Community for Kel-Tec Shooters banner

21 - 40 of 56 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
705 Posts
House just passed the combined bill, now up to senate. They have been holding hearings. Appears bump stock will be a separate issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
630 Posts
"A qualified individual must: (1) be eligible to possess, transport, or receive a firearm under federal law; (2) carry a valid photo identification document; and (3) carry a valid concealed carry permit issued by, or be eligible to carry a concealed firearm in, his or her state of residence."

Well, what about residents of Constitutional Carry States that don't need a permit to CCW? Seems this is worded to allow them to carry nationwide without any permit at all...not complaining about it, just saying....I think it would be great for those residents...


"This bill amends the federal criminal code to allow a qualified individual to carry a concealed handgun into or possess a concealed handgun in another state that allows individuals to carry concealed firearms."

Now watch California, NY and Illinois ban all forms of CCW outright, to exempt themselves from this Bill. They should have just wrote: 'This bill amends the federal criminal code to allow a qualified individual to carry a concealed handgun into or possess a concealed handgun in any other state.' PERIOD. I have a feeling the resisting States will 'lawyer it to death' on every single word and render it ineffective.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,492 Posts
Now watch California, NY and Illinois ban all forms of CCW outright, to exempt themselves from this Bill. They should have just wrote: 'This bill amends the federal criminal code to allow a qualified individual to carry a concealed handgun into or possess a concealed handgun in any other state.' PERIOD. I have a feeling the resisting States will 'lawyer it to death' on every single word and render it ineffective.
IL and Washington DC both lost big on such laws already.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,809 Posts
I still think we are in peril to let the Feds touch this. Hope I am wrong on this one...
It won't matter in the ban states. Much ado about nothing. They don't follow federal law anyway.
Take all of the state regulations on what they consider :quote:illegal-firearms:quote:, hi-cap mags, it wasn't locked away, trigger-lock, bullet-buttons, etc. etc.
They'll have so many state violations to jail you on, the lack of a valid :quote:permit:quote: would be superfluous:rolleyes:.
The federal legislation only removes one charge. It doesn't make carrying-concealed with an out-of-state permit suddenly legal where the only legal carriers have badges.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
296 Posts
The gun-grabbers are already trying to stuff Brady type clauses into it. When they are "compromising" with our 2nd Amendment rights, they are all selling out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Hey everyone - no need to wait for congress to pass some law that I will be amazed if it actually happens - just get a LEOSA Permit. You can conceal carry anywhere in the US and its territories! Of course if you don't know what a LEOSA permit is, I doubt that you will qualify for one LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,845 Posts
I would imagine that one would have to carry a mag with the required qty that state allows? If they only allow 10 you can't carry a mag with 20. You stiil have to comply with the rules of each state. Some states don't allow hollow points.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
630 Posts
I would imagine that one would have to carry a mag with the required qty that state allows? If they only allow 10 you can't carry a mag with 20. You stiil have to comply with the rules of each state. Some states don't allow hollow points.
“(c) (1) A person who carries or possesses a concealed handgun in accordance with subsections (a) and (b) may not be arrested or otherwise detained for violation of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof related to the possession, transportation, or carrying of firearms unless there is probable cause to believe that the person is doing so in a manner not provided for by this section. Presentation of facially valid documents as specified in subsection (a) is prima facie evidence that the individual has a license or permit as required by this section.

"“(2) The term ‘handgun’ includes any magazine for use in a handgun and any ammunition loaded into the handgun or its magazine."


This should be interesting. What about ammunition that's NOT loaded, such as extra rounds in the store box? (hollowpoint or other restricted rounds, in certain states, for example) I guess as long as ammo is in the firearm or in the mags you're okay.

...oh, and....looks like there is no provision for those in Constitutional Carry States that can CCW without a permit, so they'll have to get one...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,809 Posts
They'll have so many state violations to jail you on, the lack of a valid :quote:permit:quote: would be superfluous:rolleyes:.
I would imagine that one would have to carry a mag with the required qty that state allows? If they only allow 10 you can't carry a mag with 20. You still have to comply with the rules of each state. Some states don't allow hollow points.
...just to name a few.
The big one would be, that the handgun is not registered in the state.
banned.gif
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,046 Posts
TL;DR Version: BOHICA

I'm with MarkCO on this one. I've consistently been leery of pinning my hopes on the federal government to protect my rights under the United States Constitution, and doubly so for second amendment issues. Being paralyzed by abject hopelessness isn't winning back any lost liberties, but we at least need to be honest with ourselves about the obvious facts and consider the history of what rights we've lost and how.

Many gun owners were shocked by the sudden betrayal when the national concealed carry reciprocity bill suddenly became a gun control bill that would add millions of honest law abiding Americans to the list of people who would be denied legal access to firearms by the federal government via the NICS list. If you skipped over the long post by lklawson with representative Thomas Massie's warning, you probably should have read it. Don't assume that just because the NRA is still pushing HR 38 that it's still a good bill.

I'm jaded, but I was waiting for the anti-gun amendment to National Concealed Carry Reciprocity. The anti-gunners (both the overtly anti-gun Democrats as well as the covertly anti-gun neocons) have been frustrated in recent years that they have been unable to pass any more anti-gun legislation. Their decades of gradual whittling away of our innate right to keep and bear arms came to an abrupt halt when it became obvious to most Americans that making it more difficult for law abiding Americans to own guns was doing nothing to solve violent crime and/or mental illness. Americans finally realized that the guns are not the problem, so restrictions on guns will not solve the problems. If anything, meaningful solutions are delayed to continue the justification for the slow and steady gun ban. If they focused on the real problems it would detract from their simplistic narrative that the guns are the problem.

I hate to be a Negative Nancy, but we'll be lucky if there is anything good left in HR 38 when it passes. There is a very real chance that all of the Concealed Carry Reciprocity will be stripped and all that will be left is the "common sense" Fix NICS language, although that outcome seems politically difficult to achieve. Instead, Fix NICS may be passed under a separate bill and National Concealed Carry Reciprocity was only being used to get some congresscritters to agree to Fix NICS and defend it as a compromise so they'll be politically forced to vote for it as a stand alone bill to avoid flip flopping on Fix NICS in the next election ads when Democrats target them. There is also a good chance that some of National Concealed Carry legislation will survive in HR 38 but will be so convoluted with deliberate weasel words that it's worse than worthless at the state level, providing no benefit to anyone in gun ban states, and in some cases opening the door to felony convictions for out-of-state gun owners that make them ineligible to own guns. Meanwhile, HR 38 would set a precedent for future federal laws that supersede state laws prescribing who can buy guns, how firearms can be carried, etc.

Do we really want the federal government further empowered to dictate gun laws to the states? In my state, almost all gun laws that are burdensome to me are federal laws, mostly the NFA and GCA, but also the volumes of BATFE administrative law where some bureaucrat writes an opinion and it's enforced with the weight of federal law. How do I keep up with that? A shoestring is an automatic weapon. No it isn't. Yes it is! Who has the latest BATFE bureaucratic word salad letter pertaining to the Shoulder Thing That Goes Up?

I wish Congress had pushed the SHARE Act (HR 3668) to take suppressors off the NFA list.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr3668

There's a lot less opportunity for congressional procedural tricks with that bill, which is probably why it's languishing as we all run around trying to pass National Reciprocity. The forces of darkness never sleep in Mordor. The statist anti-gun orcs are busy.

The best we can do at the moment is contact our congressional representatives. It's actually fairly easy to make boilerplate letters in a word processor and mail them old time letters. A physical letter still conveys some gravitas, although letters are useless when an amendment is added and they're discussing it now and voting on it this afternoon. That happens a lot when they're up to their mischief. Barring letters, call or email. Plug their numbers into your cell phone and call while driving. It costs you nothing. It helps to prepare enough to know the bill numbers so you sound informed. Email is a quick way to reach them. Put them in your address book and it's easy to fire off an email. Probably the easiest way to stay informed and take action is to sign up for the Gun Owners of America emails. They keep you up to date with timely emails that pack a lot of information into a few paragraphs, and perhaps best of all, they have a link that allows you to email your representatives when appropriate. They even provide the text which you are free to edit as you like. A few clicks and you're done. Two senators and one House rep in two minutes, and it has a lot more impact than an online poll or petition.

Long term, we need to work to elect better candidates. Thomas Massie is a great example. Sadly, he's one of the few. We need a lot more like Thomas! Unfortunately, in our current political process, the scum almost inevitably rises to the top. It's no accident that our choice in almost every general election is between Scum A or Scum B... or I should say Scum R or Scum D.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,809 Posts
Many gun owners were shocked by the sudden betrayal when the national concealed carry reciprocity bill suddenly became a gun control bill that would add millions of honest law abiding Americans to the list of people who would be denied legal access to firearms by the federal government via the NICS list.
True.
They'll start with every vet that ever was diagnosed with PTSD (which is most of 'em).
What a way to welcome them back! After being shot-at and bombed, inform them that they will spend the rest of their life, unarmed.

Laws, by their nature, prohibit an action by making something illegal.
Laws do not make something :quote:legal:quote:. Only repealing a law does.
And the Fed can't repeal state laws. Only the SC can rule them unconstitutional.
So even if it passes, the courts will strike down reciprocity as the obvious federal overreach that it is.

So if the reciprocity part is meaningless, what are we really getting?
Fix-NICS and bumpstocks get banned eventually.
clapslow.gif
oh, I'm for that.

Some famous American once said: "I was for it before I was against it".
Almost makes sense now:rolleyes:.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
296 Posts
Great explanation Liberty4Ever. Thanks.

Currently, the MSM is reporting that "most" of the gun owners are "for" the add-ons when most, in reality, don't even know what happened. It is a bait and switch on a constitutional right.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,839 Posts
I read the full text of the actual House bill. You should too. Apparently either Rep. Massie did not read the bill, is a bit "slow," or is lying about it. Some of the things he claims are just wrong.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4477/text?format=t


Just got this off another forum.

https://www.facebook.com/RepThomasMassie/posts/1843059172384905

[...]

The bill will also advance former President Obama’s agenda of pressuring every branch of the administration (such as the Veteran’s Administration) to submit thousands of more names to the NICS background check database to deny gun purchases.
Nope. It does not. I read it. I parsed it. I even referenced the USC 18 call-outs. The only things that are being specified for reporting are those which would normally cause firearm disability. The short version is all of the disqualifies on Form 4473. It simply doesn't touch, or even imply, any of the stuff that "O" was trying to add.

The House bill is identical in every way to the Senate bill except the House bill will also commission a study on bump-stocks.
Sort of, yeah. Here's what it says:

SEC. 6. ATTORNEY GENERAL REPORT ON USE OF BUMP STOCKS IN CRIME.

(a) In General.--Using amounts made available for research,
evaluation, or statistical purposes, within 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall prepare and
submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate a
written report that--
(1) specifies the number of instances in which a bump stock
has been used in the commission of a crime in the United
States;
(2) specifies the types of firearms with which a bump stock
has been so used; and
(3) contains the opinion of the Attorney General as to
whether subparagraphs (B)(i) and (C)(i) of section 924(c)(1) of
title 18, United States Code, apply to all instances in which a
bump stock has been used in the commission of a crime of
violence in the United States.
(b) Definition of Bump Stock.--In this section, the term ``bump
stock'' means a device that--
(1) attaches to a semiautomatic rifle (as defined in
section 921(a)(28) of title 18, United States Code);
(2) is designed and intended to repeatedly activate the
trigger without the deliberate and volitional act of the user
pulling the trigger each time the firearm is fired; and
(3) functions by continuous forward pressure applied to the
rifle's fore end in conjunction with a linear forward and
backward sliding motion of the mechanism utilizing the recoil
energy when the rifle is discharged.​

Quick question, do you know now many times a bump-stock was used in a crime? How many times was it used in a crime on a SBR? How many times was a bump-stock used in a crime by someone who should have failed a 4473? That's what this "study" is supposed to answer.

What you don’t know, and what virtually no one in Washington wants you to know, is that House leadership plans to merge the fix-NICS bill with popular
Concealed Carry Reciprocity legislation, HR 38, and pass both of them with a single vote. Folks, this is how the swamp works. House leadership expects constituents to call their representatives demanding a vote on the reciprocity bill, when in fact the only vote will be on the two combined bills.
So the swamp works by scare-mongering an hype? I believe that.

How fast did Fix-NICS, HR 4477, move through the Judiciary Committee? This bill broke the previous records for fast track legislation. It was voted out of committee within hours of being introduced in the House. Check the dates on this link: https://www.congress.gov/…/115th-congr…/house-bill/4477/text . That means the text of the bill wasn’t even discoverable by the public on congress.gov until after the bill passed out of committee! The text was however available over in the Senate where you will find Senator Diane Feinstein and Senator Chuck Schumer are cosponsors. https://www.congress.gov/…/115t…/senate-bill/2135/cosponsors
Well... the Bill is short. Even the PDF with extra-indented, double-spaced, huge-typeface is only 22 pages. It's like 7 pages in normal type. Most of it isn't too hard to read either.

To recap, what are some clues that you should be concerned with the fix-NICS bill?

(1) The first sentence after the title of the bill reads “Section 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (34 U.S.C. 40901) is amended…”
First off, getting rid of, or at least amending, that piece of trash legislation isn't a bad thing. Second off, the text following that is, literally, all about forcing government departments/agencies to actually report disqualifying events which are normally disqualifies on 4473.

Apparently Rep. Massie forgot the read the next part.

(2) Senators Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer are cosponsors in the Senate.
Apparently even a blind squirrel.

(3) It’s being rammed through, without a hearing, in a very nontransparent process, and it will be passed by attaching it to the popular concealed carry reciprocity bill which already has enough votes to pass on its own.
This is false. It had a hearing.

(4) It spends over half a billion dollars to collect more names to include in a list of people who will never be allowed to own a firearm.
Well, sort of. It actually calls out a few dollar reductions but the money specified seems to have already been specified as part of earlier law. This just directs more specifically some of its use.

(5) It compels administrative agencies, not just courts, to adjudicate your second amendment rights.

In my opinion, #5 is the biggest problem. The bill encourages administrative agencies, not the courts, to submit more names to a national database that will determine whether you can or can’t obtain a firearm. When President Obama couldn’t get Congress to pass gun control, he implemented a strategy of compelling, through administrative rules, the Veterans Administration and the Social Security Administration to submit lists of veterans and seniors, many of whom never had a day in court, to be included in the NICS database of people prohibited from owning a firearm.
Only a state court, a federal (article III) court, or a military court, should ever be able to suspend your rights for any significant period of time.
Nope. This is just flat wrong. I just can't find that anywhere in the Bill. The closest it gets is if someone were BCD's or otherwise dishonorably discharged. Unless Rep. Massie thinks that Military Courts aren't actually courts, that is.

I've recently heard several 2A Lawyers talk about fix-NICS, including Alan Gura. Remember him from such greatest hits as Heller and McDonnald? While he has some concerns about fix-NICS, he is generally OK with it and didn't flag ANY of the things that Rep. Massie did.

Now, why did Rep. Massie go bat-crap on this Bill?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,046 Posts
Apparently either Rep. Massie did not read the bill, is a bit "slow," or is lying about it.
Thomas has a bachelors degree and a masters degree from MIT - electrical engineering and mechanical engineering. The average IQ of Congress rose by 17 points when he was elected, so I think we can rule out "slow".



Some of the things he claims are just wrong.... I parsed it. I even referenced the USC 18 call-outs. The only things that are being specified for reporting are those which would normally cause firearm disability.
So, if the federal government has already charged itself with reporting citizens it declares to be prohibited from owning firearms, why do they need to pass another law saying exactly the same thing? Why not simply follow their own rules if Fix NICS wouldn't add anyone else to the NICS gun ban list that shouldn't already be there? Why authorize almost a billion more dollars as incentives for federal agencies to do the reporting they should already be doing under the law and obviously haven't been doing consistently? If government bureaucrats haven't been doing what they're legally required to do, why should we expect that passing another law to reiterate the same reporting process will result in more compliance?

Do you really believe that almost a billion dollars in bribes to various government agencies isn't going to result in a lot more people added to the NICS list? More peaceful law abiding citizens, denied the right to keep and bear arms?



Now, why did Rep. Massie go bat-crap on this Bill?
I'm reluctant to speak for someone else, but I think I know the answer to this. Thomas understands how government works. He's been inside the belly of the beast and he's been gnawing at its guts for a few years. The USA PATRIOT Act keeps Americans safe from terrorism. You can keep your medical insurance plan, you can keep your doctor, and adding a huge layer of government bureaucracy and a universal purchasing mandate will make health insurance less expensive. Read my lips, no new taxes. Bill Clinton did not have sexual relations with that woman. You see? Sometimes government representatives say one thing and do another. But Dianne Feinstein wasn't lying when she said that if she could have gotten the votes, she'd have banned civilian firearms ownership outright. "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them in!"

I won't out Thomas with specifics, but I will say that as a firearms enthusiast and a second amendment advocate, he puts me to shame. He's wicked smart and he has direct knowledge of how Congress works. I implicitly trust his intentions and I completely trust his judgment.

You might want to read this to see what our congresscritters aren't telling us about Fix NICS.

https://www.gunowners.org/a-massach...-traffic-ticket-could-result-in-a-gun-ban.htm

The TL;DR version: 95% of NICS denials are currently false positives - Americans who are no threat but have been added to NICS because of bureaucratic errors, etc. Fix NICS is going to add more people who aren't a threat to the NICS database while doing absolutely nothing to stop violent crime or mental illness, and once again, gun ban advocates will use the failure of NICS to add even more innocent people to the list. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

There is a reason why rabid citizen disarmament zealots like Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein support Fix NICS. It advances their disarmament agenda.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,839 Posts
So, if the federal government has already charged itself with reporting citizens it declares to be prohibited from owning firearms, why do they need to pass another law saying exactly the same thing? Why not simply follow their own rules if Fix NICS wouldn't add anyone else to the NICS gun ban list that shouldn't already be there?
Why indeed? As it currently stands, if agencies fail to report, there are no consequences. It's a little bit like unarmed cops yelling, "Stop! ...or I'll yell 'stop' again!" This bill applies consequences. As it it currently written, if an agency fails to report, the officials don't get their Bonuses. Section 2 (1).


Why authorize almost a billion more dollars as incentives
It doesn't.
SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS (a) specifies $100,000,000 per year for 4 years (from 2018 to 2022) apparently to be taken from the budgets appropriated for NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007, Crime Identification Technology Act of 1998, and the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (as specified in Sec. 7 (a) (1) (2) (3). It also seems to call out reductions of about 5,000,000 in (b) (1) (2). So even if the call outs aren't being swiped from earlier budgets, it is 0.4 of 1 Billion, not 'almost a billion'.

for federal agencies to do the reporting they should already be doing under the law and obviously haven't been doing consistently? If government bureaucrats haven't been doing what they're legally required to do, why should we expect that passing another law to reiterate the same reporting process will result in more compliance?
The agencies complained that they can't keep up with the reporting due to staffing and budget. Further, in the Bill requires a lot of internal compliance systems which, sadly, do require more people.

Basically, from what it looks like, these agencies/departments have been running without the equivalent of a Quality Control department from reporting disqualified to NICS. How much does a decent QC system cost in a business? I don't know the answer but I know it's a lot.

Do you really believe that almost a billion dollars in bribes to various government agencies isn't going to result in a lot more people added to the NICS list?
Bribes? No. That isn't what the Bill calls out. Please read the Bill.

More peaceful law abiding citizens, denied the right to keep and bear arms?
That is not what this Bill does. It doesn't give said authority. It only specifies that normal disqualifiers from a 4473. Reference Section 6.

I'm reluctant to speak for someone else, but I think I know the answer to this. Thomas understands how government works. He's been inside the belly of the beast and he's been gnawing at its guts for a few years. The USA PATRIOT Act keeps Americans safe from terrorism. You can keep your medical insurance plan, you can keep your doctor, and adding a huge layer of government bureaucracy and a universal purchasing mandate will make health insurance less expensive. Read my lips, no new taxes. Bill Clinton did not have sexual relations with that woman. You see? Sometimes government representatives say one thing and do another. But Dianne Feinstein wasn't lying when she said that if she could have gotten the votes, she'd have banned civilian firearms ownership outright. "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them in!"
So you're saying that politicians lie? Bills don't.

I won't out Thomas with specifics, but I will say that as a firearms enthusiast and a second amendment advocate, he puts me to shame. He's wicked smart and he has direct knowledge of how Congress works. I implicitly trust his intentions and I completely trust his judgment.
I trust Alan Gura more.

You might want to read this to see what our congresscritters aren't telling us about Fix NICS.

https://www.gunowners.org/a-massach...-traffic-ticket-could-result-in-a-gun-ban.htm
I read it. The theoretical "speeding ticket fugitive from justice" has nothing to do with fix-NICS. It applies one way or another. Further, I have a lot of reasons to be suspicious of GOA. Many are.

The TL;DR version: 95% of NICS denials are currently false positives - Americans who are no threat but have been added to NICS because of bureaucratic errors, etc. Fix NICS is going to add more people who aren't a threat to the NICS database while doing absolutely nothing to stop violent crime or mental illness, and once again, gun ban advocates will use the failure of NICS to add even more innocent people to the list. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
That said, did you know that fix-NICS has a mechanism to remove erroneous entries in NICS? What else does this? Sec. 2 (2).

There is a reason why rabid citizen disarmament zealots like Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein support Fix NICS. It advances their disarmament agenda.
I'm still looking for evidence of this. Not saying it's not there, just I haven't actually seen it yet.

Frankly, I trust Alan Gura's opinion, and that of other 2A lawyers I've heard recently.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,046 Posts
...if an agency fails to report, the officials don't get their Bonuses.
Gee, I wish I got a bonus for not completely and utterly failing to do my job for a change... said every American who doesn't draw a government paycheck.



it is 0.4 of 1 Billion, not 'almost a billion'.
For the next few years. Show me a government program that goes away after the government agencies become accustomed to getting the money. I think a telegraph tax that was introduced to fund the Spanish American War was recently rescinded, although I'd bet that was only because some politician wanted to crow about reducing taxes and that particular tax was no longer generating any money for the government.

As a forward looking statement, I'd say the cumulative cost of this bill is (to borrow from Carl Sagan), BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars, going to grow government.



Bribes? No. That isn't what the Bill calls out.
Paying bonuses to government employees to do their jobs. You may not call that a bribe. I do.

It's a strong financial incentive to add more people to a NICS database that's already resulting in 95% false positives - Americans prohibited from owning firearms despite no proclivity to violence. We call this a "common sense gun law".



So you're saying that politicians lie? Bills don't.
Not sure what you mean by this, so I'll restate my position. Politicians lie. They lie right to our faces, but they also lie when they introduce bills written by lobbyists with clever lawyer language that seems to say one thing but actually says something else entirely, or is designed to transfer broad authority to agencies to implement a law in ways that the voters would never imagine. Sort of like the EPA calling a puddle in your driveway a "navigable waterway", or designating any private property they like as "endangered wetlands", or requiring runoff from a coal mine to have a lower dissolved solids than the permissible level in drinking water.


I trust Alan Gura more.
I distrust Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer more. If they're for it, I'm against it. ;)



The theoretical "speeding ticket fugitive from justice" has nothing to do with fix-NICS. It applies one way or another.
Yeah. Except for this legislation's intention to add more people to the NICS database and this bill providing the funding incentives for states like Massachusetts to add government staff to collect and report people for unpaid traffic tickets. Did you read the part in the article about Massachusetts submitting people to the NICS database as "fugitives from justice" under the Obama administration, and when the new administration tossed out these people with unpaid traffic tickets who were being denied their inalienable right to keep and bear arms, Massachusetts added those same people back into the NICS database under the category of "state prohibitor" so they were impossible to distinguish from violent criminals? Certainly you must see that more funding to state agencies will only result in more such deceptive practices designed to infringe the rights of Americans.

It's simple. We were told that we needed to keep some dangerous people from buying guns. That sounds reasonable. So NICS was created at huge expense and it's a huge infringement on our rights. At the very least, it adds $20 to the cost of every gun sold. And it's momentarily deterred a shockingly small number of people who legitimately shouldn't be allowed to own firearms to protect society from criminals and the mentally ill. Those people steal guns, or kill people by other means, so there's almost no gain for a lot of NICS pain. Realistically, honest law abiding gun owners are made to pay dearly for no real benefit to society at large. So NICS clearly doesn't work, but "we must do something", so we're going to Fix NICS. The fixes still won't result in more public safety, but will result in more false positives and more people denied their right to own a firearm. Don't think that's an unintended consequence. Keeping Americans from buying guns is the entire point.

It's not as if there haven't been numerous attempts to fix NICS in the past. It keeps failing, and they keep doing more of what makes it fail. The more it fails, the more of our rights they can take. When disarmament is their stated goal, what's their motivation to genuinely fix NICS?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,809 Posts
So, if the federal government has already charged itself with reporting citizens it declares to be prohibited from owning firearms, why do they need to pass another law saying exactly the same thing? Why not simply follow their own rules if Fix NICS wouldn't add anyone else to the NICS gun ban list that shouldn't already be there? Why authorize almost a billion more dollars as incentives for federal agencies to do the reporting they should already be doing under the law and obviously haven't been doing consistently? If government bureaucrats haven't been doing what they're legally required to do, why should we expect that passing another law to reiterate the same reporting process will result in more compliance?
Bingo. Smell the money.
this bill providing the funding incentives for states like Massachusetts to add government staff to collect and report people for unpaid traffic tickets. Did you read the part in the article about Massachusetts submitting people to the NICS database as "fugitives from justice" under the Obama administration, and when the new administration tossed out these people with unpaid traffic tickets who were being denied their inalienable right to keep and bear arms, Massachusetts added those same people back into the NICS database under the category of "state prohibitor" so they were impossible to distinguish from violent criminals?
...At the very least, it adds $20 to the cost of every gun sold. And it's momentarily deterred a shockingly small number of people who legitimately shouldn't be allowed to own firearms to protect society from criminals and the mentally ill.
...The fixes still won't result in more public safety, but will result in more false positives and more people denied their right to own a firearm. Don't think that's an unintended consequence. Keeping Americans from buying guns is the entire point.
Let's stop drinking the Kool-aid a minute and look at ourselves.
We started with National Reciprocity. It's a pipe-dream.
The NICS :quote:problem:quote: was the military not reporting the Texas shooter.
Nothing in this will fix that
NoDeal.gif
.
But you can bet if you pour billions into the NICS, they will make sure the list grows.
(to prove they didn't wa$te it:rolleyes:)
Every one of us would qualify, if the right criteria is used.

So we start with CCW reciprocity and we wind-up flogging each other on how bad Fix-NICS is, or is not.
These people are very good at what they do.
Black-Cherry Kool-aid for me:(.
 
21 - 40 of 56 Posts
Top