Prepared Testimony in Cummings Hearing

As you may have heard, Rep. Elijah Cummings and his other sympathetic friends in the Democratic Party had a closed symposium designed to deflect attention off the gun walking scandal surrounding Fast and Furious. The conclusion was meant to result in this:

This bill allows law enforcement officials to track the sales of multiple guns, end unlicensed gun purchases, formally define gun trafficking, and ease evidentiary requirements to revoke gun licenses.

I’m very interested in to see language in this bill just to figure out what they are trying to slip past. I can promise you that criminals will not be the target of whatever bill comes out of this, given the players involved in this charade. You can find the prepared testimony of participants here. The hearings were off limits to cameras, as I am aware NRA News attempted to get in and were denied. Likely they don’t want to give us time to organize opposition to whatever they are cooking up.

9 thoughts on “Prepared Testimony in Cummings Hearing”

  1. End unlicensed gun sales?

    What about the majority of states that don’t have “gun” licenses?

    Oh……..I can see where this is going.

  2. I’m seeing a bill that will never see the light of a committee vote. They had two years to ram this stuff though and they did not. They pitch it now only to cry that the republicans are blocking common sense gun laws.

  3. They played right into our hands.

    They saw Gunwalker for what it really did (created a problem that didn’t exist) – and now are creating a bill that does what we all think it does – restrict our rights by…

    1 – loss of privacy
    2 – added bureaucracy (we already HAVE laws against trafficking – its called straw purchases idiots)
    3 – “ease evidentiary requirements for revoking gun licenses: – in other words – the proof needed against you gets less and less until they simply decide they don’t like you.

    How stupid can our opponents be when they’re trying to deny what they really are doing?

  4. Is it just me, or is that photo on p2 of Kristen Rand’s testimony a Photoshop job? The front two rows of ‘assault weapons’ – the P90, Steyr etc all appear to have been shopped in. The rear two rows of rifles with wooden stocks appear to be the original firearms in the photo.

  5. Also, beyond the Photoshop job, the level of klutziness in that testimony is crazy.

    I’m used to ‘assault clips’, but who knew this one:

    “barrel shrouds that allow the weapon to be ‘spray-fired’ from the hip”

  6. The artifacts in that photo are due to compression; the Steyr, PS90, etc all appear in the original, and are consistent with what they tend to confiscate/photograph.

    Not a fake photo, at least.

Comments are closed.