H.R. 8 Votes Reveal Dem House Leadership Values Illegal Aliens over Law-abiding Gun Owners

[Elderberry]

NRA-ILA March 1, 2019

The Nancy Pelosi-led House of Representatives passed gun control measures H.R. 8 and H.R. 1112 largely along party lines this week. However, a surprise procedural move by a Republican prior to the passage of H.R. 8 underscored the deep divisions in the Democratic Party along with the depth of the leadership’s deep disdain for gun owners. Moreover, the procedural wrangling around the bill further revealed that gun control efforts are not about confronting criminal conduct involving firearms, but rather about burdening gun owners.

In passing H.R. 8, the House voted to burden law-abiding gun owners by criminalizing the private transfer of firearms, even for temporary transfers and those among friends and extended family. The legislation targets the conduct of law-abiding gun owners, as Department of Justice polling of state and federal inmates shows that a plurality of criminals get their guns from the black market (not including private sales or gun shows).

Just prior to the vote on H.R. 8, Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.) made a motion to recommit the legislation to amend it to include a provision that would require the National Instant Criminal Background Check System to notify U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) if an illegal alien attempts to purchase a firearm. Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), it is already a felony for an illegal alien to possess or receive a firearm.

The vote and surrounding furor is instructive in understanding the legislative and political priorities of the Democratic House leadership.

More: https://www.nraila.org/articles/20190301/hr-8-votes-reveal-dem-house-leadership-values-illegal-aliens-over-law-abiding-gun-owners

[Elderberry]

Go Figure: Gun Controllers Use Fuzzy Math to Push an Agenda That Doesn’t Add Up

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20190301/go-figure-gun-controllers-use-fuzzy-math-to-push-an-agenda-that-doesn-t-add-up

There are a lot of things Second Amendment supporters and gun control advocates disagree on, including history, constitutional interpretation, the frequency of armed self-defense, and the role of human agency in violent crime.

But one thing everybody should have a common understanding of is numbers and mathematics.

Unfortunately, recent events show that even when it comes to numerals and counting, gun control supporters inhabit their own alternate reality.

Take, for example, the Statements of Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee that advanced H.R. 8, commonly referred to as a “universal background check bill,” to the full House floor.

Nadler insisted during Wednesday’s debate on the bill that its opponents were exaggerating the penalties that could be assessed for violations. “I just want to point out that the penalty in this bill that keeps being cited as $100,000 is in fact $1,000,” he said (see this video at the 1:44:11 time mark).

Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA), -- Chairman of the House “Gun Violence Prevention Task Force” and the author of H.R. 8 -- then took up Nadler’s theme, characterizing the $100,000 fine as among the “outrageous allegations that were made about this bill” (see video at 1:45:13).

Not only did both men neglect to mention that violators can also be punished by up to a year in federal prison – even if the recipient of the private transfer can possess the gun legally and intends to use it only for lawful purposes – both were wrong about the fine.

We think that bears repeating. The two men most responsible for H.R. 8’s passage through the House, including the man credited with writing the bill, both misrepresented the maximum fine that could be imposed for violations of the law it would create.

As Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA) explained later in the debate (see video at 2:25:24), the maximum penalties available for violations of the Class A misdemeanor the bill would create already exist in federal statute and include a term of imprisonment of up to one year (18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(5)) and a fine of up to $100,000 (18 U.S.C. § 3571(b)(5)).

Where in that range a particular violation would be punished would of course be up to the sentencing judge, but nothing in H.R. 8 itself would prevent the judge from imposing the maximum penalties against any violator.

Nevertheless, gun control math requires that when foisting a law upon the public that could criminalize completely harmless conduct – such as gifting a cousin who is a police officer a shotgun to hunt turkeys with – it’s best to minimize the potential penalties by a factor of 100.

Another example of gun control math concerned the debate on H.R. 1112, a bill to extend the waiting period a dealer must observe before deciding whether or not to transfer a firearm to a purchaser whose NICS check has not been completed by the FBI.