While we are all distracted with this virus... Proposed Gun Legislation. (1 Viewer)

[Joe Okc]

Democrat Henry Hank introduced HR5717.. House Bill for Gun control...

H.R.5717 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Gun Violence Prevention and Community Safety Act of 2020

Summary of H.R.5717 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Gun Violence Prevention and Community Safety Act of 2020

www.congress.gov

• generally requires individuals to obtain a license to purchase, acquire, or possess a firearm or ammunition;
• raises the minimum age—from 18 years to 21 years—to purchase firearms and ammunition;
• establishes new background check requirements for firearm transfers between private parties;
• requires law enforcement agencies to be notified following a firearms-related background check that results in a denial;
• creates a statutory process for a family or household member to petition a court for an extreme risk protection order to remove firearms from an individual who poses a risk of committing violence;
• restricts the import, sale, manufacture, transfer, or possession of semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices;
• restricts the manufacture, sale, transfer, purchase, or receipt of ghost guns (i.e., guns without serial numbers);
• makes trafficking in firearms a stand-alone criminal offense;
• requires federally licensed gun dealers to submit and annually certify compliance with a security plan to detect and deter firearm theft;
• removes limitations on the civil liability of gun manufacturers;
• allows the Consumer Product Safety Commission to issue safety standards for firearms and firearm components;
• establishes a community violence intervention grant program; and
• promotes research on firearms safety and gun violence prevention.

 

[dtc]

Is that me?

I don't know.

Given your propensity to believe nonsense, it may be. Given the fact that you support some measures that are reasonable such as background checks, maybe not. I don't know.

Have you ever been convicted of a crime? Have you any problems with drugs and alcohol? Have you recently been involved in a domestic dispute? Do you have severe financial issues, depression? Are you being treated for addiction?

Have you passed a background check?

 

[Beach Friends]

I don't know.

Given your propensity to believe nonsense, it may be. Given the fact that you support some measures that are reasonable such as background checks, maybe not. I don't know.

Have you ever been convicted of a crime? Have you any problems with drugs and alcohol? Have you recently been involved in a domestic dispute? Do you have severe financial issues, depression? Are you being treated for addiction?

Have you passed a background check?

Are.you going through a divorce? Yeah, that will become part of the SOP for some divorce attorneys.

Did you recently have a boundary dispute with your neighbor? Some proposed laws are already extending who has standing.

Are you an LEO? Yeah, there was a story not long ago about how some low level criminal filed against an LEO because that's just the way these things go.

Did you recently go to a shrink after your spouse died and you lost your job in the same month? Better be careful when we start saying people with a a history of mental conditions can't own a gun.

 

[dtc]

Are.you going through a divorce? Yeah, that will become part of the SOP for some divorce attorneys.

Did you recently have a boundary dispute with your neighbor? Some proposed laws are already extending who has standing.

Are you an LEO? Yeah, there was a story not long ago about how some low level criminal filed against an LEO because that's just the way these things go.

Did you recently go to a shrink after your spouse died and you lost your job in the same month? Better be careful when we start saying people with a a history of mental conditions can't own a gun.

Why would I want to be careful? I don't have any mental conditions, but were I to find myself seeing a shrink because I was depressed, I would very likely be happy to have my guns secured away from me particularly if I had daydreams of hurting myself or others. The problem is for sure that it's subjective and potentially could be abused, but the reality is that those who are suffering from the problems that lead to violence with guns aren't thinking clearly enough to not use them.

I've said it here a thousand times.

Background checks and registrations are the key. Periodic review of fitness and an annual or biannual affirmation that ALL of your guns are in your direct, physical possession would be fine. And, for what it's worth, if the background checks and registration process were adequate, it might make it reasonable that those of us who want them might be able to legally have automatic weapons and the like.

 

[Joe Okc]

I don't know.

Given your propensity to believe nonsense, it may be. Given the fact that you support some measures that are reasonable such as background checks, maybe not. I don't know.

Have you ever been convicted of a crime? Have you any problems with drugs and alcohol? Have you recently been involved in a domestic dispute? Do you have severe financial issues, depression? Are you being treated for addiction?

Have you passed a background check?

You said this was an effort to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people.. I am just wondering who the wrong people were?

To answer your question I have had an FBI background check, took training courses, qualified at the range, given fingerprints and photo id's for my concealed carry and paid a hefty license fee...

So with all that, why do I now need to wait 7 days for a gun?
Why do I have to report my purchases?
Why can I only buy one gun in a 30 day period?

Bottom line is if I am totally legal, why make things harder for me? So I ask you again.. Am I the wrong person? Who is the wrong person?

With all that said... the other side to this is that I think there is a possablity this was trying to be introduced when we are all sidetracked with this virus...

and what makes it even more crazy is that so many people here Blame Trump.. Say that he knew how bad it was, didn't listen, didn't act fast enough, didn't listen to the CDC and WHO...

and then turn right around and Say: "But the Democrats weren't briefed by the president on any of this so they didn't know any of this was going on" is just freakin laughable... BUt that's a whole other subject...

 

[dtc]

You said this was an effort to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people.. I am just wondering who the wrong people were?

To answer your question I have had an FBI background check, took training courses, qualified at the range, given fingerprints and photo id's for my concealed carry and paid a hefty license fee...

So with all that, why do I now need to wait 7 days for a gun?
Why do I have to report my purchases?
Why can I only buy one gun in a 30 day period?

Bottom line is if I am totally legal, why make things harder for me? So I ask you again.. Am I the wrong person? Who is the wrong person?

With all that said... the other side to this is that I think there is a possablity this was trying to be introduced when we are all sidetracked with this virus...

and what makes it even more crazy is that so many people here Blame Trump.. Say that he knew how bad it was, didn't listen, didn't act fast enough, didn't listen to the CDC and WHO...

and then turn right around and Say: "But the Democrats weren't briefed by the president on any of this so they didn't know any of this was going on" is just freakin laughable... BUt that's a whole other subject...

Sounds to me you should be allowed to have a gun. Whatever gun you like. I don't think you should wait 7 days nor should I. We've done our due diligence and proven we are qualified. So, I agree with you there.

I don't know why you couldn't buy more than one in 30 days. I sure have, but that's not the point.

The point is, you are wrong. There was no intention to hide this during the pandemic. It's common practice for gun control and thousands of other bills to be introduced all the time. The virus wasn't even an issue at the time, it was impeachment if you recall.

The rest of that nonsense about democrats not being briefed and blaming Trump is very simple.

Trump is the POTUS. He has the world's greatest intelligence service and the most in depth technology and resources the world has ever known. Pelosi and Schumer and McConnell have nothing like the information he has and chose to ignore.

He consciously chose to ignore and argue against the suggestions he was given from within his own administration. That doesn't make the pandemic his fault in any way shape or form, but it does illustrate that he would rather cheerlead and obfuscate than lead. His concern is more for himself and winning than it is for the country and the citizens. He's blatantly screwed Democrat led states and bragged that they should have been nicer. Reagan would never....

What's Trump's fault is that his NPD leaves him without the capability to show or feel compassion and leads him to view the pandemic in terms of whether it's good or bad for him and then judges that by his ratings. He hasn't listened to his experts. He hasn't done what he should have or could have done...

Now, if you want to talk about hiding things during a crisis, let's talk about the anti-abortion crap and deregulation he's working. Let's talk about what's really happening instead of some nobody introducing gun legislation with no chance of ever passing.

 

[Beach Friends]

Why would I want to be careful? I don't have any mental conditions, but were I to find myself seeing a shrink because I was depressed, I would very likely be happy to have my guns secured away from me particularly if I had daydreams of hurting myself or others. The problem is for sure that it's subjective and potentially could be abused, but the reality is that those who are suffering from the problems that lead to violence with guns aren't thinking clearly enough to not use them.

I've said it here a thousand times.

Background checks and registrations are the key. Periodic review of fitness and an annual or biannual affirmation that ALL of your guns are in your direct, physical possession would be fine. And, for what it's worth, if the background checks and registration process were adequate, it might make it reasonable that those of us who want them might be able to legally have automatic weapons and the like.

While you don't actually have any mental conditions, there is no telling what your medical records indicate.

Several years ago I went to an ER with chest pains. They ran tests, all was good with the ticker.

On closer exam of my discharge papers I noticed there was a diagnosis of "depression." Really surprising since I wasn't depressed and in fact any inquiries the doctor had about stress factors were met with, "nothing more than what I am accustomed to - it's actually a good time for me."

I even remember joking with the doctor when he told me that the tests were good and that I should keep doing whatever it is I am doing.

Having said all that, I am wary about red flag laws in part because they are susceptible to abuse. Also, depriving someone of a constitutional right without due process just doesn't sit well.

 

[Heathen]

While you don't actually have any mental conditions, there is no telling what your medical records indicate.

Several years ago I went to an ER with chest pains. They ran tests, all was good with the ticker.

On closer exam of my discharge papers I noticed there was a diagnosis of "depression." Really surprising since I wasn't depressed and in fact any inquiries the doctor had about stress factors were met with, "nothing more than what I am accustomed to - it's actually a good time for me."

I even remember joking with the doctor when he told me that the tests were good and that I should keep doing whatever it is I am doing.

Having said all that, I am wary about red flag laws in part because they are susceptible to abuse. Also, depriving someone of a constitutional right without due process just doesn't sit well.

I think we're all in agreement that there are those who should be flagged and we should be very careful not to impede the rights of the individual.

Having said that, I'd err more on the side of red flag laws with errors here and there than loosening regulation as many Republicans seem to be a fan of (along with most everything else -- environmental destruction, letting the rich dictate and occasionally help tank the economy, etc -- I digress)...

Beto O'Rourke and others advocating buybacks shouldn't be a surprise. I guess I wonder why conservatives can be outraged at that yet think other higher capacity weaponry being out of civilian hands is a "duh" response. If one subscribes in any way to the accepted idea that individuals rights to any weapons to protect themselves have limits, why are they so adamant about a particular type of gun being bought back? I've had this conversation with another poster on here who's position is that any individual should be able to own any type of weapon, military-grade etc. That isn't my position, but it certainly seems like an argument that many people aren't having.

 

[dtc]

While you don't actually have any mental conditions, there is no telling what your medical records indicate.

Several years ago I went to an ER with chest pains. They ran tests, all was good with the ticker.

On closer exam of my discharge papers I noticed there was a diagnosis of "depression." Really surprising since I wasn't depressed and in fact any inquiries the doctor had about stress factors were met with, "nothing more than what I am accustomed to - it's actually a good time for me."

I even remember joking with the doctor when he told me that the tests were good and that I should keep doing whatever it is I am doing.

Having said all that, I am wary about red flag laws in part because they are susceptible to abuse. Also, depriving someone of a constitutional right without due process just doesn't sit well.

Well, I don't believe you have a constitional right to own weapons sans regulation so the potential for abuse must be dealt with. And, the diagnosis you received is a problem. It's also one I'm willing for you to endure so that those who are freaking asstonuts crazy do not go buying 10,000 rounds and a bunch of bump stock weapons and shoot up the school around the corner.

 

[Beach Friends]

I think we're all in agreement that there are those who should be flagged and we should be very careful not to impede the rights of the individual.

Having said that, I'd err more on the side of red flag laws with errors here and there than loosening regulation as many Republicans seem to be a fan of (along with most everything else -- environmental destruction, letting the rich dictate and occasionally help tank the economy, etc -- I digress)...

Beto O'Rourke and others advocating buybacks shouldn't be a surprise. I guess I wonder why conservatives can be outraged at that yet think other higher capacity weaponry being out of civilian hands is a "duh" response. If one subscribes in any way to the accepted idea that individuals rights to any weapons to protect themselves have limits, why are they so adamant about a particular type of gun being bought back? I've had this conversation with another poster on here who's position is that any individual should be able to own any type of weapon, military-grade etc. That isn't my position, but it certainly seems like an argument that many people aren't having.

A big part of it is that every bill I have read defines "assault weapon" broadly. When gun control advocates appear in the media, they typically act as though they are wanting to restrict ownership of AR15s and AK 47s.

However, when you read the definitions included in proposed legislation you see that they want to go much further. For instance, including pistols that are capable of holding magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds. Note that they are not merely wanting to make it illegal to own a 10 round magazine but also the weapon that could accept such a magazine. That pretty well prohibits every semi auto pistol.

The AR 15 is the most popular rifle platform for very good reasons. It's excellent. It is easy to use and maintain. You can convert a .223 to a 300 Blackout basically by just changing the barrel.

People who use firearms really don't like the idea of the Starbucks crowd, who repeatedly demonstrate they don't know a damn thing about firearms, trying to dictate what weapons they should be allowed to own.

 

[dtc]

A big part of it is that every bill I have read defines "assault weapon" broadly. When gun control advocates appear in the media, they typically act as though they are wanting to restrict ownership of AR15s and AK 47s.

However, when you read the definitions included in proposed legislation you see that they want to go much further. For instance, including pistols that are capable of holding magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds. Note that they are not merely wanting to make it illegal to own a 10 round magazine but also the weapon that could accept such a magazine. That pretty well prohibits every semi auto pistol.

The AR 15 is the most popular rifle platform for very good reasons. It's excellent. It is easy to use and maintain. You can convert a .223 to a 300 Blackout basically by just changing the barrel.

People who use firearms really don't like the idea of the Starbucks crowd, who repeatedly demonstrate they don't know a damn thing about firearms, trying to dictate what weapons they should be allowed to own.

I love guns. I have a bunch of them and I don't hunt really ever so I'm sympathetic. I won't call Trump supporters and gun rights advocates who take your position a bunch of bumpkins like you do with the "starbucks" dig, I get the point and did like the dig.

Anyway, the point that you can't ban guns to decrease gun crimes is horse crap. You can. An outright ban enforced in draconian fashion would eliminate gun crime, but this is the USA and we won't do that. I don't want that. But I am willing to make reasonable policy that accommodates both sides of the argument.

That used to be what governance was and should be again.

There will be attempts from the crazy gun rights folks to introduce legislation allowing tanks. There will be attempts from the starbucks/beto bros to criminalize daisy bb guns, but in the middle is a realistic policy.

 

[Heathen]

People who use firearms really don't like the idea of the Starbucks crowd, who repeatedly demonstrate they don't know a damn thing about firearms, trying to dictate what weapons they should be allowed to own.

I get that, and there is an element of authority from knowing what you're working with. There's also an element of authority of someone knowing how many kids have lost their lives to gun violence that could've been lessened were more stringent gun control legislation in place. Make no mistake, there will always be folks who conflate any gun law measures to 'gun control freaks' and anyone who owns a gun to an advocate of death. It's those folks who ruin the conversation every time.

I don't know anything about the starbucks reference other than the coffee is overpriced and definitely not near some of the better ones I've had.

I'm for one's right to own a gun. But it begs the question again of where is the line between what you can own and what the government (army, police) can. And on that line a lot of conservatives repeatedly turn a blind eye yet get angry at liberals for even mentioning increased background checks. Can't have it both ways. Or I guess one could, but it would seem quite hypocritical if they didn't spell that out.

 

[not2rich]

As a gun owner myself, I truly don't understand the run on guns and the fears being expressed in this thread. The last thing on any liberal or Democrat's mind at this point in time is restricting gun ownership under the current circumstances.

Those worried about civil unrest should maybe think about the extent of failure of Federal leadership that would be necessary to produce such a result. Think about it - this is the Federal government you wanted and you're so afraid of their inability to handle the current situation that you want to stock up on guns and ammo.

Trump is doing a great job!! (But I'm going to stockpile guns and ammo to hedge my bets that he's actually forking things up royally and civilization may collapse.) What a joke.

 

[dtc]

As a gun owner myself, I truly don't understand the run on guns and the fears being expressed in this thread. The last thing on any liberal or Democrat's mind at this point in time is restricting gun ownership under the current circumstances.

Those worried about civil unrest should maybe think about the extent of failure of Federal leadership that would be necessary to produce such a result. Think about it - this is the Federal government you wanted and you're so afraid of their inability to handle the current situation that you want to stock up on guns and ammo.

Trump is doing a great job!! (But I'm going to stockpile guns and ammo to hedge my bets that he's actually forking things up royally and civilization may collapse.) What a joke.

You just hit a home run.

Trump's supporters are scared because they know that there are people out there who need things they don't have and they seem to hope that some sort of legal and policy structure can keep those folks from revolting.

Barring that, they think a collection of guns and ammo can protect them and it can't.

 

[Beach Friends]

You just hit a home run.

Trump's supporters are scared because they know that there are people out there who need things they don't have and they seem to hope that some sort of legal and policy structure can keep those folks from revolting.

Barring that, they think a collection of guns and ammo can protect them and it can't.

Most likely any revolution from the types you may be thinking about would just result in some overturned garbage cans.

 

[surada]

This isn't about Democrats knowing anything... I was just pointing out that things were starting to get very serious around the end of January when this was Proposed. Doesn't matter whether he told Dems anything or not.

Just very ironic to me that this got proposed at a period of time in our history that everything is in chaos and the Media and everyone is focused on one thing and one thing only.. This Virus.

But yet a Democrat proposes one of the most out there pieces in history of guns legislative proposals.



Who is a republican here? Not me. But reporting how much Ammo I buy? Really.. Raising the Taxes?

Here's the thing.. I may support the Federal License... But does that mean that I can carry a weapon in every state? Or is it just more restrictions on me (legal Citizen) with no benefits?

As... The reporting of what I buy and how much to the Government? Like I said.. What if you had to report to the government how much money that you had? At home and in the banks? You'd be cool with that?

I tells ya... The timing on this is just too coincidental.

I don't see a problem. We can't drive without a valid driver's license.. and there are construction permits and business licenses. We have a shotguns from when the boys used to hunt.. and we have a German 45 from the war.. as well as a 38 revolver we inherited years ago. We really have no need for an automatic or large magazines.

 

[Joe Okc]

Again... Just on the surface... Hey.. Background checks and a gun license...iT all seems wonderful doesn;t it...

But as an example. If I pass a background check, qualify at the range etc. etc.. and I get a Federal License. Why won't my license be honored in Illinois? Make it nationally honored and then you can get my blessing. Other than that its just a farce.

If I go down and buy a .38 for home defense and I see an Old Bolt action WWII Mosin Nagant Carbine on sale for $200, with tis bill I won;t be able to buy it.. Cause you can only buy 1 every 30 days. Again, I am a law abiding citizen, when am I restricted.

I see no provision about guns in the hand of people that have them NOW illegally. What about that? Nothing....

now @dtc .. You sure seem to know a lot of what Trump supporters think.. Did you get Telepathy in life somehow.. Man stop kidding yourself.

Now going back to the democrats. Sure Trump had all kinds of itteligence at his disposal.. But for anyone to defend the Democrats with a Simple.. They didn;t know and trump didn;t brief them.. Man.. I wouldn't vote for a democrat if they lived under a rock like that...

But the real thing is how some people can point the finger at Trump and then just preend that tjhe Democrats just didn;t know...

I just hope that this bill doesn;t get lost on the Covid news. Like it seems to have.. Which I think there is a good possibility that was the intention.

 

[surada]

Are.you going through a divorce? Yeah, that will become part of the SOP for some divorce attorneys.

Did you recently have a boundary dispute with your neighbor? Some proposed laws are already extending who has standing.

Are you an LEO? Yeah, there was a story not long ago about how some low level criminal filed against an LEO because that's just the way these things go.

Did you recently go to a shrink after your spouse died and you lost your job in the same month? Better be careful when we start saying people with a a history of mental conditions can't own a gun.

There are degrees on mental instability.. Its not a one size fits all.

 

[surada]

Again... Just on the surface... Hey.. Background checks and a gun license...iT all seems wonderful doesn;t it...

But as an example. If I pass a background check, qualify at the range etc. etc.. and I get a Federal License. Why won't my license be honored in Illinois? Make it nationally honored and then you can get my blessing. Other than that its just a farce.

If I go down and buy a .38 for home defense and I see an Old Bolt action WWII Mosin Nagant Carbine on sale for $200, with tis bill I won;t be able to buy it.. Cause you can only buy 1 every 30 days. Again, I am a law abiding citizen, when am I restricted.

I see no provision about guns in the hand of people that have them NOW illegally. What about that? Nothing....

now @dtc .. You sure seem to know a lot of what Trump supporters think.. Did you get Telepathy in life somehow.. Man stop kidding yourself.

Now going back to the democrats. Sure Trump had all kinds of itteligence at his disposal.. But for anyone to defend the Democrats with a Simple.. They didn;t know and trump didn;t brief them.. Man.. I wouldn't vote for a democrat if they lived under a rock like that...

But the real thing is how some people can point the finger at Trump and then just preend that tjhe Democrats just didn;t know...

I just hope that this bill doesn;t get lost on the Covid news. Like it seems to have.. Which I think there is a good possibility that was the intention.

Trump has been fairly consistent in mocking intelligence and the generals.. stating that he knows more than either. He also claims to know more about debt..

He says his common sense is superior to all the experts whether they are doctors or whatever.