"Baker Admin Says No to Bruen"

[Coyote33]

GOAL - Baker Admin Says No to Bruen

www.goal.org

I did not know about this until today. Did you?
Just did a search on NES, but did not come up with anything.
Does anyone know if this made any progress beyond what is written on this oldish web page?
Did any of this make it into the latest 4420/4706/ABC/XYZ bills?

I only wish it also included allowing buckshot and slugs for coyote hunting, outside of "deer season".

 

[Mesatchornug]

GOAL - Baker Admin Says No to Bruen

www.goal.org

I did not know about this until today. Did you?

yes

Just did a search on NES, but did not come up with anything.

As I recall, it was discussed in the Bruen thread

Does anyone know if this made any progress beyond what is written on this oldish web page?

It says in the title - Baker refused. The extent of their respect to GOAL's guidance was the letters we've all seen telling the chiefs that there's no more restrictions.

Did any of this make it into the latest 4420/4706/ABC/XYZ bills?

Sure. In that they made everything worse.

I only wish it also included allowing buckshot and slugs for coyote hunting, outside of "deer season".

That has nothing to do with Bruen. Bruen dealt with carry, not ammo restrictions. There's no reason they should include that. Rolling in wishlists of unrelated stuff is how you guarantee they don't take you seriously.

 

[Coyote33]

That has nothing to do with Bruen.

You brought up Bruen here, not me.

Bruen dealt with carry, not ammo restrictions.

These all appear to be hunting and sporting related items.

There's no reason they should include that. Rolling in wishlists of unrelated stuff is how you guarantee they don't take you seriously.

You're kidding, right? Isn't the entire thing just a pig-pile of add-ons?

Back to this, though. GOAL should be pushing this at the same time as everything else. You know, to get them to give us something, anything as "compromise". I think as much as possible should be thrown at them, from every direction, all at once.

 

[Mesatchornug]

You brought up Bruen here, not me.

No, the page you linked did.

"GOAL - Baker Admin Says No to Bruen"

These all appear to be hunting and sporting related items.

Literally every one of them refers to "possession/carry" - the central pillar to Bruen.

You're kidding, right?

Not in the least.

Isn't the entire thing just a pig-pile of add-ons?

Not in the least.

Back to this, though. GOAL should be pushing this at the same time as everything else. You know, to get them to give us something, anything as "compromise". I think as much as possible should be thrown at them, from every direction, all at once.

GOAL has made it clear that they're not interested in compromise at this time. Specifically, that the current proposals make it clear that compromise isn't possible.

So no, they shouldn't be pushing this as a response to HD.4420 HD.4607 H.4030 H.4135 H.4139

 

[Coyote33]

Yeah yeah, I know, Bruen this, Bruen that. The thing is, the 3 mentioned, and the 1 I added were all bogus laws and fightable even before Bruen.

So no, they shouldn't be pushing this as a response to HD.4420 HD.4607 H.4030 H.4135 H.4139

No, not a "response" to those, IN ADDITION TO those. Our side does not seem to learn the lesson the other side has, which is to throw as much all at once, so even just a smidgeon sticks. This war needs to be fought on multiple fronts and multiple levels.