“This is an anti-criminal, pro-Second Amendment bill. Background checks are the first line of defense in our efforts to keep guns from criminals, domestic abusers and the dangerously mentally ill. The American people have had enough of thoughts and prayers. They want leaders to act. Congress should immediately take up and pass our bipartisan bill to close the system’s loopholes and to strengthen our background check system.”- U.S. Rep. Mike Thompson (D-St. Helena) in Thompson, King propose ‘anti-criminal, pro-Second Amendment’ gun control bill [via timesheraldonline.com]
ENTER TO WIN 1000 ROUNDS OF IMI 9MM AMMUNITION
 |
|
Click here for more information about IMI System Ammunition
Entries will be added to TTAG’s mailing list and shared with IMI Systems
I cannot stand the double talk.
And I can see where Congress’s and the re-pube-ican party’s priorities are.
Repeal Obamacare? Can’t do it…
Cut Taxes? Just don’t have the votes…
Secure the border and cut immigration? Just not possible…
But more gun control? Whole congress enthusiastically jumps up and has a collectivist orgasm at the thought of selling out American gun owners in the name of “bipartisanship”…
I’m tired of these commie traitors, as well as the democrats…
All “commercial” transactions are already required to have a background check, as only licensed FFL holders can sell guns commercially as a part of their business.
Calling a pile of dung “brown gold” may be good marketing, but it doesn’t make it smell any better.
I was going to ask how stupid do they think the voters are … but the answer is “very” and often we live up (down?) to that perception.
Bipartisan? As in a compromise in which the Republicans get something they’ve been wanting to pass for passing what is essentially a UBC? Like how about passing a national conceal carry bill as part of this “compromise”? Or how about outlawing GFZ’s on federal property?
No?
So once again there is “bipartisan” support in getting more gun control where we give up more of our gun rights, just not as much as the gun controllers want, with nothing given back in expanding other gun rights.
This is the E-mail I sent to a local representative.
To Whom it may concern;
No. Absolutely not.
Point one. There has not been one mass shooter in the last decade that had not already bought their firearms legally after passing a back ground check, or had gotten them by theft.
Point 2. Studies show that 1% of criminals get their firearms from gun shows, the other 99% get their illegal firearms from family, friends and the black market in stolen firearms.
In the end, this bill will do nothing effective in keeping firearms out of the hands of law breakers and homicidal maniacs, while increasing the paper work, the cost and government control over law abiding citizens.
Why do you think that a majority of American citizens have a more positive outlook of the NRA than of the US congress? Because all we get from congress are laws that increase government control, taxes and paperwork; while the NRA fights to decrease all of that obsessive, intrusive, burdensome, ineffective bureaucracy over one of our most important civil rights.
“The People” have had enough of political grandstanding (unless you’re a MA Democrat, apparently), which is why Trump is our President. Get with the times, and try solving a problem instead of pushing it off on a flawed system, and patting yourself on the back.
Never, Never, Never trust a politician especially not a Democrat!!!!!
Another lawmaker who doesn’t know already existing laws and try to close loopholes that don’t exist.
This guy would fit perfectly into the anti-democratic and anti-liberty EU Commission.
Translation: “Every transaction must leave a Form 4473 paper trail, which will facilitate confiscation when we come to “enforce” the Second Amendment. And we’re going to enforce it good and hard.”
California translation: it is every DROS transaction leaves a database entry. So we can come and collect them when we feel confident enough.
If only we were as brave as the potheads, civil disobedience would probably have us shipping full auto to our doors, at least in the freest states by now. Unlike the potheads though, we have more to lose. We are “good Germans”. And the Republicans care about us soooo much. And the children. Our strong man is at the helm. All will be well LOL
Thing is, many of the most powerful leftists are also numbered among the potheads. They have far more fellow travelers in the halls of government, education, bureaucracy, and entertainment than we do. Government will bend for them in a way that it won’t for the rest of us.
For all the crap that has been given to the NRA, they didn’t toss us under the bus. Their statement on the bumpees left Ryan and the Rinos with only one option. And they let it go away. The ATF cannot act only Congress can. And they seem to not want to cross that line.
They piss us off enough, no repeal, weasel down on tax cuts across the board. They hate Trump and don’t wanna give him a win, yet they walk up to crossing the line of actually pushing the Trump supporters away. The writing is on the wall, all the special elections have been on the Trump side. Jeff Flake, the little rat is gone. Too bad his buddy in AZ McCain ain’t up for re-election.
Trump ain’t the best we could have done but I still want him there instead of the Hilderbeast. The Dems keep eating their own. Not just us POTG are fed up, a lot of people out here are also.
While he may not be up for reelection, John McStain is up for imminent death. Which is just as good.
Instead of trying to keep g uns from criminals, domestic abusers and the dangerously mentally ill, wouldn’t it be easier and more effective to keep criminals, domestic abusers and the dangerously mentally ill away from the American people?
Also, can you really call it ‘bi-partisan’ because Peter King signs on?
Just ship them to north korea or afghanistan
This IS a UBC bill. Really sneaky one at that.
Redefines “commercial transfer” as “commercial transaction”. i.e. any transfer involving money whether private or with a FFL. So you could loan a gun to a buddy, but you have to get a background check to sell it to him.
While that is an improvement, I am still waiting to hear the “pro-2A” part. It is a non (as opposed to common) sense gun control law. Nothing more or less. Period.
Here in the former-Constitution State ALL sales private and commercial require a state given “authorization number” to do a sale. It only is done by the law abiding gun owners; criminals still lie, cheat, steal and get their guns without… The law is a joke; they plea bargain criminal gun crimes but double down on the legal gun owners
I don’t know that “all the special elections” have gone Trump’s way. The Georgia election was a GOP seat already. The Alabama U.S. Senate primary didn’t go Trump’s way. In fact, when his boy Luther Strange was defeated, Trump promptly deleted his tweets supporting Strange. Judge Roy Moore won that GOP primary and is headed to Washington once he wins the Dec. 7th special election.
As for Flake, well, that doesn’t count because there hasn’t even been an election. He simply decided not to run for re-election. I don’t know how you can credit Trump with that. Flake won his Senate seat in 2012 with a mere 49.2% of the vote versus the Democrat’s 46.2%. The Libertarian picked up the remainder.
Having barely squeaked into office, Flake proceeded to vote most frequently with John McCain and Joe Manchin, according to voting record analysis conducted by OpenCongress. McCain, you may recall, barely won his only 2016 GOP primary with 51.2% of the vote and did only slightly better in the 2016 general election with 53..7%. No wonder McCain was formally rebuked by the Arizona Republican Party.
Neither of these guys is very popular, but those currents were running deep well before Trump jumped on the scene.
Whether he realizes it or not the AL senate race actually went Trump’s way, his misguided endorsement (at the behest of McConnell) not withstanding. Say what you may about Moore, but he won’t be McConnell’s lap dog the way Strange would have been.
To quote David Codrea: Just because gun-grabbers call themselves “Second Amendment supporters” and “safety advocates” doesn’t mean the media should just take them at their word.
http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2017/11/reporting-on-nevada-gun-measure-lawsuit.html
War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Gun control is pro second ammendment
Not everyone agrees that democrat party politicians are vile, lying, corrupt, traitorous filth. But, who can deny, they are entertaining.
I don’t call someone who lies, who hates me, who denigrates me, who is working to destroy America entertaining.
I call them what they are, liars, communists, traitors and more.
Alan Korwin has the answer: Unilateral Background Checks
http://www.gunlaws.com/UnilateralBackgroundChecks.htm
That Korwin is one smart dude. His website is impossible to navigate, though (I don’t think it’s been redesigned or reorganized since about 2001).
Here’s his article about what would make unilateral BG checks work. http://www.gunlaws.com/BIDSvNICS.htm
Mike Thompson is not a Fudd
And then they put you on a list so they can confiscate your stuff later. Totally “Second Amendment-friendly.”
Not happening, Cupcake.
“This is an anti-criminal, pro-Second Amendment bill. Background checks are the first line of defense in our efforts to keep guns from criminals, domestic abusers and the dangerously mentally ill.”
Well that’s pretty crappy first line of defense, given the amount of ongoing violence from criminals, domestic abusers, and the dangerously mentally ill. (I’ll add known thugs, predators, and terrorists, though violence from these folks doesn’t seem to bother Rep “I should be the “King”” much.)
Maybe we don’t need more of that particular cowbell; try something else.
Since “Good to Almost Be The King” there doesn’t get it, maintaining “privacy” doesn’t need justifying; invading “privacy” does. So, what good does it do?
Since “Dreamed I Was King” doesn’t get this either, we care about what actually happens, not what he imagines will happen. Nobody cares that he continues to believe that “This law ought to fix that over there.” when we have actual results that say otherwise.
Before burdening not-criminals by eroding the Second Amendment more, maybe show that the costs you propose will do something good. If there’s evidence it doesn’t work, the whole thing is a non-starter. That is, unless the burden for no gain is the point. (Naaaah.)
Others here have already said this in various ways, but I’ll restate it: There is no such thing as a pro-2A gun control bill.
When lawmakers and bureaucrats start talking about “loopholes,” I see Big Brother stomping those jackboots down on yet another human face. To most of these people, freedom itself is just a loophole they haven’t closed yet.
Plus, “bipartisan” isn’t a selling point. That just makes it worse. Both Republicans and Democrats would happily sell us down the river if it got them one more chance at the cheese.
Studies show that every day where background checks are used, the system stops more than 170 felons, some 50 domestic abusers, and nearly 20 fugitives from buying a gun, they said. However, no system is in place to prevent these same prohibited purchasers from buying identical guns at a gun show, over the internet, or through a newspaper ad with no questions asked because background checks are not required for these kinds of sales –
If only there were some law against those 170 felons per day even attempting to purchase a gun, so that they could be prosecuted for it before they go off to buy a gun elsewhere….
Comments are closed.