Ha ha. I myself have often thought our legislators (city, state and federal) should be required to wear body cameras like the police officers do and put it in a public database. Can you imagine being able to bring up video/audio on all the backroom deals, the power lunches, the hallway meetings with lobbyists?
H.R.127 - Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act
- Thread starter pat701
- Start date
Ha ha. I myself have often thought our legislators (city, state and federal) should be required to wear body cameras like the police officers do and put it in a public database. Can you imagine being able to bring up video/audio on all the backroom deals, the power lunches, the hallway meetings with lobbyists?
Even if they had the cameras, don't think for a moment that footage of the backroom deals etc, would ever be public. Just look at how the cop's bodycam footage is so often "unavailable" or "lost"...
To paraphrase a famous old quote (Webster??)...
Laws, like sausages, are something you should not watch being made.....
To paraphrase a famous old quote (Webster??)...
Laws, like sausages, are something you should not watch being made.....
I can't help but wonder if Looney-Toon bills like this serve the purpose (other than fundraising fodder for the NRA) of making a big splash, getting everyone riled up, and making the later "compromise" bill with "just" Universal Background Checks or an AWB seem "reasonable" by comparison.
There is still no cosponsor, par for Jackson-Lee's track record, a (low performer) as a former mayor of Houston once called her. 
This bill is going nowhere.
But pieces may be resurrected.
More appropriate might be to require politicians to meet the psychological testing requirements listed herein.
This bill is going nowhere.
But pieces may be resurrected.
More appropriate might be to require politicians to meet the psychological testing requirements listed herein.
Last edited:
big al hunter
New member
This got me thinking. What do politicians fear more than mobs with guns...NOT GETTING RE-ELEECTED!!
What do you suppose would happen if we all started actively supporting the term limits for Congress? Would it be to our benefit to have a whole new Congress that was trying to learn what to do, or is it better to know your enemy?
Would it do any good for us to send emails to our representatives letting them know that if this bill passed we would all be actively pursuing the term limits by getting the signatures needed to put term limits to a vote of the people. In my state the liberal gun haters would gladly support any gun control bill. But they àlso want term limits. It wouldn't be an impossible task to get them to sign a list. They wouldn't even blink an eye before signing for term limits.
Congressional Term limits?
Congress would have to pass a law limiting their own terms. I'm sure you realize that the opposition to that would be quite bi-partisan.
Or, there'd have to be a constitutional amendment.
I'm not sure where you get the idea that there is some national mechanism for a popular referendum becoming law.
Congress would have to pass a law limiting their own terms. I'm sure you realize that the opposition to that would be quite bi-partisan.
Or, there'd have to be a constitutional amendment.
I'm not sure where you get the idea that there is some national mechanism for a popular referendum becoming law.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Some states allow that. big al hunter is from Washington, and I believe Washington (state) allows popular referendums.ghbucky said:
But you are correct -- I don't think there is anything comparable at the federal level.
The other issue with term limits is that everyone wants all the other representatives term limited, but not theirs. I'd love to see Pelosi or Lee term limited, just as I'm sure their constituents would love to see my representative (Massie) limited.
But we keep re-electing them every 2 years. So, it seems that we have collectively decided that OUR rep shouldn't be term limited.
But we keep re-electing them every 2 years. So, it seems that we have collectively decided that OUR rep shouldn't be term limited.
big al hunter
New member
Yes it would be quite bipartisan, just like the last time they voted for their own pay raise!
I saw a 5 step process recently that was for federal referendums. But it isn't a simple undertaking. A majority of states have to have enough signatures from supporters to get it to the second step. I don't recall all of the steps, but the process was shown because the author of the post was talking about term limits for Congress. It removes Congress from the process, so they can't vote on it. Wish I had saved it somewhere.
The bigger question in my mind is.....what would happen with a bunch of newbies in Congress? What kinds of laws would come up? And would it be better or worse than the current group that we already know are anti-gun?
That got me curious, so a little googling turned this up:
https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/report/national-vote-advance-term-limits
In short, this would require congress to have a questions about whether term limits should advance on all congressional ballots. That's all it would be, a question. I'm dubious that congress would be interested.
There is only one scenario where a federal term limit becomes law without Congress passing it: a Constitutional convention called by 2/3 of the state legislature.
https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/report/national-vote-advance-term-limits
In short, this would require congress to have a questions about whether term limits should advance on all congressional ballots. That's all it would be, a question. I'm dubious that congress would be interested.
There is only one scenario where a federal term limit becomes law without Congress passing it: a Constitutional convention called by 2/3 of the state legislature.
big al hunter
New member
OK.....I did some searching. And it seems the author of the article I read was a bit confused about the nation wide referendum. (Can't believe everything we see on the internet ) If a nation wide referendum is voted on, it would only be an informational vote that would be sent to Congress for review. And it would be non-binding. So, it is possible to vote on it, but it would still be up to Congress to fire themselves.
We can tell them all we want, but that probably won't make it happen.
) If a nation wide referendum is voted on, it would only be an informational vote that would be sent to Congress for review. And it would be non-binding. So, it is possible to vote on it, but it would still be up to Congress to fire themselves. We can tell them all we want, but that probably won't make it happen.
big al hunter
New member
I'm not so sure we could talk 2/3 of all the states legislators to support this. But if enough of us proposed it to our district legislators, it might get some traction. Every state would have to have advertising for people to email there state legislators. Maybe with some help from social media....
Still slim possibility. But I would try.
There has been an ongoing effort to organize a convention.
https://conventionofstates.com/
I know nothing, whatsoever, about this group. It may be legitimate, it may be fundraising to line someone's pocket. I just know they exist.
[edit]15 of the required 34 states have passed resolutions calling for one
https://conventionofstates.com/
I know nothing, whatsoever, about this group. It may be legitimate, it may be fundraising to line someone's pocket. I just know they exist.
[edit]15 of the required 34 states have passed resolutions calling for one
big al hunter
New member
I was asking if anyone felt it would do any good to let our lawmakers know that we would be more likely to push for term limits as a means of discouraging their vote for this proposed bill. But alas, it seems it may be waisted effort.
We can return to the previous discussion.
I don't think the proposition of making gun ownership and location a publicly accessible piece of information is very intelligent. Just tells the criminals where to find guns that they can attempt to steal.