Category: RKBA

Below The Radar – Gun Safety: Not Sorry Act

Representative Sheila Jackson Lee has not been a friend of law-abiding gun owners – or anyone who values the Second Amendment. If anything, she has been very active, and has introduced some of the most onerous proposals we have seen. But like Dianne Feinstein in the last Congress, she is not averse to more modest bills to unjustly punish those who seek to exercise their Second Amendment rights for horrific acts they did not commit.

In this case, her fallback is HR 125, the Gun Safety: Not Sorry Act. Rather than a sweeping licensing and registration scheme that is deeply intrusive, it instead imposes a one-week waiting period for any semiautomatic firearm, many standard magazines (like those for a Glock 17), suppressors, and “armor-piercing ammo.”

Now, we’ve discussed the waiting period scam before. Put your thoughts about the tactics used to limit the damage done by the Brady Act in 1993 aside. Suffice it to say, when the national instant background check system (NICS) is up and running, there is no justification for a waiting period. If a person is not prohibited, they should be able to take their purchase home with them the moment NICS reports it is a legal transaction.

Continue reading “”

Some Techgeeks develop a case of the vapors when they discover that the signal can’t be stopped. MwwwHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

YOU CAN NOW 3D PRINT AN ENTIRE SEMI-AUTOMATIC RIFLE AT HOME.

THE TOTAL COST — INCLUDING THE 3D PRINTER — IS ABOUT $350.

Home Brewing

3D-printed guns, or functional firearms that can be mostly or entirely manufactured at home with a 3D printer, are getting more sophisticated and more dangerous.

For a long time, 3D-printed guns were still quite slapdash. Early homemade handguns would break apart after firing once, and they served as more of a symbolic middle finger to government firearm regulation than a tangible threat. But they’re getting steadily more advanced, Slate reports. Now, a prominent 3D-printed gun community plans to unveil the designs for a functional, upgraded assault rifle early this year.

Deterrence Dispensed

The group, Deterrence Dispensed, has an online community of thousands to which it shares gun blueprints and step-by-step instructions on how to build them, alongside lists of recommended printers and parts. Aside from those flimsy handguns, the group also designed a functional assault rifle called the FGC-9 — that’s an acronym for the crude moniker “fuck gun control 9 mm” — which only costs about $100 to make with the recommended $250 printer, for a total cost starting around $350.

Most chilling? The gun is totally legal. Its barrel is made of metal, meaning it can be spotted by metal detectors, which is the one technicality that prevents the technology from being banned outright, according to Slate. But aside from that, these weapons are untraceable and allow people to circumvent other regulations like background checks — especially in countries with tighter gun control than the United States.

With the upgraded FGC-9 expected within the next few months, it stands to reason that these homemade guns — which Slate reports are favored by neo-Nazis and other extremist groups — will only become more prevalent and more dangerous.

“There is no sign of things stopping,” pseudonymous FGC-9 designer “Ivan” told Slate. “Projects are only getting more ambitious.”

It’s telling that something like this is actually necessary in the U.S.

Minnesota: Constitutional Amendment Protecting Knives Introduced

Minnesota State Senator Paul Utke and Representatives Cal Bahr, Tim Miller, John Poston, Erik Mortensen, Eric Lucero, and Donald Raleigh have introduced, respectively, SF 1026 and HF 824, Constitutional Amendment bills “providing for the right of the people to acquire, keep, possess, transport, carry, transfer, and use arms including firearms, knives, or any other weapons and ammunition, components, and accessories for these arms.” Knife Rights appreciates our friends in Minnesota, including knives in this proposed amendment.

Minnesota is one of only six states without specific constitutional protections for the right to bear arms (the others are California, Iowa, Maryland, New Jersey, and New York).

This is the first such proposed amendment, or strengthening existing protections, that specifically calls out “knives” as being protected. While the commonsense interpretation of constitutional protections for “arms” would seem to generally protect knives (see Knives and the Second Amendment), that hasn’t historically been the result in every relevant state legal case that has been adjudicated. As recent examples, cases in Connecticut and Wisconsin on appeal affirmed that knives were protected; a New Mexico lower court decision that was never appealed said switchblades were not protected (raised as a defense in the case) and suggested other knives wouldn’t be protected either.

The proposed amendment includes much stronger protection of the right to bear arms, including knives than is found in most such constitutional protections. These added protections are designed to counter infringements on the right to bear arms allowed by various courts over the years.

Knife Rights will let you know when it is time to contact your legislators to support these bills. If passed by a simple majority in both houses, voters would vote on the amendment during the 2022 General Election. It must receive “a majority of all the electors voting at the election” to be ratified.

The Constitution and Supreme Court set a high bar for gun control

On February 14, President Biden marked the third anniversary of the deadly shooting incident at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, with an announcement that he is calling on Congress to enact “commonsense gun law reforms.”

As always, the details matter. The president defined “commonsense” as a requirement for background checks on all gun sales, a ban on “assault weapons and high-capacity magazines,” and an end to “immunity for gun manufacturers who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets.”
The U.S. Supreme Court held in 2008, in the District of Columbia v. Heller decision, that the Second Amendment right to “keep and bear arms” is an individual right that is not contingent on service in “a well-regulated militia.” That means the U.S. Constitution limits the federal government’s power to pass laws restricting that right.

Exactly where are the limits? That’s always a matter of interpretation. The Heller opinion, written by the late Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, held that the District’s law prohibiting the possession of handguns was over the line, as was its law requiring residents to keep their lawfully owned, registered long guns “unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device” unless the guns were located in a place of business or in use for lawful recreational activities.

Scalia wrote that the handgun ban “amounts to a prohibition of an entire class of ‘arms’ that is overwhelmingly chosen by American society” for the “lawful purpose” of “the inherent right of self-defense.” Under any standard that the court has used, he wrote, “banning from the home ‘the most preferred firearm in the nation to keep and use for protection of one’s home and family,’ would fail constitutional muster.”

So if the president’s definition of “assault weapon” and “weapons of war” includes commonly owned firearms and magazines, it’s likely that new laws banning these or seeking to create new legal liability for their manufacturers will be found unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court, should these laws be challenged.

And there’s no doubt that such laws would be challenged. After Biden’s statement was released, the Firearms Policy Coalition responded, denouncing what it called “unconstitutional and immoral policies including bans on common semi-automatic firearms and ammunition magazines.” A number of lawsuits over various state laws related to firearms ownership are already working their way toward the high court.

The Heller decision was 5-4, with Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Steven Breyer in the minority.
Former President Donald Trump campaigned as a staunch defender of Second Amendment rights, and it would not be surprising, to say the least, if the three justices he appointed to the high court share that view to some extent. Associate Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett likely have created a solid majority to strike down broad bans on semiautomatic weapons and laws that flatly prohibit law-abiding citizens from exercising the right to carry a gun. In Scalia’s words, “the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table.”

That won’t stop the Democratic majorities in Congress, together with the president, from enacting doomed laws, or from sending fundraising letters attacking their opponents. It’s always about the next election. It remains a fact that constitutional rights cannot be overridden by a majority vote, except on the Supreme Court.

TV Shows Push Gun Control Myths — in Sync With Biden

Last week, the Biden administration promised gun control groups that it will soon roll out a massive push for limits on firearm purchases and other measures. President Biden reiterated that promise on Sunday. And the television networks aren’t waiting to lay the groundwork for this effort.

CBS is in a full-court press for gun control on its evening entertainment television shows. The bad guys are always white supremacists who use machine guns — supposedly AR-15s — to commit mass public shootings. Criminals in Mexico supposedly get machine guns from the United States. A father’s desire to protect his family only leads to tragedy when his daughter gets into the gun safe and uses the weapon in a mass public shooting. And guns in the home pose a danger for children. Gun registration is necessary for solving crime.

NBC isn’t to be left out, showing a woman who tried but failed to use a gun to protect herself. Instead, her gun was taken from her and used to kill a police officer. The lesson is that owning a gun will only bring you grief.

And that’s just in the first six weeks of the year. Every show gives an inaccurate impression about firearms, thereby helping in this push for gun restrictions. It’s as though these shows were written by Michael Bloomberg’s gun control organizations. Indeed, the networks are working with these groups. A member of  Moms Demand Action recently wrote a Washington Post op-ed headlined: “Guns are white supremacy’s deadliest weapon. We must disarm hate.” So it isn’t too surprising that show after show portrays neo-Nazis using machine guns to commit mass public shootings. CBS’s “SWAT,” “FBI: Most Wanted,” “FBI,” and” Bull” all push this theme. They often refer explicitly to these guns as AR-15s. Others, such as “Magnum PI” and “NCIS LA,” constantly show criminals using machine guns.

Continue reading “”

Report: Chris Murphy to Put Forward Background Check Bill for Biden

This is the loon who killed 8 and wounded 13 (including Gabby ‘Chatty Cathy’ Giffords) in Casas Adobes, Arizona, back in January 2011.

Report: Chris Murphy to Put Forward Universal Gun Background Checks for Biden

In coming weeks Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) reportedly plans to put forward the universal background check legislation President Biden wants to sign.

The Hill reports Murphy reacted to Biden’s February 14, 2021, call for universal background checks by making clear he will put such legislation forward.

Murphy said:

President Biden and his administration are clearly committed to signing commonsense gun violence prevention legislation into law and taking executive action to save lives and make our communities safer. Two years ago, we got pretty darn close to striking a bipartisan deal to expand background checks that I believe would have passed on the floor if [Senate Minority Leader Mitch] McConnell put it up for a vote.

Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA) is expected to introduce similar legislation in the House, but made clear he is waiting for the most opportune time to put it forward: “The White House is definitely committed to gun violence prevention and Mike’s top priority on this issue is the Bipartisan Background Checks Act. We are still actively working with leadership and advocates on timing of that bill.”

On January 24, 2021, Breitbart News pointed out universal background checks are unenforceable without a gun registry. This is because such checks are an expansion of the retail point-of-sale checks that have been in place since 1993. Under the ‘universal’ label, retail checks would be applicable to private points of sale as well, covering the sale of 5-shot revolver between lifelong neighbors.

The only way the government can know that a neighbor is not not selling a gun to a neighbor without a background check is to know where every gun is at all times, including information on who owns it.

States Push Back Against Biden Gun Control Scheme
Studies have long indicated that concealed carry permit holders are the most law-abiding of population segments, even more so than law enforcement

While the Biden administration and the Democrat-controlled legislature are putting forth their gun control agendas, states are passing legislation that provides more choice for gun owners, regardless of what happens federally. These include permitless carry legislation and declarations of sanctuary state and county status.

To be clear, gun control advocacy organizations spent big to help get Biden elected, as well as members of Congress. Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s organization Every Town for Gun Safety spent over $600 million in support of Biden, and other gun control groups spent in the 6 and 7 figures between the presidential race and other federal races. The gun control agenda is not a surprise, as the donors look for payback.

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
That leads to some basic questions every “true believer” gun-grabber ought to be asked:

  • Since you demand what you call “safe storage laws” and since a child, in this case, was able to access and use a firearm, regardless of the outcome, why wouldn’t you say the grandmother should be prosecuted?
  • Would you rather see educated children watch their younger siblings get murdered with pitchforks than able to stop maniacs by using a gun?
  • If you were being robbed, assaulted, and shot at by murderous home invaders, who would you rather have come to your defense, the armed 12-year-old in this story, or “grown-up man” David Hogg?

DGU By Minor Raises Questions for Phony ‘Gun Safety’ Prohibitionists

“A North Carolina man died on Saturday after he broke into the home of a 73-year-old woman and was fatally shot by her 12-year-old grandson who was trying to defend her,” the Daily Mail reports.

“Two masked robbers entered the home of Linda Ellis in Goldsboro at around 1am on Saturday, where they demanded money and shot the grandmother in the leg. Ellis’ grandson fired back at the two intruders in self-defense and they fled.”

Good for the boy. He was able to keep his head and act, and fortunately, he had something to act with. And by the home invaders initiating fire, they put to the lie the naïve advice of all who counsel “Just give them what they want.” By shooting the grandmother, they made that more than clear. Only one thing stood in the way of that happening.

20 years ago I wrote about another 12-year-old who saved his grandmother from armed predators who were trying to rob her store and, according to news reports, holding a gun to her head. As I asked at the time:

Do you think the scenario may have played out differently had the wonks at Handgun Control, Inc., been heeded? What do you think the outcome would have been had the grandmother kept her gun unloaded, locked up, and separated from its ammunition, or if she had installed a trigger lock? What about if her firearm was a personalized “smart gun” that no one but herself could fire? And had these “safety methods” resulted in the death of this valiant boy and his grandmother, would HCI have exploited this to call for yet more gun control?

More examples can be found – if one is inclined to look for them. These took me all of a minute to find:

Continue reading “”

Guns: Boiling the frog has begun

By V. Paul Reynolds

Those hunters I know, who supported the Biden Presidency, told me not to worry, that no matter how hard the progressive bloc pushed for anti-gun legislation, it would never happen. Americans, regardless of their political party affiliations, would never stand for gun confiscation, or any significant usurpation of their Second Amendment rights.

Don’t be so sure. Elections, as they say, do have consequences. When it comes to gun rights, the analogy applies: the frog is being slipped ever so slowly but surely into the boiling water. It may never know what is happening until it’s too late.

The anti-gun activists have learned not to launch direct assaults on the Second Amendment. They have been skillful at sugar-coating the language and conducting gauzy flank maneuvers that can be deceptive and misleading to those citizens not paying close attention.

Political pundits agree that Joe Biden, despite his reputation as a moderate, has indicated in his first days in office by his flurry of executive orders that he is being heavily influenced by the radical left wing of his party.

Here are some of the likely components of the Biden Administration’s gun safety platform:

* Repeal legal immunity that prevent gun manufacturer’s from being sued
* Ban of semi-automatic firearms
* National gun registry
* Ban on high-capacity magazines
* Buyback of “assault” guns
* Limit on gun purchases
* $300 Federal tax on each gun purchased

Without question, this represents the most sweeping and potentially unconstitutional anti-gun agenda in American history.

According to John Floyd, a gun writer for the Northwoods Sporting Journal, “The vast majority of his (Biden’s) positions are adopted from radical anti-gun groups such as March for Our Lives, The Giffords Law Center, The Trace and Everytown for Gun Safety – all innocuously named, but all pushing policies in direct contradiction to the rights of United States gun owners.”

The irony, of course, is that this country’s gun ownership per capita is higher than it has ever been, and during the past year, first-gun purchases have gone through the roof.

So, these Second Amendment issues may well be, in the days ahead, the central focus as a deeply divided country struggles for common ground.

Biden Gun Ban Not The Only Threat In Congress

With President Joe Biden calling on Congress to enact his gun ban along with universal background checks and the repeal of the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, the Second Amendment Foundation’s Alan Gottlieb says that Democrats’ are moving forward with an agenda that puts the right to keep and bear arms at risk. Gottlieb joins me on today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co. to discuss the president’s call to disarm and how the 2A community is responding.

Biden’s statement on the third anniversary of the shootings at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida was long on rhetoric and short on facts, billing the gun control battle as a generational fight pitting young Americans against their elders, while ignoring the constitutional and pragmatic objections to his anti-gun agenda.

The Parkland students and so many other young people across the country who have experienced gun violence are carrying forward the history of the American journey. It is a history written by young people in each generation who challenged prevailing dogma to demand a simple truth: we can do better. And we will.

This Administration will not wait for the next mass shooting to heed that call. We will take action to end our epidemic of gun violence and make our schools and communities safer. Today, I am calling on Congress to enact commonsense gun law reforms, including requiring background checks on all gun sales, banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and eliminating immunity for gun manufacturers who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets. We owe it to all those we’ve lost and to all those left behind to grieve to make a change. The time to act is now.

As Gottlieb argues, taken in totality Biden’s gun control agenda amounts to a full-scale attack on the right to keep and bear arms; banning some of the most commonly-owned firearms and magazines in the United States, imposing a background check law that could criminalize ordinary transfers of firearms between family and friends, and giving the green light to junk lawsuits designed to bankrupt the firearms industry.

But Gottlieb notes that these aren’t the only bad ideas offered by anti-gun Democrats. There’s HB 127, which would impose insurance mandates on all gun owners, establish a publicly searchable database of gun owners, and require gun owners to undergo psychological testing before they could receive permission from the federal government to purchase a firearm.

Additionally, Gottlieb says he believes that the Biden administration will soon unveil executive orders dealing with gun control, including an attempt to force the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to re-define firearms to include unfinished frames and receivers. Not only would that turn existing law on its head, it could open up huge legal risks to any hobbyist who has built their own firearm from scratch.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation is also speaking out about Biden’s call for Congress to start work on his anti-gun agenda. The firearms industry trade group says that Biden’s plan targets legal gun owners instead of dealing with the reality of violent crime.

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
I want to clear up a possible misunderstanding. I’m convinced that gun control leaves us at risk. I know you might feel differently and I beg you to hear me out. I think gun control laws put our children in danger, but that isn’t because I’m different than you are; it is because I’ve seen things you might not have seen. I’ve looked into the eyes of the police officer who ran toward the sound of gunfire to save kids. That officer arrived too late. I’ve listened to a victim who was shot by a mass murderer and survived. They both begged us to keep the kids safe until the police arrived. That is exactly what the investigators said after the attack in Parkland, Florida.

It is time we listened.. before it is too late.

‘I looked at the video, and we could have stopped him if someone inside the school had a gun.’

The Lessons We Didn’t Learn from Mass Murder

February 14th is the third anniversary of the attack at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkwood, Florida. If you’re like me, it is uncomfortable to stir that painful memory. I’ve studied that attack because it would be worse to see it repeated simply because we didn’t learn a difficult lesson. You might not remember, but the attack at Columbine High School was almost 22 years ago. The attack at Sandy Hook Elementary School more than 8 years ago. That is plenty of time for us to act so our children are protected. I have an uncomfortable prediction about the next mass murder. The next attack will be at a place that politicians told us was safe because law-abiding people like us were disarmed. It is time we looked harder.

Continue reading “”

Armed passengers? New push underway in Missouri to allow concealed carry on public transportation

JEFFERSON CITY — Concealed-carry permit holders would be able to legally board MetroLink trains and buses with their firearms if a proposal Missouri lawmakers are weighing becomes law.

The Senate General Laws Committee heard legislation Tuesday by Sen. Bob Onder, R-Lake Saint Louis, that would allow guns on trains and buses amid continued security concerns regarding the region’s mass transit systems. The measure wouldn’t apply to Amtrak.

The hearing this week followed the fatal shooting of security guard James Cook on Jan. 31 at the Delmar MetroLink station. Eight days later, the Bi-State Development Agency, which oversees MetroLink, voted 7-2 against rearming security guards.

Opponents of rearming guards said the matter required more discussion; members disputed whether it was legal for guards to carry guns. Officials took steps to improve security last year, including increasing police presence on the trains.
GOP lawmakers have made similar efforts to allow the public to carry concealed weapons on public transit for years, to no avail.

Democrats have mostly opposed the measures, but state Sen. Steven Roberts, D-St. Louis, said Friday he would consider supporting the bill as written — if GOP proponents maintain limiting who could carry guns to concealed-carry permit holders…………..

Utah: Governor Cox Signs Permitless Carry Legislation!

****

The fledgling governor had previously said he supported the legislation, a departure from his predecessor. Former Gov. Gary Herbert had blocked legislation to do away with the concealed carry permit for years with a veto and, later, a promise of veto.

The measure, sponsored by Rep. Walt Brooks, R-St. George, and Sen. David Hinkins, R-Orangeville, takes effect May 5………….

Attacks on Second Amendment Trigger Tyranny

The election swept in a legion of Second Amendment foes. Americans can expect them to take James Madison’s statement that disarming the people is “the best and most effective way to enslave them” as less of a warning and more of a directive.

During the campaign, Joe Biden was asked by CNN’s Anderson Cooper if a Biden administration would mean “they are going to come for my guns,” and Biden responded, “Bingo.”

Continue reading “”

Indiana looks to scrap carry permits for handguns, allow ‘constitutional carry’

(The Center Square) – Sixteen other states have done it. And Indiana now looks ready to join them in getting rid of the requirement that a person have a license in order to carry a loaded weapon on them or in their vehicle.

Earlier this week, the House of Representatives held a hearing to consider allowing what’s called “constitutional carry.”

It was the first time a hearing has been held on such a bill, and the first sign in years the Republican supermajority in the Indiana General Assembly is getting behind permit-less carry.

Numerous county sheriffs testified in support of the bill.

Continue reading “”

New “Gun Trafficking” Bill Could Cripple Legal Firearms Market

Democrat Illinois Representative Bobby Rush has sponsored a bill — already referred to the House Judiciary Committee — that would criminalize many previously acceptable practices.

So purchasing a gun on consignment at your local gun store, or — while not named — on sites such as GunBroker could be defined as a straw purchase, which in turn could effectively kill the online firearms market, never mind that any state-to-state transfer must already occur between licensed FFLs, and necessarily requires a background check before the firearm can be picked up. Nor can you pawn the thing if you’re a little short of cash.

Firearms have always been something of an investment, rarely losing value and always easy to convert to cash if you must. This bill could very well end that longstanding practice.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation has several concerns as well. Communications Director Mark Oliva said the general prohibition language against purchasing a firearm on “behalf of another” is particularly troubling:

The way it is drafted now says the bill would punish innocent conduct in the case of a lawful purchaser who is not prohibited when that person buys a firearm “on behalf of” another person who is also not prohibited.

In essence, the bill would make it illegal for an entity like a Boy Scouts or Future Farmers of America marksmanship programs to buy a rimfire .22 to use in a rifle marksmanship program or a rancher to buy a firearm for a ranch hand to use against predators.

“(ii) (I) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child;

It would also puts restrictions on just how many you can buy or sell as well.

“(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to—

“(1) ship, transport, transfer, cause to be transported, or otherwise dispose of 2 or more firearms to another person … if the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the use, carrying, or possession of a firearm by the transferee would be in violation of, or would result in a violation of, any Federal law punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding 1 year;

“(2) receive from another person 2 or more firearms … if the recipient knows or has reasonable cause to believe that such receipt would be in violation of, or would result in a violation of, any Federal law punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding 1 year.

Unless you’re already a co-conspirator, exactly how are you going to know if the “transferee’s” possession of a firearm “would result in a violation of” federal law?

Not only can this stuff lead to a prison term of up to 25 years — the previous prison terms for violations were “not more than 5 years”, but it now includes “forfeiture and fines.”

Ҥ 934. Forfeiture and fines

“(a) (1) Any person convicted of a violation of section 932 or 933 shall forfeit to the United States, irrespective of any provision of State law—

“(A) any property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds the person obtained, directly or indirectly, as the result of such violation; and

“(B) any of the person’s property used, or intended to be used, in any manner or part, to commit, or to facilitate the commission of, such violation.

Section 924(h) currently reads “Whoever knowingly transfers a firearm, knowing that such firearm will be used to commit a crime of violence (as defined in subsection (c)(3)) or drug trafficking crime (as defined in subsection (c)(2)) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both.”

H.R. 30, if passed, would replace the entire section, amending it to read:

(h) (1) Whoever knowingly receives or transfers a firearm or ammunition, or attempts or conspires to do so, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such firearm or ammunition will be used to commit a crime of violence (as defined in subsection (c)(3)), a drug trafficking crime (as defined in subsection (c)(2)), or a crime under the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.), the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act (21 U.S.C. 1901 et seq.), or section 212(a)(2)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)(C)) shall be imprisoned not more than 25 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both.

Oliva said NSSF’s legal team was also concerned about one section removes exceptions for gifts.

HR 30 removes three exceptions and only includes a gift to a recipient who provided no service or tangible thing of value to acquire the firearm, or winner of an organized raffle, contest, or auction. So, that would be a cause for concern particularly for someone who chooses to gift a firearm as gratuity to a hunting guide, a bonus to an employee – as would be the case when someone retires and they are given a firearm as a gift – or an honorarium.

Like I said earlier. Jackson-Lee’s idiot bill was simply to make this idiot bill look more ‘reasonable.

Carolyn Maloney unveils gun safety legislation package

House Oversight and Reform Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) on Wednesday unveiled a legislative package of five bills focused on gun safety.

Maloney introduced the Gun Trafficking Prevention Act, which would make gun trafficking a felony and make straw purchasing — when someone buys a gun for another person who is ineligible — a felony as opposed to a misdemeanor.

She also introduced the Handgun Trigger Safety Act, which would incentivize the development of “smart-gun technology” that would only allow authorized gun owners to fire a gun. In addition, Maloney introduced the Firearm Risks Protection Act, which would require gun owners to purchase liability insurance.

House Oversight and Reform Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) on Wednesday unveiled a legislative package of five bills focused on gun safety.

Maloney introduced the Gun Trafficking Prevention Act, which would make gun trafficking a felony and make straw purchasing — when someone buys a gun for another person who is ineligible — a felony as opposed to a misdemeanor.

She also introduced the Handgun Trigger Safety Act, which would incentivize the development of “smart-gun technology” that would only allow authorized gun owners to fire a gun. In addition, Maloney introduced the Firearm Risks Protection Act, which would require gun owners to purchase liability insurance.

ALAN GOTTLIEB TALKS GUN CONTROL, RISKS TO 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHTS

Guns.com: Let’s talk about 2021. Why is 2021 the most critical year for gun owners, possibly ever, to kind of band together here and fight some of this anti-gun legislation that we’ve been seeing?

Gottlieb: Unfortunately, 2021 has become the ultimate storm, the perfect storm against gun rights with the Biden administration in the White House. He’s had a long history of being anti-Second Amendment, and the House and Senate in control of Democrats who have already come out, basically, with a lot of anti-gun legislation. As well as, we’ve got the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee talking about, it’s a high priority for him to get anti-gun bills through the committee in the Senate so it gets to the Senate floor. If these get through the Senate and the House, there’s no doubt that the president will sign those bills, and the legislation they’re talking about, it is extremely dangerous to Second Amendment rights.

Continue reading “”