Vote NO HR 7910 and ALL gun Bills
These two bills together would prevent most (18 to 20 year old) Americans from owning or transferring even curio and relic firearms such as the M-1 Garand, and would prevent transfer of a curio and relic firearm such as the SKS fixed magazine (10 round) firearm. They not only would eliminate the capability for many Americans to own or transfer Glocks or similar modern pistols, and AR pattern firearms, but as well would effectively prohibit ownership and transfer of even curio and relic firearms that are by definition over 50 years old, and many of which typically have 8 or 10 round magazines. Further, H.R. 7910 in particular would create a definition for "large capacity feeding devices" and thus make self defense with reasonable magazine sizes (17 or 20 round magazines) illegal. These two laws together would frustrate the process of transfers from, for example, grandfather to grandson or granddaughter, father to son or mother to daughter, etc. The bills are together essentially part of a larger battle against gun owners, and should be opposed.
Why is this so?
H.R. 7910 proposes to add requirements, in part, that you would need to be 21, in order to own,
- a semiautomatic centerfire rifle or semiautomatic centerfire shotgun that has, or has the capacity to accept, an ammunition feeding device with a capacity exceeding 5 rounds, (... )
(Note: A Mosin-Nagant (M91-30, M44, etc.) is a bolt action rifle with a five round fixed magazine. An SKS in its original, 10 round fixed magazine configuration is a semiautomatic firearm. An M-1 Garand has an 8 round capacity and is a semiautomatic firearm. A Glock 17 Gen3 is a semiautomatic pistol which has magazines available in 10 round and 17 round (or larger) depending on the state you are in. None of these (except the Mosin-Nagants as the examples I mentioned) would be available to persons under 21 under this proposed bill. The language "has the capacity to accept" forecloses on any opportunity for a magblock solution - the 18 to 20 year old segment is deemed not worthy by Congress of having the right of self defense.)
- a firearm other than a shotgun, a rifle, or such a semiautomatic centerfire rifle or semiautomatic centerfire shotgun
(and in the case of any other shotgun or rifle, and would need to be at least 18 years of age)
H.R. 8 proposes to add requirements, in part, as follows:
(a) In General.—Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
“(aa) (1) (A) It shall be unlawful for any person who is not a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer to transfer a firearm to any other person who is not so licensed, unless a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken possession of the firearm for the purpose of complying with subsection (t).
What does subsection (t) say in the current law to which the proposed law section above refers?
***(t)(1)***Beginning on the date that is 30 days after the Attorney General notifies licensees under section 103(d) of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act that the national instant criminal background check system is established, a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer shall not transfer a firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this chapter, unless—
(A) before the completion of the transfer, the licensee contacts the national instant criminal background check system established under section 103 of that Act;(B)(i) the system provides the licensee with a unique identification number; or***(ii)*** 3 business days (meaning a day on which State offices are open) have elapsed since the licensee contacted the system, and the system has not notified the licensee that the receipt of a firearm by such other person would violate subsection (g) or (n) of this section, or State, local, or Tribal law; and***(C)*** the transferor has verified the identity of the transferee by examining a valid identification document (as defined in section 1028(d) of this title) of the transferee containing a photograph of the transferee. (...)
Supposedly, there is an exception in this proposed law, as follows (where the transfer restrictions above shall not apply to, for example, the following):
"a transfer or exchange (which, for purposes of this subsection, means an in-kind transfer of a firearm of the same type or value) that is a loan or bona fide gift between spouses, between domestic partners, between parents and their children, including step-parents and their step-children, between siblings, between aunts or uncles and their nieces or nephews, or between grandparents and their grandchildren, if the transferor has no reason to believe that the transferee will use or intends to use the firearm in a crime or is prohibited from possessing firearms under State or Federal law;"
It appears therefore that H.R. 8 and H.R. 7910 are provided together in order to divide and frustrate people in the gun community. On the one hand, H.R. 8 at least does provide for OPLAW / parent to child / grandparent to grandchild transfers (even though it's a horribly written bill). On the other, it's pretty obvious that H.R. 7910 would, if it becomes law, ban people from 18 to 20 years of age from becoming recipients even of a gift of a weapon that is handed down by their parent or grandparent and would also (if H.R. 7910 becomes law) result in inheritances not being able to take place. In the end, it's likely that H.R. 8 and H.R. 7910 were written as a joint effort to attempt to reduce the possible ability of people who might be able to exercise their rights via a transfer process. Both these bills should be voted down, not approved.
In California, under current law, for handguns to be transferred to persons 18 to 20 years of age, PC (Penal Code) Section 27510 prohibits dealers from facilitating handgun transfers to those who are 18-20 years of age, so OPLAW/PC 27875 is almost the only option for such a transfer, because retail sales and non-family private party transfer are out of the question. PC 27505 prohibits a sale of a pistol to anyone 18-20 in general, so gift is really the only option (unless the parent or grandparent passed away in California, the 18-20 year old lives in California, and the pistol is passed to the 18-20 year old by inheritance, in which case the 18-20 year old has a short period, 30 days after the testator effectively passes on and transfers the firearm asset to the 18-20 year old, in order to consult with the lawyer and / or executor involved for the parent or grandparent’s matters, and then file the intrafamilial firearm transaction form on CFARS). In the alternative, somebody under the age of 21 but over the age of 18 can legally buy a handgun but only if it was made before the year 1899 or loads from the muzzle using black powder for propellant. Additionally, such a handgun does not have to be sold through a licensed firearms dealer (and antique pistol / antique replica pistols can be sent direct to one's door).
Some of you reading this will ask why I'm not covering the various other gun bills pending before Congress. I feel these two are the most significant ones for the time being although I'll briefly mention the others at the end I feel you should also be aware of.
You can see the text of H.R. 7910 and H.R. 8 below, and the status of both of them, here (please refer to these links in this post before asking for text or status in comments):
H.R. 7910 - text: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/7910/text
H.R. 7910 - status: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/7910/all-actions
H.R. 8 - text: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/8/text
H.R. 8 - status: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/8/all-actions
What are some other bills and issues to be alert for?
It's recommended that you oppose all of the below:
H.R. 3015: Rep. Brown’s bill that would make felons out of Americans under age 21 to own AR-15s and hundreds of similar firearms.
H.R. 6370 / H.R. 130: Rep. Slotkin’s and Rep. Jackson’s bills that would make felons out of Americans who own firearms and have kids in their home, unless those guns are locked up 24 hours a day.
H.R. 2510: Rep. Deutch’s bill that would make felons out of Americans who buy any magazine that holds over ten rounds of ammunition.
H.R. 2280: Rep. Kelly’s bill that would make felons out of Americans who buy a gun for someone with the intent of selling or giving it to someone else -- which is already illegal.
H.R. 748: Rep. DeLauro’s bill that mimics the storage requirements found in H.R. 6370 above, on federal and tribal properties.
H.R. 3088: Rep. Cicilline’s bill that makes felons out of Americans who own an unserialized / homemade firearm. This bill would send you to prison unless you put a number on your firearms and gave it to the federal government.
H.R. 5427: Rep. Titus’s bill that makes felons out of Americans who own an unregistered bump stock. The left is scared that a court will vacate the President’s order on this, and want to put this tyranny into law.
Other: (Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached Stabilizing Braces - ATF-2021-0002) - pending, not yet finalized as of this date.
Conclusion / Recommendation:
Congress must overturn the rule (Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached Stabilizing Braces - ATF-2021-0002), which is pending as of this date (6/6/2022).
Congress must vote to approve S.J. Res. 45 and H.J. Res. 86 (Providing for congressional disapproval under Chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of a rule submitted by the Department of Justice relating to "Definition of 'Frame or Receiver' and Identification of Firearms".)
Congress must vote against H.R. 7910 'H.R. 7910, Protecting Our Kids Act.
Congress must vote against H.R. 3015, H.R. 6370 / H.R. 130, H.R. 2510, H.R. 2280, H.R. 748, H.R. 3088, H.R. 5427, H.R. 8 and any other gun control bill.
Congress must defer to the U.S. Supreme Court and look for NYSRPA v Bruen and accept the decision.
This is meant to put Congress on notice that our rights are not negotiable, not as a demand that Congress perform a job which it has essentially abandoned.
Why is this so?
H.R. 7910 proposes to add requirements, in part, that you would need to be 21, in order to own,
- a semiautomatic centerfire rifle or semiautomatic centerfire shotgun that has, or has the capacity to accept, an ammunition feeding device with a capacity exceeding 5 rounds, (... )
(Note: A Mosin-Nagant (M91-30, M44, etc.) is a bolt action rifle with a five round fixed magazine. An SKS in its original, 10 round fixed magazine configuration is a semiautomatic firearm. An M-1 Garand has an 8 round capacity and is a semiautomatic firearm. A Glock 17 Gen3 is a semiautomatic pistol which has magazines available in 10 round and 17 round (or larger) depending on the state you are in. None of these (except the Mosin-Nagants as the examples I mentioned) would be available to persons under 21 under this proposed bill. The language "has the capacity to accept" forecloses on any opportunity for a magblock solution - the 18 to 20 year old segment is deemed not worthy by Congress of having the right of self defense.)
- a firearm other than a shotgun, a rifle, or such a semiautomatic centerfire rifle or semiautomatic centerfire shotgun
(and in the case of any other shotgun or rifle, and would need to be at least 18 years of age)
H.R. 8 proposes to add requirements, in part, as follows:
(a) In General.—Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
“(aa) (1) (A) It shall be unlawful for any person who is not a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer to transfer a firearm to any other person who is not so licensed, unless a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken possession of the firearm for the purpose of complying with subsection (t).
What does subsection (t) say in the current law to which the proposed law section above refers?
***(t)(1)***Beginning on the date that is 30 days after the Attorney General notifies licensees under section 103(d) of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act that the national instant criminal background check system is established, a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer shall not transfer a firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this chapter, unless—
(A) before the completion of the transfer, the licensee contacts the national instant criminal background check system established under section 103 of that Act;(B)(i) the system provides the licensee with a unique identification number; or***(ii)*** 3 business days (meaning a day on which State offices are open) have elapsed since the licensee contacted the system, and the system has not notified the licensee that the receipt of a firearm by such other person would violate subsection (g) or (n) of this section, or State, local, or Tribal law; and***(C)*** the transferor has verified the identity of the transferee by examining a valid identification document (as defined in section 1028(d) of this title) of the transferee containing a photograph of the transferee. (...)
Supposedly, there is an exception in this proposed law, as follows (where the transfer restrictions above shall not apply to, for example, the following):
"a transfer or exchange (which, for purposes of this subsection, means an in-kind transfer of a firearm of the same type or value) that is a loan or bona fide gift between spouses, between domestic partners, between parents and their children, including step-parents and their step-children, between siblings, between aunts or uncles and their nieces or nephews, or between grandparents and their grandchildren, if the transferor has no reason to believe that the transferee will use or intends to use the firearm in a crime or is prohibited from possessing firearms under State or Federal law;"
It appears therefore that H.R. 8 and H.R. 7910 are provided together in order to divide and frustrate people in the gun community. On the one hand, H.R. 8 at least does provide for OPLAW / parent to child / grandparent to grandchild transfers (even though it's a horribly written bill). On the other, it's pretty obvious that H.R. 7910 would, if it becomes law, ban people from 18 to 20 years of age from becoming recipients even of a gift of a weapon that is handed down by their parent or grandparent and would also (if H.R. 7910 becomes law) result in inheritances not being able to take place. In the end, it's likely that H.R. 8 and H.R. 7910 were written as a joint effort to attempt to reduce the possible ability of people who might be able to exercise their rights via a transfer process. Both these bills should be voted down, not approved.
In California, under current law, for handguns to be transferred to persons 18 to 20 years of age, PC (Penal Code) Section 27510 prohibits dealers from facilitating handgun transfers to those who are 18-20 years of age, so OPLAW/PC 27875 is almost the only option for such a transfer, because retail sales and non-family private party transfer are out of the question. PC 27505 prohibits a sale of a pistol to anyone 18-20 in general, so gift is really the only option (unless the parent or grandparent passed away in California, the 18-20 year old lives in California, and the pistol is passed to the 18-20 year old by inheritance, in which case the 18-20 year old has a short period, 30 days after the testator effectively passes on and transfers the firearm asset to the 18-20 year old, in order to consult with the lawyer and / or executor involved for the parent or grandparent’s matters, and then file the intrafamilial firearm transaction form on CFARS). In the alternative, somebody under the age of 21 but over the age of 18 can legally buy a handgun but only if it was made before the year 1899 or loads from the muzzle using black powder for propellant. Additionally, such a handgun does not have to be sold through a licensed firearms dealer (and antique pistol / antique replica pistols can be sent direct to one's door).
Some of you reading this will ask why I'm not covering the various other gun bills pending before Congress. I feel these two are the most significant ones for the time being although I'll briefly mention the others at the end I feel you should also be aware of.
You can see the text of H.R. 7910 and H.R. 8 below, and the status of both of them, here (please refer to these links in this post before asking for text or status in comments):
H.R. 7910 - text: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/7910/text
H.R. 7910 - status: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/7910/all-actions
H.R. 8 - text: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/8/text
H.R. 8 - status: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/8/all-actions
What are some other bills and issues to be alert for?
It's recommended that you oppose all of the below:
H.R. 3015: Rep. Brown’s bill that would make felons out of Americans under age 21 to own AR-15s and hundreds of similar firearms.
H.R. 6370 / H.R. 130: Rep. Slotkin’s and Rep. Jackson’s bills that would make felons out of Americans who own firearms and have kids in their home, unless those guns are locked up 24 hours a day.
H.R. 2510: Rep. Deutch’s bill that would make felons out of Americans who buy any magazine that holds over ten rounds of ammunition.
H.R. 2280: Rep. Kelly’s bill that would make felons out of Americans who buy a gun for someone with the intent of selling or giving it to someone else -- which is already illegal.
H.R. 748: Rep. DeLauro’s bill that mimics the storage requirements found in H.R. 6370 above, on federal and tribal properties.
H.R. 3088: Rep. Cicilline’s bill that makes felons out of Americans who own an unserialized / homemade firearm. This bill would send you to prison unless you put a number on your firearms and gave it to the federal government.
H.R. 5427: Rep. Titus’s bill that makes felons out of Americans who own an unregistered bump stock. The left is scared that a court will vacate the President’s order on this, and want to put this tyranny into law.
Other: (Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached Stabilizing Braces - ATF-2021-0002) - pending, not yet finalized as of this date.
Conclusion / Recommendation:
Congress must overturn the rule (Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached Stabilizing Braces - ATF-2021-0002), which is pending as of this date (6/6/2022).
Congress must vote to approve S.J. Res. 45 and H.J. Res. 86 (Providing for congressional disapproval under Chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of a rule submitted by the Department of Justice relating to "Definition of 'Frame or Receiver' and Identification of Firearms".)
Congress must vote against H.R. 7910 'H.R. 7910, Protecting Our Kids Act.
Congress must vote against H.R. 3015, H.R. 6370 / H.R. 130, H.R. 2510, H.R. 2280, H.R. 748, H.R. 3088, H.R. 5427, H.R. 8 and any other gun control bill.
Congress must defer to the U.S. Supreme Court and look for NYSRPA v Bruen and accept the decision.
This is meant to put Congress on notice that our rights are not negotiable, not as a demand that Congress perform a job which it has essentially abandoned.
View Comments