H.r. 127

[HARDCORE]

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/hr127/text

H.R. 127: Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act

Compare this bill to another bill:

On GovTrack Insider:

POWER Act would overturn Biden’s executive order banning new oil and gas leasing on federal lands…
Does the executive order hurt the economy more than it helps the environment? Feb 8, 2021

After Trump exited the Paris Climate Accords, bill would prevent Biden from re-committing US to…

Maybe Rick Blaine was wrong in Casablanca, and we won’t always have Paris. Feb 5, 2021
No Masks Mandate Act would overturn Biden executive orders requiring masks on federal property and…
Was the executive order a critical public safety measure, or a violation of Americans’ individual rights? Feb 4, 2021
The text of the bill below is as of Jan 4, 2021 (Introduced).
________________________________________
I
117TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 127
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 4, 2021
Ms. Jackson Lee introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
A BILL
To provide for the licensing of firearm and ammunition possession and the registration of firearms, and to prohibit the possession of certain ammunition.
1.
Short title
This Act may be cited as the Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act.
2.
Licensing of firearm and ammunition possession; registration of firearms
(a)
Firearm licensing and registration system
(1)
In general
Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
932.
Licensing of firearm and ammunition possession; registration of firearms
(a)
In general
The Attorney General, through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, shall establish a system for licensing the possession of firearms or ammunition in the United States, and for the registration with the Bureau of each firearm present in the United States.
(b)
Firearm registration system
(1)
Required information
Under the firearm registration system, the owner of a firearm shall transmit to the Bureau—
(A)
the make, model, and serial number of the firearm, the identity of the owner of the firearm, the date the firearm was acquired by the owner, and where the firearm is or will be stored; and
(B)
a notice specifying the identity of any person to whom, and any period of time during which, the firearm will be loaned to the person.
(2)
Deadline for supplying information
The transmission required by paragraph (1) shall be made—
(A)
in the case of a firearm acquired before the effective date of this section, within 3 months after the effective date of this section; or
(B)
in the case of a firearm acquired on or after the effective date, on the date the owner acquires the firearm.
(3)
Database
(A)
In general
The Attorney General shall establish and maintain a database of all firearms registered pursuant to this subsection.
(B)
Access
The Attorney General shall make the contents of the database accessible to all members of the public, all Federal, State, and local law enforcement authorities, all branches of the United States Armed Forces, and all State and local governments, as defined by the Bureau.
(c)
Licensing system
(1)
Requirements
(A)
General license
Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the Attorney General shall issue to an individual a license to possess a firearm and ammunition if the individual—
(i)
has attained 21 years of age;
(ii)
after applying for the license—
(I)
undergoes a criminal background check conducted by the national instant criminal background check system established under section 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, and the check does not indicate that possession of a firearm by the individual would violate subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 or State law;
(II)
undergoes a psychological evaluation conducted in accordance with paragraph (2), and the evaluation does not indicate that the individual is psychologically unsuited to possess a firearm; and
(III)
successfully completes a training course, certified by the Attorney General, in the use, safety, and storage of firearms, that includes at least 24 hours of training; and
(iii)
demonstrates that, on issuance of the license, the individual will have in effect an insurance policy issued under subsection (d).
(B)
Antique firearm display license
The Attorney General shall issue to an individual a license to display an antique firearm in a residence of the individual if the individual—
(i)
is the holder of a license issued under subparagraph (A);
(ii)
supplies proof that the individual owns an antique firearm;
(iii)
describes the manner in which the firearm will be displayed in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Attorney General, and certifies that the firearm will be so displayed; and
(iv)
demonstrates that the individual has provided for storage of the firearm in a safe or facility approved by the Attorney General for the storage of firearms.
(C)
Military-style weapons license
The Attorney General shall issue to an individual a license to own and possess a military-style weapon if the individual—
(i)
is the holder of a license issued under subparagraph (A); and
(ii)
after applying for a license under this subparagraph, successfully completes a training course, certified by the Attorney General, in the use, safety, and storage of the weapon, that includes at least 24 hours of training and live fire training.
(2)
Psychological evaluation
A psychological evaluation is conducted in accordance with this paragraph if—
(A)
the evaluation is conducted in compliance with such standards as shall be established by the Attorney General;
(B)
the evaluation is conducted by a licensed psychologist approved by the Attorney General;
(C)
as deemed necessary by the licensed psychologist involved, the evaluation included a psychological evaluation of other members of the household in which the individual resides; and
(D)
as part of the psychological evaluation, the licensed psychologist interviewed any spouse of the individual, any former spouse of the individual, and at least 2 other persons who are a member of the family of, or an associate of, the individual to further determine the state of the mental, emotional, and relational stability of the individual in relation to firearms.
(3)
Denial of license
(A)
Required
The Attorney General shall deny such a license to an individual if—
(i)
the individual is prohibited by Federal law from possessing a firearm; or
(ii)
the individual has been hospitalized—
(I)
with a mental illness, disturbance, or diagnosis (including depression, homicidal ideation, suicidal ideation, attempted suicide, or addiction to a controlled substance (within the meaning of the Controlled Substances Act) or alcohol), or a brain disease (including dementia or Alzheimer’s); or
(II)
on account of conduct that endangers self or others.
(B)
Authorized
The Attorney General may deny such a license to an individual if—
(i)
the psychological evaluation referred to in paragraph (2) indicates that the individual—
(I)
has a chronic mental illness or disturbance, or a brain disease, referred to in subparagraph (A)(ii)(I);
(II)
is addicted to a controlled substance (within the meaning of the Controlled Substances Act) or alcohol; or
(III)
has attempted to commit suicide; or
(ii)
prior psychological treatment or evaluation of the individual indicated that the individual engaged in conduct that posed a danger to self or others.
(4)
Suspension of license
(A)
In general
A license issued under this subsection to an individual who is under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year is hereby suspended.
(B)
Authorized for lack of firearm insurance
The Attorney General may suspend a license issued under this subsection to an individual who has violated section 922(dd) in the most recent 12-month period.
(5)
Revocation of license
A license issued under this subsection to an individual who is or becomes prohibited by Federal or State law from possessing a firearm is hereby revoked. Such an individual shall immediately return the license, and surrender all firearms and ammunition owned or possessed by the individual, to the Attorney General.
(6)
Expiration of license
A license issued to an individual under this subsection shall expire—
(A)
in the case of a license that has been in effect for less than 5 years, 1 year after issuance or renewal, as the case may be; or
(B)
in the case of a license that has been in effect for at least 5 years, 3 years after the most recent date the license is renewed.
(7)
Renewal of license
The Attorney General shall renew a license issued to an individual under this subsection if the individual—
(A)
requests the renewal by the end of the 60-day period that begins with the date the license expires;
(B)
in the 3-year period ending with the date the renewal is requested—
(i)
has met the requirement of paragraph (1)(A)(ii)(II); and
(ii)
has successfully completed a training course, certified by the Attorney General, in the use, safety, and storage of firearms, that includes at least 8 hours of training;
(C)
meets the requirement of paragraph (1)(A)(iii); and
(D)
in the case of a license issued under paragraph (1)(C), in the 2-year period ending with the date the renewal is requested, has successfully completed a training course, certified by the Attorney General, that includes at least 8 hours of training in the use of the weapon subject to the license.
(d)
Firearm insurance
(1)
In general
The Attorney General shall issue to any person who has applied for a license pursuant to subsection (c) and has paid to the Attorney General the fee specified in paragraph (2) of this subsection a policy that insures the person against liability for losses and damages resulting from the use of any firearm by the person during the 1-year period that begins with the date the policy is issued.
(2)
Fee
The fee specified in this paragraph is $800.
.
(2)
Military-style weapon defined
Section 921(a) of such title is amended by inserting after paragraph (29) the following:
(30)
The term military-style weapon means—
(A)
any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms in any caliber, known as—
(i)
Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models);
(ii)
Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil;
(iii)
Beretta Ar70 (SC–70);
(iv)
Colt AR–15;
(v)
Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC;
(vi)
SWD M–10, M–11, M–11/9, and M–12;
(vii)
Steyr AUG;
(viii)
INTRATEC TEC–9, TEC–DC9 and TEC–22; and
(ix)
revolving cylinder shotguns, such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12;
(B)
a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of—
(i)
a folding or telescoping stock;
(ii)
a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
(iii)
a bayonet mount;
(iv)
a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and
(v)
a grenade launcher;
(C)
a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of—
(i)
an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip;
(ii)
a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer;
(iii)
a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;
(iv)
a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and
(v)
a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and
(D)
a semiautomatic shotgun that has at least 2 of—
(i)
a folding or telescoping stock;
(ii)
a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
(iii)
a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds; and
(iv)
an ability to accept a detachable magazine.
.
(3)
Clerical amendment
The table of sections for such chapter is amended by adding at the end the following:
932. Licensing of firearm and ammunition possession; registration of firearms.
.
(4)
Deadline for establishment
Within 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall prescribe final regulations to implement the amendments made by this subsection.
(b)
Prohibitions; penalties
(1)
Prohibitions
Section 922 of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:
(aa)
It shall be unlawful for a person to possess a firearm or ammunition, unless—
(1)
the person is carrying a valid license issued under section 932(c)(1); and
(2)(A)
in the case of a firearm owned by the person, the firearm is registered to the person under section 932(b); or
(B)
in the case of a firearm owned by another person—
(i)
the firearm is so registered to such other person; and
(ii)
such other person has notified the Attorney General that the firearm has been loaned to the person, and the possession is during the loan period specified in the notice.
(bb)(1)
It shall be unlawful for a person to transfer a firearm or ammunition to a person who is not licensed under section 932(c)(1).
(2)
It shall be unlawful for a person to sell or give a firearm or ammunition to another person unless the person has notified the Attorney General of the sale or gift.
(3)
It shall be unlawful for a person to loan a firearm or ammunition to another person unless the person has notified the Attorney General of the loan, including the identity of such other person and the period for which the loan is made.
(4)
It shall be unlawful for a person holding a valid license issued under section 932(c)(1) to transfer a firearm to an individual who has not attained 18 years of age.
(cc)
A person who possesses a firearm or to whom a license is issued under section 932(c)(1) shall have in effect an insurance policy issued under section 932(d).
.
(2)
Penalties
Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:
(8)
Whoever knowingly violates section 922(aa) shall be fined not less than $75,000 and not more than $150,000, imprisoned not less than 15 years and not more than 25 years, or both.
(9)(A)
Whoever knowingly violates section 922(bb)(1) shall be fined not less than $50,000 and not more than $75,000, imprisoned not less than 10 years and not more than 15 years, or both.
(B)
Whoever knowingly violates section 922(bb)(2) shall be fined not less than $30,000 and not more than $50,000, imprisoned not less than 5 years and not more than 10 years, or both.
(C)
Whoever knowingly violates section 922(bb)(3) shall be fined not less than $5,000 and not more than $10,000.
(D)
Whoever knowingly violates section 922(bb)(4) shall be fined not less than $75,000 and not more than $100,000, imprisoned not less than 15 years and not more than 25 years, or both, except that if the transferee of the firearm possess or uses the firearm during or in relation to a crime, an unintentional shooting, or suicide, the transferor shall be fined not less than $100,000 and not more than $150,000, imprisoned not less than 25 years and not more than 40 years, or both.
(10)
Whoever knowingly violates section 922(cc) shall be fined not less than $50,000 and not more than $100,000, imprisoned not less than 10 years and not more than 20 years, or both.
.
(3)
Conforming amendments
(A)
Elimination of prohibition on establishment of centralized firearm registration system
Section 926(a) of such title is amended by striking the 2nd sentence.
(B)
Applicability to governmental and military firearms and ammunition
Section 925(a) of such title is amended in each of paragraphs (1) and (2), by inserting and except for section 932, after the 2nd comma.
(4)
Effective date
The amendments made by this subsection shall take effect on the date final regulations are prescribed under subsection (a)(4).
3.
Prohibition on possession of certain ammunition
(a)
In general
Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 2 of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:
(dd)(1)
It shall be unlawful for any person to possess ammunition that is 0.50 caliber or greater.
(2)(A)
It shall be unlawful for any person to possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.
(B)
Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to—
(i)
the manufacture for, or possession by, the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, or the possession by a law enforcement officer employed by such an entity for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty);
(ii)
the possession by an employee or contractor of a licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 on-site for purposes of establishing and maintaining an on-site physical protection system and security organization required by Federal law, or off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized training or transportation of nuclear materials;
(iii)
the manufacture or possession by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney General; or
(iv)
the manufacture for, or possession by, an organization that provides firearm training and that is registered with the Attorney General, or the possession by an individual to whom such an organization is providing firearm training during and at the location of the training.
.
(b)
Large capacity ammunition feeding device defined
Section 921(a) of such title, as amended by section 1 of this Act, is amended by inserting after paragraph (30) the following:
(31)
The term large capacity ammunition feeding device means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition, but does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.
.
(c)
Penalties
Section 924(a) of such title, as amended by section 2 of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:
(11)(A)
Whoever knowingly violates section 922(dd)(1) shall be fined not less than $50,000 and not more than $100,000, imprisoned not less than 10 years and not more than 20 years, or both.
(B)
Whoever knowingly violates section 922(dd)(2) shall be fined not less than $10,000 and not more than $25,000, imprisoned not less than 1 year and not more than 5 years, or both.

[Boats]

What's the Worst Part of Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee's HR 127?
By: Mark Chesnut - Fire Arms News - 02-03-21
Re: https://www.firearmsnews.com/editori...-hr-127/388481

If you’re not living under a rock and still get occasional news from some credible source other than so-called “mainstream” media, you’ve likely heard of House Resolution 127 introduced by U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas.

My first thought when hearing about the legislation was, “How bad could it be?” After all, Lee has in the past proven herself profoundly ignorant of all things firearms related, so surely she couldn’t come up with a measure that would be taken seriously by anyone.

Full disclosure, the measure is chock full of provisions so ridiculous that reading it can make you want to laugh more than it makes you want to cry. Unfortunately, with the party of gun bans and forced buy-backs now controlling the House, Senate and White House, things we used to see as funny aren’t quite so entertaining anymore.

So, what part of the measure is worst? It certainly could be the blatantly illegal firearms registration mandated by the legislation. That portion states in no uncertain terms, “The Attorney General, through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, shall establish a system for licensing the possession of firearms or ammunition in the United States, and for the registration with the Bureau of each firearm present in the United States.”


That provision further states: “Under the firearm registration system, the owner of a firearm shall transmit to the Bureau — (A) the make, model, and serial number of the firearm, the identity of the owner of the firearm, the date the firearm was acquired by the owner, and where the firearm is or will be stored; and (B) a notice specifying the identity of any person to whom, and any period of time during which, the firearm will be loaned to the person.”


Perhaps, however, the licensing system instituted by the measure could be considered worse than that. After all, it states that: “Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the Attorney General shall issue to an individual a license to possess a firearm and ammunition if the individual — (i) has attained 21 years of age; (ii) after applying for the license— (I) undergoes a criminal background check conducted by the national instant criminal background check system established under section 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, and the check does not indicate that possession of a firearm by the individual would violate subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 or State law; (II) undergoes a psychological evaluation conducted in accordance with paragraph (2), and the evaluation does not indicate that the individual is psychologically unsuited to possess a firearm; and (III) successfully completes a training course, certified by the Attorney General, in the use, safety, and storage of firearms, that includes at least 24 hours of training; and (iii) demonstrates that, on issuance of the license, the individual will have in effect an insurance policy issued under subsection (d).”

Yes, it requires a psychological evaluation and completion of some unspecified training course (24 hours’ worth, certified by the U.S. attorney general) to get a license. But even more incredible is the last part requiring proof of an insurance policy, which is later spelled out to be provided by the attorney general for a fee of $800. And, oh yeah, the license must be renewed every three years, although the legislation doesn’t mention the fee for that.

Of course, the licensing requirements for “military -style weapons” are much more stringent. Obviously, these weapons are far more dangerous, as actually listed in the legislation are such frequently use murder guns as revolving shotguns (stagecoach holdup, anyone?), semi-auto rifles with both a telescoping stock and a pistol grip (can you say most stock AR-15s, also seldom used in crimes, according to the FBI?), and any semi-auto shotguns with a pistol grip and a magazine capacity over five or the ability to accept a detachable magazine (there goes your favorite turkey gun, also!). If you think those examples are outrageous, take a look at the legislation yourself to see what other guns the genius Jackson Lee mentions, some even by name. You can find the text here.

If that’s not the worst, maybe it is the ban on any ammunition .50 caliber or larger . Or perhaps the ban on all ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. Or maybe the stipulation that nobody can transfer a firearm to another unless they have a Federal Firearms License or permission from the attorney general. Boy, is he going to be busy!

Maybe, however, all those parts of the legislation actually pale when compared to the proposed penalties for not complying with these serious infringements. There will be no hand-slapping under the new law. According to the legislation, an unlicensed person possessing a firearm that hasn’t been registered by him or her “shall be fined not less than $75,000 and not more than $150,000, imprisoned not less than 15 years and not more than 25 years, or both.” The law further stipulates that anyone illegally transferring a firearm—like, say, loaning it to your brother-in-law for a hunting trip without permission from the government—“shall be fined not less than $50,000 and not more than $75,000, imprisoned not less than 10 years and not more than 15 years, or both.”

In the end, the question of what part of the measure is worst is, of course, a rhetorical one. No law that infringes on the right of the people to keep and bear arms is better or worse than any other, and all of these provisions are grossly unconstitutional.

Of course, none of Jackson Lee’s outrageous proposals are new to anyone who has been following Second Amendment politics for the past several decades. All have been proposed at least once in the past. What’s scary about these proposals this time around is that both branches of Congress and the presidency, charged with checking and balancing each other, are now all under the control of power-hungry gun-banners who care not a whit if they trample the Second Amendment—or any other, for that matter.

About this writer: Freelance writer and editor Mark Chesnut is the owner/editorial director at Red Setter Communications LLC. An avid hunter, shooter and political observer, he has been covering Second Amendment issues and politics on a near-daily basis for the past 20 years.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Personal note: The noose is tightening on Fire Arms allowances / provisions - and registration - so much for the 2nd Amendment.
Well at least nothing was posted about sling-shots or bows & arrows? Yeow! HC127 is becoming a nightmare.
-
Here's another link if you're interested:

2nd Posted: 2 Second Amendment Foundation
2020 Gun Rights Policy Conference Is Online Event Due to COVID-19
Re: https://www.firearmsnews.com/editori...covid19/380072

Boats

[HARDCORE]

https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/...ity-insurance/

Bill in Congress would require Americans take psych test, get liability insurance, register guns and more to own them

Posted by: Pat Droney|January 31, 2021 |Categories2A Watch, Editorial, Featured
The following editorial is written by a retired Chief of Police and current staff writer for Law Enforcement Today.
—
WASHINGTON, DC- Defund the police. Release criminals from jail. Open the borders to criminal gangs. This is Biden’s America. Now to add insult to injury, the Democratic-led House of Representatives wants to take away the ability of the American people to defend themselves. Or at the very least restrict it…severely.

Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) is by far one of the most radical members of Congress. Given the makeup of the current House, that is saying something. However, as the saying goes, elections have consequences, and we are already seeing exactly how far left this current makeup is willing to go. For further proof, look no further than H.R. 127.

We already reported on H.R. 1, a far-left radical bill clearly designed to have Democrats win national elections in perpetuity. H.R. 1 would codify every stunt pulled by Democrats in the 2020 election such as ballot harvesting and mail-in voting, much of it in violation of Article I, Section II of the Constitution. H.R. 127 would put significant limitations on the 2nd Amendment.

The law, if passed and signed into law would, under §932 establish licensing of firearms and ammunition, as well as registration of firearms. This section would require the owner of a firearm to transmit to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, under section (b)(1):

(A) the make, model, and serial number of the firearm, the identity of the owner of the firearm, the date the firearm was acquired by the owner, and where the firearm is or will be stored; and

(B) a notice specifying the identity of any person to whom, and any period of time during which, the firearm will be loaned to the person.

The above information would be required within three months of the effective date of the bill for firearms already owned by that date, and on the date an owner acquires a firearm for any weapons acquired after the effective date.

The law will direct the Attorney General to “establish and maintain a database of all firearms registered pursuant to this subsection.”

Here’s the kicker about the above section. Read this carefully:

“The Attorney General shall make the contents of the database accessible to all members of the public [emphasis added], all Federal, State and local law enforcement authorities, all branches of the United States Armed Forces [emphasis added], and all State and local governments, as defined by the Bureau.”

So think about this for a minute. This law would publicize who owns guns, and where they store them. What a windfall for potential criminals…the ability to know who keeps guns in their homes (and by extension who does NOT) and where the guns are stored.
This is like putting a scarlet letter out there for where criminals can acquire guns. Or, where they don’t need to be worried about encountering an armed homeowner.

Secondly, why would the military need to know who has arms? For what purpose? The 2nd Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights in part to protect the people from a tyrannical government.

If there is anything we have seen with the current makeup of Congress and the current administration, it is that they do not seem to be shy about imposing tyrannical standards or rules upon the American people.

Indeed, since last March, with the onset of COVID-19, we have seen one tyrannical governor after another implement random, arbitrary, draconian executive orders. More recently, we have seen members of Congress ask for “reeducation camps” or “reprogramming” for supporters of President Trump.

Big tech companies have engaged in outright censorship of points of view which do not conform to a particular narrative. Where people have previously accused gun owners and 2nd Amendment advocates of being “paranoid” about government overreach, recent events have done nothing to sway that opinion.

Section (c)(1) outlines requirements for a “licensing system.” It reads as follows:

(A) GENERAL LICENSE—Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the Attorney General shall issue a license to possess a firearm and ammunition if the individual—

(i) has attained 21 years of age;

(ii) after applying for the license—

(I) undergoes a criminal background check conducted by the national instant criminal background check system established under section 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, and the check does not indicate that possession of a firearm by the individual would violate subsection (g) or (n) of Section 922 or State law;

(II) undergoes a psychological evaluation [emphasis added] conducted in accordance with paragraph (2), and the evaluation does not indicate that the individual is psychologically unsuited to possess a firearm; and

(III) successfully completes a training course, certified by the Attorney General, in the use, safety, and storage of firearms, that includes at least 24 hours of training, and
(iii) demonstrates that, on issuance of the license, the individual will have in effect an insurance policy issued under subsection (d) [emphasis added].

That last section, folks is the money shot.

This law would require that persons who wish to get a federal license to carry firearms would have to obtain liability insurance.

One can imagine that obtaining such insurance, if it was even offered, would be prohibitively expensive. Ah, but the government has that covered as well as you’ll see further on.

So in essence, what Democrats such as Jackson Lee are doing by such a proposal is to eliminate the ability of lower income Americans to afford to protect themselves. Since many lower income Americans tend to be people of color, this section in its face appears to be rather racist.

The other portion of this, a psychological evaluation we could almost agree to under ONE condition.

That all members of Congress, including psychos such as Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, Maxine Waters, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley, Cory Bush, and Hakeem Jeffries also had to agree to psychological evaluations. For that matter, Joe Biden should also have to submit to a cognitive abilities test.

Then it is something worth considering.

Considering, and then quickly rejecting, of course.

The same rules as above would apply to anyone who wanted to obtain a license for so-called “military-style” weapons, with some exceptions. Under psychological evaluation, there are additional requirements, including:

(C) as deemed necessary by the licensed psychologist involved, the evaluation included a psychological evaluation of other members of the household in which the individual resides; and

(D) as part of the psychological evaluation, the license psychologist interviewed any spouse of the individual, any former spouse of the individual, and at least 2 other persons who are a member of the family of, or an associate of, the individual to further determine the state of the mental, emotional, and relational stability of the individual in relation to firearms.

So in other words, an ex-wife or ex-husband with an axe to grind could have their former spouse denied a license to own a “military-style” weapon. Sounds pretty fair.
These licenses of course have an expiration date, so anyone so licensed would have to renew them periodically, to the benefit of course of the government, who will get additional fees.

Remember we spoke of liability insurance? Well good old Uncle Sam has you covered there as well.
(d) FIREARM INSURANCE.—

(1). IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General shall issue to any person who has applied for a license pursuant to subsection (c) and has paid to the Attorney General the fee specified in paragraph (2) [emphasis added] of this subsection a policy that insures the person against liability for losses and damages resulting from the use of any firearm by the person during the 1-year period that begins with the date the policy is issued.

(2). FEE—The fee specified in this paragraph is $800. [emphasis added]
The proposed law would also require a valid license in order to possess ammunition. In addition, private sale or transfer of firearms or ammunition would be illegal unless the Attorney General was notified of the sale or gift. Likewise notification to the Attorney General would be required for the loan of a firearm to another person.

Please do not misunderstand what the Democrats are trying to do. National registration of guns serves one purpose and one purpose only…to know WHO has the guns.
The next “logical” step in the process is not if, but when Democrats decide to undergo a gun confiscation program, they know who has the “legal” guns.

Given the Democrats clear disdain for the Bill of Rights, does anyone think for a minute they would think twice about gutting the 2nd Amendment?

They have never been concerned about illegal guns. You need only look at the infamous “Fast and Furious” gun-running program undertaken by former Attorney General Eric Holder during the Obama presidency as proof. Anyone brain-dead enough to think laws such as this will make a dent in the criminal use of firearms needs to get one of the psychological examinations mentioned in the bill.

Democrats have been longing to implement something like this for years and now, with a feeble-minded person in the White House who is kowtowing to the hard left they feel empowered to do so.

Hopefully the conservatives in the Supreme Court will see this as the Constitution-busting piece of garbage that it is. Pass this on to everyone you know and make sure they are aware of what the radical anti-2nd Amendment left has in mind. They are coming for your guns…MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT.

—
Pat Droney

Pat Droney is a retired police officer, having worked in the field in for over 31 years, up to and including the rank of Chief of Police. After retirement, Pat worked as Director of Campus Safety for a private school, as well as Loss Prevention Supervisor in the retail sector. He currently is a supervisor for a large passenger airline. Pat is a proud Reagan conservative patriot, loves his Irish heritage, but especially loves his country and is an unabashed supporter of our military.

[Boats]

H.R. 127 – A Bill Designed to Express Hostility Toward Law-Abiding Gun Owners
By: NRA-ILA News - 02-11-21
Re: https://www.nraila.org/articles/2021...ing-gun-owners

All gun control bills share the same basic goal: a world in which fewer people own firearms. Some bills simply ban certain types of firearms or ammunition outright. Others place obstacles in the path of owning firearms or ammunition to make them more difficult and expensive to obtain, thereby shrinking the market for them. The fundamental flaw of these approaches is that they treat all law-abiding firearm owners as would-be criminals, when the reality is that most firearm-related assaults and homicides are committed by people who completely disregard the law, including laws against taking human life.

H.R. 127 combines both failed approaches. It bans common types of ammunition and original equipment magazines for most self-defense firearms. And, it makes all firearms more difficult to obtain and possess through a punitive licensing and registration scheme. In its details, however, H.R. 127 is so outrageous, persecutory, and unworkable that its main function is simply to display the hostility of its author and supporters toward firearms, those who own them, and those who want to own them.

H.R. 127 would ban common types of ammunition, including every shotgun shell larger than .410.

* The bill states: “It shall be unlawful for any person to possess ammunition that is 0.50 caliber or greater.”

* Violations of this ban would result in the imposition of a fine of at least $50,000 and imprisonment of at least 10 years, mandatory penalties not seen in many violent or infamous federal crimes, including torturing someone to death outside the U.S. or committing treason during wartime.

* Hunting whitetail deer would be legally impossible in at least 10 U.S. states if these restrictions went into effect.

* The bill would also make it impossible for Americans to follow President Biden’s advice to keep a double-barreled, 12 gauge shotgun for self-defense, rather than an AR-15.

* Innumerable numbers of shotgun shells currently possessed by law-abiding people for lawful purposes would suddenly become contraband.

* H.R. 127 would force Americans to relinquish hundreds of millions firearm magazines with no compensation.

* The bill states: “It shall be unlawful for any person to possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device”, and defines such devices to include those “that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition,” excluding certain integral .22 rimfire magazines.

* Industry production figures show that there are hundreds of millions of 11+ round magazines.

* As with its ban on shotgun shells, H.R.127’s magazine ban would apply retroactively, affecting items already owned by millions of Americans for lawful purposes, with no compensation for owners forced to relinquish property that was lawful when obtained.

H.R. 127 would require the federal government to register some 400 million guns in the span of only 3 months.

* The bill states that registration information would have to be provided to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosive, “in the case of a firearm acquired before the effective date of this section, within 3 months after the effective date of this section.”

* But BATFE would also have to create the registration system during those 3 months.

* Because the U.S. (intentionally) does not already have a national firearms registry, it would be impossible for the government to fairly and effectively enforce this system with respect to existing gun owners.

The firearm registry database would have to be made available to “all members of the public,” as well as “all branches of the United States Armed Forces,” among others.

* This would facilitate private discrimination against gun owners, including in such things as employment and access to essential services such as banking, insurance, or housing.

* It also seems to presuppose that the military, which is prohibited by law from engaging in domestic law enforcement, has some role in policing civilian firearm ownership.

Ironically, criminals who possess firearms illegally would self-exempt themselves from the registration requirement, and under U.S. Supreme Court case law, could not be required to disclose their illegal firearm possession through registration.

H.R. 127 would retroactively criminalize firearm ownership by young adults.

* Currently, there is no federal prohibition on adults aged 18 or older possessing otherwise lawful firearms.

* The bill, however, would require a license to possess any firearm, and licenses would only be available to those aged 21 or older.

* Millions of young adults, including those in the military, would become ineligible to possess firearms for their own lawful purposes under this legislation, including any firearms they already owned.

H.R. 127 would discourage voluntary mental health treatment, including for combat veterans or victims of violent trauma, by permanently prohibiting the issuance of a license to anyone who “has been hospitalized … with a mental illness, disturbance, or diagnosis (including … addiction to a controlled substance … or alcohol) … .”

* Anyone who had been hospitalized with a “brain disease” would also be ineligible for a license, including those suffering from brain cancer, epilepsy, and Parkinson’s disease.

H.R. 127 would effectively price lawful firearm ownership out of reach for many of the poorest and most vulnerable Americans.

* It would require the holder of a firearm license to pay a tax (masquerading as government-issued “insurance”) of $800 per year.

* License applicants (and even other members of their household, as directed) would also have to undergo a psychological evaluation at their own expense.

H.R. 127 has a long way to go before becoming law.

* The bill has not yet been scheduled for a committee hearing, and it currently has zero cosponsors.

* While it is not presently moving, it does show how far gun control advocates would like to go in attacking the right to keep and bear arms.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Personal note: It's back to sling shot's, bow's & arrow's & rock's. Everything is overly written and so specific - that you wonder why?
It makes no difference they will continue to exist as they have all these years. A few bad apples spoil the broth every time.
We ever get invaded they will wish all our Citizen's were locked and loaded - that's for damn sure.
-
Boats

[HARDCORE]

Thought You Guys Might Like To Read This Again.......

[HARDCORE]

We Need To Keep This Going.

We Have No President Anymore. Look What Is Happening To Our Border.

Mrs. Hardcore