Jump to content
Sniper

House passes sweeping gun legislation to expand background checks to cover virtually all sales

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Kevin125 said:

I think we can afford to lose his seat as a payback for his repeated betrayal.  It’s worth contacting his office and telling him so.

Don’t vote for this guy.  We deserve better representation.

When I still lived there, I voted against him in every primary. The guys a big gov't liberal who's been in Congress for way, way too long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Kevin125 said:

The left judge shops... why doesn’t the right use the same tactic? I feel like I’m missing something.   Seriously. The anti 2A gang games the judicial system with zero consequences.  It there a reason pro 2A groups don’t do it? Or at least not successfully.

I've always thought this, heather it's Gun laws or immigration, conservatives should file in a friendly court like, IIRC, the 5th circuit and get a pro-gun or pro-immigration enforcement ruling before the libs go to the 9th for there shit ruling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/28/2019 at 6:16 PM, Sniper said:

Here's all you need to know about Smith, he's a traitor to the 2A. I'm going to copy the complete article.

Universal background checks don't erode Second Amendment

Written by Chris Smith:

When I voted for the Brady Law in 1993, which took effect Feb. 28, 1994, it was to keep firearms out of the hands of dangerous persons including felons and abusers.         Twenty-five years later — and 300 million background checks that have blocked 3 million purchases to dangerous individuals — few if any today seriously suggest that the Brady law should be repealed.

I support the Second Amendment.  Universal background checks prescribed in H.R. 8 are an attempt to ensure that firearms are procured, owned and used by responsible, law abiding citizens.

 According to the Brady Campaign, about one in five guns now sold in America are done without a background check.  That’s a significant loophole.

According to the CDC, there was a record 39,773 deaths from firearms in 2017 — 23,854 were self-inflicted and 14,542 were homicides.

To mitigate gun violence in America, H.R. 8 expands Brady background checks to transactions by private sellers not currently covered by the law. 

Multiple school shootings have led to robust, comprehensive action at every level to make classrooms safer.  I have visited many schools in my district, and I have found that while the threat is being taken seriously, no one policy, program or initiative can ensure the level of protection our students need and deserve.

No constitutional right is absolute, including the Second Amendment.  The First Amendment’s freedom of speech, for example, has reasonable limits including the promulgation of slander and libel law. 

To preserve public order, we accept reasonable restrictions on the freedom to assemble.  Even freedom of religion isn’t without some modest boundaries. In like manner, universal background checks don’t erode Second Amendment rights but do help ensure much-needed protection from gun violence for everyone.

Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J.

4th Congressional District  

https://www.app.com/story/opinion/readers/2019/02/28/universal-background-checks-dont-erode-second-amendment-letter/3008418002/

 

The fact that Smith talks about "transactions" and H.R. 8 talks about "transfers" means that he doesn't even understand the law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I contacted his office telling them no one in my immediate or extended family will be voting for him in 2020 and that before he dismisses the dozen or so votes he is losing, he needs to realize that I am just a sampling of what his constituents think about his Op Ed and other anti 2A statements he has made over the years.

He personally probably could not care less about my message.  But if he loses, I plan to follow up with an “ I told you so” message.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, revenger said:

If there is a chance that we loose this battle at the national level it should be demanded that NICS be made available anyone requesting a background check for a private sale or purchase.   Free of charge of course!

Like the one available now to FFLs that we have to pay $15 for NJSP to call? Take a guess how that would go...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ChrisJM981 said:

Like the one available now to FFLs that we have to pay $15 for NJSP to call? Take a guess how that would go...

If the law is passed at the federal level than the federal govt. should provide a method for private FTF background checks that is accessible for free to all whom may want to use it.

I'm in no way advocating for a background check, just saying if we loose.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...