Article from The Daily Wire by Emily Zanotti.
House Democrats passed a series of strict gun regulations this week, banning so-called “high capacity magazines” and instituting a handful of “protections” to keep guns out of the hands of undesirable potential owners, but behind the scenes, prominent Dems are backing away from proposals that would create a national ban on the sale and ownership of “assault” weapons.
Bearing Arms reports that House Democrats, led by Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), passed three “gun control” bills on Tuesday: “a measure offering grants to states to set up ‘red flag’ laws, a prohibition on gun ownership for those convicted of misdemeanor hate crimes, and a ban on magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.”
The bills have little hope of becoming law; Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has already said that, while the Senate will consider possible gun control legislation, it is not planning on adopting any bills authored and passed exclusively by Democrats — and that includes the three bills that passed the House this week. The bills have their own problems: it’s not immediately clear that either “red flag” or “hate crime” restrictions on gun ownership pass constitutional muster, and leftists are notoriously hard to pin down on what they consider a “high capacity magazine.”
But the point is, of course, to put pressure on both McConnell and the White House to tackle gun control ahead of the 2020 elections, largely because the issue appeals to many middle-of-the-road Americans who believe America lacks strict gun laws, and because the issue splits Republicans. While many have expressed skepticism with any proposed gun regulation, the president and prominent leaders like Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT), have promised that some gun control legislation will be forthcoming.
Read the entire article at The Daily Wire.
wpDiscuz
What We Need Is Liberal Con trol Arrest The Demoncraps In The House For TREASON
How and when did Mitt Romney become of any importance?
It’s not the Senate or White House that Peloser and the other dimms need to be concerned about…. Rather, IT IS WE THE PEOPLE!
If you purchase 4 ten round magazines, hope many rounds do we have? Now the hard part to get through! If you buy one magazine with capability of 40 rounds, do we have an equal equation? What’s the point? Trying to appease the political spectrum maybe?
Mitt Romney is about as useful as a rubber crutch!
Magizine ammo limits are infringing on our rights to bare arms. The second amendment doesn’t say that bear arms means less capacity than the government law enforcement or army, marines, spec ops, or any other military force.
Finally, someone who interprets the 2nd Amendment correctly. You could not be more correct. How can we exercise our 2nd Amendment right to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government if we are forced to fight fire with sticks. We the people should always be on equal footing with those who rule. To me, that means that if the government can field a bazooka, then so should we. When the time comes, our response will be like shooting water pistols at navy seals; futile!
The 2nd amendment is about the right for “We The People” to posess the weapon of the common soldier. PERIOD!
U.S. Code states that all able bodied men between the ages of 17 to 35 are members of the REGULATED AND UNREGULATED MILITIA’S. Who arms the UNREGULATED MILITIA? The male citizen that belongs to it. If you belong to the militia, then it is incumbent upon yourself to arm yourself. It is your duty! You are supposed to have access to at the very least similar weaponry as the REGULATED MILITIA.
You wouldn’t seriously curtail your Militia if you did not have ill intent.