STOP EXTREME GUN CONTROL BILL H.R. 127

[Vylo]

There is so much insanely wrong with this bill. We need to streamline gun control measures, not bloat them and make them infringe even more on people's rights.

 

[Danthemailman]

H.R.127: Is this Unconstitutional overreach from authoritarian socialists bent on gun confiscation?
Text - H.R.127 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

STOP EXTREME GUN CONTROL BILL H.R. 127
jbs.org/alert/stop-extreme-gun-control-bill-h-r-127/

"Members of Congress are seeking to pass an extreme and unconstitutional
gun control bill that would effectively nullify the Second Amendment.

A great way to start a war in America would be by nullifying the 2nd Amendment. Let's hope and pray this never happens.

 

[Nithavela]

A great way to start a war in America would be by nullifying the 2nd Amendment. Let's hope and pray this never happens.

You guys need to stop threatening war.

 

[Jamdoc]

I think that at the very least, having to get a license and insurance of a firearm is completely reasonable. Why should a firearm have less requirements to own than a car?

Because a car is a privilege, not a right.

 

[Danthemailman]

You guys need to stop threatening war.

You guys? I'm not threatening war, but that's where nullifying the 2nd Amendment will take us. Do you realize how many gun owners there are in America who are very passionate about their 2nd Amendment rights? They will see that as an act of war by our government. This isn't Nazi Germany.

 

[Nithavela]

You guys? I'm not threatening war, but that's where nullifying the 2nd Amendment will take us. Do you realize how many gun owners there are in America who are very passionate about their 2nd Amendment rights? They will see that as an act of war by our government. This isn't Nazi Germany.

Oh please, an act of war. Do you really think they'll start attacking military bases with their couch commando outfit and semiautomatic AR-15s?

 

[Nithavela]

Because a car is a privilege, not a right.

You guys have your priorities backwards.

 

[Danthemailman]

Oh please, an act of war. Do you really think they'll start attacking military bases with their couch commando outfit and semiautomatic AR-15s?

Things don't have to go down exactly like that for it to be considered a war, whether you call it a civil war or a revolution, things will not end well! Also, don't underestimate the number of militia groups in America and the fire power they possess.

 

[Desk trauma]

A great way to start a war in America would be by nullifying the 2nd Amendment.

...or much more likely, and oh so boring, a legal challenge to the law as unconstitutional followed by it being struck down as a whole of piecemeal. Unless violence is the goal why not make use of the legal mechanisms of challenging bad laws?

 

[Desk trauma]

I would be interested to see if universal psychological screening for gun ownership would pass constitutional muster.

 

[98cwitr]

H.R.127: Is this Unconstitutional overreach from
authoritarian socialists bent on gun confiscation?
Text - H.R.127 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
-

STOP EXTREME GUN CONTROL BILL H.R. 127
jbs.org/alert/stop-extreme-gun-control-bill-h-r-127/

"Members of Congress are seeking to pass an extreme and unconstitutional
gun control bill that would effectively nullify the Second Amendment.

Here are the highlights of H.R. 127’s provisions:

It creates a national firearm registry that anyone – including every
level of law enforcement and the military – can access.

The registry would require one to tell the government exactly
where one’s firearms are stored.

One would need a license simply to own a firearm.
Mandatory “psychological evaluations” are required receive this license.

One would need to pay $800 for “firearm insurance.”

It would enact extreme ammunition restrictions, including
a ban on magazines more than 10 rounds.

Violating the above provisions could lead to a prison sentence
of up to 40 years and a fine of up to $150,000."

I hope you've stopped (if you ever did) giving money to the NRA, and instead vested with orgs like GOA and SAF. We need to get involved at the state level as well. Does your state have a 2A group like grnc.org?

 

[Oompa Loompa]

I know right? Next thing they'll be requiring people to register their cars too, even hold a licence to drive one and making them take out insurance!

Owning a car is not a constitutionally protected right.

 

[Danthemailman]

...or much more likely, and oh so boring, a legal challenge to the law as unconstitutional followed by it being struck down as a whole of piecemeal. Unless violence is the goal why not make use of the legal mechanisms of challenging bad laws?

I am very much in favor of a much more likely scenario. Nothing boring about a legal challenge. That’s what our laws are for.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

Never heard the "Talkin' John Birch Paranoid Blues"?

LOL, or you're just old

 

[Desk trauma]

Nothing boring about a legal challenge.

There must be as the first thing that I hear in reply to such things is "WAAAR!" not "legal challenge!". Like when I had the case made to me about the similar VA law that the first action should be outright refusal and violent resistance to the law rather than any legal remedy.

 

[Desk trauma]

Wow, the John Birch Society. Who knew they were still around.

Did you know there are red stripes in the American flag? (Lookout for those commies!)

I had hoped they quietly went away after they tried to pin 9/11 on the commies in their dispatches right after the event.

 

[Desk trauma]

H.R.127: Is this Unconstitutional overreach from
authoritarian socialists bent on gun confiscation?

Betteridge's law of headlines

 

[Danthemailman]

There must be as the first thing that I hear in reply to such things is "WAAAR!" not "legal challenge!". Like when I had the case made to me about the similar VA law that the first action should be outright refusal and violent resistance to the law rather than any legal remedy.

My implication was if the government was successful at nullifying the Second Amendment it would lead to a war (or major civil unrest) whatever you prefer to label it. I’m not saying that nullifying the second amendment will definitely happen through that gun law or that we should not seek legal remedy if attempts are made.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

You guys need to stop threatening war.

He wasn't threatening war. He was stating a predictable outcome. Unconstitutional gun laws are passed. Government tries to take guns away. A few shootouts occur from the "they will have to take it from my cold dead hands" types. Which escalates into more aggressive measures from the Government. Which results in more resistance from the American people.

Call it a slippery slope if you want. I don't care. Our founding fathers didn't threaten war with the English. They demanded liberty. War was started by England to keep those liberties from the colonies. The same principle could apply in this situation.

 

[Jamdoc]

You guys have your priorities backwards.

No, the right to self defense is more important than the convenience of travel.