Harry Reid: assault weapons ban probably doomed.

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
1,478
Likes
541
Location
Virginia Beach, VA
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/01/harry-reid-assault-weapons-ban.php

The Democratically-controlled U.S. Senate will not be a free-for-all of new gun regulations following the shooting at Sandy Hook, according to Majority Leader Harry Reid. Instead, Senators will focus on passing legislation that can move through the Republican-controlled House, Reid said.

That could spell doom for an assault weapons ban. Speaking on Nevada Week In Review, a news show on the PBS affiliate in Las Vegas, Reid said there’s no real chance of a new ban passing the House.

>Read more at link<
 
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
14,292
Likes
2,133
Location
New Hampshire
Good. Let's home standard-capacity magazines are also saved.

Because, you know, bad guys are going to say, "Sheesh, I need make sure I don't break the 30-round magazine law before I go shoot up those people in that gun-free zone over there! Oh, just give me three 10-round magazines."
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
1,478
Likes
541
Location
Virginia Beach, VA
Good. Let's home standard-capacity magazines are also saved.

Because, you know, bad guys are going to say, "Sheesh, I need make sure I don't break the 30-round magazine law before I go shoot up those people in that gun-free zone over there! Oh, just give me three 10-round magazines."

A ban on mag capacity would stand a better chance of passing, but I seriously doubt that would get through, either.

Now universal background checks? That's a different story.
 
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
12,146
Likes
3,057
Location
SC
Frankly, requiring a background check (through NICS, therefore Fed law) for a sale from one NH resident to another is unconstitutional. The Commerce clause holds no power over what two NH citizens do WITHIN the boundaries of said NH. Replace NH with any other state.

They got away with it for FFL's because the FFL's perform the act of buying a gun from another state (typically), therefore interstate commerce.

Two Private citizens of the same state? Nope.
 

Garys

NES Member
Rating - 100%
92   0   0
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
20,364
Likes
5,599
Location
Stoughton
From the same article,

“We have to be fair. I was surprised with the poll results that came after this terrible situation that occurred at Sandy Hook. the numbers around the country — most people favor having the ability of people to carry guns,” he said. “So I think that the American people want us to be very cautious what we do. I think they want us to do things that are logical, smart, and make the country safer, not just be doing things that get a headline in a newspaper.”

Once again. Reid can count, he knows that no bill will get through the Senate and he's not going to waste political capital within the Democrat caucus trying to push through Obama's anti gun agenda.

I think that in the same interview he put the kibosh on any substantive changes to the Senate rules to get rid of the filibuster rules or change cloture. He knows that while it may seem like a good idea in the short term, if the Republicans take back the Senate in the 2014 mid terms, it won't look so good. Again, he can count.

Oh, and I think the last line in the quote was a smack at Obama.
 
Last edited:

Garys

NES Member
Rating - 100%
92   0   0
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
20,364
Likes
5,599
Location
Stoughton
Frankly, requiring a background check (through NICS, therefore Fed law) for a sale from one NH resident to another is unconstitutional. The Commerce clause holds no power over what two NH citizens do WITHIN the boundaries of said NH. Replace NH with any other state.

They got away with it for FFL's because the FFL's perform the act of buying a gun from another state (typically), therefore interstate commerce.

Two Private citizens of the same state? Nope.

I disagree. As long at the firearm originated out of state, the Commerce Clause would likely be ruled to apply. Several SCOTUS decisions have expanded the doctrine from it's original text. Hell, even if the gun was manufactured in state if any of the components or materials were made outside of New Hampshire it might apply.

I don't agree with that, but I think it's likely.

OTOH, I don't think a NICS check for person to person sales is going to get through the House nor can it be done by Executive Order.
 
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
14,292
Likes
2,133
Location
New Hampshire
The only thing that scares the crap out of me is the reported favorability of "universal" NICS checks. One poll said that 88% or 89% supported universal background checks. That's a political slam dunk.

The background check is sort of a "feel good" measure anyway simply because background checks don't "know everything" about somebody. Plus they have flaws in reporting (not everything relevant is reported) and is date sensitive, meaning it may only have criminal/mental records as of three or four weeks ago or whatever. It's not updated daily.

Never mind the fact that background checks wouldn't have stopped Sandy Hook too...
 
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
4,691
Location
Clowns->Here<-Jokers
The only thing that scares the crap out of me is the reported favorability of "universal" NICS checks. One poll said that 88% or 89% supported universal background checks. That's a political slam dunk.

The background check is sort of a "feel good" measure anyway simply because background checks don't "know everything" about somebody. Plus they have flaws in reporting (not everything relevant is reported) and is date sensitive, meaning it may only have criminal/mental records as of three or four weeks ago or whatever. It's not updated daily.

Never mind the fact that background checks wouldn't have stopped Sandy Hook too...
Again, the upside is creating a challenge to both the commerce clause and NICS in general that otherwise doesn't exist.

All these gun-grabbers going full-retard could work to our favor in the courts, but it will take a long time to see that. I hope we can get gun owners to support these challenges?

I am sickened at the injustice of ramming this crap down people's throats and making us spend millions in the courts and labor for years (or longer) under this garbage until it is overturned. We also need to take our anger to the ballot box starting before the primaries and either force the RNC to become a true advocate of 2A or replace them.
 

upcountry

NES Member
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
568
Likes
631
Location
Oracle, AZ
How would the proposed universal background checks work?
Would all FTF sales go through an FFL? What would these FFL's charge per transaction? $5, $10, maybe $50?
Might raise a whole new crop of FFL's who do nothing but process FTF's. No storefront, inventory or overhead.
Of course NICS is up to the task, right?
Give me a break...
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
5,419
Likes
1,897
Frankly, requiring a background check (through NICS, therefore Fed law) for a sale from one NH resident to another is unconstitutional. The Commerce clause holds no power over what two NH citizens do WITHIN the boundaries of said NH. Replace NH with any other state.

They got away with it for FFL's because the FFL's perform the act of buying a gun from another state (typically), therefore interstate commerce.

Two Private citizens of the same state? Nope.

Tell that to Roscoe Filburn.
 
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
12,146
Likes
3,057
Location
SC
Tell that to Roscoe Filburn.

WOW.

That is complete and utter BULLSHIT.

I hate the government. [angry2][angry2][angry2][angry2][jihad]

The Supreme Court interpreted the United States Constitution's Commerce Clause under Article 1 Section 8, which permits the United States Congress "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes". The Court decided that Filburn's wheat growing activities reduced the amount of wheat he would buy for chicken feed on the open market, and because wheat was traded nationally, Filburn's production of more wheat than he was allotted was affecting interstate commerce. Thus, Filburn's production could be regulated by the federal government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn
 
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
7,363
Likes
3,782
Location
Deep in the woods of SC
Hell, even if the gun was manufactured in state if any of the components or materials were made outside of New Hampshire it might apply.

I don't agree with that, but I think it's likely.

Here is the exact text from the new montana law which addresses exactly what you mentioned. As long as other states put this in their new laws they should be good....

Section 4. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.
 
Last edited:
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Mar 26, 2009
Messages
8,033
Likes
736
Location
FreeState
Good. Let's home standard-capacity magazines are also saved.

Because, you know, bad guys are going to say, "Sheesh, I need make sure I don't break the 30-round magazine law before I go shoot up those people in that gun-free zone over there! Oh, just give me three 10-round magazines."

This is what really pisses me off. They know the laws will do nothing to reduce crime or increase compliance except by lawful gun owners. Meanwhile, prosecutors and judges will continue to dismiss these charges in plea arrangements or reduce sentences to the point of being useless.
 
Top Bottom