They must figure it's been long enough that you've forgotten we caught them dealing behind closed doors. Now they want credit for it, even if it means confirming David's and my stories at the time of the annual meeting.
Wayne the Baptist "comes to Jesus" on the evils of "sporting purposes."
Readers may well recall the contretemps at the time of the NRA national meeting when David Codrea and I broke the following story: SSI Exclusive: Negotiating Rights Away. Cynical Secret "Deal With The Devil" Confirmed. NRA, ATF& bi-partisan group of politicians agree to save ATF from itself and widen the definition of "sporting purposes." "A hole big enough to drive Diane Feinstein's limousine through."
We now have confirmation of a sort, both from the NRA and the NSSF, that SOMETHING along those lines was certainly happening at the time, Chris Cox's categorical denials notwithstanding. From the NSSF: Federal bill would revise Gun Control Act of 1968, prevent rifle ammo from being banned.
The legislation would reform federal laws in the following essential areas:
Eliminate ATF’s authority to reclassify popular rifle ammunition as “armor piercing ammunition.” Federal law regulating armor-piercing ammunition was intended by Congress to regulate handgun projectiles, but recently the law was used to attempt to ban popular rifle ammunition, notably M855/SS109 5.56×45 ammunition.
Eliminate restrictions on importation of non-National Firearms Act firearm or ammunition that may otherwise be lawfully possessed and sold within the United States. Based on the “sporting purposes” test, firearms that would be legal to manufacture, sell and possess in the United States have been banned from importation.
Protect shotguns, shotgun shells, and large-caliber rifles from arbitrary classification as “destructive devices.” When classified as a “destructive device,” a firearm falls under the National Firearms Act and is subjected to registration and taxes, and, in some states, cannot be possessed.
Broaden the temporary interstate transfer provision to allow temporary transfers for all lawful purposes rather than just for “sporting purposes.”
“This is one of the most important pieces of reform legislation that the firearms and ammunition industry has seen come before Congress in recent years,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “We applaud Rep. Bishop for his support of this legislation and of the Second Amendment, and we urge other members of Congress to co-sponsor this bill.”
So, the the subject of "sporting purposes" language in conjunction with the ATF's attempt to declare pistol grip shotguns as destructive devices was certainly being discussed, according to both the NSSF and the NRA's own announcement. This didn't just spring up last week like Topsy. (The NRA announcement is here: NRA Backs Federal Bill to Limit Arbitrary Federal Gun and Ammo Classifications)
As a faithful reader who is well-experienced in these matters wrote when forwarding the links above: "I think the language tracks fairly well with yours and David's story. Sporting purpose revision? Check! Destructive Devices revision? Check!"
For the record, our sources still stand behind their initial reports and we still stand by our stories at the time. What is evident is that whatever the NRA's motivations were, and whatever the GOP politicians intended with their negotiations with anti-firearm Democrats eager to save their bastard step-child ATF from another M855 disaster, our stories disrupted any deal which would have widened the "sporting purposes" language as the Democrats wanted. And now the NRA has had its come-to-Jesus moment and decided to reverse the play. This from folks who never evinced the least interest in attacking the "sporting purposes" language in the past. (Remember, too, that the NRA signed off on the "magnificent compromise" at the time that was the Gun Control Act of 1968 which brought us "sporting purposes" into American gun rights lexicon for the first time.)
Here's the NRA text from the newly-baptized and still dripping wet NRA:
Fairfax, Va. –The National Rifle Association today announced support for H.R. 2710, federal legislation aimed at limiting the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) from using executive overreach to undermine the Second Amendment. H.R. 2710 was introduced by United States Representative Rob Bishop (UT-1).
"This important legislation would prevent arbitrary ammunition bans like the one attempted earlier this year by the Obama Administration," said Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action. "With the support of America's law-abiding gun owners, the NRA was able to beat back Obama's attempt to ban ammunition used by millions of law-abiding Americans every day for target shooting, hunting, and self-defense. This legislation would fix the law to protect us from similar government overreach in the future."
H.R. 2710, which is commonly referred to as the "Lawful Purpose in Self Defense Act," would:
eliminate ATF's authority to reclassify popular rifle ammunition as "armor piercing ammunition;
provide for the lawful importation of any non-National Firearms Act firearm or ammunition that may otherwise be lawfully possessed and sold within the United States;
protect shotguns, shotgun shells, and larger caliber rifles from arbitrary classification as "destructive devices" which under federal law subjects them to onerous registration and taxation provisions and creates a ban on possession of the firearm in some states;
broaden the temporary interstate transfer provision to allow temporary transfers for all lawful purposes rather than just for "sporting purposes."
"On behalf of the NRA's five-million members, I want to thank Representative Bishop for his leadership in protecting our Second Amendment rights," added Cox. "Rob Bishop understands this is about freedom and protecting us from government overreach and intrusion."
So much for categorical denials, eh Chris?
Devils advocate, for just a second....
Myself and practically every NRA member I know have taken them to task on the 7n6 ban when called for PAC donations. Lots of people were pissed that the NRA couldn't even be bothered to make statement about it. Only when 855 was on the chopping block did the NRA decide it needed to act. Is it possible they have gotten enough negative feedback from that issue that they felt the need to work on the sporting purposes clause? Perhaps combined wth the "rumors" that Mike and David broke? In addition, removing the sporting purposes clause would eliminate the 855 issue too. Maybe it was all of the above?
Anyhow, I doubt very much 2710 will see the light of day, but one can dream. It would be an absolute game changer. Everything from Korean M1s to Russian AK kits would hit our shores in the hundreds of thousands.
It should also be noted for doubters such as myself, that as far as I can tell, the sporting purposes clause and the Heller ruling are mutually exclusive. In a perfect world, one or the other would eventually have to go.
Hang on a second. You originally reported hearing that the NRA was going to widen the sporting purposes clause, and Chris Cox denied it when asked. Later, after the bill restricting the sporting purposes clause had been introduced, you claim it was a 180-degree change from the original plan. Couldn't it also be that your original sources were 180-degrees off the mark?
Sure the NRA (like any large organization) has done some boneheaded things in the past, and it pays to be wary/eternally vigilant, but don't let your disdain for the organization lead you to accept specious rumors.
The ONLY WAY the NRA will ever get another dime of my money if if they get rid of GCA 1968 and NFA 1934. Otherwise, they can go piss up a rope, I'm tired of their betrayals of the Second Amendment. They've been caught selling out over and over again.
You know, if I was on the wrong side of the gun issue, you would be a constant irritation. Recently trashed a beg-a-thon letter from NRA.
Poor ol' Wayne...
P.S. Seems like your recent continental treks have energized your resolve.
Taking Heller on its face, almost all gun control falls. That is exactly why we are seeing so much legislative action across the country.
Remember now, the NRA opposed Heller all along, until the last minute when it was a foregone conclusion that it had to be done.
The NFA cannot withstand heller. Neither can GCA.
Discounting military service as a "qualification" slams "qualificiations" itself. Poll tax precedent nails NFA. Heller plus miller means autos MUST be protected.
"sporting purpose" is being clinged to for this reason. Heller left OPEN the notion that "training" can be "Imposed". As if "practice" is a function of government, rather than part of the right belonging to the people. I can see the possibility of sporting being replaced with training. I also see why it isn't already done. See, the instant training supplants sporting, pro gun legislators can have a hayday, portraying opponents as against safety training. Understand, EVERYTHING the party hacks do (on both "sides") is in relation to the next election. Its not about rights OR what is right to them pukes, its all about how can the use the "issue" to move the party power line forward. (a lot like muzzies there eh? Sharia is closer than most realize).
Anyway, from passing on cases by SCOTUS (because deciding has consequences) to skirting Heller and even ignoring the Second Amendment itself, gubmint isn't gonna let go of its longstanding gun control without a fight. In order to WIN that fight, the SIDES have to be defined. NOBODY who aims to WIN this fight for INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS operates behind closed doors, making DEALS with GOVERNMENT. The NRA is thusly EXPOSED which side it is on....and it isn't individual rights. The NRA is on the side of government control over rights. State Preemption is proof enough but add to it its support for due process incorporation (and its opposition to privileges and immunities structure). The truth becomes clear to all with open eyes. The NRA is that infiltrator destroying us from within.
It really irks me to hear lawmakers who should know better say things like, "I'm happy so-and-so supports the 2nd Amendment." Why don't they ever say things like, "I'm happy so-and-so decided not to break the law and violate people's rights?"
I think it was last week, the NRA put up an article about how they saved 855 ammo but used a picture of 7n6. I thought it ironic.
A proper reading of Miller reveals the Court's reasoning in its language. The words will prove themselves:
Absent a showing that a sawed off shot gun is a militia type weapon....
That was because Miller did not show up and the attorney representing him did not present a showing. So if there was a showing.... Then the NFA would have been dead in the water because the plain language of the statute only captures "sporting type weapons".
The only standing that an NFA law, which has included all such successive statutes is dead in the water. No one will argue this position, even pro gun attorneys, because that is not the way it was taught. They all follow the "precedent doctrine.
They do not look into the roots of the decision or the statutory history or we would not need to be having the BS go on.
In this case legislative history and intent is the Debates of the Constitution, the Framers comments in the Federalist Papers. If you back to the foundation all of it is there. They have nothing but the little pieces they have been chipping away at. But when you goo back to the foundation all their phony arguments don't hold a candle.
Post a Comment