NRA "neutral" on updated VAWA in Omnibus spending bill?

[K.Mooneyham]

So, I will not post the link here because I never know what videos are allowed or not allowed. However, I just got done watching a YT video where it was claimed that the NRA told multiple Senators to vote for the omnibus spending bill because the NRA was "neutral" on the update to the "Violence Against Women Act" contained within the spending bill. Of course, any legislation of that sort authored by Democrats will contain anti-2A and anti-self-defense provisions DESIGNED to disarm or otherwise burden law-abiding Americans. The man who made the video (who seems to stay on top of these matters pretty well) went on to say (paraphrasing here) that he was quite pleased with the efforts of NRA-ILA lawsuits, and NRA safety and education efforts, but extremely disappointed in whoever spoke to those Senators, specifically. So, what I am asking here, from those who should know, is this: did the NRA really tell several Senators that the NRA leadership was "neutral" (as in did not oppose) that provision, so it was okay to vote for it? IMHO, ALL gun control in ANY form should be opposed on the sheer principle of the matter. Plus, now is NOT the time to soft-pedal ANY of this stuff, at all. NOTHING should be done to keep the Democrat gun-grabbers from sinking under their own weight.

EDITED TO ADD: Well, it's the next day, and 64 people have seen this post. Hopefully some of them are going to YT and finding the video I mentioned. I am curious if and when I'll get a reply to this post.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I can't agree with your assessment that the YT host " seems to stay on top of these matters pretty well." I've seen a number of his videos and sometimes he is right, sometimes he's partially correct and often he is flat wrong. I'm always skeptical when someone claims "I have it on good authority, . . ." but fails to disclose his source. Couple that with someone who appears not to be in a position to obtain reliable confidential information and I'm reminded of the phrase "take that with a grain of salt."

VAWA was part of a 2700 page omnibus bill and it was all packaged under one vote. Critically important is the fact that the omnibus bill retained all pro-gun riders.

Anti-gun measures killed by the NRA:
1. Red flag laws;
2. Gun licensing;
3. Gun buybacks;
4. Ghost guns;
5 New misdemeanor prohibition for “dating partners” (commonly referred to as the so-called “boyfriend loophole);
6. New misdemeanor prohibitions for “stalking” offenses - which were undefined and could include minor, nonviolent harassment convictions;
7. New prohibitions for ex parte orders - which denies due process and a mere accusation would be enough to result in a gun prohibition.

There is a CNN article that shows that the NRA was responsible for removing all the gun control. https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/04/politics ... index.html

No, the YT presenter wasn't "on top of [this] matter." With the above-referenced facts, do you think he was being honest?

The one ATF matter that passed changes nothing. It requires the ATF to notify local authorities when someone fails a background check. It's up to those authorities to decide whether to investigate and if the investigation shows a crime was committed, they decide whether to prosecute.

Chas.

[K.Mooneyham]

I can't agree with your assessment that the YT host " seems to stay on top of these matters pretty well." I've seen a number of his videos and sometimes he is right, sometimes he's partially correct and often he is flat wrong. I'm always skeptical when someone claims "I have it on good authority, . . ." but fails to disclose his source. Couple that with someone who appears not to be in a position to obtain reliable confidential information and I'm reminded of the phrase "take that with a grain of salt."

VAWA was part of a 2700 page omnibus bill and it was all packaged under one vote. Critically important is the fact that the omnibus bill retained all pro-gun riders.

Anti-gun measures killed by the NRA:
1. Red flag laws;
2. Gun licensing;
3. Gun buybacks;
4. Ghost guns;
5 New misdemeanor prohibition for “dating partners” (commonly referred to as the so-called “boyfriend loophole);
6. New misdemeanor prohibitions for “stalking” offenses - which were undefined and could include minor, nonviolent harassment convictions;
7. New prohibitions for ex parte orders - which denies due process and a mere accusation would be enough to result in a gun prohibition.

There is a CNN article that shows that the NRA was responsible for removing all the gun control. https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/04/politics ... index.html

No, the YT presenter wasn't "on top of [this] matter." With the above-referenced facts, do you think he was being honest?

The one ATF matter that passed changes nothing. It requires the ATF to notify local authorities when someone fails a background check. It's up to those authorities to decide whether to investigate and if the investigation shows a crime was committed, they decide whether to prosecute.

Chas.

Mr. Cotton, I appreciate your considerable reply, as always. My major concern with the passage of that bill was that it gave the Feds some sort of automatic authority to "deputize" local or state law enforcement to start a criminal investigation against anyone who failed a NICS check, for whatever reason. I've never failed one, but I would hate to have that happen to me due to some clerical error. My job is very dependent upon having a clean record. I can imagine there are a lot of other folks in the same position I am regarding their employment.

Are you able to elaborate on the pro-gun measures that were contained in that omnibus bill? It's always nice to be able to counter-argue claims. Again, thank you for the reply.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I can't agree with your assessment that the YT host " seems to stay on top of these matters pretty well." I've seen a number of his videos and sometimes he is right, sometimes he's partially correct and often he is flat wrong. I'm always skeptical when someone claims "I have it on good authority, . . ." but fails to disclose his source. Couple that with someone who appears not to be in a position to obtain reliable confidential information and I'm reminded of the phrase "take that with a grain of salt."

VAWA was part of a 2700 page omnibus bill and it was all packaged under one vote. Critically important is the fact that the omnibus bill retained all pro-gun riders.

Anti-gun measures killed by the NRA:
1. Red flag laws;
2. Gun licensing;
3. Gun buybacks;
4. Ghost guns;
5 New misdemeanor prohibition for “dating partners” (commonly referred to as the so-called “boyfriend loophole);
6. New misdemeanor prohibitions for “stalking” offenses - which were undefined and could include minor, nonviolent harassment convictions;
7. New prohibitions for ex parte orders - which denies due process and a mere accusation would be enough to result in a gun prohibition.

There is a CNN article that shows that the NRA was responsible for removing all the gun control. https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/04/politics ... index.html

No, the YT presenter wasn't "on top of [this] matter." Wth the above-referenced facts, do you think he was being honest?

The one ATF matter that passed changes nothing. It requires the ATF to notify local authorities when someone fails a background check. It's up to those authorities to decide whether to investigate and if the investigation shows a crime was committed, they decide whether to prosecute.

Chas.

Mr. Cotton, I appreciate your considerable reply, as always. My major concern with the passage of that bill was that it gave the Feds some sort of automatic authority to "deputize" local or state law enforcement to start a criminal investigation against anyone who failed a NICS check, for whatever reason. I've never failed one, but I would hate to have that happen to me due to some clerical error. My job is very dependent upon having a clean record. I can imagine there are a lot of other folks in the same position I am regarding their employment.

Are you able to elaborate on the pro-gun measures that were contained in that omnibus bill? It's always nice to be able to counter-argue claims. Again, thank you for the reply.

Federal law enforcement agencies cannot force state or local authorities to start a criminal investigation. The information will simply be passed along and the decision is up to the agency receiving the information. Any NICS rejection that is not correct won't result in prosecution. In truth, very few prosecutions every occur even when a violent felon attempts to purchase a firearm from a dealer.

All of the NRA riders were retained in the bill and those prevent all sorts of anti-gun measures from being pursued. I don't have a list of those, but they have been included year after year. We do these when there aren't enough votes to pass stand-alone bills. I'll see if I can get a list from HQ, but we will probably post something early next week anyway.

Back to the YT poster. I hardly call his video honest when he attacks the NRA without giving all of the information I included. If he didn't know it, then he should have kept quite and done some research. However, that doesn't fit his anti-NRA narrative. When anti-gunners do likewise to gun owners, our community screams foul from the rooftops. When perennial anti-NRA types do it, their echo chamber is willing, no gleeful, to accept it as fact. This plays into the hands of those who would make the Second Amendment a historical footnote by attacking the only organization that have any real impact on federal, state and local laws. There is a reason CNN, MSNBC, Bloomberg, Schumer, etc. attack the NRA and not GOA, SAF, or NAGR.

Chas.

[AndyC1911]

Thank you for the info, Charles.