortgage meltdown and the crash of 2008.

Recall that in 2005, Sen. John McCain sponsored the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act, saying, “For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac … and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. … If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.”

McCain noted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac regulators concluded that profits were “illusions deliberately and systematically created by the company’s senior management.”

McCain was right, but Democrats, including Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, ensured that nothing would be done to alter current practices at Fannie and Freddie. “These two entities … are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” Frank said at the time.

The net result of the derivative dilution was a crisis of confidence in the U.S. economy, second only to that which led to the Great Depression.

Remember when Obama claimed, “We are fundamentally transforming the United States of America”? Well, we’re in mid-transformation, and how are things looking now?

Obama also said, “Generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was our time.”

Indeed, his time to saddle them and their children with unprecedented debt, not only from his “stimulus” folly, but next up, ObamaCare, and then his job-killing cap-and-tax scheme.

If you think you can count on the administration’s estimates of the true cost of ObamaCare, think again. The Washington Times recently reminded us of the estimated cost of Medicare shortly after Democrats implemented it in 1965. Then, it was predicted to cost $12 billion by 1990. In actuality, it cost $98 billion, which is to say the original estimate was short by more than a factor of seven.

In my home state of Tennessee, we’ve already been there and done that. Our state’s version of ObamaCare, known as TennCare, implemented by Democrats in 1994 ostensibly to contain healthcare expenses, has quickly grown to consume more than a third of state revenues.

The CBO now says that the $1 trillion estimated cost of ObamaCare is “subject to substantial uncertainty.” How’s that for qualifying understatement?

As for the big picture, U.S. National Debt topped the $12 trillion mark this week, or approximately $39,000 for every man, woman and child in America, and the federal deficit that Obama now pretends to be concerned about hit a record high $1.42 trillion for fiscal year 2009.

Obama’s administration projects that the national debt will top $14 trillion by this time next year, and my sense is that they’re being modest. At the current pace, within 10 years our national debt will exceed our Gross Domestic Product.

Of these staggering debt figures, Obama now claims, “I intend to take serious steps to reduce America’s long-term deficit because debt-driven growth cannot fuel America’s long-term prosperity.”

But, what’s his real endgame?

We can be certain that Obama’s solution to deficits will not be less government. Instead, it will be unprecedented tax increases, a.k.a., socialist redistribution of wealth, a.k.a., “the fundamental transformation of America.”

The Tax Foundation now estimates that to offset deficits, “Federal income tax rates would have to be nearly tripled across the income spectrum,” with the lowest bracket at 27 percent and the highest at 95. Even the CBO estimates that rates would have to exceed 80 percent, and that’s before state and local taxes.

Do you get the picture, folks?

Obama will succeed in his effort to socialize the U.S. economy, using the tax code as his hammer and sickle, unless growing ranks of Americans object to the fact that he has no constitutional authority to do so.

In the meantime, Patriots, keep your powder dry.

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander
Publisher, PatriotPost.US

Obama Approves Troop Increase in Southern District of New York

November 19, 2009

Received this in an email from a newer political group action  faction. I can’t really  vet them at this point, but?  I do like their style.

Posted: 18 Nov 2009 02:22 PM PST

Perhaps it’s not surprising that President Obama would think nothing of subjecting Manhattan to the spectacle of a civilian court trial against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, mastermind of the 9/11 attacks.  This is the administration that thought having an F-16 trail Air Force One around Ground Zero on a workday morning was a good idea.

On the other hand, perhaps we should view KSM as Obama’s consolation prize for failing to secure the 2016 Olympics on U.S. soil.  (How much tourism revenue will KSM’s trial bring to lower Manhattan?)

To try KSM and his four co-conspirators in federal court, New York will have to create a de facto Guantanamo Bay—one that is smaller than but as secure as the real thing.  The city will need to spend millions of dollars ensuring extra protection for the courthouse, the densely populated neighborhood—indeed all of downtown—including shipping in hundreds of U.S. marshals from other jurisdictions.  They will have to make special efforts to protect the judge, prosecutors, jury, federal agents, and witnesses, all of whom will receive death threats and will need armed protection.

As Rudy Guiliani noted, trying those who planned 9/11 in a civilian court in lower Manhattan is like trying those who planned Pearl Harbor in a civilian court in Hawaii.

The trial will drag on for years and New York will face extra, unnecessary risk during every day of the circus.  Manhattan will be placed in the international spotlight and become a prominent stage for jihadists to stage a suicide or car bombing.  Would-be attackers won’t have to do it right in front of the courthouse—anyplace in Manhattan would capture headlines and give encouragement to the Islamist cause worldwide. read more »

SOURCE

Happy Birthday I2I !

November 19, 2009

Happy birthday Independence Institute! Your detractors are many, and you just keep on treading along. Indeed, as so many cry out that you are insignificant they have to create counter organizations to oppose what you stand for.

Story HERE, and be sure to read the comments! 😀

And just what does the Independence Institute have to say concerning Obamacare? Well, here is a very small part…

© 2008, Benjamin Hummel. To see more cartoons like this go to www.politixcartoons.com.

Storm Warnings: Yelling fire

November 16, 2009

American balkanization is going full steam. The regional separatism that is unfolding before our eyes is telling. Even the terminology is getting twisted. The term “Redneck” is just one example. It originated in the Appalachian region, and defined union workers. Not exactly your right wing terrorists as the DHS likes to call anyone that disagrees with them, and that is not a communist or Muslim.

Anti liberty forces propagandize without bothering to note facts. Just today a WordPress blog that is anti liberty made a post about veterans and made it appear that those veterans were mentally incompetent, as defined by law. When, in fact, that statement was made by none other than the Brady Bunch. A group that has become notorious for being less than truthful.

These not so United States are being torn asunder. There appears to be little middle ground where differences can be hashed out that will be acceptable to all party’s. These things range from States Rights, to abortion, to taxes, gun control, the drug war, and beyond. Lets not forget Man Made Global Warming while we are at it.

These same arguments are all to often clouded with red herrings that further cloud issues. Be that gay rights, property rights, special rights for special groups, and racism to name but a few.

It used to be said that we are a nation of laws, and not of men. Yet, when law is used to belittle others, then respect for the law evaporates.

1984 has come and gone, yet newspeak is all the rage it seems. Most especially in the Senate and Congress. Are these concerns simply yelling fire in a crowded theater? If so, then what if the theater is in fact on fire? Do you allow those people to just burn alive?

As the song says, if you cannot stand for something, then you stand for nothing at all, or something like that.

More on obamacare: devils in the details

November 14, 2009

What a whopper… The obamanure that is the so called health care reform bill will bust the nation into pieces. Talk about a humpty dumty situation. As always, the Patriot Post provides us with a solid analysis.

Saturday Night Special

“Woohoo — I’m close to controlling your health care!”

The Constitution took a beating Saturday night when the House passed its 2,000-page version of ObamaCare by a 220-215 vote. Only one Republican, Joseph Cao of New Orleans, voted for the $1 trillion bill, while 39 Democrats voted against it. But Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) didn’t dwell on the bipartisan opposition to this legislative disgrace, instead saying, “We’re glad to take responsibility for this bill. And the credit.” Famous last words?

Perhaps. Pelosi has reportedly informed fellow Democrats that she is willing to lose seats in 2010 to get health care “reform” passed. And why not? As Wall Street Journal columnist James Taranto quipped, “At 69, Pelosi stands a good chance of facing a death panel before she leads a majority of this size again.”

ObamaCare’s prospects are uncertain in the Senate, where several Democrats have announced their opposition. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is possibly the most vulnerable Democrat in 2010 and may not be crazy about hanging this albatross around his neck. Still, we’re not hopeful that the Senate will refrain from passing something dreadful, if only less so than the House version.

As we noted Tuesday, part of the blame for passage falls on pro-life groups for forcing Republicans to vote for an amendment prohibiting funding of abortions via the “public option.” The intent was good, but ironically, the absence of the amendment might have brought the bill down to defeat. And it was likely a hollow victory anyway, as House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) says there is “no guarantee” the amendment will survive.

In fact, the real “right to life” issue is that every medical decision may soon be subject to both political and budgetary considerations. What ever happened to the old liberal slogan, “Keep your laws off my body”?

Furthermore, the bill raises a tax issue. Capital gains taxes will rise from 15 percent to 20 percent when the Bush tax cuts expire in January 2011, and the Democrats’ bill raises them again to 25.4 percent with a surtax. That’s a 69 percent increase, the result of which will be less investment, lower stock prices, economic turmoil and a drop in tax revenue. Of course, revenue is one of the gimmicks in the bill — the Senate bill counts on 10 years of new taxes to pay for just seven years of spending. And it includes a government-run long-term insurance program that begins collecting premiums in 2011 but waits until 2016 to pay benefits.

One other notable stinker is a tort provision that gives “incentive payments” to states that come up with “alternative medical liability law” that encourages “fair resolution” of disputes and “maintains access to affordable liability insurance.” The catch is that states can’t “limit attorneys’ fees or impose caps on damages.” DNC Chair Howard Dean was right: Democrats don’t have the guts to stand up to their ambulance-chasing sugar daddies.

Meanwhile, some 11 amendments requiring members of Congress to be enrolled in the public plan were rejected by Democrats. What’s good for the goose is apparently not so appealing to the gander.

And so the unconstitutional attempted takeover of one-sixth of the U.S. economy marches on.

SOURCE

Support BATFE Reform Bills S. 941 And H.R. 2296

November 14, 2009

As we’ve been reporting for months, Senator Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) have introduced S. 941, the “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform and Firearms Modernization Act of 2009” in the U.S. Senate.  Representatives Steve King (R-Iowa) and Zack Space (D-Ohio) have introduced a companion bill—H.R. 2296—in the U.S. House.  The bills would roll back unnecessary restrictions, correct errors, and codify longstanding congressional policies in the firearms arena.  These bipartisan bills are a vital step to modernize and improve BATFE operations.

Of highest importance, S. 941and H.R. 2296 totally rewrite the system of administrative penalties for licensed dealers, manufacturers and importers of firearms. Currently, for most violations, BATFE can only give a federal firearms license (FFL) holder a warning, or revoke his license.

S. 941 and H.R. 2296 would allow fines or license suspensions for less serious violations, while still allowing license revocation for the kind of serious violations that would block an investigation or put guns in the hands of criminals. This will help prevent the all-too-common situations where BATFE has revoked licenses for insignificant technical violations—such as improper use of abbreviations or filing records in the wrong order.

Among its other provisions, S. 941 and H.R. 2296 would:

·  Clarify the standard for “willful” violations—allowing penalties for intentional, purposeful violations of the law, but not for simple paperwork mistakes.

·  Improve the process for imposing penalties, notably by allowing FFLs to appeal BATFE penalties to a neutral administrative law judge, rather than to an employee of BATFE itself.

·  Allow a licensee a period of time to liquidate inventory when he goes out of business. During this period, all firearms sold would be subject to a background check by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

·  Allow a grace period for people taking over an existing firearms business to correct problems in the business’s records—so if a person inherited a family gun store (for example), the new owner couldn’t be punished for the previous owner’s recordkeeping violations.

·  Reform the procedures for consideration of federal firearms license applications. Under S. 941, denial of an application would require notification to the applicant, complete with reasons for the denial. Additionally, an applicant would be allowed to provide supplemental information and to have a hearing on the application.

·  Require BATFE to establish clear investigative guidelines.

·  Clarify the licensing requirement for gunsmiths, distinguishing between repair and other gunsmith work and manufacture of a firearm. This would stop BATFE from arguing that minor gunsmithing or refinishing activities require a manufacturers’ license.

·  Eliminate a provision of the Youth Handgun Safety Act that requires those under 18 to have written permission to use a handgun for lawful purposes (such as competitive shooting or safety training)—even when the parent or guardian is present.

·  Permanently ban creation of a centralized electronic index of out of business dealers’ records—a threat to gun owners’ privacy that Congress has barred through appropriations riders for more than a decade.

·  Allow importation and transfer of new machineguns by firearm and ammunition manufacturers for use in developing or testing firearms and ammunition, and training customers. In particular, ammunition manufacturers fulfilling government contracts need to ensure that their ammunition works reliably. S. 941 and H.R. 2296 would also provide for the transfer and possession of new machineguns by professional film and theatrical organizations.

·  Repeal the Brady Act’s “interim” waiting period provisions, which expired in 1998.

·  Give BATFE sole responsibility for receiving reports of multiple handgun sales. (Currently, dealers also have to report multiple sales to state or local agencies, a requirement that has shown little or no law enforcement value.) State and local agencies could receive these reports upon request to BATFE, but would have to comply strictly with current requirements to destroy these records after 20 days, unless the person buying the guns turns out to be prohibited from receiving firearms.

·  Restore a policy that allowed importation of barrels, frames and receivers for non-importable firearms, when they can be used as repair or replacement parts.

S. 941 represents the first time such BATFE reform legislation has been introduced in the Senate.  However, the House passed similar legislation (H.R. 5092) in the 109th Congress by a 277-131 vote.  A majority of the House–224 congressmen–cosponsored H.R. 4900 in the 110th Congress.

A fact sheet on S. 941/H.R. 2296 can be found here.

 

As of this writing, S. 941 has 16 cosponsors, and H.R. 2296 has 193 cosponsors.

Please be sure to contact your U.S. Senators and Representative, and ask them to cosponsor and support S. 941 and H.R. 2296! You can call your U.S. Senators at (202) 224-3121, and your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121.

SOURCE