National New legislation to require federal license to purchase a firearm

[penny2017]

They already have this in some states NOW.

Old GUN laws and one example is in IL with a FOID card.

CA and NY have it and a few others do too.

WELCOME to the forum!

Cate

I'm just trying to figure out how to keep the nut cases in check.
I'm an Oregonian and the Cabelas parking lot is full of Californicators most w/ Doo rags on their head.

 

[penny2017]

Well then some of us would be able to make enough ammo to keep our family supplied for a couple more generations.

I'm a reloader also.
I was thinking more about the inner city nutters, etc. and mentally challenged teens.

 

[BAJ475]

I'm just trying to figure out how to keep the nut cases in check.
I'm an Oregonian and the Cabelas parking lot is full of Californicators most w/ Doo rags on their head.

What do you expect when the main road through town has its southern end in LA and travels through SF as it heads toward Olympia? Crystalline water helps keep them out of Norther Idaho but a few manage to make it.

 

[kmk1012]

This is the same act:

Propose an extreme bill that cannot pass

Have another convenient “mass event” take place.

Play the “I told you so argument”, use this against conservatives over the next two years before the 2024 election and say its for the “chulren”.

Propose less restrictive but still tyrannical bill or the more common tactic, have states make their own legislation and little by little pass state laws banning or restricting mags/firearms.

Their playbook is OLD. I wish someone would make a graph showing this trend. Its gone on this way since 2008.

Was Texas the convenient event that they needed? You posted this well before it happened.

 

[Flopsweat]

Was Texas the convenient event that they needed? You posted this well before it happened.

I'm sure that's what he meant. He sees the pattern. There are no doubt more events coming. And Biden will again immediately use the death of children to push his agenda.

 

[po18guy]

A Senate committee has drafted what they are calling the ‘‘Federal Firearm Licensing Act’’ which would require you to obtain a federal license before you can purchase a firearm. I doubt it will make it out of committee, but these are strange times.

Democrats Push to Require Would-Be Gun Buyers to Acquire DOJ License

A group of Democrat senators is pushing to require would-be gun buyers to first acquire a license to purchase from the Department of Justice.

www.breitbart.com

They actually call it a federal firearms license in the bill. I doubt any of the co-sponsors even know that the term is already taken.

Text of the bill:

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000180-dc23-d6b4-a7e5-fcebd8760000

Every shooting causes the (D) to dredge up yet another totalitarian piece of proposed legislation from their bottomless pit.

 

[SFischer22]

A Senate committee has drafted what they are calling the ‘‘Federal Firearm Licensing Act’’ which would require you to obtain a federal license before you can purchase a firearm. I doubt it will make it out of committee, but these are strange times.

Democrats Push to Require Would-Be Gun Buyers to Acquire DOJ License

A group of Democrat senators is pushing to require would-be gun buyers to first acquire a license to purchase from the Department of Justice.

www.breitbart.com

They actually call it a federal firearms license in the bill. I doubt any of the co-sponsors even know that the term is already taken.

Text of the bill:

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000180-dc23-d6b4-a7e5-fcebd8760000

Typical grandstanding bs from the dems.

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

Was Texas the convenient event that they needed? You posted this well before it happened.

Most likely no. Mainly because it doesn't quite check all the political and racial boxes.
Im not dismissing the gruesome severity and loss of life. Its sick anyone does this.. Its just really coincidental timing wise.
It always is. And kids dying is often what grabs peoples attention and heart strings to pass further ineffective legislation.

At best, the primary arguments Im seeing from antis at this moment are:
They will raise the age of legal purchase of all firearms to 21
and
Id also assume go after 80% kits of all kinds
(though it had nothing to do with this attack).

The 80% kits are the real focus on paper. Raising the age does nothing if 80% kits are still available online or locally. So its a future issue if they dont run with it now.
They are really focused on his rifles despite him having a pistol.

He passed a BGC, but he was under 21.. so I think age and 80% online purchases may be the focus. This is exactly what they needed to distract the masses.

 

[po18guy]

The left NEVER WASTES A CRISIS. That is how they appeal to emotion and increase their power.
Look at de facto president Obama: immediately issues a statement - almost like it was prepared before the shooting (no doubt it was). He strongly desires to be the Premier of the USSA.

 

[s1xty7]

If someone is old enough to fight, kill, and die for our country in the military, there should be nothing age restricted beyond that. If you're willing to give them that level of power and responsibility, they should be allowed to drink, buy guns, and rent cars (preferably not all at once, but that is THEIR decision to make).

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

If someone is old enough to fight, kill, and die for our country in the military, there should be nothing age restricted beyond that. If you're willing to give them that level of power and responsibility, they should be allowed to drink, buy guns, and rent cars (preferably not all at once, but that is THEIR decision to make).

I agree. If they raise the age to firearm purchases then they must also raise the age to military eligibility and voting to 21 as well.
Otherwise the laws are just wacky and punish only those willing to obey them.

 

[BAJ475]

Most likely no. Mainly because it doesn't quite check all the political and racial boxes.
Im not dismissing the gruesome severity and loss of life. Its sick anyone does this.. Its just really coincidental timing wise.
It always is. And kids dying is often what grabs peoples attention and heart strings to pass further ineffective legislation.

At best, the primary arguments I'm seeing from antis at this moment are:
They will raise the age of legal purchase of all firearms to 21
and
Id also assume go after 80% kits of all kinds
(though it had nothing to do with this attack).

The 80% kits are the real focus on paper. Raising the age does nothing if 80% kits are still available online or locally. So its a future issue if they don't run with it now.
They are really focused on his rifles despite him having a pistol.

He passed a BGC, but he was under 21.. so I think age and 80% online purchases may be the focus. This is exactly what they needed to distract the masses.

A 9th Circuit panel has ruled that the under 21 provision in CA law was unconstitutional. Of course there is the en banc step. There is one simple and obvious way this could have been prevented or minimized. The doors to the school should have been locked from the outside and there should have been an armed guard or armed staff ready to repel his attack. If there are no good guys with a gun the bad guys get to dictate what happens. Ironically, Texas is not one of the 10 States that allow carrying on school grounds. Those 10 states are Alabama, Alaska, Idaho, Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming. I can understand Alabama, Alaska, Idaho, Missouri, new Hampshire, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming but the others were a surprise to me.

 

[po18guy]

Do you suppose these same liberals would agree to an abortion license? Call it "common sense birth control."

 

[BAJ475]

I agree. If they raise the age to firearm purchases then they must also raise the age to military eligibility and voting to 21 as well.
Otherwise the laws are just wacky and punish only those willing to obey them.

How can you agree? Just because some under 21 are not sufficently mature enough to possess firearms does not mean that the majority are not. How is this any different that trying to disarm the majority for the acts of a few? As you stated, otherwise the laws are just wacky and punish only those willing to obey them. Thus, we should oppose any such attempt to impose requirements that do not directly address the underlying issue and problems.

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

How can you agree? Just because some under 21 are not sufficently mature enough to possess firearms does not mean that the majority are not. How is this any different that trying to disarm the majority for the acts of a few? As you stated, otherwise the laws are just wacky and punish only those willing to obey them. Thus, we should oppose any such attempt to impose requirements that do not directly address the underlying issue and problems.

Oh No No, I agreed with him saying that raising the age would mean they’d have to raise the age on everything else, which they will not do since they prey upon naive 18yo’s for votes. Not that I support raising the age.

I can understand the confusion with the wording in my post, but I assure you I don't support any age raising or further gun control.

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

There is one simple and obvious way this could have been prevented or minimized. The doors to the school should have been locked from the outside and there should have been an armed guard or armed staff ready to repel his attack. If there are no good guys with a gun the bad guys get to dictate what happens.

100% agree

 

[BAJ475]

Oh No No, I agreed with him saying that raising the age would mean they’d have to raise the age on everything else, which they will not do since they prey upon naive 18yo’s for votes. Not that I support raising the age.

I can understand the confusion with the wording in my post, but I assure you I don't support any age raising or further gun control.

OK, maybe I should have paid more attention to what you were responding to. Sorry for any misunderstanding I may have had and glad that we are in agreement.

 

[Z-PDX]

i never understood the whole felony = no guns thing.

if a person is too dangerous to have guns, they should be in jail.

and if a person is deemed safe enough to be out of jail, give ‘em a gun.

makes sense to me. and would save a bunch of drama all around.

 

[Flopsweat]

i never understood the whole felony = no guns thing.

if a person is too dangerous to have guns, they should be in jail.

and if a person is deemed safe enough to be out of jail, give ‘em a gun.

makes sense to me. and would save a bunch of drama all around.

I have been saying this for years. Way more people are killed with blunt objects that guns. If you can't be trusted with a gun, you can't be trusted with a pipe or a bat.

 

[po18guy]

No one on the left ever seems to ask why there are so many murderers running around. Is it a virus?

Let's reverse the lib question: Why is it so easy for a gun to find a murderer? We need murderer control!