Contact Your Senators to Stop Feinstein's Proposed Semi-Auto Firearm Importation Ban

[JohnC]

Contact Your Senators to Stop Feinstein's Proposed Semi-Auto Firearm Importation Ban

As we reported last week, U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), sponsor of the federal "assault weapon" and "large" magazine "ban" of 1994-2004, is asking President Barack Obama to direct the BATFE to reinterpret a provision of the Gun Control Act of 1968 to prohibit the importation of various semi-automatic firearms and their parts.

In a letter to Obama, the text of which was included in an article published by the Daily Caller last Thursday, Feinstein said that, "at a minimum," the BATFE should:

prohibit importation of all semiautomatic rifles that can accept, or be readily converted to accept, a large capacity ammunition magazine of more than 10 rounds . . . . prohibit semiautomatic rifles with fixed magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds, prohibit the importation of the frame or receiver of any prohibited rifle . . . . prohibit the practice of importing assault rifles in parts …. prohibit the use of a "thumbhole" stock . . . . and prohibit the importation of assault pistols.

This new request is similar to the type of failed legislation Feinstein introduced in Congress last year (which would have imposed the biggest gun ban in American history), only this time she's trying to achieve some of her ends through soliciting the president's use of executive authority over firearm imports.

One might think it doesn't make sense for Feinstein to agitate for gun control in an election year, especially one in which a number of anti-gun senators are going to be facing the voters. However, she is religiously committed to gun control and has been for a long time.

Please take action NOW to stop Feinstein's proposed restrictions on the importation of firearms. Please contact your U.S. Senators TODAY, and tell them to OPPOSE Sen. Feinstein's request that the Obama Administration "take the necessary regulatory steps" to ban the importation of various semi-automatic firearms and their parts.

You can contact your U.S. Senators by using the "Write Your Lawmakers" tool at www.NRAILA.org. You may also contact your Senators by phone at (202) 224-3121.

Here we go again. This evil heifer never gives up! :down:

[Worriedman]

And you think contacting Alexander and Corker will do any good?

[Guest semiautots]

Alexander will soon be gone, we can hope.  I mean, how many years has he lived off of government fat paycheck jobs?

[Pat]

Jesus christ, it never stops. Where's the guys proposing pro-gun legislation? Sheesh. I'm glad that ignorant broad is getting as old as she is. You can only ruin other peoples' lives for so long before it catches up to you.

[Guest semiautots]

Obama could screw us good with an EO.  That's what Bush 41 did to outlaw importation of certain rifles.  ATF could screw us good with some new regulations covering everything from how many guns to what kind of ammo.  ATF has done this many times before.

 

The real question is what we are gonna do about it.

[RichardR]

Well we all know that they are never going to stop until they have made us into a "gun-free nation" aka no privately owned firearms, just like pretty much every-where else in the world.

So I'm really not surprised, chip chip chip here, chip chip chip there, chip chip chip every-where ...

[A.J. Holst]

Whoa, what's an "assault pistol" ?

[Oh Shoot]

Whoa, what's an "assault pistol" ?

 

Federally defined in 94 AWB and in her recently proposed new one also, that ameliorated into the Manchin-Toomey bill.

 

Basically, any pistol that accepts removable magazine in other than pistol grip.

 

Several states include pistols in their "assault weapons" statutes.

 

- OS

Edited March 30, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[JohnC]

So let's play with scenarios here.

What if Obama does the EO on this.

What action can we take to stop it or nullify it?

Because clearly, it is against the majorities wishes and something they couldn't even get to pass in congress. So it is totally wrong and unjustified on every level.

[JohnC]

What can we do? One day there will be so many laws that all you can do is violate them. Any other ideas, other than chains?

It was a serious question.

I'm not looking for a "Battle of Athens" here, but am wanting to know of a peaceful and legal process to stop it or nullify an unlawful unconstitutional EO. :up:

[sigmtnman]

He was serious.  You will have to violate it. Then whoever is prosecuted will have to take it to court and find out where the cookie crumbles.

Edited March 30, 2014 by sigmtnman

[Oh Shoot]

....

Because clearly, it is against the majorities wishes ...

 

Dunno about that at all. I'd posit that if federal gun laws were done by majority vote, we would be allowed to have single shot .22 rifles. Maybe.

 

Doubt we'd be carrying them just with majority vote in this state.

 

- OS

Edited March 30, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[Guest theconstitutionrocks]

If she can be stopped, great....if not, then Amer Jur. 177 & 256 kicks in and it doesn't matter anyway. Course when has the unconstitutionality of a "law" stopped the courts right?

[battleop]

Whoa, what's an "assault pistol" ?

 

 

AR-15, AK47, type guns converted to meet the definition of a pistol.

[Titansfan]

As others have eluded to, Feinstien is requesting the Pres, to set the regulation or by EO. 

 

In regard to further Ex. orders, it's now doubt that many Democrats in contested seats are running for cover, distancing themselves from political hot potatoes such as Obamacare and gun control.  I am predicting a GOP or Tea Party sweep of Congress with DNC loosing seats in the House and will lose control of the Senate.  Thinking at that point from this Nov, to Jan. we see one EO after another. 

[Worriedman]

Doubt we'd be carrying them just with majority vote in this state.

 

- OS

I normally agree with your take on most issues, but on this one, I disagree.  I propose that if there was a vote on gun rights issues, we would see basically the percentage that elected Haslam in the last governor's race go for the ability to keep, bear and wear arms, about the same number that voted to approve the hunting and fishing amendment in that same plebiscite.  The Volunteer State is still more rural than citified, and as such I believe we would carry the issue in favor of firearms Rights.

Edited April 1, 2014 by Worriedman

[Oh Shoot]

I normally agree with your take on most issues, but on this one, I disagree.  I propose that if there was a vote on gun rights issues, we would see basically the percentage that elected Haslam in the last governor's race go for the ability to keep, bear and wear arms, about the same number that voted to approve the hunting and fishing amendment in that same plebiscite.  The Volunteer State is still more rural than citified, and as such I believe we would carry the issue in favor of firearms Rights.

 

Well, we won't be testing the hypothesis. Fortunately IMO.

 

- OS

[DaveTN]

So let's play with scenarios here.

What if Obama does the EO on this.

What action can we take to stop it or nullify it?

An Executive Order can be challenged in court. I’m sure the NRA and other groups will try; but the White House has a sea of lawyers, the best in the country, at their fingertips.

What can we do? Is a good question though. The pro-gun rallies didn’t work; the turnout was pathetic.
 

Because clearly, it is against the majorities wishes and something they couldn't even get to pass in congress. So it is totally wrong and unjustified on every level.

The majority of the public? I doubt a ban on foreign import of guns and ammo would be voted down in a public election.

[Guest semiautots]

Gun owners are a growing minority.  Kids are brainwashed that guns are bad and grow up to think guns are bad.  The 2nd Amendment is in grave danger of relegation in future generations. 

 

Unless we take back education, liberalism will win.

[gregintenn]

Gun owners are a growing minority.  Kids are brainwashed that guns are bad and grow up to think guns are bad.  The 2nd Amendment is in grave danger of relegation in future generations. 

 

Unless we take back education, liberalism will win.

I don't know about that. Have you seen the sales figures for the past couple of years?

[Guest TankerHC]

Senators wont do anything, But they do not need to. Michigan called for a Constitutional Convention last week. 34th State (2/3rds). The threshold has been crossed, Boehner just doesn't want to admit the Governors and State Legislative bodies used the Constitution to take the power from the Congress (Who has held every Constitutional Convention and made all of the Amendments). He wants to be "very careful". Well screw Boehner the Progressive.

 

He wants to be "very careful" because they are calling for a Constitutional Balanced Budget Amendment. The only real problem is that some are saying once a State asks, it has to happen, while others say it doesnt. Constitutional Scholars say "Yes, its spelled out, if the States call for it, it has to happen".

 

The is the ONLY chance, probably for generations, that there will be an opportunity once and for all to fix the 2A issue.

 

Louisiana Liberals are saying this will damage the US Political system. BS, its written into the Constitution by the Founders for just this situation (And those like it). A do nothing Congress, an out of Control President and time to make some changes.

 

The House, Senate and the President are now terrified. They may not act like it (Boehner is and so are the Liberals) They are terrified because the States are about to exercise their real Power.

 

States cannot rescind. The left says a rescinded State that changed their mine must be excluded.

 

If it happens. I think we might thank Mark Levin. Come on 33rd Constitutional Convention.

Edited April 2, 2014 by TankerHC

[Guest semiautots]

I don't know about that. Have you seen the sales figures for the past couple of years?

 

Have you seen the last 2 presidential elections?

[JohnC]

Senators wont do anything, But they do not need to. Michigan called for a Constitutional Convention last week. 34th State (2/3rds). The threshold has been crossed, Boehner just doesn't want to admit the Governors and State Legislative bodies used the Constitution to take the power from the Congress (Who has held every Constitutional Convention and made all of the Amendments). He wants to be "very careful". Well screw Boehner the Progressive.
 
He wants to be "very careful" because they are calling for a Constitutional Balanced Budget Amendment. The only real problem is that some are saying once a State asks, it has to happen, while others say it doesnt. Constitutional Scholars say "Yes, its spelled out, if the States call for it, it has to happen".
 
The is the ONLY chance, probably for generations, that there will be an opportunity once and for all to fix the 2A issue.
 
Louisiana Liberals are saying this will damage the US Political system. BS, its written into the Constitution by the Founders for just this situation (And those like it). A do nothing Congress, an out of Control President and time to make some changes.
 
The House, Senate and the President are now terrified. They may not act like it (Boehner is and so are the Liberals) They are terrified because the States are about to exercise their real Power.
 
States cannot rescind. The left says a rescinded State that changed their mine must be excluded.
 
If it happens. I think we might thank Mark Levin. Come on 33rd Constitutional Convention.

How many of those states are pro-2A? Do you really think this is going to go well for us?

I fear it could go bad myself.

[Guest TankerHC]

How many of those states are pro-2A? Do you really think this is going to go well for us?

I fear it could go bad myself.

 

 

Right now 25. The 34 are for-sures and 4 need to be clarified on whether they opted out or opted out and reapplied. If a Convention is called all 50 States will have to vote. There are 29 definites and probably at least 5 Democrats, probably more. Take a look at the laws, plenty of Amendments have not been ratified by all States but are still law (13th Amendment for example was only ratified by MS 2 years or so ago).

 

I feel a Constitutional Convention would go in our favor.

[Guest TankerHC]

How many of those states are pro-2A? Do you really think this is going to go well for us?

I fear it could go bad myself.

 

Should say "You are right" it could go bad. But at the moment it cant get a whole lot worse. (Well it could but no one will do anything), a Constitutional Convention will re-enforce a lot of things, along with the CONSERVATIVES taking back the Senate and taking control of the House. If the same ole same ole win again, then that's exactly what this Country will have.

 

Problem with the "same ole" thing is that the voters are going to HAVE TO buck Historical trends or 80% plus of the incumbents jobs are safe.