These are the gun-control bills Congress will be considering when they reconvene on 9/4.

Thanks Tom.

FYI your second link takes me to the same bill as the first link for 1186. ?

While I don't like any of them I find the Disarm Hate Act particularly disturbing in it's potential for abuse considering just wearing the likes of a political statement hat is looked as hateful by so many.
 
FYI your second link takes me to the same bill as the first link for 1186. ?
Click to expand...

Fixed. Thanks for the heads-up!

I find the Disarm Hate Act particularly disturbing in it's potential for abuse
Click to expand...

Note that it's for a misdemeanor hate crime. The definition of what constitutes a hate crime is fluid and can vary from state to state.
 
I doubt the senate will take any of these up, Mitch McConnell will stall and then say it is too late to debate the bills this congress. That has been the Republican MO at least since Sandy Hook, delay until it drops off the front page.
 
Buzzcook said:
I doubt the senate will take any of these up, Mitch McConnell will stall and then say it is too late to debate the bills this congress. That has been the Republican MO at least since Sandy Hook, delay until it drops off the front page.
Click to expand...
And before somebody says, "what's wrong with that?" People on both sides are angry/upset/worried about the rash of shootings in general and mass shooting specifically.
Many(most? all?) polls say that all ask for some sort of 'enhancement' of BGC(including gun owners) AND some sort of RFL..I'm sure not the one with any answer, maybe there isn't one but after action reports on these incidents 'seem' to imply there are 'some' solutions out there BUT..Mitch won't do anything until November 2020 pass by..
 
Tom Servo said:
H.R.2708 - Disarm Hate Act: makes conviction of a misdemeanor hate crime a lifetime prohibition.
Click to expand...

I find this particularly odious. It assumes the legitimacy of the idea of a "hate crime", then restricts rights based on a misdemeanor.

Whether an act is a "hate crime" (as if ordinary crimes are manifestations of affection?) is a political matter. Trayvon Martin's death might result in an act of racial hatred depending on how Zimmerman is characterized. Ultimately, the punishment is enhanced based on an allegation about the defendant's speech, writing or thought.

USNRet93 said:
And before somebody says, "what's wrong with that?" People on both sides are angry/upset/worried about the rash of shootings in general and mass shooting specifically.
Click to expand...

One of the functions of the Senate is to keep laws from passing where the law is motivated by momentary passions, people being "angry/upset/worried". Those are all poor reasons for restricting peoples' rights.
 
Last edited:
USNRet93 said:
And before somebody says, "what's wrong with that?" People on both sides are angry/upset/worried about the rash of shootings in general and mass shooting specifically.
Many(most? all?) polls say that all ask for some sort of 'enhancement' of BGC(including gun owners) AND some sort of RFL..I'm sure not the one with any answer, maybe there isn't one but after action reports on these incidents 'seem' to imply there are 'some' solutions out there BUT..Mitch won't do anything until November 2020 pass by..
Click to expand...
I see on the news lately protesters chanting "Just do something" and that's just what I'm afraid our congress is going to so. Something to appease the masses.

I keep hearing how polls say that a great majority (including gun owners) want universal background checks. I'm sure most people don't understand what they are asking for. UBC's prevent you from even handling someone else's gun unless you have it transferred at a FFL first. People need to be informed.

Mac
 
Many(most? all?) polls say that all ask for some sort of 'enhancement' of BGC(including gun owners) AND some sort of RFL..
Click to expand...
Everyone should always be wary of the figures these 'polls' produce. Just because the talking heads say things like "80% of Americans want UBC! 2/3 of this country agrees we need a AWB!" doesn't mean squat. In my not-so-humble opinion, that is.
 
I see on the news lately protesters chanting "Just do something"....
Click to expand...

I read this and had a momentary fantasy, what would happen if we just simply arrested the protesters? That would be "doing something".

Ok, they wouldn't be happy, and I'm pretty sure most of them would say, "Why are you punishing us?? We didn't do anything wrong!"

Guess what, NEITHER did the rest of gun owning America!!
 
I see on the news lately protesters chanting "Just do something" and that's just what I'm afraid our congress is going to so.
Click to expand...

The problem is, "just doing something" leads to passing terrible laws in haste.

Our system is based on the idea that the legislative process is supposed to be plodding and deliberative. It's not meant to ramrod laws through on impulse. Yet this is exactly what gun-control advocates expect Congress to do.

And why? Because they can't afford debate. They need the emotional component to make their arguments. Once you get past the slogans, the junk science, and the lobbyist money, their always comes down to some sort of cheap emotional manipulation based on recent outrage.

Thus the cries to "do something right now." If their proposals are so compelling, why can't they wait for the process to work as designed?
 
Florida's legislature "just did something" after the Parkland school shooting. Former governor Rick Scott signed that something as fast as possible. Part of the something was to enhance school security. Sadly the county (Broward) that has done the least is the county the shooting was in. Most of the other school districts have only made halfhearted attempts at making the campuses more difficult to enter.
 
The problem is, "just doing something" leads to passing terrible laws in haste.
Click to expand...

Agreed, completely. Don't think that's the case? Ask any of the surviving Asians (or their children) who we (the Fed Govt) put into interment camps after Pearl Harbor....
For just ONE example...

Our system is based on the idea that the legislative process is supposed to be plodding and deliberative. It's not meant to ramrod laws through on impulse.
Click to expand...

Absolutely true. This was not only intentional, it was the only way possible at the time. People, including news and information could only travel as fast as a horse could run or a ship could sail.

This provided a built in "lag time" between anything people got upset about and our legislators being able to consider the issue, allowing for a (usually) rational discussion.

Our instant information technology today, and the emphasis on "democracy" over our constitutional REPUBLIC has brought us closer to mob rule than any time previous in our history.

Our current situation favors those who shout the loudest and longest, and NOT necessarily what is the right thing to do.

Today, semi auto firearms and the people who own them are made out to be today's "witches" (aka "evil") and the mob is screaming "Burn the Witch! Burn the Witch!" over and over. Some would burn the witch today, just to appease the mob.

The right thing to do, as I see it, is to wait until the mob gets tired of yelling and brandishing their torches and pitchforks and goes home, THEN decide if the witch actually NEEDS to be burned, or if something else should be done.

Being as I see myself, and others like me as "good witches" and not evil ones, I rather object to being burned, just to temporarily placate an angry mob.

Don't you??
 
Our President thinks that way?
Click to expand...

POTUS has had TV moments saying
-'universal BGC' and RFL
-then-'BGC off the table' then
-BGC back on the table so.......

IF POTUS isn't somehow onboard with something written by the Senate, these are DOA..in spite of them passing the House. This is and will continue to be political football until and thru the 2020 election season.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not sure about the rest of you but I have already sent letters to my US Senator and US Representative voicing my opposition to these bills along with explaining where I thought they were wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top