Well, Mr. Zumbo has maybe seen the error of his ways, but he HAS been shown that actions have consequences, and personal responsibility is where the turkeys come to roost.

I find Ted Nugent to be shameless huckster, and wonder how much he charged to "loan" his "friend", Mr. Zumbo his site for the apology. Probably the last major shooting/hunting site in the Continental U.S. that would do that. But, my wife says I am a cynic. I can't imagine why.

I do wish Mr. Zumbo well in his retirement.

Whether his second apology is sincere or not, his subsequent actions and writings will show.

The larger problem is, we now have two measures, given impetus by Mr. Zumbo's writings, that will affect all shooters/hunters negatively, if passed. HR 1022 (does anyone see the irony in that number?) and HR 297. We need to let our elected representatives know what we require them to do.

NRA.ILA.ORG has links and addresses. You don't have to be a NRA member to use them, but If you aren't a member, you should be!

A word to the wise. When you contact your elected representatives:

Like in debate, Be Brilliant, Be Brief, BEGONE! The last two are more important. Politicians have a short attention span.

Do I even need to mention:
Be polite
Do not become foul mouthed or abusive.
Then remember what your representative does, so if he/she displeases you, joining with people of like persuasion may defeat them at the next election.

Iligitimi non Carborundum!

Hey Sniper, I'm not familiar with these numbers. Must be living under a rock or something. Could you please brief me on them? Thanx in advance.

NRA-ILA Grassroots Alert Vol. 14, No. 8 02/23/07



States with updates this issue: Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming.


THE MOST SWEEPING GUN BAN EVER INTRODUCED IN CONGRESS;
McCarthy Bill Bans Millions More Guns Than The Clinton Gun Ban

On Feb. 14, 2007, Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) introduced H.R. 1022, a bill with the stated purpose, “to reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes.”

McCarthy’s verbiage warrants explanation. Presumably, what she means by “assault weapons ban” is the Clinton Gun Ban of 1994. Congress allowed the ban to expire in 2004 for multiple reasons, including the fact that federal, state and local law enforcement agency studies showed that guns affected by the ban had been used in only a small percentage of crime, before and after the ban was imposed.

With the nation’s murder rate 43% lower than in 1991, and the re-legalized guns still used in only a small percentage of crime, reauthorizing the Clinton Gun Ban would be objectionable enough. But McCarthy’s “other purposes” would make matters even worse. H.R. 1022 would ban every gun banned by the Clinton ban, plus millions more guns, including:

• Every gun made to comply with the Clinton ban. (The Clinton ban dictated the kinds of grips, stocks and attachments new guns could have. Manufacturers modified new guns to the Clinton requirements. H.R. 1022 would ban the modified guns too.)

• Guns exempted by the Clinton ban. (Ruger Mini-14s and -30s and Ranch Rifles; .30 cal. carbines; and fixed-magazine, semi-automatic, center-fire rifles that hold more than 10 rounds.)

• All semi-automatic shotguns. (E.g., Remington, Winchester, Beretta and Benelli, used for hunting, sport shooting, and self-defense. H.R. 1022 would ban them because they have “any characteristic that can function as a grip,” and would also ban their main component, called the “receiver.”)

• All detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles-including, for example, the ubiquitous Ruger 10/22 .22 rimfire-because they have “any characteristic that can function as a grip.”

• Target shooting rifles. (E.g., the three centerfire rifles most popular for marksmanship competitions: the Colt AR-15, the Springfield M1A and the M1 “Garand.”)

• Any semi-automatic shotgun or rifle an Attorney General one day claims isn’t “sporting,” even though the constitutions of the U.S. and 44 states, and the laws of all 50 states, recognize the right to use guns for defense.

• 65 named guns (the Clinton law banned 19 by name); semi-auto fixed-magazine pistols of over 10 rounds capacity; and frames, receivers and parts used to repair or refurbish guns.

H.R. 1022 would also ban the importation of magazines exempted by the Clinton ban, ban the sale of a legally-owned “assault weapon” with a magazine of over 10 rounds capacity, and begin backdoor registration of guns, by requiring private sales of banned guns, frames, receivers and parts to be conducted through licensed dealers. Finally, whereas the Clinton Gun Ban was imposed for a 10-year trial period, H.R. 1022 would be a permanent ban.

Please be sure to contact your U.S. Representative and urge him or her to oppose
H.R. 1022!
************************************************
This one apppears innocuous, but note the threat of financial withholding, and other government "encouragement".
*************************************************

H.R. 297, the “NICS Improvement Act of 2007”

This bill, cosponsored by Reps. John Dingell (D-Mich.), Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) and others, would improve availability of criminal history and other records for conducting background checks on firearm buyers. It also addresses concerns over past implementation actions by the FBI, prohibits the FBI from charging a “user fee” for background checks on gun buyers, and directs the General Accounting Office to audit and report to the Congress on past expenditures for NICS record improvements.

Many of the problems encountered in recent legislative debates over gun control—especially the 1999 debate on gun show regulation—center on the inadequacy of NICS records. Inaccurate or incomplete records delay firearm purchases and result in wrongful denials of law-abiding buyers.

This bill would help fix those problems. It sets specific goals and timetables and details the records improvements that are required. Unfortunately, the language in the original Brady Act may have allowed the previous $200 million intended for this purpose to be spent on largely unrelated projects—an issue addressed by the GAO audit provision.

Importantly, H.R. 297 provides for the removal of disqualifying records on individuals who are no longer prohibited from possessing a firearm. For instance, if a person was at one time committed to a mental institution, but was then found not to have any mental illness, that record should be removed from instant check databases. Additionally, in non-mental health areas, NRA is aware of a number of cases where arrest or conviction records have been left on file even after charges were dropped or rights were restored.

The core of the bill is a requirement that federal agencies and states provide all relevant records to the FBI for use in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). This would generally include records of convicted felons, fugitives from justice, persons convicted of misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence, and persons subject to domestic restraining orders, as well as federal records of illegal aliens. It also requires removal of records that are incorrect, or irrelevant to determining a person’s eligibility to receive a firearm.

The bill also requires transmittal of records of those people defined under federal law and regulations as having been adjudicated mentally defective or committed to a mental institution. Under current federal law, the requirement does not apply to records of voluntary commitments or commitments for observation, and the bill makes clear that all information is subject to applicable privacy rules. The Attorney General is directed to work with state agencies and the mental health community to develop additional protocols for privacy of records.

If a state does not provide 60% of the required records within two years, the Attorney General may penalize the state by withholding up to 3% of the state’s Byrne Grant funds. If a state does not provide 90% of required records within five years, the Attorney General shall withhold 5% of Byrne Grant funds. (A waiver is allowed based on “substantial evidence” of the state’s “reasonable effort” to comply.)

As an incentive for compliance, three years after the enactment of the act, states may receive waivers (for up to 2 years) of the 10% matching requirements for Criminal History Improvement Grants, if they provide 90% of the required information.

$750 million is authorized over three years to assist states in improving their databases relevant to NICS, or developing their own instant check capabilities. Another grant program would authorize $375 million over three years to state courts to improve and transmit their disposition records to NICS.