Gun legislation going forward?
- Thread starter AlexanderA
- Start date
- Status
Unfortunately too many gun rights advocates don't want to hear/acknowledge this. They don't understand that the best way to protect gun rights is to have enough independent voters, AND members of BOTH parties, to be so pro-gun that politicians of every type will be afraid to lose an election if they advocate for more gun control.
For any gun rights group this should be the approach:
For, or against, gay marriage? Don't care, as long as you're pro-gun. Pro life, or pro choice? Don't care, as long as you're pro gun. Want government run healthcare care, or don't want government run healthcare? Don't care, as long as you're pro gun. Etc, etc. Let other groups worry about other topics.
The "conservative Republicans" are not a majority. ALL Republicans, including moderate Republicans, are not a majority. Without getting independents, moderate Democrats, and "liberal Democrats," onto the pro gun side, it will be impossible to advance a pro gun agenda, and extremely difficult to stop an anti-gun agenda.
Basura Blanca
Member
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2004
- Messages
- 532
Gun owners as a voting bloc wield virtually no power in elections. The big 2A groups like to pretend otherwise but no candidate is afraid of catching the ire of the 2A vote if they're an opponent, or losing the support of the 2A vote if they're an ally.
Because of the sharp politicization of left/right/blue/red/whatever, we end up funding conservative candidates who view us as the sprig of parsley on the plate. The main course doesn't suffer without us because we're just there for decoration anyway. The money spent on flipping congressional seats ends up funding the pet projects of the greater party, not the 2A. We routinely elect people who have an agenda that ignores us, because they undeservedly are the so-called better option vote because their campaign made some vague throwaway statement about supporting "freedom" and guns.
Modern pro 2A lobbying has coalesced completely around litigation, with the hope that the supreme court will undo reams of historical damage *and* that once accomplished, the other side will simply give up.
American_Fusilier
Member
I see it as almost inevitable that our gun rights will be eventually completely taken away. All the left has to do is continue to brainwash kids at their propaganda centers... er... colleges, and continue to control the narrative with the media. All it takes it time.
I know, Trump did pretty good with college aged kids this time around, but low information voters will always be suckered by the media. They just need to lie harder.
We've put a tourniquet on America with this Trump victory, reversing the damage done by the left will take a while, even with republican control of all three branches of the govt.
The left is smart and never sleeps, they'll find a way to gut the 2A.
The best thing Trump could do with the presidency and a republican senate is to name Thomas and Alito's replacements.
I'd love some Pro gun legislation. But I'm not optimistic.
I'd really love for suppressors to be taken off the NFA, and for national reciprocity.
Sorry to be the gloomy gus...
I know, Trump did pretty good with college aged kids this time around, but low information voters will always be suckered by the media. They just need to lie harder.
We've put a tourniquet on America with this Trump victory, reversing the damage done by the left will take a while, even with republican control of all three branches of the govt.
The left is smart and never sleeps, they'll find a way to gut the 2A.
The best thing Trump could do with the presidency and a republican senate is to name Thomas and Alito's replacements.
I'd love some Pro gun legislation. But I'm not optimistic.
I'd really love for suppressors to be taken off the NFA, and for national reciprocity.
Sorry to be the gloomy gus...
irishlad
Contributing Member
These are the 2 I'm hoping for.
Golfanaticshooter
Member
Yes, yes they are.
Miami_JBT
Member
Miami_JBT
Member
Florida was an example to Republicans that they can push gun control, and win more seats without consequences.
Miami_JBT
Member
Other way around. Gun rights have been expanding. In a 30-year period, we went from the majority being No/May issue carry and having the Clinton AWB in place to multiple SCOTUS rulings upholding the Second Amendment as an enumerated inalienable right and over half the country is now permitless concealed carry.
Challanges are being filed left and right on all levels to claw back our rights. It has taken over 100 years for gun control to reach the levels it has. Our victories will not be sudden. But we're gaining ground and we will be victorious.
My daughter will have better rights than I do right now when she becomes an adult.
I said the following at GOALS back in August.
Unless they attach the HPA to the tax bill and add it as a tax reduction.The obvious move for legislation is The Hearing Protection Act:
It removes suppressors from the NFA. It’s already been marked up in committee. If the House stands, a vote in favour is possible.
But don’t imagine there will be a flood of legislation, let alone 2nd Amendment deregulation. Even with control of the Senate, the GOP can’t guarantee the 60 votes for cloture:
U.S. Senate: About Filibusters and Cloture
www.senate.gov
So, with a thin House margin and a bare majority in the Senate, it’s no legislative assembly line. They will have a lot to get through on border stuff and deportations; the Senate needs to work on judicial appointments (and all the 65+ conservative Supreme Court members should retire) and they will, despite promises to the contrary, pass a lot of spending authorizations. We may get some tax cut extensions. The point being, they get two years (the House will flip at the mid-terms) to pass legislation and it seems unlikely that deregulation of gun control will be prioritized.
Miami_JBT
Member
With a Republican controlled Senate? Not happening even during the lame duck. Gridlock is the only thing happening.
Possibly. But there's only a 3 seat majority favoring the Republicans. It wouldn't take much to lose any lead.
AlexanderA
Member
No. Nothing is happening on guns between now and January. Just isn't enough time.
If that's the case, there is a HUGE opportunity right now for GOA to reach out to some minority groups who have historically been lumped in with the Anti-2A groups. Specifically, LGBTQ+ people are very aware and concerned about their 2Aand self-defense rights. Nick Fuentes' comment about "Your body, my choice" may get an award for encouraging more women to look into 2A than any previous tweet ever.
I'm beginning to work with people who are looking for training and education who have never seen the need before. I hope to build trust and community, and, after the fear subsides, add new recreational shooters to our group.
If any organization is serious about RKBA applying to all Americans, now is the time to connect with the groups who are not MAGA-approved. I would love to see that - heck, I would love to be a part of it.
Miami_JBT
Member
GOA has an women's outreach program called Empowered 2A.
We're also outreaching into different minority groups.
AlexanderA
Member
This is an important concept, although I would quibble with attaching guns specifically to a tax bill.
Any pro-gun bill will not go anywhere as a stand-alone. It must be attached to a larger package.
I could see NFA reform (removing silencers, repealing Hughes, etc.) passing if something was included in it that would superficially appeal to the antigunners. Perhaps an option to voluntarily register semiautomatic look-alikes as machine guns? (This would be for free, and would allow a conversion to full automatic at any time thereafter.)
The point is, in the new environment (with Republican control) serious negotiations could at long last take place.
Miami_JBT
Member
Any Republican that strays from the party dogma of being pro-gun right now will shoot themselves in the foot for the next two years.
The majority of Republicans aren't pro-gun, but they're not stupid and want to retain their seats and committee appointments.
Armorer 101
Member
The ATF just added on an argument to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that the pistol brace ban removal was an avoidance of paying their NFA SBR tax. Welcome to the real world of the anti gun DC political arm, using taxation as an argument for keeping gun control.
In my opinion, if these adz holes are not stomped into a mud pie, they will not relinquish their current power of making arbitrary laws at will. And they believe they are beyond the law, themselves.
By the way, Texas has to fix Texas themselves. It took us over 40 years to fix Florida and it was an uphill fight all the way.
In my opinion, if these adz holes are not stomped into a mud pie, they will not relinquish their current power of making arbitrary laws at will. And they believe they are beyond the law, themselves.
By the way, Texas has to fix Texas themselves. It took us over 40 years to fix Florida and it was an uphill fight all the way.
Speedo66
Member
I wonder if there will be lobbying from the suppressor industry against it?
Right now the rules from the ATF about making home made cans are extremely restrictive, most people cannot manufacture their own from scratch.
If the regulations go away, that may open a floodgate of homemade suppressors from inexpensive kits, not helping the industry whose products are somewhat expensive. While the commercially made ones are probably more effective, the American consumer will generally go for price over quality. One only needs to look at Harbor Freight for an example.
So, would the industry possibly lobby against any rules change that might hurt their bottom line?
Right now the rules from the ATF about making home made cans are extremely restrictive, most people cannot manufacture their own from scratch.
If the regulations go away, that may open a floodgate of homemade suppressors from inexpensive kits, not helping the industry whose products are somewhat expensive. While the commercially made ones are probably more effective, the American consumer will generally go for price over quality. One only needs to look at Harbor Freight for an example.
So, would the industry possibly lobby against any rules change that might hurt their bottom line?
General Geoff
Member
Nah, Consumers at large are lazy and would rather buy a purpose built product than DIY it. And with the extra NFA paperwork and procedures gone, any established silencer manufacturer could crank out a cheap, disposable aluminum can for $40 that'll last 1500 rounds and then you toss it and buy a new one.
Right now most of the silencers on the US market are built to heirloom quality standards because of the paperwork and additional tax stamp costs associated with their transfer and ownership. Remove that and the market will be flooded with much cheaper, disposable options.
Trump is not a 2A president, he is from NYC. Being his second term he doesn't need worry about keeping people happy. My concern last time, was he like to make deals. i was always worried he would make a deal with dems to get something passed.
He wanted to require you be 21 to by long guns after parkland shooting. He is not pro 2A. He doesn't need to get re-elected now, so I am not expecting much.
He wanted to require you be 21 to by long guns after parkland shooting. He is not pro 2A. He doesn't need to get re-elected now, so I am not expecting much.
Miami_JBT
Member
FL still ain't fixed. Not by any stretch.
CapnMac
Member
This is complicated. She's 70 and has Type I diabetes with complications.
There has been much recent agitation for a National Reciprocity law. This is something I remain very cold towards. For one, on first principals, What one government grants another government can take away. Secondly, there are nearly 50 different State standards for just what "carry" is. I'm not at all keen to have to meet the requirements NY, MA, CT, NJ, IL, CA, WA, et al, would insist I meet. By the same token, none of those are likely to accept the "lesser standards" like my TX LTC. The "where" of carrying varies widely. As does signage, and whether the signage carries weight-of-law. The Duty-to-Inform varies widely.
Unlike, say, marriage or driving licenses, CHL are hugely different around the several States. This is not a simple thing, and it would not be a simple law to enact.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
