It's going nowhere because a Constitutional right doesn't require a government license to exercise.
Um, then why do we require a license in order to actually bear the arms that we keep?It's going nowhere because a Constitutional right doesn't require a government license to exercise.
Since when does any part of the U.S. government worry about labor-intensive and ridiculously expensive programs? Most Americans have no clue just how many redundant federal agencies, staggeringly bloated, all with virtually the same exact missions, we as taxpayers are funding. And I'm only talking about the administrative side. Then take a look at the law enforcement side: we started with the FBI, added BATFE, DEA, Treasury Department, Secret Service, DHS, NCIS, CID, forget what the Chair Force calls theirs... Oh, and look at how many intelligence agencies we have, starting with the CIA, NSA, DIA, and every single branch of the military (I dunno: does the Space Force have an intel agency yet?) has their own...It will never happen. Maintaining records would be absolutely staggering.
Disagree, this has no chance of passing – it’s grist for slippery slope fallacies.I could see Dems getting enough Republican votes to make this pass.
Zero chance of any Republican support. This bill was introduced in a previous session and went nowhere. I'm guessing even Democratic Sen. Manchin will not support it. This is only for purposes of being seen to be "doing something".I could see Dems getting enough Republican votes to make this pass.
I don't see the proposed license as being anything like a regular FFL. It would be more like a permit to buy from an FFL.This has no chance of passage.
But, just as a thought experiment, let's say that an FFL was required to buy a gun. That means that FFL's would be issued to "amateurs" (those without business premises, store hours, local zoning compliance, etc.). The whole market for guns would become Internet-based, and brick-and-mortar gun shops would disappear. This would be like the days of the "kitchen table" FFL dealers, except on steroids. No distinction between a "dealer" and a "consumer."
As a side effect, the ATF would be overwhelmed. They would be absolutely unable to monitor the recordkeeping.
That's true, but the people who would love to enact a law such as the proposed couldn't care less about that part. Do the people who run DHS care any whatsoever about the overwhelmed border? No. As they say, it's a feature, not a bug.As a side effect, the ATF would be overwhelmed. They would be absolutely unable to monitor the recordkeeping.
It will never happen. Maintaining records would be absolutely staggering.
Concur with the entirety of this post.Without a major paradigm shift it absolutely WILL happen. I will go so far as to say it will happen within our lifetime. The pro rights side has lost the Culture War. Joe McCarthy was right. Our government our education system and our industry leaders have been, for lack of a better term, infiltrated by Communists.
In about 20 years or sooner when all of our little L B G Q T u v w x y and z grandchildren are old enough to vote they will vote all of our rights away.
It's going nowhere because a Constitutional right doesn't require a government license to exercise.
There's a bunch of Democratic Senators that would not support it. If you want to know who they are, just look at the states they come from. I'll bet that even Mark Kelly (husband of Gabby Giffords!) would not vote for it. After all, he has to be elected in Arizona. Surely he knows that voting for gun control is electoral suicide in Arizona. (This also goes for Sinema, but she's not up until 2024.)I'm guessing even Democratic Sen. Manchin will not support it.