TIME TO GET POLITICAL

[Nemo]

and do some emails and call gents.

This is from a VCDL.org email I received regarding the new gun law in DC.

Silence is acceptance. Yes you got a weak and a bad Senator. I have 2 bad ones. But if you don't object they have no reason to think you do not accept.

VCDL sent out a basic form letter to send to our Senators  up here. Edit, adjust, modify to get it more specific to your state. But send SOMETHING OUT! ! !

It is not hard to find contact info for the Senators in your state.  If you really need help let me know and I will get you contact info.

Or do nothing and accept more control.

Nemo

   There is going to be a vote on Thursday, so we need to do the Action Item, below, ASAP!
Here is an analysis of the critical issues in S. 2938, the ?Bipartisan Safer Communities Act?:

1. Red Flag
Due process is required before guns are taken and there are some other legal protections for the accused, which is good, but red flags are still not a good law. This version does not require the accused to get mental-health help nor does it provide it.
Rather than an ?unbiased adjudicator? who decides on issuing a red flag order, the person should be a judge.
The bill, while guaranteeing the right to paid counsel, does not require the state to provide a public defender to those too poor to afford their own attorney. This lack of protection will disproportionality affect disadvantaged individuals.

2. 18 to 21-year-olds will have a 3 to 10-day possible waiting period for any gun they purchase while their juvenile background records are checked. After 10 years, the waiting period sunsets. I assume this might be because they plan on automating juvenile records by then for quick access.
Under this bill, if an 18 to 20-year-old has a juvenile felony conviction or gets convicted of a misdemeanor crime of violence against a partner, that would prevent them from being able to purchase a firearm until they turn 21. NOTE: Virginia already has the juvenile records computerized. Under current Virginia law, a juvenile felony for murder, rape, robbery, or kidnapping is a lifetime ban. For any other juvenile felony, the person doesn?t get their gun rights back until they turn 29, at which point restoration is automatic.

3. ?Boyfriend loophole?
If someone in a dating relationship is convicted of a misdemeanor crime of violence against their dating partner, they lose their gun rights for five years if they don?t have any further issues. They can have their gun rights restored earlier by the state. The provision is not retroactive.
It applies to a ?recent dating relationship?, but the bill does not define ?recent.? That?s going to make a mess in the courts.
Neither of those things is an option for those crimes committed by a spouse or certain family members. Their prohibition can be a lifetime one. Why not fix this since we are updating this framework? This has been a problem since the Lautenburg Amendment passed over 20 years ago. Not fixing that issue shows this is not about fixing problems in the law but creating more.
Taking away a civil right for a misdemeanor, any misdemeanor, is an abuse of the legal system.
 

[JohnyMac]

I just penned the following letter and sent it to both my US Senators Murphy & Toomey. I only post them here as maybe a template you could use.

John XXX
XXXX
XXXXXX

Senator Pat Toomey
455 Dirksen Senate
Office Building
Washington, D.C 20510

Senator Toomey,

I am aware that there is a bill coming to a vote before the Senate today or tomorrow, specifically, S. 2938, "The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act". Bottom-line, I believe that much of the bill is in direct violation of the United States Bill of rights, specially the Fifth Amendment when looking at the Red Flag, section.

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

My next concern is the 18-21-year-old prevision of the bill. I truly do not understand how we can infringe on the rights of this age group. Again, a direct violation to the Bill of Rights specifically, the Second Amendment.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Last concern is the boyfriend portion of the bill. In essence, at any time and with no time limits, someone can lose their Second Amendment "rights" for five years. The bill does not define a "recent dating relationship". This portion of the bill could be applied by an accuser for a lifetime. We can see the flaw in this portion of the bill by reviewing the the Lautenburg Amendment passed over 20 years ago. Please take a minute to review that Amendment.

In closing, I believe that this bill combined with the US Houses rewrite, and of course the Presidents signature, will eventually end up before the SCOTUS because as I have already pointed out, its violation of two Amendments to the United States Bill of Rights. If the court is made up of its current bench: Three justices that do not look at the Constitution as the law of the land, one moderate justice, and five Constitutional justices, the statute will be deemed, UNCONSTUTUTIONAL.

Respectively,
John XXXXXXX

[Nemo]

With NYRPA v Bruen today a pile of emails might slow things down up so they can review the new law in context, giving a better chance to derail it all.

Everyone Else, You have drafts.  Get them going!

Nemo