CNN Poll on NRA pull out from Columbus, OH

[DDGator]

CNN is running a poll about the NRA's decision to pull out of Columbus, Ohio for the 2007 convention because Columbus' City Council passed another one of the goofy "assault weapons" bans.  

Let's hit 'em with lots of "bullseyes" on the poll for moving it out.
 
The CNN Poll on NRA pulling out of Columbus can now be found below:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/07/18/nra.ban.ap/index.html

Please vote and spread the word!

[Brenden]

I voted..
45% Bullseye

55% A shot in the foot..

91671 votes..

I shall pass this on....

They are welcome to hold it in my pole barn..

I will have to clean it out though..

[Billmack]

The poll has not changed in the last 20 minutes. Still 45% to 55%.

It is after all CNN.

Thanks for the heads up Duane.

I did vote!


Bill

[Stook]

Got to say that I live in Columbus and I haven't been able to see straight since these blowhards started talking about this.  They have no concept of what they are doing, other than being "politically correct".  Coleman (the mayor) and his gang just want the attention.  (Coleman is running for govenor BTW).  

I applaud the NRA decision for "putting their money where their mouth is", so to speak.  

(Edited to remove a misinterpretation on my part.  Sorry for the confusion)

[DDGator]

Geeze Stook, I didn't realize it went that far.  Does that mean you can't BUY, or can't POSSESS such a gun in the city limits?  Are you supposed to turn in all your Glocks and such, or what?  

[Stook]

Duane -

I just poured a glass of water on myself to put out the fuse.  Now you went and lit it again.  

Yeah, the gun owning population here is really stoked.  Just for your reading enjoyment here is a link to the ordinance (proposed state)

http://www.columbuscitycouncil.org/assaultweaponban/pdf/1154-2005.pdf

In it you will notice that if you currently own a "banned" item you have 90 days to register it to be grandfathered.  Then, you are prohibited from selling, transferring, or giving the firearm to any one else.  BTW, the city attorney can't tell you if this means sell to some one outside of Columbus or not.  The way it reads you can NEVER sell the firearm, even if it is to some one outside of the city.  

Also notice that if you inherit a "banned item" that you have 30 days to 1) take it out of the city 2) render it completely and forever inoperable, or 3) surrender it to the police department for destruction (and the word destruction is part of the ordinance.)

Got to run, here comes my wife with a 5 gal bucket of ice water.

Randy

[DDGator]

Randy -- I don't get that your Glock (if you have one) would be banned.  The Glock doesn't have a "fixed magazine" capable or holding more than 10 rounds or a detachable mag capable of holding more than 20 rounds, nor a flash supressor or folding stock, etc.

Don't get me wrong -- its a BAD, BAD piece of legislation, but I think the average Glock or High-Power is not covered.

Am I reading it wrong?

That being said -- LOTS of rifles and shotguns will be affected.

ARRRRRGGGGHHHH

[Stook]

Duane -

I told you I was seeing a lot of red.  After re-reading this I defer to your comment.  To avoid further confusion I am editing the original to remove this reference.  There is enough misinformation circulating on this thing and I don't want to contribute to the morass.  

As I originally said, I don't think NRA had any choice.

Randy

[Richard S]

Thanks, Duane, for the heads up.  When I voted at 7:00 am today, the "bullseye" count had climbed from 45% to 48%.

[DDGator]

Its keeps climbing -- "Bullseye" is up to 49%.

[Richard S]

This morning at at 6:30 the "bullseye" vote had climbed to 51%!

[alfonso2501]

as of now:

bullseye:   52%, 53665 votes
SITF:        48%, 50273 votes

good work all of you who forwarded this to others!

[Richard S]

As of 7:30 a.m. today, the "bullseye" vote had it by 53% to 47%!  

[Stook]

Just a few excerpts from an article in the Columbus Dispatch today.  The full article can be found at

http://www.dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=dispatch/2005/08/03/20050803-B5-01.html&chck=t


If you can't open the page send me a PM an I will send the article to you.

I particularly like the part about making a list of all legally purchased firearms in Columbus for the reference of the police department.

Would you hold your convention in such a "friendly" city?

Kind of reminds me of another social commentary.  First, they came for the Jews ....

Randy



........
Wednesday, August 03, 2005
Jodi Andes
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
 

"Owners must register guns Columbus law now classifies as assault weapons, but city officials say they won’t make them trek to an office to do it. "


"...Public Safety officials determined this week that owners of the weapons can complete a one-page form, notarize it and mail it in, ..."

"It should be pretty painless," said city licensing officer Ralph Jones, who helped design the process. "That’s it, no fee."

"Firearm owners have until Nov. 9 to register. ...."

"Although the ban is aimed at Columbus residents, anyone who owns one of these firearms and thinks they might move to Columbus should register as well, city guidelines say.

That’s because the registration is a one-time event. If someone moves to the city after Nov. 9 and owns one of these weapons, it will be illegal for them to keep the weapon in their home unless it’s registered. "

"Many who register don’t understand they are giving up their rights because they can’t give it or sell it to someone else," Greer said. "  (Greer is secretary of the Peoples Rights Organization - added by RJ)


"Councilman Michael C. Mentel, who pushed for the ban, said the city also is trying to track assault-weapons use. The tracking is to consist of:


• Police reports that will include a new field where officers can note whether an assault weapon was used.


• The city’s registry of assault weapons will be available to officers. And the city plans to place information about all guns legally purchased in Columbus in a database that officers can access.  (emphasis added by RJ)

• Reports of seized weapons will be included at the division’s weekly briefings at police headquarters.

Information about registering can be found at www .columbuscitycouncil.org/ assaultweaponban. "


jandes@dispatch.com

[Richard S]

The following are relevant excerpts from the 2004 Gun Control Fact-Sheet issued by the Gun Owners Foundation:

Gun control has done nothing to keep crime rates from rising in many of the nations that have imposed severe firearms restrictions.
* Australia: Readers of the USA Today newspaper discovered in 2002 that, "Since Australia's 1996 laws banning most guns and making it a crime to use a gun defensively, armed robberies rose by 51%, unarmed robberies by 37%, assaults by 24% and kidnappings by 43%. While murders fell by 3%, manslaughter rose by 16%."154
* Canada: After enacting stringent gun control laws in 1991 and 1995, Canada has not made its citizens any safer. "The contrast between the criminal violence rates in the United States and in Canada is dramatic," says Canadian criminologist Gary Mauser in 2003. "Over the past decade, the rate of violent crime in Canada has increased while in the United States the violent crime rate has plummeted."155
* England: According to the BBC News, handgun crime in the United Kingdom rose by 40% in the two years after it passed its draconian gun ban in 1997.156
* Japan: One newspaper headline says it all: Police say "Crime rising in Japan, while arrests at record low." 157

Licensing or registration can lead to confiscation of firearms
1. New York City
* Registration. In the mid-1960's officials in New York City began registering long guns. They promised they would never use such lists to take away firearms from honest citizens. But in 1991, the city banned (and soon began confiscating) many of those very guns.84
* Confiscation. In 1992, a New York City paper reported that, "Police raided the home of a Staten Island man who refused to comply with the city's tough ban on assault weapons, and seized an arsenal of firearms. . . . Spot checks are planned [for other homes]."85
2. California
Part 1. The Golden State passed a ban on certain semi-automatic firearms in 1989. Banned guns could be legally possessed if they were registered prior to the ban. In the Spring of 1995, one man who wished to move to California asked the Attorney General whether his SKS Sporter rifle would be legal in the state. The citizen was assured the rifle was legal, and based on that information, he subsequently moved into the state. But in 1998, the state’s Attorney General reversed course and officials confiscated the firearm.86 In a legal brief before the state supreme court, Attorney General Daniel Lungren said that "tens of thousands of California citizens" would have to either surrender their firearms or become felons.87
Part 2. Having registered the firearms, the California Department of Justice issued a notice in 1999 to explain how more than 1,500 individuals in the state were in possession of illegal firearms—all of which were subject to forfeiture without compensation.88
Part 3. Plans to confiscate firearms in California were leaked to the public in 1999, sending shock waves through the gun rights community. The document entitled "Relinquishment of Assault Weapons" stated: "Once the 90-day window of opportunity for turning in such assault weapons concludes, we will send each sheriff and police chief a listing of the affected individuals [who own banned firearms]."89
3. Foreign Countries
* Gun registration has led to confiscation in several countries, including Greece, Ireland, Jamaica and Bermuda.90
* And in an exhaustive study on this subject, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership has researched and translated several gun control laws from foreign countries. Their publication, Lethal Laws: "Gun Control" is the Key to Genocide documents how gun control (and confiscation) has preceded the slaughter and genocide of millions of people in Turkey, the Soviet Union, Germany, China, Cambodia and others.91