The House Passed a New Handgun Bill.

The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • RaleighReloader

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    32   0   0
    Jan 30, 2015
    1,177
    48
    Baton Rouge, LA
    The bill actually isn't that long. Here's the text of it:

    https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/8/text

    In addition to the usual exemptions for law enforcement and military, the following exemptions to the background check are stipulated:

    (B) a transfer that is a loan or bona fide gift between spouses, between domestic partners, between parents and their children, between siblings, between aunts or uncles and their nieces or nephews, or between grandparents and their grandchildren;

    (C) a transfer to an executor, administrator, trustee, or personal representative of an estate or a trust that occurs by operation of law upon the death of another person;

    (D) a temporary transfer that is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm, if the possession by the transferee lasts only as long as immediately necessary to prevent the imminent death or great bodily harm;

    (E) a transfer that is approved by the Attorney General under section 5812 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; or

    (F) a temporary transfer if the transferor has no reason to believe that the transferee will use or intends to use the firearm in a crime or is prohibited from possessing firearms under State or Federal law, and the transfer takes place and the transferee’s possession of the firearm is exclusively—

    ----- (i) at a shooting range or in a shooting gallery or other area designated for the purpose of target shooting;

    ----- (ii) while reasonably necessary for the purposes of hunting, trapping, or fishing, if the transferor—

    ---------- (I) has no reason to believe that the transferee intends to use the firearm in a place where it is illegal; and

    ---------- (II) has reason to believe that the transferee will comply with all licensing and permit requirements for such hunting, trapping, or fishing; or

    ----- (iii) while in the presence of the transferor.

    The dangers of this legislation:

    1. The "family exemption" has some pretty specific criteria for what constitutes family. Does this also apply to in-laws? What about the legal custodian of a child?

    2. The transfer to an executor is interesting, since it implies that the ownership is being transferred -- when in fact, an executor doesn't actually "own" anything in an estate unless specifically bequeathed. I'm not a lawyer, but I'd be curious to hear from an attorney what implications this would have, especially given that state laws vary regarding how estates are handled.

    3. The "necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm" provision sounds nice for self-defense, but is this going to be a "guilty until proven innocent" type of provision that will be practically impossible to apply in real life? Its vagaries make it sound like a nightmare for courts to interpret, which I suspect is deliberate.

    4. The "at a shooting range" provision is the back door to get guns banned outside of shooting ranges. While is all sounds lovely and reasonable, this is all currently the law of the land and doesn't need to be spelled out here, and certainly not with the vague provisions for things like "reasonably necessary" and "reason to believe." Make no mistake: if a firearm is loaned and misused, this legalese will allow for a witchhunt.

    And here's the final gem:

    Nothing in this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to authorize the establishment, directly or indirectly, of a national firearms registry

    Oh, thanks. So when this little nugget gets repealed, we then have carte blanche to setup a gun registry?

    The only real question will be how many turncoat RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) support this crap.

    Mike
     
    Last edited:

    RaleighReloader

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    32   0   0
    Jan 30, 2015
    1,177
    48
    Baton Rouge, LA
    And ... the turncoat Republicans that voted for this are:

    Vernon Buchanan (FL)
    Mario Diaz-Balart (FL)
    Brian Fitzpatrick (PA)
    Will Hurd (TX)
    Peter King (NY)
    Brian Mast (FL)
    Chris Smith (NJ)
    Fred Upton (MI)
     

    Emperor

    Seriously Misunderstood!
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Mar 7, 2011
    8,376
    113
    Nether region
    232 out of 235 democrats voted for this. This gaggle of America hating idiots are in lock-step!

    What a scary prospect knowing that they apparently NEVER have an independent thought when it comes to representing their districts.
     

    hunter5567

    Monolithic Mentor
    Rating - 100%
    133   0   0
    Oct 9, 2006
    2,668
    63
    Denham Springs, LA. near B.R.
    Well, everybody already knew this would pass in the House. The Senate would have to come up with a matching bill and have it pass and both bills to match up before it could even get to the President's desk for signature. I don't see the Senate even coming up with it's own version of this bill.

    Both sides are using this to solicit donations. I wasn't going to donate a farthing to try and stop it in the House. If for some stupid reason it does get a matching bill written up in the Senate with some even stupider reason that it could possibly pass, yea I'll get involved.
     

    Bangswitch

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 10, 2019
    2,221
    38
    a location near you
    Come on trump!!!! *Get em*

    You mean the guy who got elected as a republican who then signed a kings decree to single handedly take away more gun rights than Obama (bump stock ban)? Sorry, if I had been here in 2016 I would tell y’all I told you so.

    Guys we are giving away the farm, because a rebulican is in power. Same thing happened after 9/11. It took years for us to realize the stupid crap we allowed an all republican $**tfest do the following days and weeks after the towers fell. How have we remained free(ish) for so long being as stupid as we are collectively.
     

    machinedrummer

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Apr 5, 2010
    3,685
    113
    Kingwood, Tx
    I think the prez would sign any bill that the senate sends to his desk regarding gun control. He tipped his hand with the bump stock ban. I have absolutely no trust in him anymore when it comes to the second amendment. His idea of compromise is giving something up for nothing in return.
     

    Bangswitch

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 10, 2019
    2,221
    38
    a location near you
    The prez banned bump stocks, so we all need to vote for Beto or Kamala next time.

    Straw man argument. Although sadly it would keep the masses focused on *fighting tyranny*. We get tricked by the so called security of a *republican* in office and assume everything they do is good for the country. This why the media shouldn’t have sides, and why the *conservative* media is just as dangerous as the massive onslaught of flat out liers on on the network channels.
     

    RaleighReloader

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    32   0   0
    Jan 30, 2015
    1,177
    48
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Straw man argument. Although sadly it would keep the masses focused on *fighting tyranny*. We get tricked by the so called security of a *republican* in office and assume everything they do is good for the country. This why the media shouldn’t have sides, and why the *conservative* media is just as dangerous as the massive onslaught of flat out liers on on the network channels.

    This is exactly it. As long as we're programmed to the two party system and not open to considering independent candidates, we're going to be stuck with piles of dung from both sides.

    Notwithstanding the fact that Trump has the IQ of a peach pit and notwithstanding the fact that he's been the worst president in modern history, I find it laughable that anyone thought that a rich New Yorker was actually going to stand up for gun rights.

    Mike
     

    Bangswitch

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 10, 2019
    2,221
    38
    a location near you
    This is exactly it. As long as we're programmed to the two party system and not open to considering independent candidates, we're going to be stuck with piles of dung from both sides.

    Notwithstanding the fact that Trump has the IQ of a peach pit and notwithstanding the fact that he's been the worst president in modern history, I find it laughable that anyone thought that a rich New Yorker was actually going to stand up for gun rights.

    Mike

    Until he violently prison-raped the 2A and was cautiously optimistic.
     

    hunter5567

    Monolithic Mentor
    Rating - 100%
    133   0   0
    Oct 9, 2006
    2,668
    63
    Denham Springs, LA. near B.R.
    This is exactly it. As long as we're programmed to the two party system and not open to considering independent candidates, we're going to be stuck with piles of dung from both sides.

    Notwithstanding the fact that Trump has the IQ of a peach pit and notwithstanding the fact that he's been the worst president in modern history, I find it laughable that anyone thought that a rich New Yorker was actually going to stand up for gun rights.

    Mike

    I guess Obozo the Moozlum and his He/She wife and the Clinton Crime family were the best Presidental material ?
    Whatever you say, comrade.
     
    Last edited:

    RaleighReloader

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    32   0   0
    Jan 30, 2015
    1,177
    48
    Baton Rouge, LA
    I guess Obozo the Moozlum and his He/She wife and the Clinton Crime family were the best Presidental material ?
    Whatever you say, comrade.

    Right, because our only other choice besides Trump was Obama or Hillary. Try harder.

    (and again: we have lost more gun rights under Trump than we did in 8 years with Obama.)

    Mike
     

    Gator 45/70

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    31   0   0
    I think the prez would sign any bill that the senate sends to his desk regarding gun control. He tipped his hand with the bump stock ban. I have absolutely no trust in him anymore when it comes to the second amendment. His idea of compromise is giving something up for nothing in return.

    Didn't that go in ''effect''today?

    Wonder what the tally is so far?
     

    hunter5567

    Monolithic Mentor
    Rating - 100%
    133   0   0
    Oct 9, 2006
    2,668
    63
    Denham Springs, LA. near B.R.
    So what's the list of gun rights we have lost under Trump besides the Bump Stocks?

    I was in BJ Pawn the other day and overheard the dude in the gun room telling a customer that if a rifle had a pistol grip like an AR15 that you had to be 21 to purchase. never saw where this law was passed. I won't be buying any guns from BJ but not just for that.
    Most of the used guns cost as much as buying new or higher than a cat's arse in a bucket of water.
     
    Last edited:

    Bangswitch

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 10, 2019
    2,221
    38
    a location near you
    So what's the list of gun rights we have lost under Trump besides the Bump Stocks?

    Thats exactly one more right than Obama could erode in 8 of the longest years of my life.

    And it’s not just banning an item that you don’t care about. I’ve never used or owned a bumpstock and couldn’t care less about them. The problem is he pronounced from on high a unilateral ban of something that could be legally purchased with no grandfathering of current legal owners. The fact that he skipped the legislature and used an EO should definitely not be missed. This is unprecedented and if Obama had tried that the internet outrage machine would have been cranked up to 11 all day every day until he was stopped or physically removed from office. Every time Obama formed the Gu sound in his mouth you couldn’t buy 22LR for 6 months.
     
    Last edited:

    hunter5567

    Monolithic Mentor
    Rating - 100%
    133   0   0
    Oct 9, 2006
    2,668
    63
    Denham Springs, LA. near B.R.
    I don't like it either whether I care about bump stocks or not. I don't look at the news everyday and didn't know if he did an EO about the 21 year old purchase of AR's or is it just some companies that are making their own rules like Blow J's about not selling them to under 21 year olds.
     

    RaleighReloader

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    32   0   0
    Jan 30, 2015
    1,177
    48
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Thats exactly one more right than Obama could erode in 8 of the longest years of my life.

    And it’s not just banning an item that you don’t care about. I’ve never used or owned a bumpstock and couldn’t care less about them. The problem is he pronounced from on high a unilateral ban of something that could be legally purchased with no grandfathering of current legal owners. The fact that he skipped the legislature and used an EO should definitely not be missed. This is unprecedented and if Obama had tried that the internet outrage machine would have been cranked up to 11 all day every day until he was stopped or physically removed from office. Every time Obama formed the Gu sound in his mouth you couldn’t buy 22LR for 6 months.

    Again, @Bangswitch is right on the money.

    As a body politic we've become far too enamored with the results and far too little concerned with how we get there. Conservatives don't cry shrill when Trump uses an executive order to build a border wall. Democrats don't cry shrill when legislation is proposed that would circumvent the 4th and 5th amendment to allow the state to seize private property (AKA "red flag" laws). Both sides are willing to trample the Constitution and the rule of law to get their way, and both sides are happy to invent crises (aka the "border wall" crisis) to get it.

    I had no love for Obama. I have no love for Trump. What I do love is the Constitution and the rule of law. Sometimes that means I support liberal causes. Sometimes that means I support conservative causes. Sometimes that means I support neither, because I think both parties went off the rails a long time ago.

    Mike
     

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    195,218
    Messages
    1,546,023
    Members
    29,168
    Latest member
    Lyle.lejeune2017
    Top Bottom