Good article from Forbes after the Biden request to Congress

daniel craig said:

a mental health certificate of health no older than a month.

Click to expand...

Will I have to prove I am not crazy every month before exercising any other constitutional rights or is that just for the 2A?

A right that is subject to approval is not a right at all.

FFGColorado said:

Not true

Click to expand...

So much the better, thanks for the information.

Fine Figure of a Man said:

Not true and the current administrations stated agenda is far left of Obama's

Click to expand...

This is true they are more open and bold about it than ever before to include other topics . Very often when debating left Democrats they use the come back of " well Obama didn't take your guns away" but we all know the political landscape has changed in the last four years and the want for payback and retribution seems more common now in a nation that hasn't been so divided since 1861.

Which while I said earlier that it is questionable if the Dems have the votes to enact any legislation, but for many of them it seems they don't care what the blow back might be later politically. Even Biden's executive orders can do some serious damage,if at least temporarily. Talk about banning internet sales wasn't even really pressed by them before, now it is. How far can executive orders go I don't know but one thing is for sure gun control is on their agenda and I wouldn't be surprised if it takes center stage in the next few months if not sooner.

Elkins45 said:

Then Biden would get credit for being the guy who resurrected Bushmaster after everyone in the industry had given it up for dead. We could call the initiative “Make American Guns Again” and have that acronym printed on hats. What color hats do you think we should use?

Click to expand...

More like his executive orders won't allow the re-importation of American made guns, like the Garand and carbine on top of other surplus. What about a Miroku made Winchester made in Japan or a Italian Uberti six shooter or 1873 Winchester? Or what about Serbian Prvi ammo that makes 7.5 French and 7.65 Argentine that nobody else makes or S&B ammo? All those just mentioned aren't in the limelight like a AR or AK but his damage with executive orders could be just as severe.

lionking said:

More like his executive orders won't allow the re-importation of American made guns, like the Garand and carbine on top of other surplus. What about a Miroku made Winchester made in Japan or a Italian Uberti six shooter or 1873 Winchester? Or what about Serbian Prvi ammo that makes 7.5 French and 7.65 Argentine that nobody else makes or S&B ammo? All those just mentioned aren't in the limelight like a AR or AK but his damage with executive orders could be just as severe.

Click to expand...

You really think Biden is willing to expend political capital to ban the importation of fancy sporting rifles and obscure cartridges? And are there really any Garlands or (especially) carbines left? If DCM left any of those Garands in the Philippines after November 3 then they need to fire some people pronto.

Elkins45 said:

You really think Biden is willing to expend political capital to ban the importation of fancy sporting rifles and obscure cartridges? And are there really any Garlands or (especially) carbines left? If DCM left any of those Garands in the Philippines after November 3 then they need to fire some people pronto.

Click to expand...

These days I don't know what is possible or likely, Obama banned Garands from coming in executive order and Biden is even more motivated than him.
https://www.ammoland.com/2013/09/obama-banning-re-imports-of-m1-garand-rifles/


https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/oba...ical-collectible-m1-carbine-rifles-fate-86000

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ob...-course-forbids-sale-of-850000-antique-rifles

A boat load of carbines was found in Africa just a couple years ago, no doubt there are surplus stashes still waiting to be found or legally brought back from somewhere.

The Dems are going to do everything they can to hurt and limit gun and ammo ownership in the next two to four years but most of what they do will go largely unreported by the media because they don't want to look too anti gun even if they are because banning relics and antiques doesn't come across as "reasonable" pro 2nd amendment does it?

As I said earlier the country is divided more than ever, payback, cancelling opposition (cancel culture) and retribution seems to be the order of the day and many politicians openly say inflammatory things and so far based on what I have seen in the last month they are willing to push legislation and executive orders without care or worry how it will affect their politics or re-election chances in the future and more alarming many are openly calling for becoming one party dominant in the future by cancelling half the country out by adding DC as a state, adding senators, ending the electoral college and stacking the supreme court, so I really don't see much fear by them to conjure up their gun control measures from the left controlled portion of the Democratic party because they are motivated by doctrine more than anything right now.

hso said:

Neither do I. What we don't want is to expend too much energy on virtue signaling stalking horses like 147 that are too irrational for serious consideration. It is the more subtle legislation that has 1 element we want, 1 we might ignore, and the poison pill the Antis really want that we have to look for.

Click to expand...

I agree with the virtue signaling and your basic premise.

Frustrating thing is hearing other gun owners who support this stuff, not as a means of deflecting or reducing harm to the 2A, but outright willing to embrace aspects of gun control that only lead to becoming bedrock on their anti-gun platform, and another talking point of "these common sense measures are supported by gun owners" argument.

No different that when Jim Zumbo came out against AR style firearms and, more recently, Ryan Busse, a former Kimber executive. I can almost forgive Zumbo's ignorance, as he was a wood and blue steel rifleman hunter, and made his living using such guns. Zumbo was ignorant in my opinion, and he paid a price for his opinion. But Busse...I regard that guy as a snake. He earned a very nice living working for a company that had a very strong business selling handguns, many used as self defense carry guns. To come out publicly in Montana against Constitutional Carry is mind-blowing to me:

"Ryan Busse says he helped build an iconic firearms company. Busse was the Vice President of Sales for Kimber America for 25 years until 2020 and he uses those bona fides to bolster his argument opposing a billcurrently under consideration in the Montana legislature that would make it the seventeenth constitutional carry state in the nation.

The Missoulian published a column by Busse yesterday in which he states his case against un-permitted concealed carry in Big Sky Country. After the requisite paragraphs establishing his gun-owning credentials, Busse wrote this:

Montana boasts of a wonderful common sense and deep down all of us know that protecting our rights also means avoiding extremist policies that only increase the likelihood of bloodshed. Montana House Bill 102 will not make us safer. It is not a pro-gun bill. It is an anti-responsibility bill."

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/former-gun-company-vp-opposes-constitutional-carry-in-montana/

Honestly, if gun owners could simply settle on supporting real firearms legislation like forbidding felons who committed violent crimes or crimes using a weapon from owning guns, and largely opposing the rest, we'd be good. But We have to be splintered with nuances and personal biases.

The other side is pretty much in lock step. Right or wrong, I fear they have more unity than we do.

Just my respectful and honest opinion.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/23/biden-gun-safety-pandemic-471064
An analysis of Biden's current gun action situation:

1. Executive action of ghost guns, if doable. Or some regulation change.
2. Maybe some on UBC
3. Major AWB, etc. take 10 GOP senators, not likely
4. Gun control groups frustrated on not having more action.

A major moral panic could flip #3. No need to imagine what some horror show might be. Thus flipping out over virtue signaling bills like 147 isn't worth the time. Yep, it's a good fund raiser for both parties. They probably know that. Scotus flounders around as usual. Takes a peripheral case or one with the actors being less than pleasant - is most likely.

The intent of this administration is no secret for those to care to listen.
https://www.theblaze.com/news/merrick-garland-advance-biden-gun-control

But if I ever again , just for example, walk into a Starbucks for their Nasty, Chernobyl Nuclear Meltdown Coffee..

carrying one of my AKMs or the VZ on a sling...or any rifle out in public...

...certainly won’t help.
The point is to avoid all controversial images and perceptions .

As legalistic as ever with words, Garland said that he “...would....Biden..”.
Garland did not say that he Will.
Keep calm. Getting upset accomplishes exactly What?

Ignition Override said:

Keep calm. Getting upset accomplishes exactly What?

Click to expand...

It accomplishes the small thinker, with THINKING they rrrrrreally did something.

Here's Plan B...those same small thinkers can stop being stinkers, and ACTUALLY do something such as...drum roll....wait for it... CALL THEIR ELECTED Representatives

Ignition Override said:

But if I ever again , just for example, walk into a Starbucks for their Nasty, Chernobyl Nuclear Meltdown Coffee..

carrying one of my AKMs or the VZ on a sling...or any rifle out in public...

...certainly won’t help.
The point is to avoid all controversial images and perceptions .

As legalistic as ever with words, Garland said that he “...would....Biden..”.
Garland did not say that he Will.
Keep calm. Getting upset accomplishes exactly What?

Click to expand...

Of course.
Yeegads..it's a milk toast, fairly 'ceremonial', used by some senators for fund raising, congressional hearing. Nothing etched in stone from this Attorney General that does not make policy or laws, in spite of a previous DOJ. The DOJ follows and enforces the rule of law. Pretty sure Garland understands the constitution 'fairly well' and has never shown any inkling of being political hack like 'some'...

Fine Figure of a Man said:

We will be hearing the term "Nobody needs" frequently in the coming weeks and months.

Click to expand...

Frankly, what 'nobody needs' is some ignorant ideologue to tell them what they 'need'. On that basis, no one, male or female needs to have hair. We have hats to keep off sun, rain and snow. Therefore we should ban hair as unneeded.
And chocolate candy. No one needs candy.

Starting to wander a touch, but amusing. Let's bring it back. However, I will note that hair control has been a political issue if you watch the news.

daniel craig said:

In MY mind a UBC should be a criminal background check, like a NICS check but it also runs military records (so that of the military never got around to reporting criminal activity to non-DOD entities, at least it would be known), a mental health certificate of health no older than a month.

All of which are to be done any time a firearm changes ownership or accessibility.

Click to expand...

Are you saying that every time a person wants to buy a gun they need to have obtained a mental health certificate within the previous month?

TomJ said:

Are you saying that every time a person wants to buy a gun they need to have obtained a mental health certificate within the previous month?

Click to expand...

Yes.

daniel craig said:

Yes.

Click to expand...

Why would we ever agree to that? Who pays for it? The buyer or the government? If the buyer, how much does that add to the cost of the gun? What about lower income people who can barely afford the price of the gun and now can not afford the additional expense? It's okay with you that they now lost their 2A rights? If the government is responsible for it, the feds or states? Federally we're adding to our national debt at an alarming rate. In other words, we're broke and can't afford this. If it's the states, Illinois is in a dire financial situation and can't pay the bills they have. Who do we go to for this certificate? A mental health professional? Who decides whether that professional is qualified? Does that professional need to be approved by the government? If yes, how many professionals will be approved? Will there be a wait list to see one? How long of a wait list? Illinois has used the process of obtaining or renewing a FOID or CC permit to hamper our guns rights with their delays, as they short staffed the department responsible for them and are not processing them in the required time period. We'd be opening the door to similar abuse, as this process will be used by the anti's to deny or delay 2A rights. The questions go on and on. I'll take a pass on this idea.

a mental health certificate of health no older than a month.

Click to expand...

Yea, right, nothing could go wrong with that plan...

Doc L, well You are a member of N and voted for T, I don't think you are safe to buy a new gun and we need to take away the ones you have.....

"Mental health certificates" are a way to potentially disqualify everyone, given that psychology is not an exact science. What mental health professional would be willing to go out on a limb and give you a clean bill of health, knowing that a mistake could come back to destroy him/her?

The really troubling part of any newly passed legislation is it is nearly impossible to reverse it once it is on the books. Something that's bad legislation passed in the heat of the moment will usually haunt us forever. Rank choice voting here in Maine survived a repeal by only several hundred votes even though everybody complained about it being bad. So theres that aspect.

FROGO207 said:

The really troubling part of any newly passed legislation is it is nearly impossible to reverse it once it is on the books. Something that's bad legislation passed in the heat of the moment will usually haunt us forever. Rank choice voting here in Maine survived a repeal by only several hundred votes even though everybody complained about it being bad. So theres that aspect.

Click to expand...

As a fellow Mainer, I hate the ranked choice voting.

TomJ said:

Why would we ever agree to that? Who pays for it? The buyer or the government? If the buyer, how much does that add to the cost of the gun? What about lower income people who can barely afford the price of the gun and now can not afford the additional expense? It's okay with you that they now lost their 2A rights? If the government is responsible for it, the feds or states? Federally we're adding to our national debt at an alarming rate. In other words, we're broke and can't afford this. If it's the states, Illinois is in a dire financial situation and can't pay the bills they have. Who do we go to for this certificate? A mental health professional? Who decides whether that professional is qualified? Does that professional need to be approved by the government? If yes, how many professionals will be approved? Will there be a wait list to see one? How long of a wait list? Illinois has used the process of obtaining or renewing a FOID or CC permit to hamper our guns rights with their delays, as they short staffed the department responsible for them and are not processing them in the required time period. We'd be opening the door to similar abuse, as this process will be used by the anti's to deny or delay 2A rights. The questions go on and on. I'll take a pass on this idea.

Click to expand...

I like it better than the status quo which is basically nothing.

I don't think there are enough psychologists to do a mental health check for everyone buying a gun in America. Another problem is psychologists are notoriously bad at predicting which individuals will be violent.

This could only be part of an agenda to repress gun ownership. That's all.