She should have started out asking for just 60% of the guns to be registered. I hear it's a good lobby strategy.
Sheila Jackson Lee Sponsors Gun Grab
- Thread starter 3855WIN
- Start date
She should have started out asking for just 60% of the guns to be registered. I hear it's a good lobby strategy.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
Tanny cannibalism always gets the juices flowing....
406Born
Well-known member
You mean you can reload a magazine? Dang and I have been wasting all this money buying new magazines each time.
.beginnerhunter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2016
- Messages
- 1,320
What's crazy is how many non-NRA types bought guns last year!
Matt Yglesias wrote a substack a while back about why gun control is such a losing issue. People like guns! In terms of mortality, it's less than alcohol use, but few would call for prohibition or alcohol regulations as burdensome as what they do for guns (guns and alcohol are both subject to some regulation). The funny part is the comments where people say, straight faced, "Well yeah but the idea of banning alcohol is ridiculous." Matt thinks it's a class issue.
www.slowboring.com
Matt Yglesias wrote a substack a while back about why gun control is such a losing issue. People like guns! In terms of mortality, it's less than alcohol use, but few would call for prohibition or alcohol regulations as burdensome as what they do for guns (guns and alcohol are both subject to some regulation). The funny part is the comments where people say, straight faced, "Well yeah but the idea of banning alcohol is ridiculous." Matt thinks it's a class issue.
National Democrats' misguided re-embrace of gun control
It costs votes and doesn't produce any gun control
www.slowboring.com
What's crazy is how many non-NRA types bought guns last year!
Matt Yglesias wrote a substack a while back about why gun control is such a losing issue. People like guns! In terms of mortality, it's less than alcohol use, but few would call for prohibition or alcohol regulations as burdensome as what they do for guns (guns and alcohol are both subject to some regulation). The funny part is the comments where people say, straight faced, "Well yeah but the idea of banning alcohol is ridiculous." Matt thinks it's a class issue.
National Democrats' misguided re-embrace of gun control
It costs votes and doesn't produce any gun control
When we tried prohibition, a lot more people drank and a lot more people got shot. Seemed to work great!
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
Today is turning into call your officials day...Here is the member page for the Judiciary Committee. Feel free to send emails.
Polite, courteous and no calling MOC's mean names. Be a good representation of the gun owners of America when you comment on this very bad bill.
Members | U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee
judiciary.house.gov
Nick87
Well-known member
Probably gonna be a lot more of those days to come soon.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
Lotta people died so I can call up congressmen in California about bear hunting, in Mass about chasing deer on Sunday, and in CO about owning firearms. So I'm going to try and keep the griping to a dull roar.
Last edited by a moderator:
The sad part about this, and I know I don't need to say it here, is that the majority of the people doing crimes and killing people with guns would not obey this law anyways. It is just, as mentioned earlier, a power grab over us peons. The people that would obey this law aren't the ones that are causing issues. And I would imagine there would be a large number of people that are otherwise law abiding that would simply refuse to obey this law. I shake my head at the stupidity that comes from some law makers at times. And as a Texan, I apologize that SJL is from Texas, she would make a much better Californian.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
I don't necessarily think it's a "power grab" so much as the congresswoman sincerely thinks the best way to save lives is to eliminate gun ownership. I give her the benefit of the doubt that she's trying to help her community.
(This is the argument I would make to my anti-gun friends)
This bill in it's current form would basically eliminate gun ownership, obviously anything like this that ever made it out of committee would be watered down.
The problem with a watered down bill is it would be impossible to implement. Currently, there are about as many gun owners as passport holders in the US, ~140million. Passport requires you to do basically nothing, send in ID/photos/money and wait. Because it's such an administrative hassle they are good for 10 years.
Psch eval... your going to get 140 million people into a psychiatrist? We already have a massive shortage, further recent research suggest that people with mental illness are actually less likely to lash out than others.
Insurance... forcing people to buy insurance... I feel like we tried that...
Training... I mean I guess a new NRA could take that bull by the horns, maybe not a bad thing.
Valid for 1 year until 5 years 3 years after. Mass played around with this because it's such a hassle for the government. My Non-Resident License will be good for only 1 year, but all I have to do is send in a renewal and only have to complete the other steps every 5 years. Also they farm the whole process out the the local towns, essentially your local chief of police runs everything the state just does the background check... which again speaks to home much of a drain on resources it is.
As far as registering guns, looking again at Mass; basically anything you previous had was grandfathered in. If you leave the state establish residency elsewhere buy a bunch of guns and move back you don't have to register those. If you have a non-resident license you don't have to register them. If you move to mass you don't have to register guns before you became a resident. All this goes to show what a nightmare the registration component is.
So basically take the DMV and then add it to the passport office, that's the kinda infrastructure you would need to make a licensing - registration system work at current gun ownership scale.
Basically this bill is insane, even a watered down version of this is logistically insane. To make it work you'd need to shrink your problem massively with huge gun buyback program. Mass has low gun ownership 700,000 owners for 7 million people. If the goal was to hit that level your buying back ~110,000,000 guns back so about 170x as many guns as Australia did.
Also I would imagine the locales like CA and MA actually might not vote for it as then they essentially have to trash the systems they've built.
Personally I think federal gun laws are a nonstarter, it should be entirely a state issue. Mass has it's system, CA, Maryland... fine, WY, ID, MT, NV, VT, NH more power to you.
I think the US is often the best when we respect each others differences; personal and geographic.
Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
Instead of talking amongst our selves about how dumb they are....let's left them know how un American this is.
Here's where you find your congressman:
www.house.gov
Let's have an ice bucket style challenge to see just how many emails we can flood them with.
Keep it short, respectful, and blunt.
Example:
If you decide to support this bill in any manner, I will spend time, money, and effort to vote you out.
Thanks for listening
Mr. Average Joe
Registered Voter
Did you see what commoners did to game stop?
If every member of every outdoor forum sent that email, this bill fades into the abyss.
Here's where you find your congressman:
Find Your Representative | house.gov
Let's have an ice bucket style challenge to see just how many emails we can flood them with.
Keep it short, respectful, and blunt.
Example:
If you decide to support this bill in any manner, I will spend time, money, and effort to vote you out.
Thanks for listening
Mr. Average Joe
Registered Voter
Did you see what commoners did to game stop?
If every member of every outdoor forum sent that email, this bill fades into the abyss.
Doublecluck
Well-known member
That’s the strategy, they know there will be voices from “our” side who say if we just give in to “this” and “compromise” on “that” so we can seem reasonable to the people in the middle. Hell, I had that line of thinking in my early 20’s when I started paying attention to this stuff. But it’s hogwash, these people don’t go away, it’s not like their gonna stop at 30 rd mags, or bump stocks, or pistol grips, or gun registration. As soon as they pass those they will move right on to introducing the next one. Just keep chipping away piece by piece.
Doublecluck
Well-known member
Well at least I live in Montana where We have people who represent us that have common beliefs about 2A. Jed is a good guy, used to be neighbors with him. And he is a hell of a taxi.
blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com
Montana Bill Would Set Foundation to Stop Enforcement of Federal Gun Control | Tenth Amendment Center
The legislation would prohibit police officers, state employees, and employees of any political subdivision of the state from enforcing, assisting in the enforcement of, or otherwise cooperating in the enforcement of a "federal ban" on firearms, magazines, or ammunition.
blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com
beginnerhunter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2016
- Messages
- 1,320
I think everyone generally knows how each side feels about gun control. Hunters have to weigh other issues they feel passionately about (environment, economy, civil rights, abortion, religious freedom, etc.) and hope it all works out. So I don't blame hunters when they decide some of those other issues outweigh the gun issue. And I hope they don't dislike me if I vote for candidates with bad enviro records because of issues I care about (religious freedom, trad values).
The main thing is to keep pressuring the people in office regardless of their stated positions or if you voted for them.
Don’t fool yourself they dislike you. Pressure all you want there’s an anti gun agenda here and you aren’t going to do anything about it.
MarvB
Well-known member
@wllm1313 said it spot on when it comes to the complexity something like this would require ... a non-starter!
Had to laugh (and agree) at “ So basically take the DMV and then add it to the passport office, that's the kinda infrastructure you would need to make a licensing - registration system work at current gun ownership scale”
When life forced me to living in Cali for awhile the Director of the DMV had (mid 90s) just been fired for dumping $44 mil into “upgrading” their computer system only to make it worse! Then years later (around 2010+\-) they started another improvement process and after spending some $134 million they had “significant concerns with their lack of progress,” and the DMV decided to call it quits once again and do a rethink of the program’s direction.
Sorry, didn’t mean to turn this into a Cali DMV thread but just goes to show you how closely that dept. aligns with all it’s other political perspective
Had to laugh (and agree) at “ So basically take the DMV and then add it to the passport office, that's the kinda infrastructure you would need to make a licensing - registration system work at current gun ownership scale”
When life forced me to living in Cali for awhile the Director of the DMV had (mid 90s) just been fired for dumping $44 mil into “upgrading” their computer system only to make it worse! Then years later (around 2010+\-) they started another improvement process and after spending some $134 million they had “significant concerns with their lack of progress,” and the DMV decided to call it quits once again and do a rethink of the program’s direction.
Sorry, didn’t mean to turn this into a Cali DMV thread but just goes to show you how closely that dept. aligns with all it’s other political perspective
stevejfarms
Well-known member
Pretty sure this won’t pass, but the fact that it isn’t feasible for the feds to get everything needed done may be the goal.
Similar threads
