Robin
.475 A&M Magnum
Its gnat season.
Robin
Robin
Collin's challenging the Safe Act?
- Thread starter Defilade
- Start date
I won't disagree with some of what you said. I think the real difficulty will be to get this bill out of committee and voted on. The Republican leadership RINO's in the House and Senate are against us,- they just like to use us. Fuckin Ryan is a double talking prick (witness his immigration statements and his actual actions). Now, he hides behind his leadership security when in DC, and behind his fence at home in WI.
I don't necessarily see Collins doing this to shore up his base over stock trade stuff because I am aware he was working on this at least 6 months before it became public last week.
ArmedCorgi
.475 A&M Magnum
It's possible it could work if we get all the votes from states who don't ban guns, simpathetic to the cause of helping those of us in ban states to enjoy the freedom they enjoy and as a measure to protect against the further spread of laws like the safe act. The bill may just pick up in popularity and get the support it needs. We shall see. At this point, its something. Not gonna be shocked if it dies in committee, will be jovial if it passes and gets signed into law and enforced.
Agreed Robin.
My take, the only way Unsafe goes away is through a SCOTUS ruling. I don't trust politicians to do a God Damn thing for us. It isn't in their best interest to do so and even SCOTUS is a longshot.
The next avenue of remedy is for the DOJ to take action against States who infringe on 2nd Amendment rights. This COULD happen if Trump got off AG Sessions back over his recusal from the Russia Fake News Investigation.
To defeat the enemy, you have to think like the enemy. Tell me why the Speaker of the House or the Senate Majority Leader would open up this can of worms for the people of NY? Is it in their best interests to do so ? Will they lose support in the way of registered voters in their districts if they view the legislation favorably?
What's in it for them...
If you think for a New York minute that there are "Patriots" in the halls of Congress who will lay down their lucrative careers to support something as small and insignificant as the 2nd Amendment then there isn't a hell of a lot more I can say.
This bill, just like others before it is mostly symbolism. Designed specifically to grab headlines and shore up support at the ballot box for the author in his district.
R's have control over all branches of Government yet still no ACA repeal, no tax reform, no immigration reform outside of Executive Orders, nothing is getting done because they're too busy denying the President his agenda and I'm supposed to believe Federal legislation to erase UnSafe will defy the odds and be signed into law ?
My take, the only way Unsafe goes away is through a SCOTUS ruling. I don't trust politicians to do a God Damn thing for us. It isn't in their best interest to do so and even SCOTUS is a longshot.
The next avenue of remedy is for the DOJ to take action against States who infringe on 2nd Amendment rights. This COULD happen if Trump got off AG Sessions back over his recusal from the Russia Fake News Investigation.
To defeat the enemy, you have to think like the enemy. Tell me why the Speaker of the House or the Senate Majority Leader would open up this can of worms for the people of NY? Is it in their best interests to do so ? Will they lose support in the way of registered voters in their districts if they view the legislation favorably?
What's in it for them...
If you think for a New York minute that there are "Patriots" in the halls of Congress who will lay down their lucrative careers to support something as small and insignificant as the 2nd Amendment then there isn't a hell of a lot more I can say.
This bill, just like others before it is mostly symbolism. Designed specifically to grab headlines and shore up support at the ballot box for the author in his district.
R's have control over all branches of Government yet still no ACA repeal, no tax reform, no immigration reform outside of Executive Orders, nothing is getting done because they're too busy denying the President his agenda and I'm supposed to believe Federal legislation to erase UnSafe will defy the odds and be signed into law ?
fartgamer
.223 Rem
Amazing how House of Cards mirrors real life(or the opposite)............including the murders most likely.
Yes, how do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time. Sometimes that's how it gets done. And yeah, I was onboard and still would be today.
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Nah. Fake enthusiasm is like fake news.
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
You're confused. I was a cheerleader for the Hartford Hawks in the early 80's. Hung that up after my concussion. Just a guy trying not to be overtly negative and keep the faith, that's all. In no way am I butt hurt and there is no need to praise anyone. Just think it is more constructive not being a fly in the ointment.
Atty
.38 Special
Tom Reed supports Chris Collins’ gun rights bill
WASHINGTON — The signs calling for the repeal of New York’s SAFE Act have become a fixture in the landscape of many parts of upstate New York, including the Finger Lakes.
Now a western New York congressman is sponsoring legislation he claims would do what so many Second Amendment supporters have called for since the state Legislature adopted it with virtually no public debate in 2013: Repeal the controversial gun-control legislation called Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act, or SAFE Act.
Rep. Chris Collins, R-27 of Clarence, said Monday that he is sponsoring legislation called the Second Amendment Guarantee Act, which he said would prohibit states or localities from prohibiting conduct and levying taxes or penalties related to shotguns or rifles.
Collins’ district includes the western half of Ontario County.
The move has the initial support of Congressman Tom Reed, R-23 of Corning, who represents the eastern half of Ontario County, as well as Seneca and Yates counties.
While not familiar with all of the bill’s details, Reed said in a conference call with reporters on Monday that he supports the thrust of the legislation.
“I stand for the repeal of the SAFE Act,” Reed said. “Of course I’m going to be there (supporting the effort).”
Collins said the repeal of the SAFE ACT is a priority, given its “blatant encroachment of citizens’ Second Amendment rights.”
Gov. Andrew Cuomo pushed for gun-control measures following the massacre of 26 people, including 20 children, in Newtown, Conn., in 2012. The SAFE Act expanded the definition of assault weapons and instituted restrictions on the resale of guns. It also included new rules concerning access to guns by people with serious mental illnesses.
Senate and Assembly Republicans, including local representatives, have consistently called for its repeal, saying, among other things, that it is an infringement on gun owners’ rights and does not make anyone safer.
Cuomo defended the bill and took aim at Collins, with whom he has been at odds over other issues, including the recent House healthcare legislation, which included an amendment Collins co-sponsored that would force the state to pick up the full cost of Medicaid programs.
“In a blatant political ploy, Chris Collins is turning his back on New Yorkers and putting millions of people at profound risk,” Cuomo said. “By fighting to roll back vital legislation that protects the people of the Empire State, Collins is demonstrating once again that he is beholden to no one but the gun lobby and entrenched special interests.”
Rep. John Katko’s office could not be reached for comment on his position Tuesday afternoon.
WASHINGTON — The signs calling for the repeal of New York’s SAFE Act have become a fixture in the landscape of many parts of upstate New York, including the Finger Lakes.
Now a western New York congressman is sponsoring legislation he claims would do what so many Second Amendment supporters have called for since the state Legislature adopted it with virtually no public debate in 2013: Repeal the controversial gun-control legislation called Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act, or SAFE Act.
Rep. Chris Collins, R-27 of Clarence, said Monday that he is sponsoring legislation called the Second Amendment Guarantee Act, which he said would prohibit states or localities from prohibiting conduct and levying taxes or penalties related to shotguns or rifles.
Collins’ district includes the western half of Ontario County.
The move has the initial support of Congressman Tom Reed, R-23 of Corning, who represents the eastern half of Ontario County, as well as Seneca and Yates counties.
While not familiar with all of the bill’s details, Reed said in a conference call with reporters on Monday that he supports the thrust of the legislation.
“I stand for the repeal of the SAFE Act,” Reed said. “Of course I’m going to be there (supporting the effort).”
Collins said the repeal of the SAFE ACT is a priority, given its “blatant encroachment of citizens’ Second Amendment rights.”
Gov. Andrew Cuomo pushed for gun-control measures following the massacre of 26 people, including 20 children, in Newtown, Conn., in 2012. The SAFE Act expanded the definition of assault weapons and instituted restrictions on the resale of guns. It also included new rules concerning access to guns by people with serious mental illnesses.
Senate and Assembly Republicans, including local representatives, have consistently called for its repeal, saying, among other things, that it is an infringement on gun owners’ rights and does not make anyone safer.
Cuomo defended the bill and took aim at Collins, with whom he has been at odds over other issues, including the recent House healthcare legislation, which included an amendment Collins co-sponsored that would force the state to pick up the full cost of Medicaid programs.
“In a blatant political ploy, Chris Collins is turning his back on New Yorkers and putting millions of people at profound risk,” Cuomo said. “By fighting to roll back vital legislation that protects the people of the Empire State, Collins is demonstrating once again that he is beholden to no one but the gun lobby and entrenched special interests.”
Rep. John Katko’s office could not be reached for comment on his position Tuesday afternoon.
The problem as I see it is there is not enough skin in the game for those who we need to support it as it does nothing for their constituencies. It's a non issue for most of the country aside from the Northeast, IL and CA. However it's a big thorn in the side of those who stand to lose face. Think Chucky and Gilly will support this should it ever make it to the Senate? Yeah, LOL...
With that said, I'd certainly like to see it gain some traction just not that optimistic about it moving anywhere.
Trump would probably sign it though if it ever made his desk. That's a plus.
With that said, I'd certainly like to see it gain some traction just not that optimistic about it moving anywhere.
Trump would probably sign it though if it ever made his desk. That's a plus.
fartgamer
.223 Rem
With Bombardo? Maybe if you need a divorce lawyer, ok.
Atty
.38 Special
Aquadoc
.177 BB
The hope is that The Republicans will realize that they have to deliver on some of their campaign promises and pass some legislation in support thereof. The 2018 elections are not that far away and the left is energized while the right is losing faith fast. So far nothing on Obamacare, no boarder wall, no tax reform. Zero. So maybe a pro 2A bill, almost all claim to be pro 2A, has a better chance now because it won't cause a ruckus in most of the country and they can all say they kept a campaign promise.
Last edited:
Sorta my point. The people we need to support it never made any such promises to their constituencies because it's not needed in most of the country therefore no skin in it for them to support it. Just my view we'll see how it goes.
Atty
.38 Special
I don't believe that the Republicans can retain control of the congress next year unless they do something to protect the Second Amendment. Trump used the Second Amendment more often than any other issue during his 2016 whistle stops.
Aquadoc
.177 BB
"The people we need to support it" claim to be pro 2A and run on pro 2A platforms. That includes both Republicans and Democrats. That's how they got elected in those free states. If SAGA is put before them, they will support it. We can truly hope for bipartisan support.
FrankenCub
.338 Win Mag
Doesn't Paul Rino "claim" to be pro 2A? I expect Hillary to survive terminal cancer before Rino lets it go anywhere.
FrankenCub
.338 Win Mag
The NRA has a habit of endorsing pols that have been useless, especially here in NY. He's been a major road block with so much else and with the connections he has, I don't see him doing what's right when the time comes. There's a few others that would be much better suited for his position. Guys we could trust.
And to be honest, this bill's passing would mean a huge lose of revenue for the NRA-ILA. How many 6 digit salaries do they have to pay out? I really feel this is exactly why we didn't, and wont, get direct involvement from the NRA against UnSAFE.
Aquadoc
.177 BB
NRA Endorses Paul Ryan for Re-election to U.S. House of Representatives
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
Paul Ryan has earned an “A+” from the NRA for this election.
Co-sponsored the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2015 that would ensure law-abiding Americans with concealed handgun permit can carry their firearms in other states that do not prohibit concealed carry.
I don't know but that sounds pro 2A enough to support our SAGA Act.
See link below:
NRA-ILA | NRA Endorses Paul Ryan for Re-election to U.S. House of Representatives
FrankenCub
.338 Win Mag
And yet that bill is dead in the water. Just because he co-sponcered it doesn't mean he allows it to go anywhere. With the amount of sponsors that bill had you'd think it would have gotten somewhere by now. Rino wants to keep his plush job and lieing comes easy,
Deplorable Me
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Constitution trumps states rights, individual rights trump state rights. It's a pro-choice thing. Libtards need to get the memo that the micro management nanny state is in trouble.
10th amendment is the words you are looking for on the first part
10th doesn't trump Rights specifically enumerated to free men under federal charter...
10th amendment gives the federal government power over the states on matters specifically mentioned in the US constitution, in this case I do believe i read somewhere in that document about gun ownership, thus fed trumps state
Yeah, we're in agreement, I was looking at it the other way, states have rights not specifically enumerated in US constitution... Some say Tomato some say Tomato and all that, LOL...
All good I figured if I elaborated we both would find out we are saying the same thing.
Sorry if I came off like an ass, been reading a few other of the posts on this (and other) forums and people are irritating me, so i start to come off as an ass even in posts like this when I'm not meaning to
GOYABEAN
.950 JDJ
You rang
