Re: Research: Case Shows HR 2640 Threatens Gun Owners

[Pat McGarrity]

Thanks again for your service to our country Steve.

I had an afterthought. Respectfully, why not support the restoration of the rights of our veterans, who should not have had them violated by Clinton to begin with, without the steps backwards that could cause the very same situation for yet even more Americans?

In Section 101(c)(1)(C) of the McCarthy bill; an "adjudication", such as it is supposed to correct for veterans, does not need to be made by a formal court, but can simply be a "determination" - such as a medical diagnosis.

Why must we accept one to get the other, or have the NICS funding attached to it? After all, it's OUR MONEY! Congress seems to be big on "all or nothing" legislation this year, such as the amnesty bill.

In Liberty,

Patriot Pat McGarrity


In a message dated 7/10/2007 10:23:15 PM Central Daylight Time, meadsteve@comcast.net writes:

I normally agree with GOA. In this case I don't. This bill will restore
gun rights to thousands of former military service members who had temporary psychological issues when discharged, and does not create a single new prohibited person. This bill is being backed by the NRA and others (which I don't always agree with either).

Steve Mead, LCDR USN (RET)

Oak Ridge, TN