H. R. 1565

[jim-analog]

Greetings,

Didn't see this posted, sorry if a dupe. Please look at the current list of over 180 co-sponsors of US HR 1565 and call your congress critter. This is a house bill very similar to the Senate Toomey/Manchin/Schumer bill that was narrowly defeated. FYI, here is a link to the text:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr1565/text

BTW, Bucks Counties own Mike Fitzpatrick has signed up FOR this! Please light up his email and phone lines.

Regards, Jim

[JenniferG]

Mr. King of New York (for himself, Mr. Thompson of California, Mr. Fitzpatrick, Mr. Meehan, Mrs. McCarthy of New York, and Mr. DeFazio) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

rinos teaming up with extreme leftists to start a gun registration scheme from within the House.

[GeneCC]

Congress and the citizens of the United States agree that in order to promote safe and responsible gun ownership, dangerous criminals and the seriously mentally ill should be prohibited from possessing firearms; therefore, it should be incumbent upon all citizens to ensure weapons are not being transferred to such people.

"We had to burn down the village to save it from Communism".

(8)

Whoever makes or attempts to make a transfer of a firearm in violation of section 922(t) to a person not licensed under this chapter who is prohibited from receiving a firearm under subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 or State law, to a law enforcement officer, or to a person acting at the direction of, or with the approval of, a law enforcement officer authorized to investigate or prosecute violations of section 922(t), shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

So if I leave my firearms for safe keeping am I committing a felony?

(8)

Whoever makes or attempts to make a transfer of a firearm in violation of section 922(t) to a person not licensed under this chapter who is prohibited from receiving a firearm under subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 or State law, to a law enforcement officer, or to a person acting at the direction of, or with the approval of, a law enforcement officer authorized to investigate or prosecute violations of section 922(t), shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

Anyone else think that the Committee will decide that, yes Virginia, your Doctor is an agent of the State?

There is established a commission to be known as the National Commission on Mass Violence (in this title referred to as the "Commission") to study the availability and nature of firearms, including the means of acquiring firearms, issues relating to mental health, and all positive and negative impacts of the availability and nature of firearms on incidents of mass violence or in preventing mass violence.
(b)
Membership
(1)
Appointments

The Commission shall be composed of 12 members, of whom—
(A)

6 members of the Commission shall be appointed by the Majority Leader of the Senate, in consultation with the Democratic leadership of the House of Representatives, 1 of whom shall serve as Chairman of the Commission; and
(B)

6 members of the Commission shall be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, in consultation with the Republican leadership of the Senate, 1 of whom shall serve as Vice Chairman of the Commission.

Bet they won't investigate this famous series of incidents involving firearms...








You know darned sure that genocidal incidents involving firearms in GOVERNMENT HANDS will not be one of the items on the agenda of the committee.

FWIW - the Warsaw uprising involved a hand full of firearms. Rather than everyone starving to death or dying in gas chambers- as what happened in the Warsaw Ghetto when the Jews did not have firearms - a few Jews survived.... In the Vietnam conflict sixty percent of US casualties were from "small arms fire".

What can a handgun do against a tank? Ask a Vietnamese or an Afghan.

[GeneCC]

I can see the Committee saying...

"You don't need an Uzi or AK-47 to hunt ducks".


Naturally if the "NRA defeats this Common sense gun control legislation" then the Elitists will say, "Guess they don't want to lose their rights on the Installment plan. Confiscate them ALL".

[bogey1]

I can see the Committee saying...

"You don't need an Uzi or AK-47 to hunt ducks".


.

No not for hunting. For protection from our government.
A "constitutionally correct" reason to own one, IMO.

[c45man]

There was a time that a republican controlled house of representatives would of never introduced such a controversial piece of legislation, especially in an upcoming election year. I suppose they have no concern for the firearm owners in this country becoming single issue voters like they had been in the past. The many republican cosponsors obviously have no fear of reprisal from the millions of firearm owners in this country. Apparently the careless voting practices of many gun owners in the country has brought forth this type of contempt against firearm possession.

[JenniferG]

Mike Fitzpatrick and Pat Meehan prefer to wear their Arlen Specter masks when talking gun control. In Delaware county where they have launched an all out effort through all the government handout programs have managed to register enough new democrat voters to equal that of the strongly Republican county. Even though they managed through those handout programs to register all those new democrats the Republicans made a complete and total sweep of the county. Pat Meehan with his Arlen Specter gun control mask on looks like the virtual speech giver not seeing the impending curtain about to fall on him.

[GeneCC]

There was a time that a republican controlled house of representatives would of never introduced such a controversial piece of legislation, especially in an upcoming election year. I suppose they have no concern for the firearm owners in this country becoming single issue voters like they had been in the past. The many republican cosponsors obviously have no fear of reprisal from the millions of firearm owners in this country. Apparently the careless voting practices of many gun owners in the country has brought forth this type of contempt against firearm possession.

I don't agree. SOME Republicans were hostile to firearms for ages.

For example - former Republican Senator John Chafee used to introduce a bill banning the private ownership of handguns. He did it at the start of each session. Here's his 1993 version.

from 1993...

Sen. John Chafee, R-R.I., said he wants a law that would require U.S. handgun owners to turn in their pistols and revolvers for $25 or the market value of each firearm as part of a nationwide ban on handgun owner-ship.

Chafee also wants the national handgun ban to prohibit the sale, purchase, transfer, manufacture, possession, transportation and import and export of handguns and handgun ammunition, he said Wednesday. Former Supreme Court Justice Warren Burger and former Health Secretary Louis Sullivan joined Chafee in a news conference to announce the ban proposal. Chafee also appeared on Fox Television's "Morning News" to talk about his bill.

"It's affecting our hospital costs in the United States. Over $4 billion a year is spent by us, the taxpayers, to care for those who are injured by handguns. And it's bringing incredible tragedy to innumerable families. And all too frequently, it's the small child that's affected," Chafee said.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/2...-HANDGUNS.html

[GeneCC]

No not for hunting. For protection from our government. A "constitutionally correct" reason to own one, IMO.

Of course... but you have to "think" like these people. The magic of "Gradual Incrementalism" is to "peel off" groups from a coalition "one at a time".

Also known as "Divide and Conquer".

Today the Elitists silence the "Insurrectionists" by making talk of "armed resistance against tyranny" into "talk of terrorism". This nullifies any "reason" to own any firearm that even looks "military".

The People Owning firearms is a deterrent, another form of "Checks and Balances". Progressives hate Checks and Balances because it "slows progress".

Nobody is talking of marching on DC. That's crazy talk. Doesn't matter - those who believe in the Religion of Democracy consider talk of tyranny to be horrifying. The People are always right, unless they're too stupid to know it's for their own good, in which case it's not tyranny, it's "Progress".

I'm sure that the Nazis sincerely felt that they were thinking "progressively" too. The Communists certainly were convinced that they were "Progressive". Both of them held elections too. They also both practiced gun control. Bolsheviks summarily executed anyone found with a firearm at first. Then it was five years for "Terrorism". The Nazis tossed them into camps. Free labor, waste not, want not.

Once we don't have a justification to own a firearm for political purposes it's a discussion about Sporting Equipment.

Congressperson Giffords is already there. Her "reasonable gun safety" is a discussion about Sporting Equipment. Once you see things their way the Gun Control people sound pretty reasonable... but they ignore history. They also forget that making a right a privilege turns it into a political football.

In New York State they got everything that Giffords wants. NYC still has too much crime to refrain from meddling in our affairs. Chuck Schumer gets re elected pushing laws on us that don't work in New York City.

People in the US don't always pay attention to history. Even our own history. Used to be a crime to sell firearms to Native Americans. Death penalty for any black - free or slave - found with ANY weapon in some States after the end of Turner's Rebellion.

Nobody stood up for black folks and Native Americans. Nobody plead their case before the Supreme Court. No court cases, no Constitutional challenge, no problem.

Indians got massacred and were turned into welfare cases in their reservations. Slaves got beaten, their families were torn apart and they were treated like crap. More so after Turner's Rebellion was crushed.

After Emancipation the legislatures started to pass "Saturday Night Special" laws to disarm freed blacks and poor whites. Keep 'em weak, their wages low and their personal safety dependent upon the kindness of rich folks. Indian women were raped, their men were killed and "the only good Indian is tame".

Gun Control - It works!

[c45man]

I don't agree. SOME Republicans were hostile to firearms for ages.

For example - former Republican Senator John Chafee used to introduce a bill banning the private ownership of handguns. He did it at the start of each session. Here's his 1993 version.



http://www.deseretnews.com/article/2...-HANDGUNS.html

We will agree to disagree gene. Yes, there was always that percentage of republicans from anti-gun states and districts that kept their seats even though they were anti-gun. The difference today is that republicans within districts that are not traditionally anti-gun feel no fear of reprisal for an anti gun vote. There was a time that even a democrat like lapdog casey would of thought twice supporting an anti-gun measure in a state like Pa. Every U.S. Senator from Pa. that sided with the anti-gun zealots went on to lose their seats in the following election. Joe Clark, Harris Wofford, Arlen Spector, who did not make it past the primaries. Lapdog Casey should not and will not be the exception. Casey had an unexpected harder time winning in the last election against a unknown candidate who did not have the backing to beat an incumbent, but on the other hand, casey did not fully show his hand until after the election. All of this plus the fact that he voted for Obama Care, but that is another issue.

With the number of backers that this bill has, it may very well come to a vote in '14. Unbelievable as it may seem in an election year. 85 Million firearm owners in this country, apparently, have become a paper tiger.