Dems Lose ‘Embarrassing’ Gun Control Amendment Vote After Multiple Defections

The gunphobes are at it again. Even though the background check is unconstitutional, and IF anyone can name ANY mass shooter that didn't under go the background check.

Please by all means name them.

The House voted Wednesday on H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019. The bill would expand background checks to include all gun sales, rather than just sales by licensed gun dealers as under current law.

It is beyond maddening these jacksnips oppose voter id laws, and push this fascism.

Civil liberty? What effing civil liberty. Prove your innocence to the Borg!

But the R's trolled the D's in some epic fashion.

Republicans in the minority countered with an amendment to require that federal officials notify Immigration and Customs Enforcement whenever a lawful or unlawful immigrant tried to illegally purchase a firearm. That measure, opposed by most Democrats, was voted down when the bill was still in the House Judiciary Committee.

But in a surprising development, the motion passed 220-209, with 26 Democrats joining the Republicans.

Sure hope this snip gets shot down in the senate.

I retort You decide.



March onward to that glorious police state D's love so effing much.

a reply to: neo96


Lunatics! They want citizens to be lose their Constitutional rights, but those law breakers here illegally should be protected from being arrested for breaking our laws.

Every time I hear one of these Progressive Congress critters mention the Constitution, I want to choke them. They are like the Marxists of the 60's and 70's who took over our institutions of higher learning. Do everything within their power to destroy our freedom and liberty by dismanteling our Constitution and use it when it is convenient to them to try and destroy it yet some more.

a reply to: seeker1963

They want citizens to be lose their Constitutional rights,

It's a proven fact they really don't care for them.

The writing is on the wall

There's some truly wicked snip headed our way.

a reply to: neo96

"The bill would expand background checks to include all gun sales, rather than just sales by licensed gun dealers as under current law."

So how exactly am I supposed to do a background check on the guy I'm selling my gun too?

And who is gunna pay for the check cuz the cops dont to anything free?

a reply to: Bluntone22

Good points.

Private citizens don't have access to the FBI system.

And I am sure there's gonna be a nice sized 'fee' attached to it.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: neo96

"The bill would expand background checks to include all gun sales, rather than just sales by licensed gun dealers as under current law."

So how exactly am I supposed to do a background check on the guy I'm selling my gun too?

And who is gunna pay for the check cuz the cops dont to anything free?

It could be a very easy fix.

Just like we have to register vehicles, and transfer the title immediately via the DMV, we could do the same with guns.

Rather than go to the DMV with plates, this could be called in and a piece of paper with a signature emailed in by both parties so we don't have to go to the worst institution in America.

I have no problem with that type of system, it would even protect sellers. Why sell a gun registered to you and not make the third party take the registration under their name?

What if they sell it again and a crime is committed with it and the gun left at the scene, why object ourselves to that?

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Sure does have an easy fix.

Obey the constitution.

In its 1997 decision in the case, the Supreme Court ruled that the provision of the Brady Act that compelled state and local law enforcement officials to perform the background checks was unconstitutional on 10th amendment grounds.

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Sure does have an easy fix.

Obey the constitution.

In its 1997 decision in the case, the Supreme Court ruled that the provision of the Brady Act that compelled state and local law enforcement officials to perform the background checks was unconstitutional on 10th amendment grounds.

en.wikipedia.org...

That only affected the local and state background check... The federal one is still done.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

The FEDs have no legal authority to discriminate who gets to practice a right ,and who doesn't.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

I have a lot of guns that I didn't purchase from a dealer. Therefore not registered.

Why would I want them registered?

And since I already went through a background check to get my concealed carry permit, why would I need to waste the time and money "you know it won't be free" to go through the process again to buy a gun?

This entire idea is about tracking guns not keeping them away from criminals.

a reply to: neo96

They should make committing a crime with a firearm illegal.

Everything else? Is just government encroachment on a Constitutional right.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: CriticalStinker

The FEDs have no legal authority to discriminate who gets to practice a right ,and who doesn't.

So prison is unconstitutional?

If we have the right to bear arms, why can't I buy an F-35 if I have the money?

Where's my tank with armor piercing rounds?

As the times change, so does the interpretation, as what we have today was not so back when it was written.

I'm not saying we need to make it harder to get arms, hell, I'm cool with easier.

But I'm also not against having them registered to the correct person to make it easier on law enforcement to solve crimes.

a reply to: DBCowboy

They already did that.

That's why we have so many laws saying we can't hurt each other.

Everything else? Is just government encroachment on a Constitutional right.

Yes it is.

Taking the guns and ignoring due process.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yeah That prison gun control IS unconstitutional.

Everyone has been declared guilty without ever seeing their day in a court of law.

When the current US military gets done with the F-35 you can.

Most warbirds can be owned by private citizens.

www.trade-a-plane.com...

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

www.law.cornell.edu...

I know posting this is a waste of time.

People can't even read the second or any of the others in the Bill of Rights.

a reply to: Bluntone22

And since I already went through a background check to get my concealed carry permit, why would I need to waste the time and money "you know it won't be free" to go through the process again to buy a gun?

This entire idea is about tracking guns not keeping them away from criminals.

I think it's complicated just like everything our government does. We track cars, likely more for property tax than anything, but also so we know who the cars are registered should something go wrong... That doesn't stop you from building your own car however, and you could go without registering it.

So with a the guns, if a manufacturer makes one, they have to put a serial number on it, and before it gets sold it typically gets registered.

The same work around exists for guns as cars, you can build your own with no serial number, just buy an 80% lower.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

That thought also occurred to me.
Find all the guns.
Register all the guns.
Excise tax all the guns..


No thanks.

a reply to: neo96

It is beyond maddening these jacksnips oppose voter id laws, and push this fascism.

Interesting point.

The debate for voter ID laws (one that I agree with) is we have to have ID's to conduct every day matters in our lives, why not show ID to vote?

I have to show ID to buy beer, I have to show ID if I get pulled over, or even register my car. Is it infridging on our right to vote to prove we have the right in the first place (show we're registered in that locality, so on and so fourth).

Again, I don't want to make it harder for anyone to get a gun or even make less people be able to get them... But don't you find it ironic everyone wants things to work in their favor when it fits their narrative, but then argue against a mirrored case when it doesn't?

I know, second amendment shouldn't be deluded, I agree.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Send armed thugs to take them.



It only ends one way.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: CriticalStinker

That thought also occurred to me.
Find all the guns.
Register all the guns.
Excise tax all the guns..


No thanks.

I personally think property tax as it stands is double jeopardy in almost all cases anyways, I agree.

But do you propose we just rid firearms of their serial numbers?

If we don't need to track them at all whats the point.