USA Today: Yes, HR 5717 Would Ban Civilian Owned ‘Assault Weapons’

Assault Weapons Ban

Bigstock

Lots of gun owners, gun rights supporters and gun rights organizations have taken note of Rep. Hank “Cappy” Johnson’s HR 5717. We wrote about that abomination which is chock full of wonderful surprises like national gun owner licensing, a ban on suppressors, federal red flag confiscations and more.

MAC wrote about it on his Facebook page and asked his readers to call their representatives in Washington about the “assault weapons” ban bill. The alarm somehow got the attention of the ever-vigilant “fact checkers” at the McPaper, who actually looked into it.

And here’s what they found . . .

The ban has a few exceptions. Law-enforcement officers can possess these firearms as can those who are providing security at nuclear energy facilities. Firearms that are “manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action,” have “been rendered permanently inoperable” or are antique are exempt from the ban as well.

The bill has not yet passed the Democrat-controlled House. In order to become law, the Republican-controlled Senate would have to pass it and the president would have to sign it.

It has 18 co-sponsors, all Democrats, including Rep. Joseph Kennedy of Massachusetts, Rep. Mike Quigley of Illinois, Rep. Anthony Brown of Maryland and Rep. Joseph Morelle of New York.

The Gun Violence Prevention and Community Safety Act of 2020 is not the first of its kind. Congress enacted a 10-year assault weapon ban that was in effect from 1994-2004. Democrats also attempted to pass an assault weapons ban in 2013 following the Newtown shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

Just as Johnson’s bill has not passed the House, Warren’s bill has not passed the Senate.

Rep. David Cicilline, D-R.I., sponsored in February 2019 a semiautomatic assault weapon ban that the House didn’t pass.

Our ruling: True

The claim on the pro-gun Facebook page that an assault weapons ban bill was introduced in the House is TRUE. If passed, H.R. 5717 would ban semiautomatic assault weapons.

– Molly Stellino in Fact check: Would a U.S. House bill ban assault weapons?

comments

  1. avatar De Facto says:

    I almost prefer the honesty at this point. That’s the way, keep pushing. Let’s see what happens.

    1. avatar Eric Swalwell says:

      Nuclear war my friend….. Nuclear war happens.

      Eric Swalwell 2020

      1. avatar SGT Preston says:

        AND, so do elections that send politicla hacks who want to change government to suit themselves, off to the “happy hunting grounds” of fired government employees who refused to represent their people.

        1. avatar Eric Swalwell says:

          Obviously you missed the news footage of the dozens of people who showed up to my Presidential rallies. I’m on my way my friend, and four years from now when my base is consolidated, you’ll see massive rallies with throng of screaming supporters! I’ll be drawing crowds in triple digits!

          Eric Swalwell 2020

    2. avatar Unlicensed Bozo says:

      There “some” democrats that are gun nuts too. Wonder if they will vote party line.

      1. avatar Mark N. says:

        Democrats in the House, unless they are running for re-election in a Red State, will toe the Party line or face the wrath of Ms. Pelosi. That wrath has real consequences, such that there does not appear to be any one willing to cross her.

        1. avatar W says:

          Everyone in the house is up for election every two years. It is time to remove anyone, democommie or Republican, from office during this upcoming election. That’s if the demomaggots don’t subvert the election process. They are the ones who are desperately trying to manipulate the election process.

      2. avatar Hannibal says:

        I have a feeling that in this election they will care less about gun rights than voting out the idiots that bungled a pandemic.

        1. avatar Michael Christensen says:

          The democratic screwed up the pandemic by starting the impeachment process. Everyone was so wrapped up in this whole process that nobody was paying attention to what was happening in the world at the time. This created a delay of several months of response time

        2. avatar John Denton says:

          I don’t know who you are talking about I have seen no bungling on the part of the present administration! T he president has done everything possible to help people stay well! Some people claim he waited to long I say he watched to see which was was going to be the best move for the country and its people. A wrong move would have been worse that no move at all!

        3. avatar Huntmaster says:

          All the money wasted on Solyndra and all the other green failures would have bought a hell of a lot of ventilators. And a lot of respirators. And N95 masks. And beds. And a whole of other stuff.

        4. avatar frank speak says:

          mistakes were made by members of both parties…let’s not forget how dems vigorously opposed the travel ban….

    3. avatar frank speak says:

      congress has more important things to concern themselves with these days…kill this thing and move on…

    4. avatar Chad says:

      You know I was reading what they said about that that probably would be true if the AR-15 was an assault rifle which it is not the M16 is a fully automatic freeze burst machine gun the AR-15 is not a machine gun AR-15 is a semi-automatic weapon which means one pull the trigger one round 1 round only goes down range

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        they know that…but it’s to their advantage to keep the public confused…it’s guilt by appearance…

  2. avatar Darkman says:

    Check out Marjorie Greene’s face book campaign ad for Georgia’s 14th Congressional District. It’s going to drive the Anti 2A Pols and gun grabbers bat shit crazy. Keep Your Powder Dry.

    1. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

      Yup. Just watched her video on a news feed. I’d vote for her.

      1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

        …because?…

        1. avatar Geoff "Guns. LOTS of guns..." PR says:

          “…because?…”

          She blows up Tannerite. She’s somewhat-attractive. She works out. She likes guns.

          Do you need more than that? 😉

      2. avatar CarlosT says:

        Nice demonstration of proper trigger discipline, too. Yeah, she’d have my vote.

    2. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

      Apparently “bat shit crazy” has more meaning than we thought

      1. avatar possum says:

        Would you like an order of bat shit with your pangolin?

      2. avatar frank speak says:

        consider where the sponsorship of this bill is coming from….hardly representative of the country as a whole…

    3. avatar A says:

      But what’s her stance on guns?

  3. avatar MikeJH121 says:

    If there is just one thing you can agree on with Trump, like him or not, TDS has exposed the haters, anti’s and commies for who they really are. They can’t hide behind their China-virus masks, even though they can’t even wear them right, check out the Chuck Shumer pic, masks also cover noses moron.

    If Trump said we all need oxygen the libtards would try to outlaw it.

    1. avatar possum says:

      They’d tax the hell out of it, that’s for sure

    2. avatar Unlicensed Bozo says:

      Chuck is a mouth breather. No worries

    3. avatar frank speak says:

      schumer needs a gag more than a mask!….

  4. avatar LifeSavor says:

    Since this legislation has no chance of becoming law, what are the motivations behind it?

    Grandstanding. “Look at how I am fighting to stop those evil gun-owners”.

    Deamonizing: ” Look at how those evil Republicans prevented me from preventing mass-shootings”.

    Sensationalizing: “Guns are evil; we can never stop fighting those evil gun owners”.

    Collecting: “Look at me, Mr. Bloomberg. I did good. May I have some money, please?”

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      imagine a Democrat president and Congress. It becomes law.
      Should we enter a great depression, that’s a possibility.

      1. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

        Scary indeed.

        1. avatar GS650G says:

          We are starting to see the progressives root for financial ruin. They are using a 1932 playbook. An ideal situation is we are devastated financially, hundreds of thousands dead from the virus, millions unemployed and the nation turns to:

          Joe Biden.

          And his VP. Who will undoubtedly take over as soon as possible next year. Nancy can be VP. There will be much rejoicing in the media over events.

        2. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

          I’m 59 with a progressive, disabling disease. My wife and kids are set.

          Just sayin’.

        3. avatar Hannibal says:

          Capitalism requires a relief valve. When people see billionaires “self-isolating” on massive boats harbored off their private islands (via instagram!) while pensioners can’t get a ventilator or even a viral test (but the NBA gets em!) they get mad. They get violent. And maybe they should.

          The socialist measures in the US that were taken following the Great Depression may have saved capitalism.

          The real problem is that the 2nd Amendment has been so politicized that they are linked to the success of one political party. This is a very bad thing for a right.

      2. avatar In for a penny, In for a pound says:

        Oh, my gosh, then that means We Americans might actually have to do the right thing, and remove both parties. Moral men do not even accept the option of taking the lesser evil. Older folks should have removed both parties back in nam, but they did not have the honor or integrity to follow the Constitution. They choise wealth over Liberty, and materialism backed by Chinese communism.
        Nam as our nation’s Nazi moment of saying yes to a corrupt government, instead of having honor and using deadly force on that government and it supporters.
        Fortunately, for the Vietnamese the our corrupt government’s useful idiots were nowhere near as efficient as the Germansvat removing their government’s enemy.

        1. avatar LifeSavor says:

          In for a Penny,

          “Nam as our nation’s Nazi moment of saying yes to a corrupt government…”

          Truth in your words, but not sure the ideals you describe are achievable. Still, that does not mean we stop insisting on government by and for the people.

          Eisenhower saw it coming even before our Vietnam involvement.

          https://www.google.com/search?q=military+industrial+complex+speech&oq=military+indus&aqs=chrome.2.0j69i57j0l2.13827j0j7&client=ms-android-verizon&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#

        2. avatar neiowa says:

          Only a total moron would champion replacing the two party system with some parliamentary abortion. Or are you just pimping for anarchy?

        3. avatar Hydguy says:

          You need to lay off the pounds of crack you are smoking.
          China wasn’t even up to the technology of the late 19th century when Vietnam started.
          Their rise started after Vietnam, and the Nixon giving them ‘most favored nation’ status.

        4. avatar possum says:

          Vietnamese, make a way better shoe then the Chinese do.

        5. avatar Ad astra says:

          Never actually read a history book on the writing of the Constitution and the comprises the founders made have you? And remive both parties then what parlimentry system like say 1933 Germany?
          Honstly i think at least half of all these call for the shooting to start types are just leftist shills.

        6. avatar jakee308 says:

          At what point was that choice even remotely possible? It’s easy to claim that a certain circumstance was available and operative in exactly the manner those who weep because opportunity was lost but without a detailed and signed (not anonymously) brief on how and when that could’ve been accomplished legally and constitutionally, I’ll just chuckle and say to you: “whatever dude. Believe what you have to but your chance is coming and you’ll find those opportunities are scarce and hard to see when others with an agenda say they were available”. You’ll get to explain to some wet behind the ears book reader who doesn’t even have any direct knowledge of events except what they’ve been told by others who may or may not have been there either.

      3. avatar LarryinTX says:

        I will not comply, I will not even pay attention.

    2. avatar John Marren says:

      Never say never.

    3. avatar Mark N. says:

      I disagree. It isn’t grandstanding when a bill such as this is their actual goal. If they cold get it enacted, they would.

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        a lot depends on who wins the next election…and the dems are counting on gun control being a winning issue…we’ll see….

  5. avatar GS650G says:

    Banning by fiat is pretty hard. Confiscating and incarcerating over it is another matter.

  6. avatar C.S. says:

    I propose instead an “Asshault Weapon” Ban. By “Asshault Weapon”, meaning USA Today, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, Politico, or basically anything that shows up as “News” on YouTube… we’ll let the Trump government bureaucrats decide. Don’t worry, the 1st Amendment isn’t unlimited.

  7. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    What I want to know is when do the trials for Treason begin, then carrying out the sentancing,sarcasim off.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      They aren’t and won’t.

      Aside from echo chambers, gun laws are not the important thing to people. Right now people are worried about the virus and their jobs.

      There’s not enough motivation for gun owners to increase their voter turnout past around 50% and you think you’re gonna see treason trials?

  8. avatar Debbie W. says:

    The Roots of Gun Control are in Racism and Genocide. That makes the people who support such rot nazis and racists and politically inept history illiterates. What Filth.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Debbie,

      History is replete with examples of the Ruling Class disarming their own race as well as other races. Therefore, I would argue that the roots of “weapon control” are the desire of the Ruling Class to consolidate their power and facilitate the exploitation, abuse, and consumption of the working class, which may or may not coincide with any given race or races at any given time.

      1. avatar Debbie W. says:

        The Roots of Gun Control as applied to US History. I.E. Slavery, segregation, Jim Crow, lynching, the KKK, Eugenics, etc. Not Rome, England, BC, AD, etc.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Debbie, my understanding (I was not around at the time) is that you are correct. At the end of the civil war there were near zero gun control laws, but they began being passed pretty rapidly and without much opposition. The reason was that everyone understood they were only going to be applied to blacks. Thus the law was acceptable to the courts, since it was non-discriminatory, and acceptable to the majority white community since LE would not enforce it against them. In Texas, we went around 100 years, I think, with laws against any manner of carry, concealed or open, which is clearly unconstitutional but nobody cared enough to oppose since the law was not enforced against whites. In the early ’80s I read an article by a reporter in Austin (seem to recall it was the American Statesman) that he had spent the day with a group of Texas legislators in the Capitol working on an article about something or other. During a smoke break, several of the legislators got into a show and tell about what guns they were carrying that day, proceeding to swap back and forth loaded guns for examination. Texas legislators. In the Capitol. The very people with the ability to address the law declaring THEIR OWN ACTIONS to be a felony, blatantly violating the law with impunity, not because they were legislators, but because they were white. Certainly, in Texas at least, the roots of gun control are in racism. If those laws were intended for whites, they would have never been passed.

        2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Debbie,

          As applied to U.S. History, I would agree that disarmament laws in the middle to late 1800s were racially motivated. Into the 1900s I believe disarmament laws are aimed at the working class, regardless of race.

        3. avatar Mark N. says:

          The weapons control laws (which included a variety of weapons in addition to firearms) enacted in California after it became a state were clearly directed at the Mexicans and the Chinese.

        4. avatar Southern Cross says:

          Uncommon_sense, the big rash of gun control laws started occurring globally in the 1920s. Up until then even the European gun laws were quite lax. The cause was the Reds taking control in Russia, the almost state of civil war in Germany, and civil war in Ireland. And add the socialist agitation, strikes, and other events a clampdown on the potential means of revolt was inevitable.

        5. avatar Tom Stark says:

          Modern firearms laws got it’s foundation in the Firearms Act of 1934 which was intended to curtail the criminal cartels from possessing automatic weapons, “silencers” etc. Recall that this was during the depression and followed prohibition and the likes of the legends of crime (Capone, Kelly, etc.). Then the mail-order purchase of the Kennedy rifle launched the Gun Control Act of 1964. Nearly always, the efforts were knee-jerk reactions to significant acts of violence. Instead of focusing on the perpetrator, the tool took the rap. It remains the same 90 years later. Every such historical event provides those who crave maximum power another opportunity to prey on the gullible to take away the tools whereby power can be most effectively resisted. It is the sole purpose of the 2A and very likely why the efforts will continue unabated until we add a couple more originalists to the SCOTUS to lock such efforts away for another half-century. May it ever be so.

      2. avatar Nero "...diction, not grammar..." Wolfe says:

        “Replete” is a good word. Thank you for using it appropriately. Lightning vs. a lightning bug! A gun magazine writer of decades past slathered that word all over his articles whenever describing the features of a firearm he was reviewing. Treacle.

  9. avatar IAmNotTheHulk says:

    I propose we bring back punishment for treason and attacks on our Constitution.
    Clear examples “might” actually be a deterrent to this whole bag o’crap attack on our rights.

    1. avatar warfab says:

      Things will continue getting worse until there are real punishments for breaking one’s oath of office. At this point they’re not even pretending to want to uphold the constitution. They’re quite open about their disdain for it.

      Especially bad when a SCOTUS justice openly expresses her disdain for the legal document she is supposed to be upholding.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        She also made it very clear that she meant exactly what she said, there was no slip of the tongue, there was no mistake. And somehow, there was no mention (that I ever heard) of impeachment, which should have been nearly instant.

      2. avatar Thomas Gore says:

        Well put.

  10. avatar former water walker says:

    Do you want a shooting war? Pass this abomination…guess who has most of the gunz?!?

  11. avatar Truckman says:

    this does not have a snowball’s chance in hell of passing as long as Republicans are in charge

    1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

      When people are scared and or hungry, what they will vote for changes quite a bit. Who knows what this pandemic will bring us in November.

    2. avatar Hydguy says:

      You give ‘Republicans’ too much credit.
      We have seen ole ty of times where they have supported unconstitutional laws.

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        Republicans have always been gun control light…using it as an issue only when it was to their advantage…the idea of placing semi-autos under the NFA was actually bandied about during a republican administration back in the eighties when there were fewer of them and it was possible…they settled for the Hughes amendment instead….which did set the template for future actions…

    3. avatar GS650G says:

      No argument about the present makeup of government. Imagine the Senate in dem hands for starters. Then a dem president. this ws the truth just 12 years ago and they had 60 senate votes then.

      The SCOTUS gets 6 new , 40 something year old members permanently diluting the makeup of the court. RBG retires to make it even more lopsided. FDR threatened the court this way but they mean to do it.

      Just wait and see what they have planned for the day they control it all again.

      1. avatar Tom Stark says:

        I have often wondered why we have never seen a constitutional amendment proposed to lock down the number of SCOTUS justices to nine so that this approach could never rear its ugly head again. It would be difficult for the leftists to reach a majority on the court for at least 40 years given the current justices on the court. However, your scenario of a completely leftist govt would certainly give rise to another mini-dark ages climate for the US. Heaven forbid.

  12. avatar Prndll says:

    I thought ‘civilian owned assault weapons’ had already been banned…decades ago.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      The sale of new assault rifles (i.e. fully automatic firearms) were banned in 1984, but existing automatic weapons are legal to own and transfer. “Assault weapon” is a specially defined legislative term of art applicable solely to semiautomatic rifles, and other firearms within the scope of the definitions. As such, the definition varies from state to state.

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        actually ’86…things were going just fine in ’84….then the hammer dropped…and that was after they raised the fee for a class III license from $200 annually to $500…..

  13. avatar Bortan says:

    “manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action,”
    What about the Rossi Circuit Judge?
    It doesn’t use any of these.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      Depends where you live. In California it is deemed a short barrelled shotgun and therefore illegal.

  14. avatar Steve B says:

    Good luck in this gun buying frenzy!

  15. avatar Wiregrass says:

    Every year we have to beat this shit back, it’s like a damn weed. Manageable but you can’t ignore it or it will take over eventually.

  16. avatar Debbie W. says:

    Uncle Tom’s HR 5717. With his lily white democRat Slave Master’s encouragement rep. hank johnson AKA “cappy” steps to the podium and introduces a gun ban bill that would make Adolph Hitler and Jim Crow proud. And double proud seeing a Black Man dumbed down to the level of carrying their tyrannical baggage.
    There was a time when cappy’s very own democRat Party concocted sleazy gun control laws directed specifically at the color of his skin. These gun control laws made it easy for the KKK to raid homes of defenseless blacks.
    Today the democRat Party wants to pass gun control laws to specifically control those who do not fall in line for their sicko anti American ideology. They desire having a jack booted thug government do their dirty work because they are too gutless to attempt doing it themselves.

    1. avatar C.S. says:

      The truth was that some black people in the South also owned black slaves. For thousands of years of human history and across the globe, slavery was never racial… until the Democrats made it that way.

      1. avatar Debbie W. says:

        Slavery was found where slave owners were found. Contrary to those who want to rewrite history for political gain slavery was never limited to the South and was also at home in the North, East and West.
        Gun Control as applied to US History came about as a way to deny freed Black Slaves their right to own firearms. As time progressed so did laws concocted specifically to deny Black Americans their 2A Right. What the democrat party is to attempting to do to gun rights today is what their democrat party ancestors did to Black Americans not so long ago. Only difference today is instead of targeting skin color they are targeting all who stand for God Given Rights.
        Bottom line…Whenever the democrat party goes Gun Control return fire with a Gun Control History Lesson. Anything else is shooting blanks.

        1. avatar frank speak says:

          Reagan’s laws were a direct response to groups like the Black Panthers….as well as the drug wars…

        2. avatar Dave G says:

          Debbie:
          Explain to me why blacks consistently vote Democrat. I don’t get it.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        In Sudan in the 1980s and ’90s, the people who were less black enslaved their brothers who were darker black. And killed them if they resisted. Note the *1980s*, not the 1880s, or the 1780s.

        1. avatar Dave G says:

          Yes, and many of the black slaves that were shipped to America were sold into slavery by other blacks. That doesn’t change anything. Slavery is still evil, anyway you cut it.

  17. avatar Daphyd says:

    But how do they know who has qualifying weapons?

    1. avatar A says:

      It’s not for current gun owners. It for the next generation of gun owners. They are playing the long game.

    2. avatar Ed Schrade says:

      The form that you filled out when you made a gun purchase actually has it registered. Form # 4473 never goes away. That’s what they use to trace a firearm used in a crime. If purchased from an individual, then the trail goes cold. That’s the reason they want comprehensive background checks which is comprehensive gun registration.

      1. avatar Debbie W. says:

        If the firearm has a serial number a private sale does not necessarily make the trail go cold. Rest assured a detective shows up at your door and the serial number says you owned the firearm 20 years ago you’ll spill the beans on who you sold it to and it’s on and on until a connection to a suspect is made.
        Even if a serial number is ground off it can be possibly recovered. Forensics have come a long way.
        What those who fall for extended background check hoopla fail to comprehend is the fact that if you privately sell a firearm to an individual who commits a crime with said firearm you can be arrested and held responsible.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Bullshit. I have no idea who I sold my Winchester Model 77 semiauto .22 to, back in 1966. Nor would I recall who I sold a pistol to yesterday, except it was a guy who had the amount of money I was asking for. I am assuming that is the gun you are talking about, but I am not sure since I have no idea what the serial numbers are on the guns I own, including the SN on the Colt Python which I purchased in 1973 and therefore have owned for 47 years. Why would I know them? And if you wish to prosecute me for any such thing, you are going to have to present actual evidence that that particular gun is one which I owned, since I am certain that it was not. Like, evidence, not secret squirrel bullshit from your own department. Good luck on that. Many dealers who sold me guns are long dead.

        2. avatar Dave G says:

          Larry:
          If was a handgun and you were in Michigan, not Texas, that would not fly. If you sell a handgun here without the registration paperwork, YOU ARE LIABLE. That’ why I keep all my paperwork from firearms transactions.

  18. avatar Dude says:

    How does this not also ban auto-loading pistols?

    Their definition:
    “The bill defines a semiautomatic assault weapon as ANY FIREARM with the capability to “accept a detachable magazine” and either a pistol grip, forward grip, grenade launcher, barrel shroud, threaded barrel or a folding, telescoping or detachable stock.”

    1. avatar Dude says:

      Wouldn’t this definition include a Glock, but exclude a Mini-14 without a threaded barrel? Serious question.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      That’s a feature, not a bug.

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        They make the definitions as broad as possible to restrict the most guns. Or as leverage in negotiations to get the bill to pass.

  19. avatar Dude says:

    Second question regarding their exception:

    “The ban has a few exceptions. Law-enforcement officers can possess these firearms as can those who are providing security at nuclear energy facilities.”

    Will those law enforcement officers and security professionals be able to use these banned firearms while off duty? At that point, how are they any different from anyone else that is trained in using firearms? Just another carve out from the party of equality?

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      The Heller decision was supposed to put a stop to this. Clearly it’s being ignored.

  20. avatar IAmNotTheHulk says:

    It’s 2020, they track EVERYTHING electronically and warehouse the data, not difficult with todays machine learning to see who is buying what and making the “list”.
    Maybe they are clearing out the prisons for this?
    Back when the abortion called the Patriot Act was introduced I had a discussion with my wife’s family about how it erodes our rights. Her moron brother said, “if you aren’t doing anything wrong you have nothing to worry about.” I replied “until they pass more laws making what you do now a crime and backtrack the data to incarcerate you.”
    Too bad we do not educate our youts in the ways of the Constitution, Bill of Rights or Federalist Papers anymore. We are officially on the edge of being a 3rd world shithole. If they (meaning the Dems, Socialists, fascists, choose a label) kill 2A…well ….draw your own conclusions and decide where you and yours stand.

    1. avatar Dude says:

      “We are officially on the edge of being a 3rd world shithole.”

      Just wait until we have major inflation problems and we can’t make our debt payments. Ask Greece how that went.

      1. avatar Darkman says:

        We are long past making “Debt” payments. I’m not even sure it is a real thing among nations. The whole world monetary system is nothing more than a paper chase. Follow the link to what I mean.
        Modern Monetary Theory explained simply – Business Insider
        https://www.businessinsider.com/modern-monetary-theory-mmt-explained-aoc-2019-3
        Keep in mind it’s not just Liberal Democrats who believe in this Ideology.
        News Flash…
        Bernie Sanders just dropped out of the 2020 Race for President.

        1. avatar Dude says:

          Debt payments was poorly worded. I guess you could call it interest payments. It has been consuming more and more of the federal budget, although not that much. When we crawl out of this current economic downturn, interest rates will rise again, and a good chunk of the federal budget will be dedicated to making these payments. We just surpassed a U.S. debt to GDP ratio of 100%. This was BEFORE the current economic crisis. The World Bank says the tipping point is 77%. This wasn’t news because everyone in D.C. LOVES spending money. They derive their power from their budget.

          I’ll check your link, but my understanding of Modern Monetary Theory, is that it supposedly works as long as you can control inflation. In other words, it works until it doesn’t. Ask Iran and Venezuela why they can’t control inflation.

      2. avatar GS650G says:

        There is a saying that when you owe the bank 1000 dollars you have a problem. When you owe the bank a million dollars the bank has a problem.

        We owe the world trillions. The world has a problem.

        1. avatar Darkman says:

          @Dude: Interest payments and Debt payments are interchangeable. They are both money owed. Your reference to the “World Bank” is no better than the IMF. They are both part of the system of Modern Monetary Theory. World leaders and the Mega rich gave known for decades the whole idea of Real money. Is just a term to keep the populace satisfied. That they actually have $$$. They all know “Money” is nothing more than a tool to play the game. Just like Monopoly. It’s just a number they use to keep score. Since they own everything that really matters. They simple trade it back and forth as they move around the board.

        2. avatar Dude says:

          In other words, more debt benefits them.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      IAm, while that is true, such collection of data is also illegal under federal law, meaning AT LEAST that it cannot be used as evidence against you in a trial. The same law which mandated the background checks made it mandatory that all related data be erased from government records within some number of *hours*, not years.

      1. avatar Mark N. says:

        Not true. It is illegal for the federal government to maintain a database of guns and gun owners. However, it is NOT illegal for states to maintain such a database (and more than a few do), which information may be subpoenaed by the feds and introduced into evidence at trial, along with the FFL records of the sale or subsequent sales (to the extent they exist). Further, if you used a credit or debit card or a check to purchase a firearm, a private entity maintains that record, and it too is admissible.

  21. avatar Chuck says:

    Legislators, you want to come to us to outlaw and confiscate? How about we come to you? And not in a good way?

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Yeah, I bet most of ’em have some stuff we could outlaw and confiscate.

  22. avatar Mark N. says:

    I have to have doubts that the Supreme Court, as currently constituted, would find that a national licensing law passes Constitutional muster, as it would constitute the mandatory licensing of a guaranteed right that “shall not be infringed.”

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Now, if we could just get RBG (or a replacement) to realize that …

      1. avatar Mark N. says:

        If Trump is able to appoint her successor, it will undoubtedly be a conservative. But it isn’t likely that a successor, should she die suddenly in the next five months, will be ratified by the Senate before the next election.

  23. avatar lefty says:

    Morelle of NY has always been the typical demoncrap hoplophobe.voters in Rochestervoted him in to replace deceased Louise the Sleaze Slaughter

  24. avatar Dale Cobb says:

    District of Columbia v Heller (2008) the court ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right” to keep and carry arms in case of confrontation”‘, not contingent on service in a malitia.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      That has not stopped a number of states from banning AR-15s and AK-47s.

  25. avatar AC says:

    The article states; “The bill has not yet passed the Democrat-controlled House. In order to become law, the Republican-controlled Senate would have to pass it and the president would have to sign it.”

    Sorry, but in truth any proposed legislation must also pass the test of not being in conflict with the Constitution, as amended by the Bill of Rights. The key thing to remember is that the Constitution was permanently altered and changed by the Bill of Rights. Whatever authority can be claimed under the original document (such as the Supremacy Clause and Commerce Clause) are no longer the ruling provisions as the amendments over ride and “supersede” everything that came before it. The command directive of the Second Amendment of “Shall Not be Infringed” can only be lawfully challenged and changed via the required constitutional amendment process… and this to date has never been done and so the Second Amendment stands as originally written and remains the supreme law of the land in exactly the same way that Prohibition was made the supreme law of the land by the 18th Amendment until the ban on alcohol was reversed by the passage of the 21st Amendment. The truth is that absent a constitutional amendment that directly alters and changes the provisions and the command directive of the Second Amendment, the government lacks the authority to in any way regulate the firearms industry.

    However, nobody seems to want to argue this point and so we see unconstitutional changes to our constitution by redefining and reinterpreting the Right to bear arms via acts of the Congress in direct violation of the Constitution and without the existence of any authority for doing so. The Rule of Law is blatantly being violated.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      You are simply wrong to suggest that your point has never been argued in a court of law. Rather, it has been argued repeatedly before and after Heller, but with very limited success. The issue arises almost entirely in liberal jurisdictions such as California, NY, NJ, and Maryland, where those appellate courts apply a version of “intermediate scrutiny” that gives short shrift to the right and the power to the (state) governments to regulate such firearms without, according to those courts, infringing on the right to keep and bear arms. You can bear all the arms you want, just not those arms. For an eyeful, read the Court of Appeals decision in NYRPA v. NYC, where the court validated a NYC ordinance prohibiting owners of firearms from taking their guns anywhere except to gunsmiths and ranges in city limits. It is truly shocking. (The Supreme Court decision in this case should be published by sometime in June.)

  26. avatar Paladin says:

    These pos due gooders can’t figure that guns save more lives than all the thousands of laws against them! How about tougher laws on the criminals??? Oh that would cause them to lose votes! Look at any socialist or communist country, but I repeat myself, once they lose gun rights all the others go with it! Let’s try restrictions on their 1st amendment rights! Like limits on use, background checks, fingerprints and a permit needed to use! And the peace d resistance, 1st amendment free zones! Hey Joe say it ain’t so!

  27. avatar Richard D Cutie says:

    That bill does alot more then just ban so called assault weapons!!
    It would basically make it almost impossible to buy a gun in the future!! These clowns are trying to destroy this country and everything it stands for. Hank Johnson didn’t write this bill himself!! He’s too damn slow for that, it would’ve taken him 4 years to write that bill himself. God bless you guys and your families!!!

    STAND YOUR GROUND UNTIL THE LAST ROUND!!!!

  28. Just what the “Dr. Ordered” for the so-called Coronavirus Viral Pandemic…This Bill will probably cure COVID-19, Heart ❤ Disease, and SARs…And that pesky Bill of Rights bunion…..If no one’s going to take a stand…”Then, ALL Hail Hydra !!! All hail the New World 🌎 Order !!! “

  29. ….Hope nobody here minds illegal aliens slaughtering their families as the NWO moves them into THEIR originally owned property…Just like what’s happening in South Africa to Dutch Boar farmers…..

  30. avatar Timothy Rue says:

    Perhaps it is best to simply honor the Founders of the “United” States by getting real, getting responsible and doing the job the Founders of the “United” States gave the people to do when they established a government of, for, and by the people. Our government is not an absentee business! Elections are only the who to hire part and we do pay their salaries. They clearly need our direction as its obvious that without it they make stupid stuff up to do in trying to justify their positions. With our direction all this crazy crap won’t happen and our representatives job will be easier as they won’t need to resort to telling their constituents what they want and trying to make it sound like it is what the people want. They will instead know how to represent their constituents.

    How did what the United States Founders established get so far off course?
    Answer: When income tax was established (maybe not properly ratified) they failed to tie the peoples voice to the taxes. And as population has massive grown, the peoples voice is hardly heard, if at all.

    How do we correct this incorrect business practice? Answer: a work order for our business of government, send to your representatives and higher up the heirachy see 3seas dot org

  31. avatar Aaron Linsdau says:

    The bill is now available to read on Amazon: https://amzn.to/2VRxIfg

  32. avatar Jerry Owens says:

    So, please tell me again how you are going to disarm criminals with illegal unregistered guns again?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email