Any Thoughts?

[Horse'nround]

So I don't know how of you are aware of what the Demoholes are up to. On January 4th a House Resolution was introduced HR 127. It is an outright attack on your 2nd amendment rights in oh so many ways. It was introduced by the Rep from Texas, she is the one that cosponsored and is pushing the removal of the Castle doctrine in the state legislature. You can read it here:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/hr127/text

So I wrote Rep. for what good it will do ( he's a Demohole to the core) but I voiced my opinion...

Rep. Kilmer,
I am writing you today as I became aware of HR 127 a bill that I find to be one of the most egregious violations of my constitutional rights ever written. I say this this because the very text is aimed at me and other law abiding citizens for express purpose of identifying me / my family as gun owners, registering me and restricting what I can lawfully own whether or not I have committed a crime. I am 65 years old I have carried for self-defense since I was 18. I have been in the service of this country in the Navy and the DoD since I was 19. I find it very disconcerting that the moment the Democratic Party acquires a majority in the government law making process that they would attack my rights and wellbeing. How can I say this you ask?
1. I will be required to apply for a federal license (at what cost?) to possess a firearm and or ammunition. After applying I will be required to submit to another background check, this one under section 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act which has nothing to do with lawful possession or ownership, along with caveat of added state regulation.
2. I will be required to undergo a psychological evaluation conducted in accordance with paragraph (2), and the evaluation does not indicate that the individual is psychologically unsuited to possess a firearm. Under what guidelines or who’s agenda? Who will be paying for said psychological evaluation? As with the implied public gun registry will the results of the psychological evaluation be public record?
3. I will be required to successfully complete a training course, certified by the Attorney General, in the use, safety, and storage of firearms, that includes at least 24 hours of training; and that demonstrates that, on issuance of the license, the individual will have in effect an insurance policy issued under subsection (d).
I find this bill nothing more than an attempt to criminalize the law abiding citizen while giving the federal government the ability to pursue the privacy of its citizens and unfairly tax the exercising of one’s constitutional rights. As one with prior military service I already know that the PTSD card will be played even though I have served and supported DoD security and local law enforcement for the last 45 years.

Any thoughts...

[sdmc530]

She has been doing this for a while now. Crazy lady.

If you read thought this entire 19 page bill you know it will not pass. Min jail time of 7-15 years per violation? Never happen. Penalties of 5-75K per violation? Never happen. Was introduced 6 weeks ago, no action, no support, not even a whisper. Hell even the gun groups are not talking about this so that is a clue. This is not one to worry about. To big, too much for them to handle in one shot. She has a history of doing wacky bills like this just to get her name out and saying hey I am trying. Just a PR snow job.

[Horse'nround]

True is in Judiciary where it will hopefully die a quiet dark death. Just remember something like this can slip out of committee and on the the floor for discussion and vote at the drop of a hat while some other A$$hat demohole bill is in the lime light and whose to say they won't section off a clause or 2 and attach it to another bill. They did that here and now we have this dipshit definition of an assault weapon, "Any weapon that uses ANY portion of the gas or pressure from the cartridge to cycle the action of said weapon is an ASSAULT WEAPON"
Yes even your little Ruger 10-22 or your old tube fed Winchester, Remmington, Marlin or Savage. They don't care they're on the ASSULT WEAPONS list and if they change hands in this state, they go on the permanent Department of Licensing registry. I trust none of them what so ever.

[RKP]

Originally Posted by Horse'nround

...... I trust none of them what so ever.

Well said and I totally agree !!

[sdmc530]

Originally Posted by Horse'nround

Yes even your little Ruger 10-22 or your old tube fed Winchester, Remmington, Marlin or Savage. They don't care they're on the ASSULT WEAPONS list and if they change hands in this state, they go on the permanent Department of Licensing registry. I trust none of them what so ever.

this is why it is a dead issue. Way to broad, now if they were after one specific type again like the AR platform or such then yes, the worry would be legit but this time its just a moon shot.

[sdmc530]

But still, none of them can be trusted for sure.

[Rick McC.]

Originally Posted by sdmc530

But still, none of them can be trusted for sure.

You can trust a lib to spend their life trying to screw over decent folk at every opportunity; real or imagined.

There outta’ be a bounty on ‘em...