HR 1263 - We're Only After Most, Not All Your Guns Act

[WISD0MTREE]

   Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL) introduced a bill last month which would make all semi-auto rifles and shotguns with detachable magazines items restricted by the National Firearms Act (NFA). For anyone not familiar with US gun laws, NFA items are heavily restricted. They include short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns, destructive devices, suppressors, full auto firearms (further restricted by the Hughes Amendment) and a weird classification known as "any other weapon" (AOW). To obtain these firearms, you must

• Fill out a large amount of paperwork
• Send in fingerprints for a more in depth background check
• Pay a $200 tax stamp (only $5 for AOWs)
• Register it on a federal registry (Unless you break another law with the firearm, in which case you can't be tried for not registering it as that would be self incrimination.)
• Transfer it at a dealer with a Federal Firearms License
• Wait months for approval (usually between 6 and 12 months; I'm currently on 6)
• Must be placed into a trust to be reasonably transferred through a will

   There's a ton regarding the legality of the NFA. I may make a rant post about it some day. Anyway, HR 1263 is interesting for a few reasons.

   First, it uses a current law to further restrict purchasing a firearm as opposed to new laws. This seems easier to do and different from the usual assault weapon ban proposed every year. However, it's also much more restrictive. HR 1263 doesn't exempt .22s with detachable magazines, which are commonly used for summer camps and programs such as scouts. While tube fed .22s are exempt from the definition of "ammunition feeding device," only firearms with detachable "ammunition feeding devices" are being restricted. Tube fed guns don't have detachable magazines. Why would this be included? The only answer would be to make it easier to enact bans in the future, which may include guns with fixed magazines.

   In addition, definition of detachable magazine is similar to the one used in California that led to the creation of the bullet button. Effectively, people made the magazine release on their guns to act similar to a reset button on a calculator, using a bullet as a "tool" to release the magazine. Because a "tool" was used, they legally "disassembled" the firearm when they reloaded, making the magazines legally fixed magazines. It took the state years to actually ban bullet buttons. The fact that this bill doesn't learn from California shows that Ted Deutch hasn't researched the topic at all.

   Finally, the bill only targets rifles and shotguns, a common theme with gun laws. Had Deutch done his homework, he would know that the vast majority of homicides are committed with handguns, not rifles and shotguns. Homicides with rifles, shotguns, other firearms, and all unspecified firearms would still be less than half the number of homicides with handguns. This bill, like many others, completely ignores that handguns make up a disproportionately large part of homicides. Instead, it focuses on weapons commonly demonized by the media and politicians. Ted Deutch would've known this if he did his research. In reality, he doesn't care about firearm homicides. He doesn't care about your safety. He only cares about his politics, his donations, and his reelection.

[Tali]

On 3/11/2019 at 9:04 PM, WISD0MTREE said:

First, it uses a current law to further restrict purchasing a firearm as opposed to new laws.

lAzY

On 3/11/2019 at 9:04 PM, WISD0MTREE said:

HR 1263 doesn't exempt .22s with detachable magazines, which are commonly used for summer camps and programs such as scouts. While tube fed .22s are exempt from the definition of "ammunition feeding device," only firearms with detachable "ammunition feeding devices" are being restricted.

I'm gonna be honest, i dont know much about firearms because I'm a dirty liberal but I dont see why this would be restricted. 

 

On 3/11/2019 at 9:04 PM, WISD0MTREE said:

Finally, the bill only targets rifles and shotguns, a common theme with gun laws. Had Deutch done his homework, he would know that the vast majority of homicides are committed with handguns, not rifles and shotguns. Homicides with rifles, shotguns, other firearms, and all unspecified firearms would still be less than half the number of homicides with handguns.

Funny enough - eventhough far left politicans does target these bigger weapons, and try to paint them worse than handguns but I looked up a study one of them quoted from and found large data they didnt post which would of contradicted their position which showed handguns were far more used in assaults and robberies due to the ability to conceal them

#TheFarLeftIsRuingingTheLiberalName 

I know it seems I'm supporting conservative points, but last I checked, liberalism is about personal freedoms and that's why I consider myself a liberal, personal freedoms should never be infringed, and guns go in line of personal freedoms. 

Edited March 13, 2019 by Arizona Robbins
Oppsie was made

[True King]

The guns issue is what will most energize voters toward Republicans; Democrat party has went so anti-Gun there is a danger of them trying to weaponize the gov against gun owners. It’s people like this congressman the founders were worried about.

I’m a Libertarian & don’t care for either major party. Although the democrats are bad enough on this issue I want them to lose more usually.

[WISD0MTREE]

On 3/12/2019 at 12:04 AM, Arizona Robbins said:

I'm gonna be honest, i dont know much about firearms because I'm a dirty liberal

but I dont see why this would be restricted.

I know it seems I'm supporting conservative points, but last I checked, liberalism is about personal freedoms and that's why I consider myself a liberal, personal freedoms should never be infringed, and guns go in line of personal freedoms. 

Stick around and you'll learn. We all begin somewhere.

It's just as much a cultural battle as a political one. If nobody grows up shooting weapons, they're less likely to get into guns when they are old enough to buy one as they'll have other hobbies. It'll then be easier to pass gun laws and demonize the few remaining gun owners.

Absolutely. It's a shame the parties and extremists on both sides seem more concerned with opposing the other. Anyway, glad to have you onboard!

[Tali]

3 hours ago, WISD0MTREE said:

Stick around and you'll learn. We all begin somewhere

I'll never consider myself a conservative. I dont believe in traditional values and etc. Dont get me wrong that does not mean I dont have morals, I do but I just find traditional values to be backwards 

But i do believe in gun rights 

[Tali]

4 hours ago, WISD0MTREE said:

Absolutely. It's a shame the parties and extremists on both sides

So nice to see someone who actually criticizes both parties, I am so use to people supporting one and always defending the one the support no matter what. It is a shame the parties are going extreme, and our first President did warn us against creating political parties, and look where we are xd