2018 Gun Legislation You Must Keep Your Eyes On
There are several items that Americans should keep their eyes on in 2018, and they each have to do with the rights of gun owners.
Awr Hawkins of Breitbart News listed four things that were begun in 2017 but failed to succeed. I’ll list them and comment on each one.
- National Reciprocity—National reciprocity for concealed carry passed the House on December 6, 2017. It was introduced by Rep. Richard Hudson (R-NC) on January 3, 2017, then sat idly until conservatives were able to overcome Speaker Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) stonewalling. Now it has gone to the Senate, where it sat idly throughout December, as Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) busied himself with other things. National reciprocity must be the number one priority in 2018 for supporters of the Second Amendment, as it will fix the cumbersome patchwork of laws that concealed carry permit holders currently face as they travel.
National Reciprocity sounds good, right? It makes a federal law that every state has to recognize every other state’s concealed carry permit. That sounds great, right?
- Activate Your Own Stem Cells & Reverse The Aging Process - Choose "Select & Save" OR Join, Brand Partner & Select Silver To Get Wholesale Prices
- Get your Vitamin B17 & Get 10% Off With Promo Code TIM
- How To Protect Yourself From 5G, EMF & RF Radiation
- Protect Your Income & Retirement Assets With Gold & Silver
- Grab This Bucket Of Heirloom Seeds & Get Free Shipping With Promo Code TIM
- Here’s A Way You Can Stockpile Food For The Future
- Stockpile Your Ammo & Save $15 On Your First Order
- Preparing Also Means Detoxifying – Here’s One Simple Way To Detoxify
Well, yeah, it sounds good to those who are used to asking the government permission to enjoy and exercise a God-given right protected under the Second Amendment, but that’s just it, isn’t it? Isn’t national reciprocity embedded in the Second Amendment?
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Now, consider that the Second Amendment does not state a limitation on whether you carry open or concealed or have a rifle slung across your back. It says that right “shall not be infringed.” It shouldn’t be infringed by government for money, taking classes, jumping through hoops, background checks or anything else. It is a right given to you by the Creator, not permitted by government.
What many have not thought through is that if this is implemented at the federal level, what will stop the feds from building a database of who has these permits and thus who has guns? Nothing. After all, the argument will be made that DC needs the database to ensure the concealed carry permit holder is legitimate in the state they are from. Sure, there could be a simple check with the state, but you know how DC works.
This actually could be dealt with quite simply by DC repealing any and all gun laws, which it has unconstitutionally written, and enforce the protections of the rights of gun owners on the states that have also flagrantly disregarded the rights of gun owners. As someone has so aptly stated, “The Second Amendment is my concealed carry permit.”
We don’t need to fix “patchwork of laws.” We need to demand that those laws are repealed and the Second Amendment trump those usurpations.
Anyways, that’s the first item.
- Repeal of Gun Ban for Military Veterans—On March 16, 2017, the House voted to repeal the gun ban for military veterans. The ban is structured in a manner similar to Barack Obama’s Social Security gun ban inasmuch as it allows bureaucrats to flag military disability recipients who require help with their finances. Those flagged recipients are then turned over to the National Instance Criminal Background Check System (NICS) and barred from purchasing firearms for self-defense. Although the House voted to repeal the ban, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and his colleagues never took up the measure for a vote.
Clearly, this ban is simply unconstitutional, so it is not law. It is a usurpation of law and a criminal violation of the Fifth Amendment rights of America’s veterans who fought to preserve the very rights that they are having infringed.
If there is no due process of law, there is no loss of liberty, property or life.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
What law have veterans violated simply because they are disabled or need help with finances? None. I will tell you though, I wish the people of the community and families of these veterans would simply take care of them so they didn’t have to have their hands out to the government. Why should those who have served have to be dependent upon the very people seeking to remove their rights illegally? They shouldn’t!
- Hearing Protection Act—The Hearing Protection Act was introduced in the House on January 9, 2017. The measure is designed to remove suppressors from the purview of the National Firearms Act (1934). Contrary to the left’s scare tactics, the Hearing Protection Act is not about making suppressors legal, as they are already legal in over 40 states. Rather, the Hearing Protection Act would simply make the devices less difficult for law-abiding citizens to acquire. The Act would accomplish this by removing the requirements that suppressor purchasers submit fingerprints and photographs of themselves, and would also remove the registration requirement and $200 federal tax for suppressor owners. The Hearing Protection Act was days away from a vote on House floor in early October but Speaker Ryan shelved the bill, providing no insight into when he might allow the measure to come up for a vote.
This is ridiculous to even have to talk about this. You need fingerprints and photographs to purchase an accessory for your gun, but you can buy a bump stock, which is an accessory, for $200 and not provide any of that? No, seriously, this is what is wrong with DC. There is no constitutional authority for Congress to write legislation to make purchasers provide any of this information because they want to purchase a suppressor.
Furthermore, the fact that a $200 federal tax is also placed on the item demonstrates the other part of why such legislation is written, money. First, it’s about control, and second, it’s about money.
Why someone has to go through all of this for a suppressor, is anyone’s guess, as they are rarely used in the commission of a crime, if at all. Perhaps, someone in Congress watched to many movies where suppressors were used and figured it was a common thing.
I’m all for them being legally sold without government interference and taxation. Why can’t we simply repeal the “laws” that are written preventing this and declare such items protected under the Second Amendment? Because our masters have said it is so.
- Defeat of Elitist Push for Bump Stock Ban—Elitists within Congress and without have been pushing a ban on the firearm accessories known as “bump stocks” ever since they were criminally used by the Las Vegas attacker. In other words, one criminal misused the accessories on October 1, and Senators and House members who admitted to not even knowing what bump stocks were piled on for more gun control. The Senators who voiced support for legislation or bump stock hearings included John Cornyn (R-TX), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), and Charles Grassley (R-IA). House members supporting action against bump stocks include Reps. Bill Flores (R-TX), Kevin Yoder (R-KS), Mark Meadows (R-NC), and Carlos Curbelo (R-FL). The DOJ is now quietly doing the biding of elitists in Congress and without by pushing to redefine terms in the National Firearms Act (1934), so as to allow bump stocks to be reclassified and banned. Gun Owners of America vows to fight tooth and nail against a bump stock ban.
The same thought flows to the bump stock as the suppressor issue. It’s an accessory. It does not change a semi-automatic gun into a fully automatic gun, but that is irrelevant to the discussion because the Second Amendment accounts for military-style weapons, and when it comes to that, I’m for machine guns not being governed by legislation either.
Furthermore, as I’ve demonstrated, banning bump stocks will not get rid of bump firing semi-automatic rifles. Additionally, for those who have never used a bump stock or bump fired, you have to learn the technique of using it. It doesn’t just work because you install bump stock. You have to have technique. You can see videos demonstrating what I’m talking about here.
The very premise I’m speaking of about the Second Amendment and bump stocks is the same one being used by an attorney bringing a lawsuit against the city of Columbia, South Carolina.
The ATF has no constitutional authority to determine whether bump stocks should be approved or not, and as we’ve seen, Congress has no authority to write legislation pertaining to any arms and I would add, that includes their accessories.
Let’s call for something simple, enforcement of the Second Amendment and a repeal of every single gun control/confiscation pretended legislation on the books. How’s that for celebrating 2018 with a bang!