Soap Box Ravings E-Mail To The National Rifle Association

A message from Soap Box Ravings to the National Rifle Association, as sent:

As a retired military person, I want you to know that I do not agree with your NRA position on the Leahy/McCarthy/Schumer bill.

I agree with the Gun Owners of America position and I feel terribly let down by the NRA's action in support of Schumers gun bill.


The National Rifle Associations response:


Dear Mr. S. B. Ravings,

Thank you for your email to the NRA-ILA regarding H.R. 2640, the NICS Improvement Act. I apologize for the extremely delayed response. We appreciate everything our members have to say, and we thank you for taking the time to contact our office.

The NRA examines and supports legislation based upon its merits and benefits for law-abiding gun owners. Despite the fact that Reps. Carolyn McCarthy, Chuck Schumer, and other representatives associated with the Brady Campaign were involved with H.R. 2640, this legislation improves current law for gun owners and all Americans, and therefore holds the support of the NRA. Along with Rep. McCarthy, sponsors of this
bill include Reps. John Dingell, Lamar Smith (R-Texas), and Rick Boucher (D-Va)- all longtime supporters of gun owners' rights and sponsors of many pro-Second Amendment bills.

Recently, H.R. 2640 passed the House by a voice vote, which, although some have stated is a 'back door deal,' is in fact standard procedure. The reality is that there's nothing unusual about passing a widely supported bill by voice vote. Once a voice vote has occurred, any House member may request a recorded vote on any issue, and in practice, those requests are universally granted. Despite having that option on the floor, no representative asked for a roll call on this bill.

Despite what many letters and articles have stated, H.R. 2640 is not a gun control bill, and it doesn't ban anyone from owning guns. Instead, this bill provides federal funds to states to update their mental health records. This update will ensure that those who are currently prohibited under federal law from owning a gun because of mental health adjudications are included in the National Instant
Criminal Background Check System (NICS). For many years, NRA has supported ensuring that those who have been adjudicated mentally incompetent are screened by the NICS.

H.R. 2640 states that in order to be added to the NICS system one must be adjudicated mentally incompetent or committed (i.e. against one's will) to a mental institution. H.R. 2640 would prevent use of federal "adjudications" that consist only of medical diagnoses without findings that the people involved are dangerous or mentally incompetent.

The fact that medical diagnoses would not qualify as adjudication would change the current NICS standards, which accept Veterans` Administration decisions that a veteran or other beneficiary is an "adjudicated mental defective" where there was no "adjudication" at all--only a decision that the patient is unable to manage his own finances. Many patients may have accepted such a decision without expecting to lose their gun ownership rights. Instead of allowing this to continue, H.R. 2640 would eliminate purely medical records from NICS. Gun ownership rights would only be lost as a result of a finding that the person is a danger to himself or others (by a court or legal authority, not, as we have established, by a medical professional), or
lacks the capacity to manage his own affairs.

It is also important to note what H.R. 2640 will not do. This bill will not add any new classes of prohibited persons to NICS, and it will not prohibit gun possession by people who have voluntarily sought psychological counseling or checked themselves into a hospital for treatment.


So why the confusion?


First and foremost, the national media elite is irate that NRA has been able to roll back significant portions of the Clinton Administration's anti-gun agenda and pass pro-active legislation in Congress and in many states. They are desperate to put a "gun control" spin on anything they can. The only real question here is--given the media's long-standing and flagrant bias on the gun issue-- why are some gun owners suddenly swallowing the bait?

Second, some people simply do not like the NICS. In 1993, Congress passed the Brady Act, including a mandatory five-day waiting period, over strong NRA opposition. Due to NRA's insistence, that waiting period was allowed to sunset in 1998, once the NICS was up and running nationwide. Now that the NICS is in place, it makes sense to ensure that this system works as instantly, fairly, and accurately as possible.

This is an extremely important and complex issue, and as part of your ongoing research, I encourage you to further review the information regarding this bill and to read the bill itself (which I have attached to this email for your review). By doing so, you will be able to properly compare the media you have been receiving and reach your own conclusion about whether or not you support this legislation. If you
haven't already, I encourage you to become more familiar with the bill by visiting our website, www.nraila.org and reading the five articles on HR 2640. These articles give credence to the legitimate pro-gun nature of this bill. One of the articles is written by Larry Scott for www.military.com. Formed in 1999, this group was started, "to revolutionize the way the 30 million Americans with military affinity
stay connected and informed. Today, [they are] the largest military and veteran membership organization - 8 million members strong." I can assure you that they have a vested interest in caring for the well-being of veterans and military personnel.

The NRA continues to support this legislation, which streamlines the NICS system to ensure law-abiding citizens are afforded their rights. Simultaneously, this bill ensures that criminals and those adjudicated mentally incompetent by a court will be unable to own firearms. Rest assured that if the anti-gunners use this legislation as
a vehicle to advance gun control restrictions, NRA will pull our support for the bill and vigorously oppose its passage!

Once again, thank you for your comments. If you need any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at the above address or at (800) 392-8683.


Sincerely,

Alicia Borgess
NRA-ILA Grassroots Division


Soap Box Ravings has posted the National Rifle Associations response to enable those who read it to make up their own minds on whether the NRA is acting in their benefit or not. Soap Box Ravings suggests that all who have an interest in the final outcome of the NICS Improvement Act complete their own analysis of the facts before making their decision on the NRA's efforts.

Qualifications? What Are Qualifications?

“[T]here is one job we can’t afford on-the-job training for—that’s the job of our next president. Every day spent learning the ropes is another day of rising costs, mounting deficits and growing anxiety for our families.” —Hillary Clinton jabbing Barack Obama

“My understanding was that she wasn’t Treasury secretary in the Clinton administration, so I don’t know exactly what experiences she’s claiming.” —Barack Obama jabbing back “There is no doubt that Bill Clinton had faith in her and consulted with her on issues, in the same way that I would consult with Michelle, if there were issues. On the other hand, I don’t think Michelle would claim that she is the best qualified person to be a U.S. senator by virtue of me talking to her on occasion about the work I’ve done. I think the fact of the matter is that Sen. Clinton is claiming basically the entire eight years of the Clinton presidency as her own, except for the stuff that didn’t work out, in which case she has nothing to do with it.” —Barack Obama back at her


Soap Box Ravings wonders if either of them have any "qualifications" other than the minimum legal qualifications required to run for the Presidency.

It is Soap Box Raving's opinion that neither of them have demonstrated any ability nor proficiency that would cause me to believe that either of them is capable of being the President of the United States of America.

American Heritage Dictionary:

1. The act of qualifying or the condition of being qualified.

2. A quality, ability, or accomplishment that makes a person suitable for a
particular position or task.

3. A condition or circumstance that must be met or complied with: fulfilled the
qualifications for registering to vote in the presidential election.

4. A restriction or modification: an offer with a number of qualifications.

Food For Thought

Soap Box Ravings says this information arrived via the internet. You will find similiar accounts posted on various sites. It is posted here because it matches my basic philosophy of life.

To all you old law dogs now just lyin' in the shade; current pistoleros and other fervent Second Amendment believers:

I would rather be your friend, but if you are not interested in that, I am prepared to be a capable and efficient enemy. ~ Jeff Cooper


This is the law:

(1)The purpose of fighting is to win.

(2)There is no possible victory in defense.

(3)The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either.

(4) The final weapon is the brain.

All else is supplemental." ~ John Steinbeck


Some Natural Rules of Life:

1- Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he's too old to fight, he'll just kill you.

2- If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics probably stink.

3- I carry a gun, 'cause a cop is too heavy.

4- America is not at war. The U.S. Military is at war. America is at the mall.

5- When seconds count, remember the cops are just minutes away, the bad guy is all ready there.

6- A reporter did a human interest piece on the Texas Rangers. The reporter recognized the Colt Model 1911 the Ranger was carrying and asked him "Why do you carry a 45?". The Ranger response was, "Because they don't make a 46."

7- An armed man will kill an unarmed man with monotonous regularity.

8- The old sheriff was attending an awards dinner when a lady commented on his wearing his sidearm. "Sheriff, I see you have your pistol, are you expecting trouble?"

The old sheriff responded; "No Ma'am. If I were expecting trouble, I would have brought my rifle."

9- Beware of the man who only has one gun. He probably knows how to use it!