# HR 127 - Heavy Gun Control



## esmok (Mar 20, 2020)

*HR 127 - Heavy Gun Control & More*

This is unconstitutional but remember we are living under a Communist-occupied government now. And because of the measures they have been taking to ensure they can never lose an election in the future...

"You have no rights, you will own nothing and you will be happy."


----------



## Steve40th (Aug 17, 2016)

Most of it has been run before and through the courts. Mostly illegal.
Here is an older link explaining some items in the bill that is illegal, at this time
https://www.nraila.org/get-the-facts/registration-licensing/


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

esmok said:


> This is unconstitutional but remember we are living under a Communist-occupied government now. And because of the measures they have been taking to ensure they can never lose an election in the future...
> 
> "You have no rights, you will own nothing and you will be happy."


 Need to change your thinking. The only thing that decides what is and is not Constitutional is at least 5 of 9 on the court. They can rule anyway they wish. they can choose not to take a case. They can invent a case. They can change words, apply new meaning they can totally ignore congressional intent.
They are 100% free to do as they please. they have done it they will do it again. They will in time apply new meanings to every word in the 2nd.


----------



## Trihonda (Aug 24, 2020)

Smitty901 said:


> Need to change your thinking. The only thing that decides what is and is not Constitutional is at least 5 of 9 on the court. They can rule anyway they wish. they can choose not to take a case. They can invent a case. They can change words, apply new meaning they can totally ignore congressional intent.
> They are 100% free to do as they please. they have done it they will do it again. They will in time apply new meanings to every word in the 2nd.


and to that, with court packing, the curent leaders could potentially change the entire makeup of the court.


----------



## Steve40th (Aug 17, 2016)

Smitty901 said:


> Need to change your thinking. The only thing that decides what is and is not Constitutional is at least 5 of 9 on the court. They can rule anyway they wish. they can choose not to take a case. They can invent a case. They can change words, apply new meaning they can totally ignore congressional intent.
> They are 100% free to do as they please. they have done it they will do it again. They will in time apply new meanings to every word in the 2nd.


Problem is it takes a long time to get a case to them, if they even take it.


----------



## Nick (Nov 21, 2020)

I think that's their plan. Ram this bill through the House and Senate (probably not in this exact form) the send it to Old Joe to sign. It gets signed and becomes law. Of course it will be fought in court which could take years. In the meantime it would be law. And by the time it did make it to SCOTUS this administration would probably have already have them packed with a liberal majority. They're already taken the steps appointing a commission to look at reforming the SCOTUS. In which case they would probably confirm it as law or maybe refuse to even hear it.


----------



## Piratesailor (Nov 9, 2012)

I posted this on OTP the other day. 

I doubt it will pass..

But here is the thing.... a version of it will pass. 

You need to understand the process of ‘bills’ and the legislation. 

They, the communist democrats, will throw out something like this bill that is way over the top. So they will be pretty far on the left. The republicans and rino’s will be on the right. So the communists will then say, ok, negotiate/compromise and they’ll bring the bill down a notch or two and eliminate some provisions like maybe the $200 fee. The republicans will huff and puff and protest and suggest alternatives in order to meet in the middle.

And the communists will again say, negotiate/compromise and they’ll again tone it down and get rid of any provision that may allow people to access the information, or add a grandfather clause, or eliminate making one an immediate felon, etc. (just examples).

The republicans will huff and puff but much less and less and less...

Until a compromise/negotiated bipartisan bill is introduced and approved. 

The only question is what will be the final outcome. 

I have zero doubt that it will indeed be a full on registration. The registration will start with any new purchases. There will be a requirement for current owners to register but if they don’t they will not be penalized or fined or jailed. There will be no $200 fee for registration. If the gun is sold or transferred it needs to be registered. 

There will not be a “evil rifle” ban nor will there be a 10 round limit. States may do that but the feds won’t. 

In order to do all of this they will raise a tax on all ammunition and weapons.

The communist are thinking the long game and that over time, there will be a complete system that will register over 80% of firearms in the US.


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

Piratesailor said:


> .....I doubt it will pass.........
> 
> But here is the thing.... a version of it will pass......


Here's the other thing..... When it doesn't pass, they'll start breaking it down into smaller pieces and get it passed one paragraph at a time.


----------



## Piratesailor (Nov 9, 2012)

Back Pack Hack said:


> Here's the other thing..... When it doesn't pass, they'll start breaking it down into smaller pieces and get it passed one paragraph at a time.


They'll get a "compromise " bill passed. Of that, you can bet your caboose.


----------



## Back Pack Hack (Sep 15, 2016)

Piratesailor said:


> They'll get a "compromise " bill passed. Of that, you can bet your caboose.


And the rest of the train will get more compromises passed.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Steve40th said:


> Problem is it takes a long time to get a case to them, if they even take it.


 Not if they don't want it to. People keep thinking there is this Constitution written in stone that gives them rights and protects them. there is not. It is a court with the power to do away with laws, to write new ones or to change them. they can even choose to ignore them. they have done so in the past they will soon really step up and show you what they can do.


----------



## Idwanderer (May 4, 2020)

So ... last time I asked this all I got was a bunch of chest thumping from a bunch of blow hards... but I'll ask again. Share some of your thoughts on what you're going to do? Some version will pass as has already been suggested. Whether you turn them in or bury them they get what they want ... you're disarmed. Read this bill. An 'ex' can turn you in, they have to pursue any lead, they can enter your home without a warrant it goes on and on. Really I curious are your writing you representative, are you encouraging your state to become a sanctuary state or are your going to bury your guns. You sure won't be able to use them or afford them. Or are you just going to say ' they're not taking my guns' and stick you heads in the sand. This is real ... share some thoughts so we all can all figure out whats the best route of each of us individually.

I don't mean to offend anyone here, and I've no doubt I'll be 'censored' forever on Pepperforums' because I've offended some of you. But I'm still trying to figure what the best route is and your input is as important to me as it is a lot of others to look up to you guys.


----------



## Steve40th (Aug 17, 2016)

Not talking about plans on a forum.. Nothing is secure anymore.


----------



## Nick (Nov 21, 2020)

Idwanderer said:


> So ... last time I asked this all I got was a bunch of chest thumping from a bunch of blow hards... but I'll ask again. Share some of your thoughts on what you're going to do? Some version will pass as has already been suggested. Whether you turn them in or bury them they get what they want ... you're disarmed. Read this bill. An 'ex' can turn you in, they have to pursue any lead, they can enter your home without a warrant it goes on and on. Really I curious are your writing you representative, are you encouraging your state to become a sanctuary state or are your going to bury your guns. You sure won't be able to use them or afford them. Or are you just going to say ' they're not taking my guns' and stick you heads in the sand. This is real ... share some thoughts so we all can all figure out whats the best route of each of us individually.
> 
> I don't mean to offend anyone here, and I've no doubt I'll be 'censored' forever on Pepperforums' because I've offended some of you. But I'm still trying to figure what the best route is and your input is as important to me as it is a lot of others to look up to you guys.


Just like when you asked last time you asked other people to tell you what they would plan to do without any mention of what you would do yourself. Probably the same reason no one else wants to answer......


----------



## esmok (Mar 20, 2020)

Many of you just don't get it. We are under full enemy control now. Supreme Court included. We got here partly due to unconditional faith in "the system" that many of you are showing here. But we let that system we hang onto get ripped apart. It no longer exists because we failed to protect it and secure it just to "keep the peace" and not "upset the apple cart". Muh football, muh TV, muh pretty guns.

This has been a long time coming. They have been running the show for many decades now, but we are in the last stages of the final takeover.

The coup was completed and the barricades have been erected around them with military to protect them. And we mostly just sat and watched.

They are now taking our right to free speech away every day as we speak, so that we cannot speak against them. Big Tech was just the beginning, now Alt Tech sites like Bitchute, Gab and Minds are also falling inline with the occupied government's order to stifle the speech of the opposition.


The call us insurgents, when they themselves were the insurgents. And people believed them. 
They accused us of attempting a coup when they were the ones attempting the coup. And people believed them. 
They say we are terrorists when it is they who are terrorizing us. And people believed them. 

They have been in control of our mass media, entertainment and education system for decades, indoctrinating generation upon generation. 80% of Americans are now indoctrinated: they either accept them with open arms as "just" & "righteous" or do not see them at all and think "it'll all work out".

The remaining that see them for what they are, communist tyrants? They are too few to matter now and they will eventually be culled (that process in being implemented).

It's all over. You have no rights, you will own nothing, and you will be happy (that is, if you are willing to go along, otherwise you will be shot dead).

Yuri Bezmenov and many, many others have been warning but we never listened.






Want the whole interview?






Here's another short Paul Revere video (in fact, this is the interviewer in the above vids, G Edward Griffin)



Full video available on many sites. Search "G Edward Griffin More Deadly than War The Communist Revolution in America".

As far as those asking what you will do, what she will do, what I will do. I personally cannot do much. I do not know anyone who understands this situation or who cares.

it has been said that Americans today will never do anything to save America until which time their food and water are gone, their entertainment is gone and they want it all back so badly that they will kill for it.

But that is all in vein because you cannot win a war if all you want is to go back to the old, soft, carefree ways of the past.

So back to me, I cannot do anything on a grand scale. My plan? Well, my plan is in my signature line. I will wait for them to act on me, wait for them to take me down and do my best to take at least one of them down with me. If most of you have at least that goal in mind I think that's probably all one can hope for at this juncture. I will not be taken alive, it's against my personal constitution to live under such a tyranny.

Better dead than red? You bet. If you plan to go along to get along, then you have been one of them all along and merely larping to be against them for social credits.


----------



## esmok (Mar 20, 2020)

Idwanderer said:


> An 'ex' can turn you in, they have to pursue any lead, they can enter your home without a warrant it goes on and on.


NO ONE will be "worthy". that's the whole point. Between the character evaluations of family and friends and psychological evaluations alone, no one will be "worthy" of private gun ownership. The only ones with guns will be their minions.

This is delivered under the guise of safety for the citizenry, but it's simply just tyranny and therefore the death of the constitution, meaning you have no right to keep arms, let alone bear arms against them, the tyrants.

It would be silly to have any notion that anyone will be deemed " worthy".


----------



## Idwanderer (May 4, 2020)

Nick said:


> Just like when you asked last time you asked other people to tell you what they would plan to do without any mention of what you would do yourself. Probably the same reason no one else wants to answer......


Good point. Thank you. So ...

It seems if I bury my guns ... they win. If I turn them in ... they win. If I keep them ... they win. My senator comes to our Kiwanis meeting when he's in town. Thats sweet cuz we can hear from him first hand and several of us have voiced our concerns to him and have gotten some feed back. He isn't too hopeful about the future for us but none the less he nows how those here feel. A starting point. I also know our State rep ... a gun owner so he knows how I feel.

It appears you've limited options.

1. Take an active LEGAL roll in whats happening.
2. You can sell them while the $ is high.
3. You can turn them in and admit your a 'sheeple'.
4 You can hide them at home but with the questionable search and seizure under this bill you're taking a real risk of loosing them anyway.
5. You can bury them and hope they not found by someone and that you packaging is perfect.
6. Do nothing and pretend that the G'vmt will do the right thing.

They don't need this site to know you have guns so trying to be quoi isn't going to fool them. I 've the PVC needed and its ready to go once this bill hits the Senate but I don't really want to do that. Some thoughtful options would be a great asset.

There you go ...


----------



## Nick (Nov 21, 2020)

I have no illusions that they don't know each and every gun I own. I live in one of the most restrictive states in the country and no for a fact that they know what I own. I don't try and hide the fact that I'm a gun owner. But saying that on a forum is a lot different than saying what your future plans are under a socialist dictatorship. I'm pretty sure most people who are here have at least some kind of idea what's going on. Just because they don't want to tell their plans to a person they don't know typing somewhere on a keyboard doesn't mean they don't have any.


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

Idwanderer said:


> 1.So ... last time I asked this all I got was a bunch of chest thumping from a bunch of blow hards... but I'll ask again. Share some of your thoughts on what you're going to do? Some version will pass as has already been suggested. Whether you turn them in or bury them they get what they want ... you're disarmed.
> 
> 2.Read this bill. An 'ex' can turn you in, they have to pursue any lead, they can enter your home without a warrant it goes on and on. Really I curious are your writing you representative, are you encouraging your state to become a sanctuary state or are your going to bury your guns. You sure won't be able to use them or afford them.
> 
> ...


1. What am I going to do? Let me see, I am going to fast and pray, because there is something spiritual going on.
And, anyone who denies or is blind to that, is nearly useless and powerless to cause it to change. There is a wickedness at work, it is physical and spiritual.

2. There is no need for me to read the bill, but I scanned it. The bill will gut the Bill of Rights, and that is something that I predicted on this forum. Yes, they will enter and search your home without a warrant. Just like they will intercept your phone calls, without a warrant, and your internet usage too.

3.They are not taking my guns, and that is really what I mean.

4.You won't be censored on PrepperForums.net, but you will be in disagreement with the milieu here.
Such as myself and what I wrote. Let me close by saying that you are in a situation, that won't be fixed by writing your Congressmen. They are in on it for the most part.

What are your intentions , to write your Congress man, until the cops show up at your house?Then proceed to search it? If it is, then you are blind to reality, once they have your guns: then they will treat you like a worm.

The Good Lord did not say, that we would live out our days in peace and comfort. As for myself, I never expected to.


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

@esmok
That video of the ex KGB agent, just rocked.


----------



## Nick (Nov 21, 2020)

Even in it's current form I wouldn't rely on SCOTUS to weigh in. I realize these are regarding state laws and not federal, but still.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/suprem...ar-gun-rights-cases-massachusetts-california/


----------



## Trihonda (Aug 24, 2020)

The Supreme Court can take up a highly publicized case and rule on it whenever they see fit. They just did so with a Qualified Immunity case, and it was my understanding they just ruled without giving anyone on either side an opportunity to present briefs or arguments. 

I would hope that if something like this were to pass (and get signed by Joe), it would get plenty of press, and the supreme court would be very aware of it, and understand the implications to the 2nd Amendment. They should shut that crap down in it's entirety! 

I think there's two things that'd spark a civil war, This bill... and packing the court... Because they are the same thing.


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

Trihonda said:


> The Supreme Court can take up a highly publicized case and rule on it whenever they see fit. They just did so with a Qualified Immunity case, and it was my understanding they just ruled without giving anyone on either side an opportunity to present briefs or arguments.
> 
> I would hope that if something like this were to pass (and get signed by Joe), it would get plenty of press, and the supreme court would be very aware of it, and understand the implications to the 2nd Amendment. They should shut that crap down in it's entirety!
> 
> I think there's two things that'd spark a civil war, This bill... and packing the court... Because they are the same thing.


Watch for this, the DumboCrats will try to change the number of Supreme Court judges. I think they will try for 12 judges in total.

And the sad part is that it is , they may get that. It would be a dilution of the power of each judge, and a general weakening of the Court.

More is not better, when there is bad intent.


----------



## Trihonda (Aug 24, 2020)

MisterMills357 said:


> when there is bad intent.


This gives me some hope. I hope that the court could rule the "intent" to pack the court as a direct threat to diminish the court for political reasons, not for legitimate structural reasons. Thus rule against it. The court has used intent to rule on things in the political sphere before, such as with DOCA. I hope the court sticks up for itself. If the executive and legislative branch have unfettered control to alter the court for purely political gains, then it go against the very fabric of the intent of separation of powers. If court packing were to stand, and they could just add however many justices they wanted to achieve their political goals, then who's to say they can't just eliminate justices at some point, decide to reduce the number for political gains.. This messing with the courts sets a VERY dangerous tone... I think two things actually spark civil war, HR127 and/or court packing (which essentially would be used to pass HR127).


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

Trihonda said:


> This gives me some hope. I hope that the court could rule the "intent" to pack the court as a direct threat to diminish the court for political reasons, not for legitimate structural reasons. Thus rule against it. The court has used intent to rule on things in the political sphere before, such as with DOCA. I hope the court sticks up for itself. If the executive and legislative branch have unfettered control to alter the court for purely political gains, then it go against the very fabric of the intent of separation of powers. If court packing were to stand, and they could just add however many justices they wanted to achieve their political goals, then who's to say they can't just eliminate justices at some point, decide to reduce the number for political gains.. This messing with the courts sets a VERY dangerous tone... I think two things actually spark civil war, HR127 and/or court packing (which essentially would be used to pass HR127).


The number of justices is fluid, there were 10 justices under Lincoln. Biden is going to swing and try to hit a home run, with 12. 
And if the Court has any sense, it had better defend itself, and turn away any expansion. It has the power to accept or deny an expansion.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

I'm just in this type of mood today...

BRING IT THE F*@k ON!

As far as I'm concerned this slow burn is getting old and I'm sick of it.

In the words of my good buddy and hero The American Dream Dusty Rhodes; Its Time To Take Care of Bidness!


----------



## SDF880 (Mar 28, 2013)

How bout the Sheriff's get together and deputize all legal gun owners?


----------



## Chiefster23 (Feb 5, 2016)

Just buy black boots, black jeans, black hoodie, and black facemask/bandanna. Register as a democrat and self identify as antifa. All gun offenses will be overlooked.


----------



## Nick (Nov 21, 2020)

Chiefster23 said:


> Just buy black boots, black jeans, black hoodie, and black facemask/bandanna. Register as a democrat and self identify as antifa. All gun offenses will be overlooked.


I've actually thought about registering as a democrat just in case they decide to start rounding up Republicans.


----------



## Nick (Nov 21, 2020)

I don't know that the court would have any say in whether or not judges could be added. I know they have no control over who gets appointed. 

Then again I'm not a lawyer......


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

Slippy said:


> I'm just in this type of mood today...
> 
> BRING IT THE F*@k ON!
> 
> ...


Yep, I am sick to hell of dying by a thousand paper cuts. Bring it on if your gonna, Let's do this damn thing.


----------



## Chipper (Dec 22, 2012)

Nick said:


> I've actually thought about registering as a democrat just in case they decide to start rounding up Republicans.


Run and hide just what we need more of.


----------



## Nick (Nov 21, 2020)

Chipper said:


> Nick said:
> 
> 
> > I've actually thought about registering as a democrat just in case they decide to start rounding up Republicans.
> ...


I didn't say anything about running and hiding. But why make it easy on them to find me by simply looking up registered Republicans??? Believe it or not there are a lot of conservatives that register as democrats for that exact reason.

It doesn't mean that it would change what I do or how I do it. It just means that maybe I get overlooked.

If you know your name is going to be put on a list by the government and you could make a simple change to potentially not be put on that list then why wouldn't you?

I also live in a very liberal state (MA). We're one of those states when you hear about ridiculous laws that are passed we were probably one of the first ones to adopt them.


----------



## Piratesailor (Nov 9, 2012)

Slippy said:


> I'm just in this type of mood today...
> 
> BRING IT THE F*@k ON!
> 
> ...


As someone said over on OTP... can we just get this whole thing started already. He was tired of the slow motion collapse.


----------

