Teamski Posted May 15, 2017 Share #51 Posted May 15, 2017 I talked to Senator Coons' aide this morning about the bill. Coons, of course, is on the Committee for the Judiciary. His aid told me that two senators are currently cosponsoring S.R.765 right now (which I got no update on through the congressional site....mmmm....). He doesn't see bill advancing any time soon primarily due to their workload. He did say that Coons won't likely back it as it has some red flags. When I brought it up, he agreed it was more to do with private property laws that state that no limitations can be made on the private ownership of an item if that item does not have an adverse affect, safety or otherwise, on the public. I really see this as being the primary defense against the bill rather than our moral objections to it. So, hit your congressmen right now and talk to them!!! -Ski Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garandomatic Posted May 15, 2017 Share #52 Posted May 15, 2017 There's ammo we might be able to work with... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarbridge Posted May 15, 2017 Author Share #53 Posted May 15, 2017 I relayed the very same to Congressman Hudson...after the sentiment..heartfelt and knee jerk...it comes down to private property rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete-o MSU Posted May 15, 2017 Share #54 Posted May 15, 2017 I talked to Senator Coons' aide this morning about the bill. Coons, of course, is on the Committee for the Judiciary. When I brought it up, he agreed it was more to do with private property laws that state that no limitations can be made on the private ownership of an item if that item does not have an adverse affect, safety or otherwise, on the public. -Ski Yet the MOH is still illegal to buy or sell.... Keep contacting your elected officials! Just because the bill seems poorly thought out/unlawful doesn't mean congress won't pass it and Trump won't sign it. Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jguy1986 Posted May 15, 2017 Share #55 Posted May 15, 2017 I've been saying that bit for a while. We can talk about being devoted caretakers until we're blue in the face, but it will have no sway with those who are steadfast in their belief that these medals only belong with family. The true legal precedent for fighting this is as a freedom of personal property issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarbridge Posted May 15, 2017 Author Share #56 Posted May 15, 2017 Yep...we can't quit...we all know it's a private property issue...the problem lies in our opposition...they see it different and have the ear of the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wharfmaster Posted May 15, 2017 Share #57 Posted May 15, 2017 This is a private property issue, pure and simple. The Government got their foot in the door with the MoH and no one challenged it, setting a very dangerous precedent. Now, it will be very difficult to reverse this trend. Gun collectors have an ever vigilant nation wide organization to protect their Constitutional rights. Militaria collectors do not. Wharf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teamski Posted May 17, 2017 Share #58 Posted May 17, 2017 Another co-sponsor for HR544. Now at 45. Contact your representatives ASAP before this hits the floor. Rep. Peterson, Collin C. [D-MN-7] 05/16/2017 Rep. Pearce, Stevan [R-NM-2] 05/04/2017 Rep. Veasey, Marc A. [D-TX-33] 05/04/2017 Rep. Correa, J. Luis [D-CA-46] 05/04/2017 Rep. Rush, Bobby L. [D-IL-1] 05/03/2017 Rep. Barragan, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44] 05/03/2017 Rep. Butterfield, G. K. [D-NC-1] 05/02/2017 Rep. Jones, Walter B., Jr. [R-NC-3] 05/02/2017 Rep. Takano, Mark [D-CA-41] 05/02/2017 Rep. Courtney, Joe [D-CT-2] 05/01/2017 Rep. Cicilline, David N. [D-RI-1] 04/25/2017 Rep. DeFazio, Peter A. [D-OR-4] 03/22/2017 Rep. Peters, Scott H. [D-CA-52] 03/22/2017 Rep. Rooney, Thomas J. [R-FL-17] 03/17/2017 Rep. Young, David [R-IA-3] 03/10/2017 Rep. Smucker, Lloyd [R-PA-16] 03/08/2017 Rep. Beatty, Joyce [D-OH-3] 03/07/2017 Rep. Rutherford, John H. [R-FL-4] 03/06/2017 Rep. Hill, J. French [R-AR-2] 02/28/2017 Rep. Moulton, Seth [D-MA-6] 02/28/2017 Rep. Coffman, Mike [R-CO-6] 02/27/2017 Rep. Lofgren, Zoe [D-CA-19] 02/21/2017 Rep. Gallagher, Mike [R-WI-8] 02/17/2017 Rep. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large] 02/17/2017 Rep. Gallego, Ruben [D-AZ-7] 02/17/2017 Rep. Roe, David P. [R-TN-1] 02/17/2017 Rep. Frelinghuysen, Rodney P. [R-NJ-11] 02/15/2017 Rep. Kind, Ron [D-WI-3] 02/15/2017 Rep. Shea-Porter, Carol [D-NH-1] 02/13/2017 Rep. Thompson, Mike [D-CA-5] 02/13/2017 Rep. Castro, Joaquin [D-TX-20] 02/07/2017 Rep. Calvert, Ken [R-CA-42] 02/02/2017 Rep. Abraham, Ralph Lee [R-LA-5] 02/02/2017 Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9] 02/02/2017 Rep. Collins, Chris [R-NY-27] 02/02/2017 Rep. Maloney, Sean Patrick [D-NY-18] 02/02/2017 Rep. LoBiondo, Frank A. [R-NJ-2] 02/02/2017 Rep. Grothman, Glenn [R-WI-6] 02/02/2017 Rep. Pingree, Chellie [D-ME-1] 02/02/2017 Rep. Marshall, Roger W. [R-KS-1] 02/02/2017 Rep. Dunn, Neal P. [R-FL-2]* 01/13/2017 Rep. Poliquin, Bruce [R-ME-2]* 01/13/2017 Rep. Jenkins, Lynn [R-KS-2]* 01/13/2017 Rep. Chu, Judy [D-CA-27]* 01/13/2017 Rep. Bishop, Sanford D., Jr. [D-GA-2]* 01/13/2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teamski Posted May 17, 2017 Share #59 Posted May 17, 2017 I am no lawyer whatsoever. I have a question for those who are. Is the possession of the Purple Heart covered under the 5th Amendment or is that strictly land property? If so, what specific law covers the possession of goods that do not harm the safety of others? I have been looking for the specific law and can't seem to find it. I know it would be helpful to all of us to quote from it. Thanks! -Ski Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aerialbridge Posted May 17, 2017 Share #60 Posted May 17, 2017 The Fifth Amendment covers all property. Here's an excellent primer on the nature of private property rights in America published by the Cato Institute. Every congressman should be required to read it before they are able to vote on Cook's bill-- if and when it comes to a vote. The Cato Institute would also be an outstanding potential ally with very substantial resources to try to enlist against this atrocious attack on private property rights. Apart from what this bill represents to collectors and historical preservationists, most people here are now understanding that it is also the "poster child" for the continuing and increasing onslaught on property rights. https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato-handbook-policymakers/2009/9/hb111-34.pdf The Cato Institute and contact information. Don't know why I didn't think of them before, this fight is right up their alley. I doubt very much the cheap, transparent "feel good" aspects of this bill are going to impress them as a legitimate public purpose for this draconian exercise of police powers to trample on private property rights for something that is not inherently dangerous or unsafe. Have at it, boys. https://www.cato.org/ . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teamski Posted May 17, 2017 Share #61 Posted May 17, 2017 Awesome info! Thanks! -Ski Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teamski Posted May 24, 2017 Share #62 Posted May 24, 2017 Here is the response from my Senator, which I hope is a sign that common sense will prevail.... -Ski "Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns with the Private Corrado Piccoli Purple Heart Preservation Act. I appreciate hearing your thoughts on this important matter. As you well know, the Purple Heart is one of the oldest and most recognized medals granted to American military servicemembers. It is awarded to servicemembers who were killed or wounded by enemy action. I have had the honor of presenting the Purple Heart to veterans in the past. Our veterans put their lives on the line to defend our nation and I am proud that we are able to deliver the honor that those veterans deserve. As a naval flight officer who served in Southeast Asia during the Vietnam War, I understand the obligation we have as Americans to honor the sacrifice of our nation's veterans and protect recognitions of that service from disgrace. The least we can do for our men and women coming home from battlefields across the globe is to protect their honor and recognize their courage. You raise interesting points regarding the status of Purple Hearts and your concerns for S. 765, the Corrado Piccoli Purple Heart Preservation Act. As you mentioned in your correspondence, Senator David Perdue (R-GA) introduced S. 765 in an effort to prohibit the sale of Purple Heart medals by a second party. The bill is currently pending before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Companion legislation was also introduced in the House of Representatives as H.R. 544 by Congressman Paul Cook (R-CA). I have heard from supporters of this legislation who believe that prohibiting the sale of Purple Hearts will ensure that the medals make their way back to recipients or families. However, I have also heard from opponents of this bill, like yourself, who maintain that the policy is misconceived, questioning potential unintended consequences and whether the legislation upholds the civil liberties of Purple Heart recipients. I certainly understand these concerns and encourage my colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee to explore these matters further in a Congressional hearing. Please be assured that I will be certain to follow this matter closely. Should I have the opportunity to consider the Private Corrado Piccoli Purple Heart Preservation Act before the full Senate, I will be certain to keep your views in mind. Thank you again for contacting my office. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about matters of importance to you." With best personal regards, I am, Sincerely,Tom CarperUnited States Senator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KASTAUFFER Posted May 24, 2017 Share #63 Posted May 24, 2017 Here is the response from my Senator, which I hope is a sign that common sense will prevail.... -Ski "Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns with the Private Corrado Piccoli Purple Heart Preservation Act. I appreciate hearing your thoughts on this important matter. As you well know, the Purple Heart is one of the oldest and most recognized medals granted to American military servicemembers. It is awarded to servicemembers who were killed or wounded by enemy action. I have had the honor of presenting the Purple Heart to veterans in the past. Our veterans put their lives on the line to defend our nation and I am proud that we are able to deliver the honor that those veterans deserve. As a naval flight officer who served in Southeast Asia during the Vietnam War, I understand the obligation we have as Americans to honor the sacrifice of our nation's veterans and protect recognitions of that service from disgrace. The least we can do for our men and women coming home from battlefields across the globe is to protect their honor and recognize their courage. You raise interesting points regarding the status of Purple Hearts and your concerns for S. 765, the Corrado Piccoli Purple Heart Preservation Act. As you mentioned in your correspondence, Senator David Perdue (R-GA) introduced S. 765 in an effort to prohibit the sale of Purple Heart medals by a second party. The bill is currently pending before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Companion legislation was also introduced in the House of Representatives as H.R. 544 by Congressman Paul Cook (R-CA). I have heard from supporters of this legislation who believe that prohibiting the sale of Purple Hearts will ensure that the medals make their way back to recipients or families. However, I have also heard from opponents of this bill, like yourself, who maintain that the policy is misconceived, questioning potential unintended consequences and whether the legislation upholds the civil liberties of Purple Heart recipients. I certainly understand these concerns and encourage my colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee to explore these matters further in a Congressional hearing. Please be assured that I will be certain to follow this matter closely. Should I have the opportunity to consider the Private Corrado Piccoli Purple Heart Preservation Act before the full Senate, I will be certain to keep your views in mind. Thank you again for contacting my office. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about matters of importance to you." With best personal regards, I am,[/size] Sincerely,[/size] Tom Carper[/size] United States Senator[/size] This is actually the best response I have read from any Legislators concerning this bill! Kurt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emccomas Posted May 24, 2017 Share #64 Posted May 24, 2017 Sorted by State (easier for me to read) Rep. Hill, J. French [R-AR-2] 02/28/2017 AR Rep. Gallego, Ruben [D-AZ-7] 02/17/2017 AZ Rep. Correa, J. Luis [D-CA-46] 05/04/2017 CA Rep. Barragan, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44] 05/03/2017 CA Rep. Takano, Mark [D-CA-41] 05/02/2017 CA Rep. Peters, Scott H. [D-CA-52] 03/22/2017 CA Rep. Lofgren, Zoe [D-CA-19] 02/21/2017 CA Rep. Thompson, Mike [D-CA-5] 02/13/2017 CA Rep. Calvert, Ken [R-CA-42] 02/02/2017 CA Rep. Chu, Judy [D-CA-27]* 01/13/2017 CA Rep. Coffman, Mike [R-CO-6] 02/27/2017 CO Rep. Courtney, Joe [D-CT-2] 05/01/2017 CT Rep. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large] 02/17/2017 DC Rep. Rooney, Thomas J. [R-FL-17] 03/17/2017 FL Rep. Rutherford, John H. [R-FL-4] 03/06/2017 FL Rep. Dunn, Neal P. [R-FL-2]* 01/13/2017 FL Rep. Bishop, Sanford D., Jr. [D-GA-2]* 01/13/2017 GA Rep. Young, David [R-IA-3] 03/10/2017 IA Rep. Rush, Bobby L. [D-IL-1] 05/03/2017 IL Rep. Marshall, Roger W. [R-KS-1] 02/02/2017 KS Rep. Jenkins, Lynn [R-KS-2]* 01/13/2017 KS Rep. Peterson, Collin C. [D-MN-7] 05/16/2017 LA Rep. Abraham, Ralph Lee [R-LA-5] 02/02/2017 LA Rep. Moulton, Seth [D-MA-6] 02/28/2017 MA Rep. Poliquin, Bruce [R-ME-2]* 01/13/2017 ME Rep. Pingree, Chellie [D-ME-1] 02/02/2017 ME Rep. Butterfield, G. K. [D-NC-1] 05/02/2017 NC Rep. Jones, Walter B., Jr. [R-NC-3] 05/02/2017 NC Rep. Shea-Porter, Carol [D-NH-1] 02/13/2017 NH Rep. Frelinghuysen, Rodney P. [R-NJ-11] 02/15/2017 NJ Rep. LoBiondo, Frank A. [R-NJ-2] 02/02/2017 NJ Rep. Pearce, Stevan [R-NM-2] 05/04/2017 NM Rep. Collins, Chris [R-NY-27] 02/02/2017 NY Rep. Maloney, Sean Patrick [D-NY-18] 02/02/2017 NY Rep. Beatty, Joyce [D-OH-3] 03/07/2017 OH Rep. DeFazio, Peter A. [D-OR-4] 03/22/2017 OR Rep. Smucker, Lloyd [R-PA-16] 03/08/2017 PA Rep. Cicilline, David N. [D-RI-1] 04/25/2017 RI Rep. Roe, David P. [R-TN-1] 02/17/2017 TN Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9] 02/02/2017 TN Rep. Veasey, Marc A. [D-TX-33] 05/04/2017 TX Rep. Castro, Joaquin [D-TX-20] 02/07/2017 TX Rep. Gallagher, Mike [R-WI-8] 02/17/2017 WI Rep. Kind, Ron [D-WI-3] 02/15/2017 WI Rep. Grothman, Glenn [R-WI-6] 02/02/2017 WI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teamski Posted June 19, 2017 Share #65 Posted June 19, 2017 Been pretty quiet lately. Hopefully that is silence of logic working and we are seeing the bills slowly vanish into the trash bins of each Judiciary Subcommittee. -Ski Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kadet Posted June 19, 2017 Share #66 Posted June 19, 2017 My Take: both of those bills were written to pacify a large and vocal special interest group (veterans/MOPH) during a key election year. Both have now met with significant resistance, and also have some very shaky legal logic with regard to personal property rights. Many Congressmen are attorneys and understand this, despite the politics. Although it is certainly prudent for collectors to take continued action, IMO neither of those bills will ever emerge from their respective committees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarrantMafia Posted June 19, 2017 Share #67 Posted June 19, 2017 I have contacted all the Georgia Representatives/delegation. Just received confirmation only they all received it. I Will update once I get any responses to the thread. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teamski Posted June 28, 2017 Share #68 Posted June 28, 2017 One more cosponsor added to the H.R. 544 list to make it 46. PLEASE continue to contact your representatives to counter this resolution. We cannot afford to sit and wait. Rep. Costello, Ryan A. [R-PA-6] 06/27/2017 Rep. Peterson, Collin C. [D-MN-7] 05/16/2017 Rep. Pearce, Stevan [R-NM-2] 05/04/2017 Rep. Veasey, Marc A. [D-TX-33] 05/04/2017 Rep. Correa, J. Luis [D-CA-46] 05/04/2017 Rep. Rush, Bobby L. [D-IL-1] 05/03/2017 Rep. Barragan, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44] 05/03/2017 Rep. Butterfield, G. K. [D-NC-1] 05/02/2017 Rep. Jones, Walter B., Jr. [R-NC-3] 05/02/2017 Rep. Takano, Mark [D-CA-41] 05/02/2017 Rep. Courtney, Joe [D-CT-2] 05/01/2017 Rep. Cicilline, David N. [D-RI-1] 04/25/2017 Rep. DeFazio, Peter A. [D-OR-4] 03/22/2017 Rep. Peters, Scott H. [D-CA-52] 03/22/2017 Rep. Rooney, Thomas J. [R-FL-17] 03/17/2017 Rep. Young, David [R-IA-3] 03/10/2017 Rep. Smucker, Lloyd [R-PA-16] 03/08/2017 Rep. Beatty, Joyce [D-OH-3] 03/07/2017 Rep. Rutherford, John H. [R-FL-4] 03/06/2017 Rep. Hill, J. French [R-AR-2] 02/28/2017 Rep. Moulton, Seth [D-MA-6] 02/28/2017 Rep. Coffman, Mike [R-CO-6] 02/27/2017 Rep. Lofgren, Zoe [D-CA-19] 02/21/2017 Rep. Gallagher, Mike [R-WI-8] 02/17/2017 Rep. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large] 02/17/2017 Rep. Gallego, Ruben [D-AZ-7] 02/17/2017 Rep. Roe, David P. [R-TN-1] 02/17/2017 Rep. Frelinghuysen, Rodney P. [R-NJ-11] 02/15/2017 Rep. Kind, Ron [D-WI-3] 02/15/2017 Rep. Shea-Porter, Carol [D-NH-1] 02/13/2017 Rep. Thompson, Mike [D-CA-5] 02/13/2017 Rep. Castro, Joaquin [D-TX-20] 02/07/2017 Rep. Calvert, Ken [R-CA-42] 02/02/2017 Rep. Abraham, Ralph Lee [R-LA-5] 02/02/2017 Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9] 02/02/2017 Rep. Collins, Chris [R-NY-27] 02/02/2017 Rep. Maloney, Sean Patrick [D-NY-18] 02/02/2017 Rep. LoBiondo, Frank A. [R-NJ-2] 02/02/2017 Rep. Grothman, Glenn [R-WI-6] 02/02/2017 Rep. Pingree, Chellie [D-ME-1] 02/02/2017 Rep. Marshall, Roger W. [R-KS-1] 02/02/2017 Rep. Dunn, Neal P. [R-FL-2]* 01/13/2017 Rep. Poliquin, Bruce [R-ME-2]* 01/13/2017 Rep. Jenkins, Lynn [R-KS-2]* 01/13/2017 Rep. Chu, Judy [D-CA-27]* 01/13/2017 Rep. Bishop, Sanford D., Jr. [D-GA-2]* 01/13/2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarrantMafia Posted July 9, 2017 Share #69 Posted July 9, 2017 Here is one response I received so far: figured I would share. I give him credit, he has written back, radio silence on the others. Dear Mr. Jackson: Thank you for contacting me to express your opinion regarding S. 765, the Private Corrado Piccoli Purple Heart Preservation Act. As your Congressman, I appreciate hearing your thoughts and welcome every opportunity to be of service. As you may know, S. 765 was introduced by Senator David Perdue (R-GA) on March 29, 2017. If enacted, it would provide for penalties for the sale of any Purple Heart awarded to a member of the Armed Forces. S. 765 was referred to the Senate Committee on Judiciary, where it is currently awaiting further action. The Purple Heart medal solemnly recognizes the great, and at times the ultimate sacrifice of American service members like Private Corrado Piccoli, and we should consider ways in which to maintain its importance and significance. Although I am not a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, please be assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind should S. 765 come before the full House for a vote. Again, thank you for sharing your concerns. If you feel that I may be of additional assistance on this, or any other matter of importance to you, please do not hesitate to contact me. I also invite you to sign up for my weekly email newsletter or to share your ideas and opinions by visiting my website at https://hice.house.gov or emailing me at [email protected]. You may also follow me on Facebook, Twitter, @CongressmanHice, Instagram, and YouTube for live updates from Washington. Sincerely, Jody Hice Member of Congress Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teamski Posted July 10, 2017 Share #70 Posted July 10, 2017 Not much, but it is something..... -Ski Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEAST Posted August 4, 2017 Share #71 Posted August 4, 2017 Did I read correctly? S.765 passed the Senate and has been sent to the House? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMariner Posted August 4, 2017 Share #72 Posted August 4, 2017 I just checked and it appears you did! Looks like it passed the senate first run through! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarbridge Posted August 4, 2017 Author Share #73 Posted August 4, 2017 This is an amendment... Mr. PERDUE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. 765 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will report the bill by title. The legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (S. 765) to amend title 18, United States Code, to provide for penalties for the sale of any Purple Heart awarded to a member of the Armed Forces. There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill. Mr. PERDUE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Perdue substitute amendment be considered and agreed to, the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment (No. 767) in the nature of a substitute was agreed to, as follows: (Purpose: In the nature of a substitute) Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``Private Corrado Piccoli Purple Heart Preservation Act''. SEC. 2. FINDINGS. Congress finds the following: (1) The Purple Heart medal solemnly recognizes the great and sometimes ultimate sacrifice of American servicemembers like Private Corrado Piccoli. (2) The Purple Heart medal holds a place of honor as the national symbol of this sacrifice and deserves special protections. SEC. 3. PENALTY FOR SALE OF PURPLE HEARTS AWARDED TO MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES. Section 704 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-- (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``Whoever'' and inserting ``Except as provided in subsection (e), whoever''; and (2) by adding at the end the following: ``(e) Purple Heart.-- ``(1) Penalty.--Whoever willfully purchases, attempts to purchase, solicits for purchase, mails, ships, imports, exports, produces blank certificates of receipt for, manufactures, sells, attempts to sell, advertises for sale, trades, barters, or exchanges for anything of value any Purple Heart awarded to a member of the armed forces or former member of the armed forces by the Secretary of the military department concerned, except when authorized under regulations made pursuant to law, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both. ``(2) Limitation on regulations.--Regulations described in paragraph (1) may not authorize the sale of any Purple Heart awarded to a member of the armed forces or former member of the armed forces by the Secretary of the military department concerned, unless the sale is conducted by the member or former member to whom the Purple Heart was awarded. ``(3) Definition.--In this subsection, the term `willfully' means the voluntary, intentional violation of a known legal duty.''. The bill (S. 765), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed. Mr. PERDUE. Mr. President, this legislation is important because it will offer the Purple Heart the same types of legal protections currently in place for the Medal of Honor and help put an end to profiteering off of the sacrifice of our great American heroes. I would like to thank those Senators who have cosponsored this bill, as well, and the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee for persisting to get this bill on the floor. There is no higher honor that we have in the Senate than to honor our veterans and the people who put their lives on the line every day for their country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devildog34 Posted August 4, 2017 Share #74 Posted August 4, 2017 There is no higher honor that we have in the Senate than to honor our veterans and the people who put their lives on the line every day for their country. Ya well, there is no greater honor for us either but thanks to those who voted in favor of this today, you have taken that honor away and have done nothing more than further endanger the perpetuation of the memory, story and experiences of these warriors who will often fade into greater obscurity as these tangibles of their sacrifice will be forced to reside with those who often do not share the passion to keep these stories alive or worse yet, find their way into the garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarbridge Posted August 4, 2017 Author Share #75 Posted August 4, 2017 Folks...now is the time to go harder...don't let this deflate your efforts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now