MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘HR 127’

Psych Evals, $800 a Year “Insurance,” a PUBLIC Gun Registry

Posted by M. C. on February 19, 2021

https://www.theorganicprepper.com/new-gun-control-bills/

by Robert Wheeler

Congress and the White House (currently, perhaps the most anti-Second Amendment collection of politicians ever to grasp the reins of power) are now pushing several bills to dismantle the right to keep and bear arms.

United States Bill of Rights: Second-Amendment

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

One new piece of legislation submitted by Sheila Jackson Lee HR 127 is being called “insanity on steroids” by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

“Over the years,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, “we’ve seen some astonishingly bad legislation originate on Capitol Hill, but this one takes the term ‘abomination’ to an entirely new level. One look at this bill and you wonder whether Congresswoman Jackson Lee ever heard of the Bill of Rights, which includes the Second Amendment.”

Things were bad enough with the bills Congress attempted to push through when President Trump was in office but this takes things to an entirely different level.

HR 127 combines many approaches to destroy Americans’ gun rights

If passed, HR 127 would ban some common types of ammunition and “original equipment magazines” for most firearms. Also, it imposes a punishing licensing and registration scheme.

Essentially HR 127 would: 

  • Ban common types of ammunition, which would include every shotgun shell that is larger than a .410. The bill actually states, “It shall be unlawful for any person to possess ammunition that is 0.50 caliber or greater.” The punishment? A fine of at least $50,000 and imprisonment of at least ten years. So say goodbye to your 12 gauge and many other forms of shotguns.
  • Force Americans to give up hundreds of millions of firearm magazines. Of course, they won’t even be compensating you for doing so. The bill states, “It shall be unlawful for any person to possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.” It then defines “large capacity ammunition feeding devices” in a way that includes those “that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition,” except for .22 rimfire magazines. According to industry figures, there are more than hundreds of millions of 11+ round magazines. Like the ban on shotgun shells, the bill would ban these magazines retroactively, with no compensation for items that MUST be turned in.
  • Require the federal government to register around 400 million guns in America in about three months. The bill says that the registration information would have to be provided to the BATFE (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives) “in the case of a firearm acquired before the effective date of the section, within three months after the effective date of this section.”
  • Require the firearm registry database to be available to “all members of the public” and “all branches of the United States Armed Forces,” among many others. According to the NRA, that 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 is also interesting to note that the US military (which is prohibited by law from engaging in domestic law enforcement) is listed as an agency that would take an interest in knowing who owns these firearms and where they are.
  • Retroactively criminalize firearm ownership by young adults. As it currently stands, there are no federal laws prohibiting firearm ownership by adults over 18. This bill would require a license to possess any firearm, and those licenses could only be obtained by those who are 21 or older.
  • Discourage voluntary mental health treatment. The bill permanently bans license issuance to anyone who “has been hospitalized . . . with a mental illness, disturbance, or diagnosis (including addiction to a controlled substance . . . or alcohol).” Anyone who has a “brain disease” would also be banned from receiving a license. “Brain disease” includes brain cancer, epilepsy, and Parkinson’s Disease.
  • Require the firearm licensee to pay a tax, aka “government insurance,” for around $800 a year.
  • Require license applicants and other household members to undergo a psychological evaluation, which would be paid for by the applicant.

And that’s not all.

In addition to HR 127, there is a host of other gun control or gun control-related bills being submitted by the new House of Representatives.

For instance:

  • HR 121 – introduced by Sheila Jackson Lee: Provides for the hiring of 200 additional BATFE agents and investigators to enforce and investigate gun laws.
  • HR 125 – introduced by Sheila Jackson Lee: Creates a seven-day waiting period before semi-automatic firearms, silencers, armor piercing ammunition, or large-capacity ammunition magazines may be transferred.
  • HR 135 – submitted by Sheila Jackson Lee: Requires the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to report to the Congress semiannually on the number of firearms transfers resulting from the failure to complete a background check within three business days, and the procedures followed after it is discovered that a firearm transfer has been made to a transferee who is ineligible to receive a firearm.
  • HR 167 – submitted by Al Green: Prohibits a firearm transfer at a gun show by a person who is not a federally licensed firearms dealer.

Of course, all of these bills will be advertised as “common-sense gun reform.” Every shooting victim in the country will be paraded in front of the American people to ensure maximum sympathy while simultaneously destroying their rights.

What are your thoughts?

Do you find any of these measures reasonable? Do you plan to contact your representatives? Share your opinions in the comments.

About Robert

Robert Wheeler has been quietly researching world events for two decades. After witnessing the global network of NGOs and several ‘Revolutions’ they engineered in a number of different countries, Wheeler began analyzing current events through these lenses.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Prepare: The Supreme Court Might Legalize Warrantless Gun Seizures | The Libertarian Institute

Posted by M. C. on February 11, 2021

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/prepare-the-supreme-court-might-legalize-warrantless-gun-seizures/

by Matt Agorist

Last week, the Free Thought Project reported on HR 127, the most tyrannical gun bill ever proposed. The bill would target the poor by forcing citizens to pay $800 per year to possess firearms that they are required to register. It also bans multiple legal guns and ammo types, turning tens of millions of Americans into felons over night. While this bill is, without a doubt, the worst gun bill in history, it didn’t lay out any guidelines for violating a citizen’s Fourth Amendment right. Next month, however, the Supreme Court will be considering exactly that—can cops enter a home to seize guns without a warrant?

That escalated quickly.

In March, the Supreme Court will hear the case of Caniglia v. Strom, which asks the question of whether the “community caretaking” exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement extends to the home.

The community caretaker exception, has already been recognized as an exception to the Fourth Amendment by the United States Supreme Court. In Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U.S. 433 (1973), the United States Supreme Court held that police officers did not violate the Fourth Amendment when they searched the trunk of a car that had been towed after an accident.

The Court acknowledged that, “except in certain carefully defined classes of cases,” police cannot search private property without consent or a warrant. It emphasized, however, that “there is a constitutional difference between houses and cars.” Since Cady, there has been a whole host of cases that took this holding and created the doctrine of “community caretaking.” Cady defined community caretaking activities as those “totally divorced from the detection, investigation, or acquisition of evidence relating to the violation of a criminal statute.”

In other words, as long as an officer might reasonably think that a warrantless search will alleviate a danger to the community, the search is considered constitutional. This was in vehicles, not homes.

While the caretaker exception has long been applied to vehicles, the idea of applying it to homes and allowing cops to seize guns without a warrant is worrisome. In an article from Forbes, the case of Caniglia v. Strom, is explained:

Mr. Caniglia was arguing with his wife and melodramatically put an unloaded gun on the table and said “shoot me now and get it over with.” His wife called a non-emergency number for the police who arrived shortly thereafter. The police disagreed about whether Mr. Caniglia was acting “normal” or “agitated” but they convinced him to take an ambulance to the local hospital for evaluation. The police did not accompany him.

While he was on his way to the hospital, Mrs. Caniglia told the police that her husband kept two handguns in the home. The police decided to search his home for the guns without obtaining a warrant. (Mrs. Caniglia’s consent to have the police search their home was legally negated because the police untruthfully told her that her husband had consented to the seizure of any guns.) The police located and seized the two guns. Mr. Caniglia sued for the violation of his 4th Amendment right to privacy and his 2nd Amendment right to keep handguns in the home for self-protection.

The case has been making its way through the courts, with the courts ruling in favor of warrantless searches. The federal court just below the Supreme Court, the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that it is fine and dandy for cops to warrantlessly search your home and take your guns because they need “elbow room” to provide safety.

“At its core, the community caretaking doctrine is designed to give police elbow room to take appropriate action when unforeseen circumstances present some transient hazard that requires immediate attention. Understanding the core purpose of the doctrine leads inexorably to the conclusion that it should not be limited to the motor vehicle context. Threats to individual and community safety are not confined to the highways,” the court wrote.

As Forbes points out, unlike the “exigent circumstances” and “emergency aid” exceptions, the community caretaking exception is not limited to circumstances where there is no time to apply for a warrant. And the question of what sort of caretaking falls under this exception is extremely vague. Will the police be able to use it to, for example, conduct warrantless searches of political protesters’ homes to make sure they aren’t planning on violent behavior at their next political rally?

We have already seen tech giants like Facebook hand over the private messages of those who talked about the events of January 6. If this ruling is upheld, it could pave the way for cops to raid the home of those who engage in peaceful discourse based solely on the premise that violence might happen.

President Biden has already labeled tens of millions of Americans who supported the pro-Trump rally in DC as “terrorists.”

Just a few weeks later and a DHS terror alert was issued for beliefs held by tens of millions of Americans like those who oppose lockdowns or who were upset over the outcome of the election. With the slippery slope of this case, these views could easily be included in the “elbow room” granted to police to carry out their “community caretaking” and subsequently raid homes and seize guns with no warrant.

Hopefully SCOTUS knocks down this ruling and cooler heads prevail. However, at the rate this tyranny is unfolding in 2021, that is not very likely.

This article was originally featured at The Free Thought Project

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »