It’s the war without end in Missouri and Washington, where anti-rights lawmakers have pre-filed gun control legislation as the new legislative sessions loom on the horizon.
In Missouri, among the proposals are Senate Bill 163 and House Bill 210, which would “criminalize private firearm transfers,” according to KFEQ in St. Joseph.
“If approved by the general assembly, the bill(s) would make it illegal for a person to sell or transfer a firearm unless the person is a firearms dealer; selling or transferring to a firearms dealer, or performing the transaction through a licensed firearms dealer,” the station explained.
Moms Demand spokesman Scott Randolph asserted that this requirement, generically called “universal background checks,” will reduce violent crime.
Will this presidential election be the most important in American history?
“It’s been proven in other states and other areas to be an effective way to reduce gun violence and to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people,” Randolph stated.
But that’s wishful thinking, according to firearms instructor Shawn Harper. He suggested to KFEQ that the proposals won’t solve or prevent anything.
“No gun control law will fix the problems that we have,” Harper reportedly stated.
And there is some dispute as to whether such background checks have prevented any crime. California police on Friday arrested the suspected killer of Newman Police Cpl. Ronil Singh. The suspect has been identified as an illegal alien, who, under California’s strict background check law, should not have had a firearm.
In Washington State, voters approved a background check initiative in 2014, but that law did not prevent two high-profile shootings that claimed eight lives altogether in 2016. Three teens were murdered at a party by a gunman who had passed a background check, and five shoppers were killed at a shopping mall three months later by a gunman who used a gun he took from his step-father’s home without permission.
Evergreen State gun rights activists are girding for battle when lawmakers hold hearings on House Bill 1068, which restricts so-called “large capacity magazines” that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition. Anti-gun Democrats, emboldened by the passage of anti-rights Initiative 1639 in November think the wind is at their backs to turn Washington into another California or New Jersey.
Under the language of HB 1068, “Large capacity magazine” means an ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition, or any conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which such a device can be assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person, but shall not be construed to include any of the following: (a) An ammunition feeding device that has been permanently altered so that it cannot accommodate more than ten rounds of ammunition; (b) A twenty-two caliber tube ammunition feeding device; or (c) A tubular magazine that is contained in a lever-action firearm.”
There is a provision that ostensibly allows existing magazines to be “grandfathered,” but some activists call this a sham. ”In order to continue to possess a large capacity magazine that was legally possessed on the effective date of this section,” the bill states, “the person possessing the large capacity magazine shall possess the large capacity magazine only on property owned or immediately controlled by the person, or while engaged in the legal use of the large capacity magazine at a duly licensed firing range, or while engaged in a lawful outdoor recreational activity such as hunting, or while traveling to or from either of these locations for the purpose of engaging in the legal use of the large capacity magazine, provided that the large capacity magazine is stored unloaded and in a separate locked container during transport.”
Critics believe this prohibits the carrying of a loaded magazine in a handgun while going about one’s business.
Missouri lawmakers will also consider Senate Bill 40, which requires so-called “safe storage” of firearms, and a pair of so-called “red flag” bills, House Bill 40 and Senate Bill 23. Harper, the instructor, zeroed on the problems with such legislation, which already exists in Washington State.
“Anyone that is a danger to themselves or others should not possess firearms,” Harper was quoted as stating, “although let’s also not forget due process, because firearms are also covered under property rights. You can’t just take someone’s guns because someone accuses them of something.”
Gun prohibitionists are convinced they can continue eroding the Second Amendment in 2019. Beleaguered rights activists are determined to stop them.
—————————–
If you haven’t checked out and liked our Facebook page, please go here and do so. You can also follow us on Twitter at @co_firing_line and be sure to check out our MeWe page here and our new PatrioticSpace group here.
If you appreciate independent conservative reports like this, please go here and support us on Patreon.
And while you’re at it, be sure to check out our friends at Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative front-page founded by ex-military!
