Posted on 12/05/2018 10:42:59 AM PST by rktman
House Democrats plan to introduce legislation criminalizing private gun sales once the new Congress is in session.
Mother Jones reports that Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA) met with gun control groups that included the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Everytown for Gun Safety, the Center for American Progress, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, and Gabby Giffords’ group. He asked them what they wanted, and a bill to criminalize private gun sales was on their wish list.
So Thompson will sponsor legislation requiring a background check before someone may buy a gun from his neighbor, a co-worker to get a background check before buying a gun from a co-worker, and so forth. The bill will go so far as to require a son to get a background check before a father can give him a gun as a gift.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Yes.
Need to stop ANY anti-gun legislation from these people.
They won’t. This is just theater.
Liberal policies cannot succeed if citizens have guns. It’s actually good that they cannot go after their ultimate goal at this time (confiscation of all weapons). But we need to make sure they don’t chip away at rights so that confiscation is acceptable to most people in a few generations.
And we need to get younger generations to understand that deer and muggers are not the reason we need the 2nd. Prohibiting citizens from owning guns will not stop the government from shooting citizens. Police shootings are one of the concerns of younger generations we should be able to capitalize on, not shy away from.
“Shall not be infringed”.
Wonder what that means? I’m sure our betters can ‘splain that to us ignorant hick rubes in flyover Jesusland.
“Making private sales illegal is really to create a registry so they know where all the guns are.”
Correct.
They did this multi-step gun confiscation process already in most Western countries.
The registry will start by regulation to “give meaning to the law”. Or it will start off voluntary “to provide proof that no improper transfer occurred” and then become mandatory.
And then they will confiscate.
Reminds me of when the republican majority kept voting to kill Obamacare - until their vote actually mattered. Then they stopped voting to kill obamacare.
Drain the friggin swamp already.
“Liberal policies cannot succeed if citizens have guns”
Have you been paying attention the last 50 years?
Of course, this is going no where. It’s just a cheap election stunt for the Commie faithful.
These treasonous scum need to be tarred and feathered and them summarily removes from office.
I will not bow down to these tyrants and destroyers of liberty.
It’s DOA there.
It will get by SCOTUS with ease.
>>>Liberal policies cannot succeed if citizens have guns<<<
Liberal Policies are succeeding because Democrats Harvest Votes, own the Media, own the Education System and they run Washington D.C.
Citizens owning Guns has done nothing to stop them.
This scheme will stop zero mass shootings across the country.
They also have zero chance of getting this bill past the Senate or the president.
About this legislation, first consider that as a consequence of gridlocked Congress and Republican president, Democrats probably aren’t going to get their unconstitutional INTRAstate-related gun control legislation any more than Pres. Trump got his wall.
In other words, Democrats are likely politicking for 2020.
Otherwise, note that regardless what FDR’s state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices wanted everybody to think about the scope of Congress’s commerce clause powers when SCOTUS scandalously decided Wickard v. Filburn, 1942, in Congress’s favor imo, consider the following.
A previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified the already clear interpretation of the Commerce Clause (1.8.3), that the states have never given Congress the express constitutional authority to regulate intrastate commerce.
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
"State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added]." -Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Also, using a 2nd Amendment-related topic, murder, as example, the congressional record shows that constitutional lawmaker Rep. John Bingham had clarified that the states have never expressly delegated to Congress the specific power to make peacetime civil penal laws.
"Our Constitution never conferred upon the Congress of the United States the power - sacred as life is, first as it is before all other rights which pertain to man on this side of the grave - to protect it in time of peace by the terrors of the penal code within organized states; and Congress has never attempted to do it. There never was a law upon the United States statute-book to punish the murderer for taking away in time of peace the life of the noblest, and the most unoffending, as well, of your citizens, within the limits of any State of the Union, The protection of the citizen in that respect was left to the respective States, and there the power is to-day [emphasis added].” —Rep. John Bingham, Congressional Globe. (See bottom half of third column.)
In fact, not only would Democrats be interfering with 10th Amendment-protected intrastate commerce by making vote-winning, but in stark contrast to constitutionally indefensible civil gun control laws, consider that 14th Amendment gives Congress the power only to strengthen constitutionally enumerated protections, the 2nd Amendment in this case, from abridgment by the states.
14th Amendment:
"Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States [emphasis added]; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
"Section 5: The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."
It’s a miracle that we held the Senate. Trump second term is no guarantee. Our side better get its act together.
Maybe having the House in radical hands wont be so bad for two years. It will let the country see how utterly mad the Democrats have become without them actually being able to pass any of their nonsense. Let people see the rights they want to take away, open borders, endless spending, destructive policies all around. With Trump as their foil, it can only be a positive for the Republicans and the country in 2020.
No more yard sales for you.
Think about it...
5.56mm
Is there anything a citizen can legally own that he or she cannot sell, other than firearms certain firearms (grandfathered weapons, etc.). Perhaps some eagle feathers or ivory? Stocks (other than through a broker?).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.