Main Menu
Home
GunVoter Discussion
Welcome
Get Involved
Links
Search
Contact Us
News Feeds
Reference
Senators
Representatives
Senate Bills
House Bills
How To Use This Site
A Call To Communicate
Myths About Gun Control
American Hunters and Shooters Assoc.
Related Links
US Code Title 18 Chapter 44 - Firearm Law
US Code Title 26 Chapter 53 - NFA Law
The House
The Senate
The White House
The Declaration of Independence
The Constitution
The Bill of Rights
History
The Sullivan Act (in progress)
National Firearms Act of 1934
Federal Firearms Act of 1938
Gun Control Act of 1968
Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986
The Lautenberg Amendment of 1996
United States vs. Miller (1938)
Senate Report on the Second Amendment (1982)
DOJ Report on the Second Amendment (2004)
FAQ on the Death of the AWB
The Heller Files
Free Wayne

Free Wayne Webring

Home/Join | List | Next | Previous | Random

alt-webring.com


Gun Law News

I present for your consideration Sportsmen for Obama? The next presidential election will be especially important in case the Democrats retain control of the House and Senate.

 
H.A.1156 - To defund 924(p) - Senate Amendment 1626. PDF Print E-mail
User Rating: / 1
PoorBest 
Thursday, 29 June 2006

Details

  • Sponsor - Musgrave
  • Proposed - June 28, 2006
  • Congressional Record Link - HA1156
  • Amends - H.R.5672 - An appropriations bill.
  • Amendments - None.
  • Vote - Roll no 343 - June 28, 2006, 230-191 Amendment passed.
  • Results - No change in law.

Status

June 29, 2006 - H.R.5672 is still on the House floor.

June 29, 2006 - H.R.5672 has moved to the Senate Appropriations Committee.

July 13, 2006 - H.R.5672 Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 516. 

Synopsis

The bill prevented federal funds from being used in connection with enforcement of 924(p) which was enacted in 2005 as Senate Amendment 1626 - Child Safety Lock Act of 2005, a trigger lock law.

Testimony of Rep. Musgrave

Mrs. MUSGRAVE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

   Mr. Chairman, my amendment will prohibit any funds in this bill from being used to enforce the burdensome trigger lock law that was passed and that went into effect on April 24 of this year. I believe this law is needless and equivalent to a tax on citizens who purchase firearms.

   The law states that all licensed manufacturers, licensed importers and licensed dealers must provide a trigger lock with every handgun they sell. This is not a cost that will be absorbed by the gun industry; it is a cost that will be passed on to lawful gun owners.

   Trigger locks do not stop gun crimes or accidental shootings. Mandating gun buyers to pay for a gun lock is not making America safe; it just is making guns and self-defense and personal protection more costly.

   Mr. Chairman, should the government mandate safety devices for every possible household danger? Lawn mowers can be dangerous. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, approximately 9,400 children younger than 18 years of age receive emergency care for lawn mower related injuries every year. Should we mandate that all lawn mowers be sold with a blade lock?

   Medicine cabinets contain dangerous substances. According to the Center for Disease Control, in 2000, over 1 million children younger than age 6 were exposed to poison, with some of the most common exposures being cosmetics and personal care products.

   Should we make medicine cabinet locks mandatory? Knives, electrical outlets, power tools. I could stand here and list hundreds of household mechanisms. Safety needs to be a priority in all households; we all know that. I believe that parents should be responsible

[Page: H4761]  GPO's PDF
and store and manage household products in a safe manner.

   But should lawn mower dealers be required to sell blade locks with every lawn mower sold or every cabinet maker sell a cabinet lock with every cabinet sold?

   Mr. Chairman, my point is that many things around the home are dangerous when used without proper instructions or supervision. But it is not the government's job or responsibility to mandate every conceivable protective mechanism imaginable.

   Responsible adults do not need the government to force them to purchase protective mechanisms for their homes or businesses. Responsible gun owners who need a trigger lock would have purchased one on their own without a government mandate. A government mandate is not the answer.

   Forcing gun buyers to purchase gun locks will not make guns more safe; it will only result in gun lock manufacturers making larger profits and increasing costs for all lawful gun owners.

   Mr. Chairman, I urge my fellow Members to vote in favor of my amendment.

Comments

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Powered by AkoComment 2.0!

 
< Prev   Next >




About Us |  Copyright 2004-2008, Gun Law News
Do not construe anything you read here to be legal advice.
Consult your attorney for any advice you may require.



Visitor Map

 

Alert
Subscribe






Support GLN

 

The World At War:

Collector's Edition DVD set

 

Login Form





Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
Current Initiatives
Popular
Most Rated Content
Polls Archive
September - Would You Support Repeal of the Brady Bill?…
October - What Should We Go For Next…
Would You Support Repeal of Lautenberg?…
Are you a one-issue voter?…
Let's relax. How many guns do you own?…
Blog Roll
A Keyboard and a .45
Alphecca
Another Gun Blog
An Ol' Broad's Ramblings
Bitch Girls
Bloggo the Dog Boy
Blue Grass, Red State
Call me Ahab
Captain of a Crew of One
carnaby fudge
Chicago Handgun Rights
ConservaChick
Cowboy Bob
Crime, Guns and Video Tape
Damnum Absque Injuria
Dave Kopel
Days of Our Trailers
Elendil's Journal
Freedom Sight
Front Sight Press
Fun Turns to Tragedy!!!
Geek with a .45
John Lott
massBackwards
Michael Bane
Mr. Completely
No Quarters
Of Arms & the Law
Pointman's Page
Resistance is futile!
Say Uncle
The Smallest Minority
Texican Tattler
Triggerfinger
The View From North Central Idaho
View From The Porch
The War on Guns
Xavier Thoughts