Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What's In HR 8 and HR 1446, the Pair of Universal Background Check Bills?
townhall.com ^ | 3/22/2021 1005 hrs edt | Beth Baumann

Posted on 03/22/2021 9:24:07 AM PDT by rktman

A couple weeks ago, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 8, the "Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2021" and H.R. 1446, the "Enhanced Background Checks Act of 2021."

H.R. 8 passed 227 to 203, with eight Republicans – Reps. Vern Buchanan (FL), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA), Andrew Garbarino (NY), Carlos Gimenez (FL), Adam Kinzinger (IL), Maria Salazar (FL), Chris Smith (NJ) and Fred Upton (MI) – voting in favor of the legislation. Democrat Jared Golden (ME) voted against the bill.

H.R. 1446 passed 219 to 210, with two Republicans – Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA) and Chris Smith (NJ) – voting in favor of the legislation. Democrats Ron Kind (WI) and Jared Golden (ME) voted down their party's bill.

Both bills are commonly referred to as "universal background checks" and are designed to close the so-called "Charleston loophole."

(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2a; banglist; kaba
Yup. Had these been in place the perp would NEVER have obtained a weapon. Lucky for us it only stops bad guys and the good guys will be okee dokee. No? That's odd. Almost like some sort of infringement or something.
1 posted on 03/22/2021 9:24:07 AM PDT by rktman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rktman

with eight Republicans – Reps. Vern Buchanan (FL), Brian Fitzpatrick (PA), Andrew Garbarino (NY), Carlos Gimenez (FL), Adam Kinzinger (IL), Maria Salazar (FL), Chris Smith (NJ) and Fred Upton (MI)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Assistant Democrats


2 posted on 03/22/2021 9:39:27 AM PDT by Lurkinanloomin (Natural Born Citizens Are Born Here of Citizen Parents)(Know Islam, No Peace - No Islam, Know Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman

If I had any guns I would have bought them all and sold them all before the “universal” back ground checks. Prove otherwise! What this bill REALLY does is force people (who actually follow the law) to hand over their guns to a dealer while everyone waits for the back ground check. How long will the Chomo Ho administration stretch out the process? Who knows. 10 days? 20 days? Never? And if neither seller or buyer can “pass” the back ground check the dealer keeps the fire arm. It is just confiscation with a “for the children” name.


3 posted on 03/22/2021 9:40:50 AM PDT by Organic Panic (Democrats. Memories as short as Joe Biden's eyes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rktman
Will somebody please primary Upton ?

He did enough damage by banning incandescent light bulbs ...

4 posted on 03/22/2021 9:55:51 AM PDT by SecondAmendment (This just proves my latest theory ... LEFTISTS RUIN EVERYTHING !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Organic Panic
“If I had any guns I would have bought them all and sold them all before the “universal” back ground checks. Prove otherwise!”

Collin Noir has pointed out that there is no way to enforce universal BG checks without universal registration. Which is the excuse the left will use to ram through registration a year from now.

5 posted on 03/22/2021 10:17:27 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rktman; All
Patriots, in addition to continuing to argue your 2nd Amendment (2A) protections, please consider also doing the following.

In addition to arguing 2A, also argue that the states have never expressly constitutionally given the feds the specific power to make peacetime gun control laws.

More specifically, since the federal government has only those powers that the states expressly constitutionally give to it, some of the drafters of the Bill of Rights had expressed the following concern. The drafters had feared that patriots would eventually develop tunnel vision (my words) for Bill of Rights protections and forget that the Bill of Rights was redundant in the context of power that the states had never expressly constitutionally given the feds the powers to regulate our basic protections are prohibited to the feds.

In fact, the congressional record shows that Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker, had included 2A when he read the Bill of Rights as main examples of constitutionally enumerated protections that the 14th Amendment (14A) applies to the states.

John Bingham, Congressional Globe. (See 2nd Amendment (Article II) about in middle of 2nd column.)

The congressional record also shows that Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker, had clarified that, until 14A was ratified, the states hadn’t expressly constitutionally given the feds the specific power to make peacetime penal laws, not even for murder.

"Our Constitution never conferred upon the Congress of the United States the power - sacred as life is, first as it is before all other rights which pertain to man on this side of the grave - to protect it in time of peace by the terrors of the penal code within organized states; and Congress has never attempted to do it. There never was a law upon the United States statute-book to punish the murderer for taking away in time of peace the life of the noblest, and the most unoffending, as well, of your citizens, within the limits of any State of the Union. The protection of the citizen in that respect was left to the respective States, and there the power is to-day [emphases added].” —Rep. John Bingham, Congressional Globe. (See bottom half of third column.)

The great irony of 14A where today’s unconstitutional (imo) peacetime federal gun control laws are concerned is this. That amendment gives Congress the specific power only to make laws that STRENGTHEN constitutionally enumerated rights, including 2A, from abridgment by state actors.

Unfortunately, today’s generation is living proof that patriots have long-forgotten about the significance of constitutionally enumerated federal government powers, particularly the lack of such powers in the context of peacetime gun rights.

Even the post-FDR era, institutionally indoctrinated Supreme Court is glaring evidence that the professionals don’t bother to check if a contested federal law is reasonably justified under a constitutionally enumerated power.

In fact, it is disturbing that peacetime restrictive federal gun laws seem to have started appearing in the books during FDR Administration, FDR and the Congress at that time infamous for making laws which they had no express constitutional authority to make imo.

Franklin Roosevelt: The Father of Gun Control

Finally, citizens need to start working with their federal lawmakers to demand the following. When the federal government accuses someone of violating a federal law, the accused also needs to be informed of at least the common name of the constitutional clause that arguably justifies the law for further scrutiny of the constitutionality of that law.

6 posted on 03/22/2021 12:29:03 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amendment10
When the federal government accuses someone of violating a federal law

The Fascist Bureau of Intimidation will be there to arrest them.

7 posted on 03/22/2021 2:29:18 PM PDT by MikeSteelBe (The South will be in the right in the next war of Northern aggression.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MikeSteelBe; All
"The Fascist Bureau of Intimidation will be there to arrest them."

Actually, having to reference constitutional clauses when informing the accused what federal laws they have broken will be a great way for FBI agents to learn to identify and flag questionable laws, helping agents to get up to speed with the fed’s constitutionally limited powers.

Likewise for the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) to publicly report federal spending bills that cannot be justified under the post-17th Amendment ratification Congress’s very limited, constitutionally enumerated powers.

"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.

8 posted on 03/22/2021 3:16:44 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Amendment10

Points well taken. But SCOTUS has harmed the “enumerated powers” argument by expanding the “commerce” and “welfare” clauses to basically mean ignore the enumerating language. So now what?


9 posted on 03/22/2021 3:38:41 PM PDT by MileHi ((Liberalism is an ideology of parasites, hypocrites, grievance mongers, victims, and control freaks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson