The text to HR-8 is out, or at least this report that is accompanying it:
Let’s break down this absolute trash:
Background and Need for the Legislation
In any given year, more than 120,000 Americans are shot in murders, assaults, suicides and suicide attempts, unintentional shootings, or police actions. Of these, 35,000 result in death. Over 17,000 of those injured or killed are children and teens. On average, 34 people in America are murdered on account of gun violence every single day
Notice how they include suicides & suicide attempts, along with ‘unintentional shootings’ in their justification for why… background checks are needed? Wait, WHAT?
How in the world are background checks are needed for suicide prevention? Considering that 2/3rd of the shooting deaths in this country are suicides, including them & their attempts is really padding the stats.
Those 17,000 children & teens “injured” & killed btw? Where & how? Because according to CDC WISQARS:
It’s not suicides:
Homicides? Not massive.
The clear answer here is they are counting 17-19 year olds in gangs as “children”
Ready for some more hamfisted horseshit?
Gun violence of this magnitude is a distinctly American
problem. A country to country comparison is shocking. For
example, in 2011 the United Kingdom had 146 deaths due to gun
violence; Denmark, 71; Portugal, 142; and Japan, just 30.\3\ A
recent study in the American Journal of Medicine found that,
compared to 22 other high-income countries, the gun-related
murder rate in the United States is 25 times higher.\4\ Even
when you adjust for population differences, Americans are
disproportionally killed by gun violence.
Notice the sleight of hand here. They are again referring to “gun violence” which includes firearms suicides, but omit the overall suicide rates of these countries.
Japan, despite being gun free, has almost double our suicide rate. South Korea, despite being gun free, has more than double our suicide rate.
Notice too how they compare us to “other high income countries” which is a dogwhistle term used to exclude OECD nations like Mexico & Turkey which coincidentally destroy the gun control arguments.
Despite a single gun store in the country, Mexico had 29,168 firearms homicides last year, with a per capita murder rate of 20.5 per 100k. If anything, that’s VASTLY UNDERCOUNTED
Another good question to ask: what is the US non-firearm homicide rate compared to these 22 “high income” countries?
Here, I’ll help:
Our non gun homicide rate is higher than most of those countries TOTAL HOMICIDE RATE. It’s not the guns causing non-gun homicides.
No call for gun control is complete without the requisite list of mass shootings
In the modern era, the daily ravage of gun violence is, unfortunately, all too frequently punctuated by “mass shootings,” which the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) defines as shootings where four or more victims are killed.\5\
Since the mass shooting at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado in 1999, where 12 students and one teacher were killed, there have been a number of mass shootings, including:
Virginia Tech (2007): 27 students and five teachers were killed;
Sandy Hook Elementary School (2012): 20 children and six adults were killed;
Aurora, Colorado (2012): a gunman opened fire in a movie theater, killing 12 people;
Charleston, South Carolina (2015): nine people were shot dead by a white supremacist at the historic Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church;
San Bernardino (2015): 14 people were killed at an office gathering;
Pulse nightclub, Orlando (2016): 49 people were killed inside a gay nightclub;
Mandalay Bay, Las Vegas (2017): the shooter opened fire on a crowd of concertgoers at a country music festival, killing 58 people and injuring nearly 500 others;
Sutherland Springs, Texas (2017): 25 people and an unborn child were killed during a Sunday morning church service;
Parkland, Florida (2018): 17 adults and students were killed at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School; and
Thousand Oaks, California (2018): 12 people were killed at the Borderline Bar and Grill.\6\
Wow, so we need background checks to stop mass shootings? Is that it?
- Virginia Tech: Shooter was background checked, but passed due to state laws not complying with NICS.
- Sandy Hook: the shooter murdered his mother and stole her guns. No background check would stop that
- Aurora Colorado: the shooter passed a background check for his guns
- Charleston, South Carolina: shooter passed a background check due to police error
- San Bernardino: California has required universal background checks since 1991 – the shooters straw purchased their guns.
- Pulse Nightclub: the shooter not only was repeatedly background checked, but also underwent mental evaluations, was investigated by the FBI and had a security clearance.
- Mandalay Bay: shooter passed multiple background checks
- Parkland: shooter passed background check and cops came to his house dozens of times, not to mention he was directly reported to the FBI twice.
- Thousand Oaks: gun was legally owned, CA has mandatory background checks.
Universal Background Checks wound not have stopped ANY of these mass shootings.
The Brady Act background check requirement applies only to licensed dealers, allowing transactions conducted by private, unlicensed sellers to be completed
without any check. Private, unlicensed sellers need not conduct any check under current law, even if the seller sells a large number of guns.
To address this gap, a bipartisan group of Members introduced H.R. 8, the “Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019.” This bill would make it illegal for any person who is not a licensed firearm importer, manufacturer, or dealer to transfer a firearm to any other person who is not so licensed without a background check, subject to certain exceptions. Individuals seeking to transfer a firearm under this measure would be required to visit a licensed firearms dealer to run the necessary background check before the transfer could be finalized.
Meanwhile, existing Federal NICS denials are not being prosecuted. I’m not even joking:
In 2010, the FBI and state agencies denied a firearm to nearly 153,000 persons due to National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) records of felonies, domestic violence offenses, and other prohibiting factors.
It’s a felony to fill out an ATF 4473 if you are a prohibited person.
34,459 denials due to felony indictment or conviction. 13,862 due to fugitive status. 7,66 due to state law prohibition = 55987 felonies, each with a 10 year prison term & up to $250,000 fine.
Guess how many prosecutions there were?
18 declined to prosecute, 13 guilty pleas, 10 dismissals, 12 pending action. 62 out of 55987 felonies, that is a 0.04465% success rate.
Wow. Clearly we need more background checks, that also won’t be prosecuted or enforced… or something.
On top of this, the same people pushing Universal Background Checks refused to allow ICE to be notified when an illegal alien attempts to buy a gun: https://twitter.com/LouisvilleGun/status/1100106437076938752
The Committee’s hearing on “Preventing Gun Violence: A Call to Action,” held on February 6, 2019, was used to consider H.R. 8. During the hearing, the Committee heard testimony on a wide variety of gun-related topics, including background check deficiencies and loophole. The Committee heard testimony from: Aalayah Eastmond, a student at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School; Savannah Lindquist, a student at Old Dominion University; Diane Latiker, President and Founder of Kids Off the Block; Dr. Joseph V. Sakran of John Hopkins Hospital; Major Sabrina Tapp-Harper of the Baltimore City Sherriff’s Office; Chief Art Acevedo of the Houston Police Department; Dr. Joyce Lee Malcolm, professor at the Antonin Scalia Law School; and Robyn Thomas, Executive Director of the Giffords Law Center. During the hearing, the witnesses testified to the impact gun violence on communities, discussed a wide range of policy proposals, and offered suggestions on
how current firearms restrictions may be improved.
House Republican Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., said Wednesday that Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee refused to let him testify at a hearing on gun violence about his experience as a victim of the congressional baseball practice shooting two years ago. The move infuriated his fellow Republicans.
Scalise told Fox News that he found out over the weekend that Democrats had chosen not to allow his testimony at the hearing –“Preventing Gun Violence: A Call to Action” — something he said is a courtesy traditionally extended to any lawmaker who wishes to speak.
Attempts to add amendments to this trainwreck were all defeated:
An amendment by Mr. Sensenbrenner amending section 3 to add a provision that would exempt from the bill’s background check requirement a transfer to an individual who is the holder of a valid permit to carry a concealed firearm, which has been issued by a state was defeated
Have a valid CCW showing you are a law abiding citizen and have been background checked? No exemption
An amendment by Mr. Gaetz to require the Attorney General to promulgate regulations to cap the amount a firearms dealer may charge at zero dollars for any transfer for which the background check is not complete within 24 hours
Dealers can charge for NICS checks that don’t go through.
An amendment by Mr. Chabot amending section 3 to add an exemption from the bill’s background check requirement to allow a transfer to a law enforcement officer who is authorized to carry a firearm as part of his employment was defeated
Active law enforcement have to have background checks despite carrying a sidearm daily or whatever
An amendment by Mr. Biggs adding a new section to the bill expressing a Sense of Congress that rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution should not be hampered by financial restrictions or constraints on the exercise of those rights; that the exercise of citizens’ Second Amendment rights must not be abridged or restricted by burdensome payments or delays in the conduct of background checks for lawful firearms transfers; and that financial constraints have no place in the exercise of constitutional rights in that a citizen’s right to bear arms, just like a citizen’s right to vote, must not be qualified by the ability to pay a certain sum of money in order to exercise those rights was defeated
I cannot express how abhorrent this is. Democrats voted in lockstep against preventing the gun equivalent of poll taxes.
Every single democrat who voted for this said that they support the 2019 version of Jim Crow era policies.
An amendment by Mr. Steube requiring regulations promulgated pursuant to section 922 of title 18, as amended by this measure, to require notification to the field office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the local law enforcement
agency, the state law enforcement agency; and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the case of a person illegally or unlawfully in the United States was defeated
THIS SHIT RIGHT HERE IS WHY GUN CONTROL IS THEATER
Democrats want to make US citizens felons if they don’t get a background check, but if illegal aliens commit a felony by unlawfully trying to purchase a firearm, they don’t want ICE notified.
An amendment by Mrs. Lesko, as amended by Mr. Gaetz, to
add an exemption from the bill’s background check requirement
for a transfer to a victim of domestic violence or sexual
assault who is to be protected under an order of protection
issued by a court of law was defeated
If a victim of rape or domestic violence wants to borrow a firearm to protect against their ex coming back that evening or bailing out, they cannot do so without getting a background check.
This isn’t just theorycrafting; a woman had to kill her husband less than 15 minutes after he got out of jail. Meanwhile in NJ, this woman was murdered while waiting for state approval to own a firearm.
An amendment by Mr. Reschenthaler to add an exemption from the bill’s background check requirement for a transfer by an individual who, by his or her own determination, may be a risk to himself or herself or others to a person who is not prohibited by federal law from receiving a firearm was defeated
Remember when they used suicide & suicide attempts to justify requiring background checks? Here they are voting against exempting transfers for people trying to remove firearms from their possession if they feel like they are a danger to themselves or others.
“Hey Bob, it’s 2AM, I lost my job, my wife left me, and I’m feeling depressed. I’ve been drinking for a while. Mind taking my firearms for a couple days because life is looking kinda bleak.”
“Sorry Jim, that’s a felony unless we can go to a store and transfer all of them to me. Oh, and the stores are all closed now LOL”
THIS SHIT IS WHY YOU KNOW THEY ARE NOT ACTING IN GOOD FAITH.
An amendment by Mr. Armstrong to add an exemption for a temporary transfer of a firearm for the purpose of hunting, trapping, fishing, ranching, farming, or target practice from the bill’s background check requirement, and eliminating provisions of the temporary transfer section that require transferors to have no reason to believe that the transferee will use the firearm in a place where that is illegal and the transferor has reason to believe that the transferee will abide by all licensing and permit requirements for such hunting, trapping, and fishing; or the transferee will use the firearm in the transferor’s presence was defeated
No letting someone use your firearm at the range or while you two are hunting together.
BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE:
SEC. 5. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, shall be
(1) authorize the establishment, directly or indirectly, of a
national firearms registry;
Universal Background Checks with no registry = completely unenforceable. ‘
The Dissenting Views section really speaks to how fucked up this was and eviscerates all of the nonsense used to justify this bill. I’ll do a separate article quoting them.