Clinton/Feinstein Gun Ban Could Come up in
the Senate Soon
South Dakota Gun Owners E-mail Alert
PO Box 3845, Rapid City, SD 57709
(605) 737-5583
LibertyTeeth@sdgo.org http://www.SDGO.org
An alert from Gun Owners of America - http://www.gunowners.org
Friday, July 22, 2005
While the big news of the day is President Bush's pick for the Supreme Court
(more on this below), Gun Owners of America is hearing rumblings that the Senate
will soon be considering legislation to slow down the number of frivolous
lawsuits against gun makers.
Although SDGO and GOA are supportive of this legislation, S. 397, we must
remember that anti-gun Senators used this legislation last year to load it up
with all kinds of anti-gun riders -- things like gun show restrictions,
semi-auto bans and more.
In the end, pro-gun supporters were forced to vote against (and kill) the
lawsuit protection bill in order to defeat the anti-gun amendments.
GOA told Majority Leader Bill Frist that all of this could have been avoided if
he used certain parliamentary maneuvers to keep Senator Dianne Feinstein from
offering her gun ban amendment to the bill. Later, when she tried to attach the
semi-auto ban to another bill, SDGO asked you to contact Frist and urge him to
use those parliamentary procedures.
Well, he did. And it worked. Feinstein & Co. were furious that Frist was acting
in such an "undemocratic" fashion. They railed against Frist and the Republican
leadership. But we escaped without getting ANY new gun restrictions. (You can
read about this victory by going to http://www.gunowners.org/a091404.htm on the
GOA website.)
Fast forward one year. Some Republicans have seemingly forgotten this key
success from last year, and seem willing to allow Sen. Feinstein to offer gun
control amendments to the gun makers' protection act.
The Washington Post reported last week that Sen. Feinstein is looking to offer a
gun ban when the lawsuit protection bill comes up for a vote in the next couple
of weeks. Feinstein said she "would try to limit sales of powerful 50 caliber
weapons so that they could only be sold through federally licensed dealers, not
at gun shows."
Unfortunately, rather than repeating a proven strategy for success, Senate
Republicans are reportedly adopting a VERY DANGEROUS plan. In fact, they would
be going down the same road that gave us both the semi-auto ban and the
McCain-Feingold incumbent protection act.
The Post quotes Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) as saying that the "strategy this
time would not be to dump the bill but remove anything objectionable in
conference with the House of Representatives."
OK, there are two problems with this strategy. First, they don't need to "dump"
the bill. Why not just use the parliamentary procedures (described at http://www.gunowners.org/a030204a.htm
on the GOA website) which would prevent -- and have prevented in the past --
anti-gun amendments from even being offered in the first place?
Second, it's very dangerous to ask Senators to vote for gun control legislation,
on the promise that it will be killed later on. You wouldn't try this approach
out in the woods. When is the best time to kill a poisonous snake? Answer: the
first chance you get. The longer you let it live, the better chance it has to
bite you.
This is exactly what happened in 2002, when many senators voted for the
McCain-Feingold restrictions on free speech, based on the assumption that the
conference committee would clean up the bill later and the Supreme Court would
overturn it.
Gun owners are now well aware that the conference committee never cleaned up the
McCain-Feingold incumbent protection bill, and draconian restrictions on the
ability of Gun Owners to inform people of their legislators' anti-gun records
went to the President's desk.
President Bush then signed the bill, also relying on the presumption that the
Supreme Court would strike down unconstitutional provisions that were in it.
Well, wrong again. The Supreme Court upheld the restrictions in December, 2003.
This is also the SAME FAILED STRATEGY that gave us the semi-auto ban. Pro-gun
Senators refused to filibuster the semi-auto ban – when Senator Feinstein
offered it as an amendment to the crime bill in November of 1993 -- arguing that
they would remove the language in conference! Sound familiar?
The ban survived the conference committee and was happily signed into law by
President Clinton. Were it not for the sunset provision, the semi-auto ban would
still be the law of the land.
Remember, you always kill a poisonous snake the first chance you get. One can
only assume that a conference committee will "take care of the problem" if one
ignores the determination of Ted Kennedy, Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer.
ACTION: Please urge Senator Bill Frist to do whatever it takes to keep anti-gun
amendments off of the gun makers' protection act. Ask him to use ANY and ALL of
the parliamentary maneuvers that he has at his disposal to keep Dianne Feinstein
from attaching her gun ban to S. 397. Urge him to use the power of the majority
to stand for the Bill of Rights.
You can call Senator Frist at (202) 224-3344, or go to http://www.frist.senate.gov
and select "Contact Senator Frist" under the "About Senator Frist" heading to
send a message similar to the one below.
Please note: Even if you do not live in Tennessee, Sen. Frist will probably
appreciate your opinion since he is looking to represent you in the future as
the next President of the United States.
----- Pre-written letter -----
Dear Senator Frist:
South Dakota Gun Owners informs me that Senator Dianne Feinstein and her cohorts
are looking to offer gun control amendments to the gun makers' protection act,
S. 397. I want you to know that the minimal gains this legislation will give us
should NOT be accepted in exchange for Feinstein-style gun control.
You should also know that I am very wary of promises that the offending gun
control language will be taken out of the bill in a conference committee. Those
are the same kinds of failed promises that I have heard in years past when we
got stuck with the Clinton-Feinstein semi-auto ban in 1994 and the
McCain-Feingold free speech restrictions in 2002.
Instead, I would encourage you to use the SAME SUCCESSFUL STRATEGY that you used
last year to keep gun control off of the class action lawsuit bill. I would urge
you to use any and all parliamentary tools at your disposal to prevent this
amendment from being offered
to the gun makers' protection act.
Gun Owners of America has listed how this can be done, step by step, at http://www.gunowners.org/a030204a.htm
on its website. Thank you.
Sincerely,
---------------------------------------
Bush Makes Supreme Court Nomination
As you know, President Bush has nominated Judge John G. Roberts, Jr., to replace
the retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Roberts served as the
deputy solicitor general in the Bush I administration and has briefly served on
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. In all candor, not much is known
about this "stealth candidate." There are indications that he believes in
judicial restraint, but there is really not much of a paper trail -- especially
regarding the Second Amendment -- to be sure of his approach to the
Constitution.
On the one hand, choosing stealth candidates has given us bad judges like David
Souter. Ann Coulter is certainly a notable conservative who is out front,
leading the charge against any such stealth nominee. On the other hand, choosing
a candidate who does not have a paper trail could be a brilliant strategy to
prevent him from being "Borked."
All of this to say, Gun Owners of America will be looking forward to the
nomination hearings with great anticipation. Please stay tuned.