TexasCHLforum.com

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/20 ... nd-checks/

House Democrats plan to prioritize a bill that will require a background check for every gun sale, according to multiple sources close to the matter. The legislation represents an aggressive shift in strategy by Democrats and their gun reform allies, who in previous years had tended to pursue more modest background check bills that would have exempted large numbers of gun purchases

Since then, legislation that echoes the Manchin-Toomey provisions has languished in the GOP-controlled Congress. Reps. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) and Peter King (R-N.Y.) have reintroduced the measure twice in the last four years, but House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) refused to bring the bill up for a vote—even as it racked up 208 co-sponsors, including 14 Republicans.

But with Ryan leaving Congress and Democrats winning control of the House, Thompson now plans to introduce a bill that will go further than any of those earlier proposals: It will require a background check for every gun sale or transfer, regardless of who’s doing the selling or transferring. The move has been in the works since before the election, when Thompson met with outside gun reform allies like the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Everytown for Gun Safety, the Center for American Progress, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, and Giffords to talk about what they might push for if Democrats won the House

And some Republicans are on board with this.

I see the next false flag being a nerf guns.

Good thing that the Senate maybe on our side, for now.

Background check for any sale or TRANSFER.

How will they define "transfer." The Dems will want to define it as broadly as possible. If I'm target shooting with a friend and he asks to shoot a few rounds through my .45, will that require a background check?

I have a Savage .22magnum/410 shotgun over-and-under I was given at about 12 years of age. If I pass it down to my grandson when be turns 12, will that require a background check? Will it be permitted at all?

I’d say what my two probabilities are, but the antis read these pages, and I don’t want to give them additional ideas.

KLB wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 9:15 pm Background check for any sale or TRANSFER.

How will they define "transfer." The Dems will want to define it as broadly as possible. If I'm target shooting with a friend and he asks to shoot a few rounds through my .45, will that require a background check?

I have a Savage .22magnum/410 shotgun over-and-under I was given at about 12 years of age. If I pass it down to my grandson when be turns 12, will that require a background check? Will it be permitted at all?

That is precisely what it means. They would also like you to fill out a transfer and pay a transfer fee at a licences FFL anytime a firearm you own is handed to someone else for any reason. So....hunting buddy wants to borrow your rife. Yep, transfer paperwork and fee on both ends.

KLB wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 9:15 pm Background check for any sale or TRANSFER.

How will they define "transfer." The Dems will want to define it as broadly as possible. If I'm target shooting with a friend and he asks to shoot a few rounds through my .45, will that require a background check?

I have a Savage .22magnum/410 shotgun over-and-under I was given at about 12 years of age. If I pass it down to my grandson when be turns 12, will that require a background check? Will it be permitted at all?

There are three types of laws that should never be passed. The first type is a law that you cannot possibly enforce. For example, requiring a background check for every transfer of a firearm when you define transfer to include loaning a firearm to someone while at the range. The second type is a law that is so unpopular that it will not be obeyed. A great example of this was the national 55 mph speed limit. It really did not help much because most people slowed down somewhat but not to the limit. The problem with these two types of laws is that all they end up doing is breeding disrespect for the law in general. It is not hard for people's minds to go from saying that a law makes no sense and ignoring it to saying most laws make no sense. A lack of enforcement helps people think they can ignore laws because you won't enforce them anyway. Unfortunately, I think 99% of our legislators from all political parties have forgotten or stopped caring about the results of these two types of laws being passed.

The third type of law that should never be passed is the one that will actually spark the revolution that is brewing. Unfortunately, there is a large group (though a minority) that do not believe this category of law exists. They think we will all continue to obey all laws and submit to the government. A very small minority doesn't care because they "know" they will win the war. And an even smaller portion is trying to figure out exactly how to pass a law that will start this war because they honestly want to tear this country apart. While I am concerned about all three of these types, I truly do not understand the last group. I know they are there, I just have no understanding why they would feel this way.

srothstein wrote: ↑Mon Dec 10, 2018 1:23 am ...
submit to the government. A very small minority doesn't care because they "know" they will win the war. And an even smaller portion is trying to figure out exactly how to pass a law that will start this war because they honestly want to tear this country apart. While I am concerned about all three of these types, I truly do not understand the last group. I know they are there, I just have no understanding why they would feel this way.

An anarchist is like a sociopath. You can't understand them, just realize they exist and are active. Maybe some are possessed.

"Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them." - Frederick Douglass