The bipartisan group of Senators who have been “negotiating” our rights is all the talk right now. “Negotiating” is in quotations because only one side is giving anything up here, as usual. TTAG’s Jennifer Sensiba has a rundown of that if you need to get up to speed.
The deal announced over the weekend is still just a “framework.” No legislation has been written. It’s basically an agreement to consider a bill, but gun owners aren’t the only ones who are unhappy. Many gun control advocated aren’t happy with the deal either…they think the restrictions on gun rights don’t go far enough, but they see it as a first step.
The US House of Representatives recently passed a series of bills that are loaded with the kinds of “commonsense” “gun safety” restrictions Democrats really want. None of those measures is likely to pass the Senate with its filibuster. But as the Senate has clearly shown, Republicans are willing to talk about gun control.
There are at least ten Republican Senators who can’t be counted upon to stand up for Constitutional rights. That’s enough to break the filibuster if the gun controllers sweeten the deal enough.
The bipartisan group means to put more “red flag” confiscation laws in place by structuring a bill that incentivizes states to enact them. It’s basically an end run around the filibuster to get what they want without forcing Senators to actually vote on confiscation. Never mind that red flag laws are, by definition, unconstitutional violations of individuals’ due process rights.
If that works, expect the Feds to try the same approach with other measures. State legislatures are always looking for more federal cash, so it might be an effective tactic.
The gun control industry want to move fast and get this done while the media are actively helping to push their agenda and Uvalde is fresh in voters’ minds. Pull up any news site and you’ll see how many “mass shootings” took place last weekend.
Never mind that it’s like that it’s almost all gang-on-gang and criminal activity taking place in Democrat-controlled large cities. Why let nuance get in the way of a perfectly good agenda?
So, here’s a quick look at what still on the anti-gunners’ wish list . . .
1: Universal Background Checks
Yes, I know we hear this one constantly. The House passed this back in 2019 as HR 8 and then again as HR 1446 last March. It’s been floating around ever since. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer would dearly love to bring this one to the floor, but he knows he doesn’t have the votes.
Keep in mind that background checks on every gun sale, commercial or private, is only enforceable through a national gun registry, which is currently illegal. Savvier anti-gun politicians, including Schumer, know that.
“Universal” background checks will fail to reduce crime in any meaningful way, giving civilian disarmament advocates an excuse to push for a full-blown registry. I think that’s the real endgame here. Schumer is on record saying that all he’s asking for is registration. This is a step in that direction.
2: A National Firearms License
The current iteration of this idea comes from New Jersey Senator Cory Booker. His bill, if passed, would raise the age to buy any firearm to 21 and require anyone wishing to own a gun to obtain a license from the Department of Justice.
It’s unclear whether that license would cover all firearms or if you have to get a license for each one. I suspect Booker would prefer the latter. The bill doesn’t have anything close to the support it needs to pass the Senate.
3: An ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban
This has been a big one since Bill Clinton’s ban expired in 2004. California’s Dianne Feinstein has reliably trotted out her versions again and again. Given the fact that so-called assault weapons are used in only a tiny fraction of crimes committed and AR pattern rifles are incredibly popular among the gun-buying public, none of the proposals for a new AWB have some anywhere close to passing. This could, however, be a prime candidate for federal bribery of the states.
There are an estimated 20 million AR-15s in the US. That doesn’t count the other models that would also qualify under various definitions of an “assault weapon.” So America’s favorite rifles are, by any definition, in common use as defined in the Heller decision. But since when have gun controllers cared about constitutional niceties?
4: The House’s Gun Control Bills
As noted earlier, the House passed a package of eight bills they predictably named the Protecting Our Kids Act. While it isn’t expected that any of it could clear the Senate, the measures include . . .
Age Restrictions
This raises the age to purchase any firearm to 21 years old. Interestingly, the very liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that California’s ban in sales to adults under 21 is unconstitutional. But that was only a three-judge panel. Whether an en banc panel agrees remains to be seen.
Straw Purchase and Gun Trafficking Measures
This would make straw purchases of firearms and gun trafficking illegal. Never mind that both are already illegal and have been for decades. I sometimes wonder about the people’s mental capacity of our elected representatives, but this was done for a purpose.
Gun controllers never pass up an opportunity to stoke fear in the ignorant and gullible and this is one of those times. It furthers the narrative of unfettered, unregulated gun transfers on street corners and in parking lots. Most people only know what the media spoon feeds them and they rarely dish up anything accurate where the topic is America’s gun laws.
All Firearms Must be Traceable
This is a federal ban on “ghost guns.” Americans have been making their own firearms since we were British colonies and no one in the gun-grabbing community is happy about that. This would only be truly enforceable through a national registry that accounts for all gun sales.
The reality is anyone can buy the parts needed to build a gun at Home Depot in exchange for a piece of paper with Andrew Jackson’s portrait on it. They can also buy a 3D printer for under $250 and turn out their own very functional firearms with increasing ease. In other words, whatever the law says, government simply can’t stop the signal.
Safe Storage Mandate
As usual, gun controllers want to dictate how you use your own property. Of course we should store our firearms safely. But if you have a home defense gun, storing it unloaded and locked away, separate from the ammunition means you don’t really have a home defense gun.
Let’s be honest…that’s the point for the anti-gunners, isn’t it? Say it with me: The operative word in “gun control” is “control.” Safe storage laws also appear to be questionable under the Heller decision, but that’s yet to be decided.
Closing the ‘Bump Stock Loophole’
Whatever that is. Seriously, that’s a new one on me. The ATF put bump stock makers out of business years ago and “loophole” means anything that gun controllers don’t like.
Magazine Capacity Limits
They say this will help keep Americans safe. If I roll my eyes any harder, I’ll be looking out the back of my head.
Here’s an excerpt from the bill’s language . . .
It shall be unlawful for a person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, a large capacity ammunition feeding device.
Notice they don’t provide a number defining “large capacity.” That gives them room to keep reducing it as they see fit. The goal, as we all know, is an ultimate magazine capacity of ZERO.
Remember that police and other government agencies are exempt from this limit. The people looking to impose these restrictions on you aren’t about to compromise their own security. Because they’re important.
Also remember that the Supreme Court has already ruled that cops have no duty to protect private citizens. That’s on you. Not that gun controllers give a damn about that. Or you.
And let’s not kid ourselves. The gun controllers don’t really want to get rid of guns. They just want the government to have a monopoly on them and their use. Big difference. Again, it’s all about the control.
5: The ‘Accountability for Online Firearms Marketplaces Act’
Colorado Congressman Jason Crow thinks it would be a great idea to remove legal protections for online sellers of firearms and gun parts. There’s a Senate version, too. If enacted, the bill would remove section 230 protection from online sellers.
As Feinstein’s press release noted . . .
The Accountability for Online Firearms Marketplaces Act would clarify Section 230 to ensure that the law’s blanket liability shield does not apply to online firearms marketplaces. In enacting Section 230, Congress did not intend to grant a sweeping liability shield to all companies, including firearms marketplaces, merely because they operate in cyberspace. Under the Accountability for Online Firearms Marketplaces Act, online firearms marketplaces will no longer enjoy sweeping, blanket immunity—a change which will help take guns out of the hands of dangerous persons seeking to evade background checks and other gun safety measures.
In other words, if someone shoots up his workplace and bought the firearm legally through a transaction arranged on a web site like, say, Armslist or Gunbroker, the platforms could be sued into bankruptcy.
It would effectively shut down many of these online platforms. But that, of course, is the goal.
6: A 1,000 Percent Tax on ‘Assault Weapons’
You’ve may have heard about this garbage bill being pushed by Virginia Congressman Don Beyer. It’s patently absurd, but there’s a slim chance it could be brought to a vote through the reconciliation process.
That means that, as a tax measure, it’s attached to a large general tax bill that most of our “representatives” will vote for. Reconciliation bills only require a simple majority in the Senate, thus bypassing the 60-vote filibuster hurdle. That’s how oily politicians like Beyer get things done.
No one really thinks this one will fly. It raises legal questions under the 1943 Supreme Court Murdock vs. Pennsylvania case on taxing Constitutional rights and would be ripe for court challenges.
I’ve heard it opined that the bill is intentionally extreme in order to make the other stuff in the pipeline seem “reasonable.” Maybe. Control freaks like Beyer will do everything they can to kill things they don’t like and they really don’t like civilian gun ownership.
Once again, Beyer’s personal security would be unaffected because the police and government agencies would be exempt from the tax.
Keep Up to Date
This stuff is important. Ever since the 1934 National Firearms Act, gun rights on the federal level have flowed steadily away from We the People. Rarely has anything come back our way.
Once something is gone, it tends to stay gone, especially in the current political climate. Unlike the 1994 “assault weapons” ban, there won’t be a sunset clause on any of this that may be signed into law. If you don’t stand up and speak now, you might never get the chance.
If you don’t care about ARs and AKs, I urge you to reconsider your stance. It won’t be long before your deer rifle becomes a “sniper rifle” and your bird gun a “riot gun.” Stay informed. The control freaks will never be satisfied.
The economy is tanking at a rapid rate. joe burden is the worst president ever. The upside of this is that the dems cannot win an election now even if they cheat.
This gun control push is to take the sheep’s eyes off the shit show that is the biden economy and the pain it is causing the poors. A dog and pony show that will achieve nothing. Like the Jan. 6 circus.
i watched none of that and yet i still find myself cognisant of giuliana possibly being inebriated on election day. if so, he was in good company.
straight dog and pony, strike while the irons hot.
When sending e-mail to your whatever in congress on the drop down menu if applicable select “Civil Rights” instead of Gun Control, Second Amendment, etc. Chances are better you’ll be heard instead of your opinion being lost in a swamp of Gun Control spammers.
Make no mistake about it, worthless pathetic wimpy RINOs are sacrificing more of your 2A Rights just to pacify finger pointing incompetent tantrum throwing snot nosed Gun Control drama queens. Like all spoiled brats Gun Control useful idiots need time spent behind a woodshed learning it’s not nice to trample on the Constitutional Rights of others No Matter What. And they won’t get what that from the likes of mitt romney, bill cassidy et al.
In elections everything runs downhill from the 2A. If your candidate is not 110% 2A chances are good they are not worth a dime anywhere else.
Yesterday, on the Progress XM Radio channel, I actually heard liberal hosts and politicians saying (without any sense of irony) that “gun control is the civil rights issue of the 21st century.” Did they mean gun rights are civil rights? No, they meant the exact opposite! They said that taking AWAY gun rights is somehow “the civil rights issue of the 21st century,” as in something that SHOULD be done, to somehow “protect” civil rights of black people by taking away their civil rights to own guns! They said that banning guns is a civil rights issue because they claimed that removing guns from “black neighborhoods” is a civil rights issue in a GOOD way. Like they need to remove the rights of black people in order to save themselves from themselves — and that somehow taking away their civil rights was “the civil rights issue of the 21st century.”
The blatant hypocrisy made my head spin, but the liberal gun-banners on the radio didn’t even realize the hypocrisy or irony or their own words.
Unbe-f**ing-lievable.
You obviously haven’t been reading the “brilliant” insights of dacian the stupid, MinorIQ, or our other resident Leftist/fascists here on TTAG, have you??
That’s OK; we don’t pay attention, either, except to mock them mercilessly (just ask MinorIQ how Article I, Section 8 authorizes universal federal gun control). If your point is Leftist/fascists are intellectually bereft, illogical halfwits? Yes, and in other news, water is wet.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HrIpa0q3Qj0
For a fun earworm.
>>>>If John Cornyn was a Police Officer <<<<<
Officer Cornyn; We spotted some burglars breaking into your home.
Homeowners; Thank you Officer Cornyn, with record high inflation we don’t have the money to buy new replacements. Do you need us to press charges?
Officer Cornyn; Well not exactly. You see the burglars told us they wanted to steal everything in your home, they even brought a box truck.
Homeowner; I don’t understand what difference that would make?
Officer Cornyn; Well because they wanted everything, we “COMPROMISED” with the burglars, for your safety of course.
Officer Cornyn; Lucky for you we were here. Because instead of everything, they ONLY took four chairs, two TV’s, one car, and the contents of your safe. We feel it strikes a good "COMPROMISE" for both parties.
Homeowner; What!?! Our car? Our safe…?
Officer Cornyn; That is correct, and I'm sure they will not return later for the rest of your belongings.
Officer Cornyn; But if they do, we will likely have to “COMPROMISE” with them again.
Homeowner; But… B..u..t..
Officer Cornyn; No need to thank us, it’s our job to serve the people. So remember to drive safe, and have a nice day.
Those 10 Republican senators supporting gun control aren’t up for re-election.
Which only proves that they’ll talk the talk when they want your votes; but the real agenda for ALL of them is to keep you disarmed while they have private security.
>>>>If John Cornyn was a Police Officer <<<<<
Officer Cornyn; We spotted some burglars breaking into your home.
Homeowners; Thank you Officer Cornyn, with record high inflation we don’t have the money to buy new replacements. Do you need us to press charges?
Officer Cornyn; Well not exactly. You see the burglars told us they wanted to steal everything in your home, they even brought a box truck.
Homeowner; I don’t understand what difference that would make?
Officer Cornyn; Well because they wanted everything, we “COMPROMISED” with the burglars, for your safety of course.
Officer Cornyn; Lucky for you we were here. Because instead of everything, they ONLY took four chairs, two TV’s, one car, and the contents of your safe. We feel it strikes a good "COMPROMISE" for both parties.
Homeowner; What!?! Our car? Our safe…?
Officer Cornyn; That is correct, and I sure they will not return later for the rest of your belongings.
Officer Cornyn; But if they do, we will likely have to “COMPROMISE” with them again.
Homeowner; But… B..u..t..
Officer Cornyn; No need to thank us, it’s our job to serve the people. So drive safe, and have a nice day.
“…Your comment is awaiting moderation…”
You have real spammers all over, and you only moderate real comments.
Dan, where are you?
You have no idea how many spam comments are kept out by the filters. The few that get through are only a small fraction.
But you knock out all those comments that DARE to have a word or thought that might not be politically correct, right, Dan???
Our resident Leftist idiots publish comments on the daily that contain bile . . . and the rest of us get our comments moderated all the time.
Dan, I am not blaming you (personally) for the s***show that is the TTAG “moderation policy”, but . . . you work here, dude.
GET. IT. FIXED. If online hos can scam us on the daily, and we have to listen to the drivel of MinorIQ and dacian the stupid, stop moderating comments by Sam, Walter, Rider/Shooter, etc. And you DO, literally all the time.
Your moderation “policy” is a sick joke. Either get the hell rid of it, and I’ll just skip over the spam, or actually start MODERATING. Your choice, but the current goat-rope??? Ain’t it.
The founding fathers were so correct. The seventeenth amendment removed a critical check on government power. Under the old way the state legislature voted on senate representation. Not the public. If a senator voted against his own states interests. He could be recalled and replaced immediately. They didn’t have to wait for the next election. I believed this happened at least two or three times in history. Just the threat of possible removal kept them in line.
The founders created a system that made it extremely difficult to expand federal power. If the senators colluded with each other to grow the power of the federal government. And that is was the progressives have always wanted.
“Why, sure, you canlet your camel take a peek inside of the tent – hell, they don’t eat much or take up THAT much room.”. Some negotiating.
Entirely this, they will never be happy as their mantra is misery.
“A National Firearms License”
Not needed, full stop.
It’s so simple, even a Leftist Scum ™ can figure it out – If an individual is a legally-prohibited person, they can’t own or possess a gun.
See? 🙂
Licensing leads to registration, registration leads to confiscation plain and simple.
The real goal of our Leftist-Socialist anti-gun radicals is to disarm Americans. It would make it much easier for their take over, which they ar already well on the way to accomplishing.
We can only stop this with a RED WAVE in November.
We can only stop this with a RED WAVE in November.
Wow, people still believe that the GOP is going to help them? LOL, well, the awakening shall be most rude.
No, strych9, the GOP WILL “help them” (the Leftists, that is), because that’s what they do. Having the Republican Party “represent” you is like having the French for an “ally”. As Patton famously said, “I’d rather have three German divisions in front of me than one French division behind!”
The “Republicans” are only SLIGHTLY better than the Dimocrats. “Put not thy faith in politicians.”
When you’re right, you’re right.
Universal checks are impossible to enforce without a registry, but what they would do is establish a chain of blame for any incidents. Someone commits a crime with a gun, dies, but oh, where did that gun for from? Go arrest his buddy for an illegal transfer, oh he got it from an uncle, another illegal transfer… You can have a bunch of perp walks nabbing all those who “helped” the criminal get a gun.
I think the punishment is all on the seller/giver of the firearm, for not doing the check, similar to busting retailers for selling to underage kids, the kid would barely get in trouble but the seller has more to lose so punish them.
And some police agencies would get to have fun busting gun owners by trapping them.
I will not comply. Period. The blood of patriots et all…
First they came for the large capacity magazines
And I did not speak out
Because I did not use large capacity magazines
Then they came for the assault rifles
And I did not speak out
Because I dont care for assault rifles
Then they came for the 9mm
And I did not speak out
Because I dont use pistol ammunition
Then they came for the handguns
And I did not speak out
Because I only own a rifle
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
Thanks for posting that. I think I’m going to print that out and hang it on the bulletin boards at the range I’m a member of. Nice range, but very hunter oriented with lots of baby boomer Fudds around (especially senior members/RSOs) who look at you like you’re a terrorist if you show up with a black rifle – to say nothing of an AR pistol or similar.
It was an obvious poach but, even so, its poignant; Im glad you liked it; Im sure you could clean it up a bit to make it even better.
Pass whatever you want. We will not comply. We will defend ourselves.
How about this compromise; Every state runs its entire drivers license and ID database through NICS. Then put either a green gun symbol or a red gun symbol in a cross out circle on everyone’s drivers license or ID. Do this for all IDs and licenses going forward. Want to buy a gun? Show me your license.
I’ve been suggesting that to anti gunners for over a decade. All the is say it will cost much or can’t be done because something something bull$hit something.
My thoughts and prayers to the future widows, widowers, and the children of the police officers, who try to enforce these laws.
Fuck ’em. Should have married better.
In the Three Musketeers and the Cowboys films, two Christian characters, played by Roscoe Lee Browne and Charlie Sheen. Both prayed over their soon to be victims. I always thought this was very humorous and not an insult to anyone.
And you are correct. They should have been a better judge of the character, of the person they were marrying.
strych9,
OK, you and SamIam are now officially in the medal round for “Most Cynical MOFO on TTAG”!!!
Cold, but undeniably accurate.
Personally, I don’t see it as cold. It’s simply pragmatic.
Sam probably wins on cynicism. I’m probably a touch more ruthless when push comes to shove.
You are not wrong.
Three presidents Carter, Clinton, and Obama, have had their school-age children set to a School building that was itself turned into an armed Fortress.
The rich, criminal or law abiding, will always have access to the firepower that the rest of us will be denied having.
As I said before, the “Bipartisan” Negotiations are being constructed to fail on purpose as the Democrats want.
The Senate and House Bills are both being deemed “NOT ENOUGH”! by the Democrats.
This is all so they can blame the GOP for the failing and make Gun Politics the front and center national issue. All of course, a Distraction to all the economic issues going on, the Court Packing threat, and Immigration..
In the 1960’s it was “Saturday Night Specials” (cheap handguns) which were banned from importation in 1968. In the 1980’s the para-military rifles became “Assault Weapons” which were banned from importation in 1989 and domestically in 1994 (until 2004). Today its’ “Ghost Guns” and “Assault Weapons” again. Tomorrow it will be “high caliber Sniper rifles” that kill at 1000 yards and go through bullet proof vests. (which is your scoped Remington 700 30-06 deer rifle) So all you hunters who don’t own semi autos or handguns better wake up because your guns are NEXT.
The rifle scope will be banned next. Only iron sites will be allowed. Long distance shooting will be against the law.
“That would never happen here”
quote————Keep in mind that background checks on every gun sale, commercial or private, is only enforceable through a national gun registry, which is currently illegal. Savvier anti-gun politicians, including Schumer, know that.
“Universal” background checks will fail to reduce crime in any meaningful way, giving civilian disarmament advocates an excuse to push for a full-blown registry——–quote
Falsehood in the extreme:
Just where does the author think criminals and psycho’s get their firepower from? They get them from second hand gun sales because the Brady bill stops them from buying new guns. And Safe Storage laws would cut down substantially on stolen guns because most gun thefts are smash and grab robberies. Every civilized nation has such laws and their crimes and mass shootings with firearms are way less than what ours are. Try and buy an illegal gun in Europe or Japan some time as compared to the U.S. where you can get one on the street in less th an 5 minutes.
And by the way a registry is not necessary for Universal Background Checks because the Brady Bill has worked without them for over 2 decades and extending the checks to second hand gun sales is not rocket science either. If the penalties are made severe enough no one in their right mind would risk losing their gun rights forever, their job and their assets when selling a gun and not going through a dealer to sell it.
Woe to they who call falsehoods true, and truths false.
Classic doublethink.
All restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms are unconstitutional. These elected officials are in violation of their oath to uphold the constitution. Want to change it… amend it plain and simple. Let’s see the States vote for that. 🤣🤣🤣
Slo Joe says the Second Amendment is not absolute. But, “….SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” followed by a period appears pretty damn absolute.
Politicians with laws never stop bad guys with guns.
They only control the good guys, which is their true agenda.
“Tyranny is that which is legal for governments, but which is illegal for citizens.” so saith Tommy…..Tommy Jefferson.
At which of those steps is the Second actually implemented for what it was intended?
Regardless of what laws they pass they need to be able to enforce them and they do not have the resources to do that with 150 million firearm owners. During prohibition they simply made it easier for the criminals to make money and people had their alcohol anyhow. What makes anyone think that the criminal element would not get into the firearm business black market?
My suggestion is not to acknowledge any correspondence from the Government and force them into an administrative nightmare of having to exhaust a process before they could even legally go after your firearms. Once they do it then invoke your State’s Make My Day or Castle Domain laws because the Supreme Court has ruled no entry without a warrant and to have a warrant they have to prove that they have enough evidence to charge you with a crime. Since the vast majority of us are law abiding they have no basis to charge us with anything. They want them, molon labe, make them come and get them and work for everyone they try to take. Heck they can’t even stop a riot when people are not armed.
Develop early with your neighbors your fields of fire for those fun, team building no-knock knockings ahead…..kinda’ like impromptu “National Night Out” neighbor events. If they’d just call ahead, it would provide time to ice down more beer.
Let’s cut through the crap, and tell it like it is. If the Democrats (and Republicans, too) had their way, they would eliminate the Second Amendment altogether, shut down all gun and ammo companies, and then enact door-to-door gun confiscations. As Eric Swalwell said, they would then shoot everyone that does not comply. Perhaps those in the U.S. military would not go along with this, not wanting to risk their own lives for such a task. But U.N. troops certainly would be more than happy to relieve Americans of their firearms, and shoot us accordingly. As screwy as this world is, I would also not be surprised if the Democrats invited Chinese troops to help with the cause. If this is how Democrats are treating well-armed Americans now, it would behoove one to pause, and consider just how much worse this country will slide down into the pits of hell, if such a goal is achieved.
So, buy more guns. Got it.
If your guns are dispersed sufficiently to survive the initial Red Flaggings, we’ve got enough guns……hoard ammo for TRE dead ahead. 🙂 🙂 🙂
When the Hangman shows with coils & coils of rope….they will try to run….but,….
The “Bump Stock Loophole” is because if any court considered the regulations seriously they’d get thrown out.
The definition of “Machine Gun” was changed in 1984 to be specific and include devices that make a gun fire more than one shot per action of the trigger.
BATF (Predecessor to BATFE, the present agency ) participated in the writing of the bill to include conversion devices that don’t change the weapon itself, but make it fire multiple shot or till the magazine is empty. So it is VERY specific.
A “Bump Stock” is nowhere near that definition, and they need to change the law to ban them. They want this BEFORE a Federal Court or SCOTUS rules against it, weakening their future administrative powers.
Sliding that in makes them more powerful because they can just redefine things at will, making more and more guns illegal.
Their current ban is illegal, and being fought in court. If they lose, they know it hurts them badly, especially in places like California and NY or NJ, where they do that kind of thing constantly.
Comments are closed.