National Gun Forum banner

1 - 20 of 36 Posts

·
Aim true !
Joined
·
11,361 Posts
Wow if this passes. It's going to be terrible for those who have large collections. My son wanted to buy a bushmaster the other day. I told him to hold off for now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,079 Posts
How on earth would they coordinate getting mental health exams for at least 1/3 of the country?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Russ D

·
AZHerper
Joined
·
4,126 Posts
Cross your fingers that Joe Manchin (Sen. West Virginia) is a true moderate Democrat. He could save a lot of votes.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,730 Posts
Voting for this bill would be political suicide. The amount of protesting and push back from this would be like nothing you’ve ever seen before. There’s a lot of DemocRats that are gun owners and would also jump in on removing these gun hating politicians. They know it too. I can’t see Joe Manchineel or any other congressman from below the mason/Dixon line surviving after supporting this.
 

·
Registered
Pistoleer
Joined
·
103 Posts
This is what happens when Un-American politicians take control away from those that uphold the Constitution and the ideals of the Founding Fathers of our Constitutional Republic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
987 Posts
What would they do, if people who had large gun collections started giving them away, to other people, prior to registration, just to stick the new law?

Perhaps they should consider, better 60 guns, in the hands of one pacified LAGO, that they know about,who can pass a 4473, regularly, than those 60 guns, in the hands of 60 different people, of which they have NO firearms records, none of whom have ever been screened...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,802 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I was watching Colion Noir earlier. He was going on a rant about universal background checks and how they can only lead to a gun registry. His argument is that the only way to prove that someone went through a background check for a each firearm is to attach a serial number to the background check. He made mention of Hitler using that tactic to identify gun owners to create a list of targets for confiscation. I don’t disagree with that in the manner by which they wrote it in the bill.

Although I don’t recall him actually calling this out, here lies the issue. The way we do private transfers in Illinois, the Foid has to be run through the State Police for approval to transfer. No documentation of the actual firearm is submitted to the State Police. You do have to keep that documentation for 10 years to be able to prove you did it legally. The FOID act itself is another conversation altogether so I won’t dive into that. Democrats would assume that enacting a firearm registration would force people to register their firearms. IF you hold possession of a firearm illegally, you cannot be prosecuted for not registering it regardless of how severe the crime may be. See Haynes vs United States. The NFA has to be revised to take into account that doing so violates the constitutional right afforded to the individual to avoid self incrimination. The only people they can prosecute for not registering their firearms are those that possess their firearms legally. It does nothing to prevent illegal possession of a firearm. The only reason I can see to go down that path is a list of targets for gun confiscation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,079 Posts
there are over 400 million guns in this country. If they enact a national UBC system tomorrow and you sell a gun next week how will they know when you sold it if you don't do the UBC? That will be the argument so registration will follow. Mr. Noir is correct on his assumptions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Philmo11

·
Registered
Joined
·
987 Posts
This bill is poorly thought out, constitutionally bereft, financially unfeasible.

It's just another unenforceable law, which will be retracted, once it's shown to be impossible to tenably enforce, unilaterally.
 

·
Keep calm & return fire!
Joined
·
12,903 Posts
There is a name or term for what they are doing with these bills. I dont remember what it is but I heard it somewhat recently. It's called the blank effect or something like that. There's an actually term for it.

They introduce something that is astonishing bad, psychologically setting people up to accept a lesser yet still bad version.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
119 Posts
There is a name or term for what they are doing with these bills. I dont remember what it is but I heard it somewhat recently. It's called the blank effect or something like that. There's an actually term for it.

They introduce something that is astonishing bad, psychologically setting people up to accept a lesser yet still bad version.
What is happening is incremental socialism. The Democrats know they can only get a portion of what they ask for, but that's the way the game is played. Ask for a million dollars. Gun owners give ten percent and say "whew, it could have been worse." The Dems return and the incrementalism continues. Republicans should ask for something in return. When the Democrats demand a Universal Background Check, the Republicans should only agree IF we get constitutionally carry or universal reciprocity. RINOs are not really with us, so they play stupid. Most gun control WILL pass, but on the backs of omnibus bills where the Democrats add gun control as an amendment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Sheila Jackson Lee submitted this last year and it failed. I suspect it will again. That woman puts the capital in Stupid
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
119 Posts
Sheila Jackson Lee submitted this last year and it failed. I suspect it will again. That woman puts the capital in Stupid
You can keep this thread jotted down and come back in a year to see if I'm right. The Democrats will ask for every concession known to God or man. The NRA will beg for money and when it's over, they will compromise and then say "whew, it could've been a lot worse." What you will most likely see is a Universal Background Check, a high capacity magazine ban, and the genesis of gun registration (the Universal Background Check is as worthless as a eunuch in a brothel without registration).

The Republicans, pretending to be on your side, will not ask for constitutional carry or universal reciprocity for ccw. The Republicans will not ask for a tightening down on "legal" drugs that many shooters are on when they commit gun crimes. They won't even ask that BATFE be reined in and quit pretending to be legislators. No, they will help keep America drugged so that there will continue be a need to compromise with the gun grabbers. They will expand government - incrementally. This stuff is like watching pro-wrestling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,633 Posts
Sheila Jackson Lee submitted this last year and it failed. I suspect it will again. That woman puts the capital in Stupid
And stupid are also the idiots who voted for this POS
 

·
Ancient Gaseous Emanation
Joined
·
54,602 Posts
HR 127 would allow a "licensed psychologist" to interview "any spouse of the individual" or "any former spouse" to "further determine the state of the mental, emotional, and relational stability of the individual in relation to firearms."

Nothing could go wrong with this one, right? All divorces end amicably without any ill-will or hurt feelings and a former spouse would only have good, truthful things to say about their former partner...

Or if you live in reality like we do, head over to FightHR127.com and stand up against this atrocious bill ASAP!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Philmo11
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Top