your 2A... Missouri Senate Bans All Federal Gun Control Laws in Proposed Bill
- Thread starter WVU82
- Start date
Yep take the guns to save one life ...cause guns kill....let illegal aliens in cause people dont kill , wont build the wall knowing that illegals kill bunches of people, including cops but dear ol Nancy wont say a word
Im still waiting on anyone to show me the gun that kills people.....dumb Democrats people kill people....want our guns but insist on letting people in who want to kill people...lol
Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing Wednesday on new gun control legislation Democrats plan to push on the American people. The top Republican on the committee, Doug Collins, R-Ga., asked committee Democrats if I could testify about this legislation in an appropriate setting to offer another perspective as both a survivor of a shooting attack and strong supporter of our Second Amendment rights. But the Democrats said no. While liberals may try to silence conservative voices, I will not be silenced. The American people deserve to hear all perspectives. Here is the testimony I planned to give:
Statement for the Record
Republican Whip Steve Scalise
House Committee on the Judiciary
February 6, 2019
My name is Steve Scalise. I am the Congressman for Louisiana’s 1st District. I am the Republican Whip. I am also a target of gun violence.
Many of you may be familiar with the events of June 14, 2017. Around 7:00 AM, at the last morning practice before the annual Congressional Baseball Game for Charity, an Illinois man named James Hodgkinson opened fire on myself and a group of Republican legislators and volunteers on an Alexandria, Va. baseball field.
Fortunately, as a member of House leadership, I was accompanied by my Capitol Police security detail who were able to return fire and engage the shooter until additional law enforcement officers arrived and ultimately took down the shooter. I was shot and nearly fatally wounded, and both of my detail agents were shot as well. I am alive today thanks to the bravery of U.S. Capitol Police and the Alexandria Police, heroes like Congressman Brad Wenstrup and the first responders who rushed to the scene, the incredible medical team at Washington MedStar Hospital Center, and most importantly the grace of God.
I applaud the intentions behind this hearing and believe we are all pursuing the same goal of reducing gun violence. As someone who experienced gun violence, I do not want anyone else to go through that trauma. However, it is also important to me that we be honest with ourselves and the American people about what will -- or won’t -- actually prevent these tragedies. The shooter who targeted me that morning was armed with an SKS rifle and a 9mm Smith & Wesson handgun, both of which were purchased in compliance with Illinois gun laws.
The new gun control restrictions currently being considered by the Democratic majority in H.R. 8 would not have prevented my shooting.
In fact, these new gun control measures being proposed in H.R. 8 would not have prevented any number of recent mass violence events. Several perpetrators of recent multi-victim shootings also purchased their guns legally. In some instances, the background check system failed, and lack of intervention from law enforcement failed to intercept potential threats.
I want to stress that the man who shot me was issued a permit to purchase firearms by the state of Illinois, and had acquired them legally. At Virginia Tech, Charleston, and Sutherland Springs failures in the background check system allowed individuals to illegally obtain the firearms they used to commit their crimes. The alleged loopholes that H.R. 8 claims to fix would not have prevented these tragedies either.
Instead, whether intentionally or not, the gun control proposals in H.R. 8 could turn law abiding citizens into criminals while also failing to achieve the stated purpose of reducing gun violence.
A recent study by the Violence Prevention Research Program at UC Davis and Johns Hopkins University into California’s effort to implement “comprehensive background checks” found that, “The simultaneous implementation of [the Comprehensive Background Check policy] and [prohibitions on firearm purchase and possession for persons convicted within the past 10 years of certain violent crimes classified as misdemeanors] was not associated with a net change in the firearm homicide rate over the ensuing 10 years in California.” Even though California implemented more stringent background checks, this study shows that these measures did not reduce gun violence.
In fact, most criminals obtain firearms through unlawful means -- whether through theft, straw purchases, or lying on the required paperwork. A DOJ study of federal inmates found that only seven percent who possessed a firearm while committing the crime they were serving time for purchased it legally from a firearms dealer under their own name. Based on similar gun control measures in states like California, H.R. 8 would not deter a criminal from engaging in criminal activity, and it won’t decrease gun crime. Instead, it only succeeds in limiting the ways that law-abiding citizens could exercise their Second Amendment rights.
Every single month in America, law-abiding citizens with concealed carry permits defend themselves and others against criminals who have guns. For example, on January 8th, a man approached a 25-year-old woman in Chicago, displayed a weapon, and attempted to rob her at a bus stop. The woman had a concealed carry permit. She drew her own weapon and fired a shot, killing the armed robber. The owner of a nearby pharmacy said such violence happens “all over” Chicago. However, in this case, the intended victim was able to defend herself with her own gun.
On January 2nd, a Good Samaritan in California with a concealed carry permit used his firearm to stop an attempted stabbing of a security guard and held the perpetrator until law enforcement could arrive at the scene.
On January 17th, a man at an IHOP in Alabama opened fire on employees, killing one before another employee pulled his handgun and killed the shooter in self-defense.
On January 29th, an armed robber held up a Family Dollar Store in Georgia. A customer was able to use a personal firearm to shoot and kill the robber before the criminal could hurt any of the many employees or customers in the store.
These are just some examples from the last month alone. There are hundreds of stories like these every single year from law-abiding Americans all over the country.
I am alive due to the effective and immediate response of my Capitol Police detail, and the Alexandria Police Department. Most victims of gun violence do not have law enforcement already on the scene to respond to a violent gunman. Instead of making it harder for citizens to defend themselves until law enforcement arrives, Congress should consider legislation like H.R. 38, the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, a bill that would help law-abiding citizens have the same tools to defend themselves as a criminal has of trying to inflict harm, regardless of where they travel.
I firmly believe we must never forget, nor minimize, the importance of the Second Amendment to our Constitution.
H.R. 8, as well as other new gun control legislation currently being considered by the House Democrat majority do not accomplish the goal of reducing gun violence.
If our goal is to reduce gun violence, then we should focus on penalizing criminals, not law-abiding citizens.
Thank you.
H.R. 8 would outlaw the private gun sales Americans have enjoyed since December 15, 1791, the date on which the Second Amendment was ratified. This would criminalize a neighbor who sold a gun to lifelong neighbor without first getting government permission via a background check. It would also criminalize a friend for selling a gun to lifelong friend without government permission.
Ironically, the bill would have done nothing to stop the attack on Gabby Giffords because her attacker did not buy his gun privately. Rather, he passed a background check to acquire the gun retail.
Moreover, H.R. 8 would have done nothing to stop nearly every mass shooter to date in the 21st century. This is because nearly every mass shooter acquired his guns via background checks, rather than private gun sales. The exceptions are those who stole their guns.
Yet Democrats are rushing this legislation to the House floor for a vote. Reuters reports that the House Judiciary Panel “will mark up the bill…on February 13 and send it to the House floor for a vote.”
One of the main talking points from the event was having a “national government registry.”
For starters, there is no government registry.
Gun owners do not “register” with the federal government, they are required to pass a background check in the state in which they are in prior to being able to legally purchase a firearm.
It’s not handled by the federal government because states have different laws in place regarding waiting periods, “red flag” laws, and other measures citizens must go through before being able to legally buy a gun.
After cutting through many of the liberal talking points, it is clear that House Democrats are going to do everything imaginable to erode as much of the Second Amendment as possible.
This is why many don’t take these anti-gun movements seriously, because many liberals don’t want solutions, they want to ban all guns and erode as much of the Second Amendment as possible.
While the bill may pass in the House, it’s highly unlikely that it would ever pass in the Republican-controlled Senate.
H.R. 1112, which purportedly targets the inappropriately-named “Charleston loophole,” is just as insidious an attack on gun owners. Both bills were passed out of the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday. H.R. 1112 would eliminate the 3-day safety-valve provision under the federal firearms background check system that prevents the government from enacting an indefinite delay of firearm purchases for law-abiding Americans. All Federal Firearms Licensees (gun dealers) are required to conduct a background check on prospective purchasers to determine if transferring the firearm would violate state or federal law. Under current law, if an FFL initiates a background check, but does not receive a determination from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System within three business days, the FFL may proceed with the firearms transfer. After the three-day window, FBI continues to research the matter that gave rise to an individual’s delay for 90 days after the check was initiated. If it is later determined that the person is prohibited from possessing firearms, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is notified and tasked with retrieving the firearm.
And it gets a veto if it were to reach the President. End of story!. Doubt it could clear the Senate either.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
WVSPORTS.COM West Virginia basketball lands UIC transfer guard Okani
- Latest: MountaineerGuy
-
-
-
