Analysis of HR 127 by the Firearms Policy Coalition:
FightHR127.com: Stop HR 127 - Gun Licensing, Registration & Partial Ammo Ban

HR 127:
 

Communism is here The CCP & Zing Chow Zing wants the U S A to be like China when it comes to firearms....

https://dailycaller.com/2021/02/02/n...ary-on-record/

January 2021 FBI NICS figure 4,288,240 reflects a 61.7 percent increase

Caniglia v Strom
 

https://americanmilitarynews.com/202...out-a-warrant/



https://www.scotusblog.com/case-file...iglia-v-strom/

Dont get your hopes up for that to have a 2a friendly outcome....

Agree. They will say it’s in the community’s best interest to seize the firearms.

Speaking of 2A, yesterday I decided to go with CCW Safe, a sort of 2A "insurance"...mostly for piece of mind. It's inexpensive enough, and supposedly they're pretty good.

I know it doesn't keep them from taking a weapon, but it may keep them from taking me...

I'm not wanting to use it, but it's there just in case..

All of us can have hopes dashed against the wall with No BOR absolute. Not my fundamental belief, a right given by GOD can't be given, changed or removed. John Locke.

I'll stand by the Brief Amicus Curiae of Gun Owners of America, Inc.,
Gun Owners Foundation, The Heller Foundation, and Conservative
Legal Defense and Education Fund in Support of Petitioner

"B. The Exercise of Second Amendment Rights Must Not Result in the Forfeiture
of Other Constitutional Rights.

The First Circuit’s decision violates the principle that the exercise of one constitutional right may not permissibly be conditioned on the forfeiture of another
constitutional right.

page 24.... For if the government could deny a benefit to a person because
of his constitutionally protected [rights], his exercise of those freedoms would in effect be penalized and inhibited.

This would allow the government to ‘produce a result which [it] could not command directly.’ ... Such interference with constitutional rights is impermissible.”

Id. at 597. Here, Petitioner was deprived of his Fourth Amendment right to be “secure in his house ... against unreasonable searches and seizures” because he exercised his Second Amendment right to “keep ... arms....”

After Heller, Respondents cannot prohibit Petitioner from exercising his Second
Amendment right to keep a firearm in his home for
self-defense, and the First Circuit may not allow the City to deprive Petitioner of the “benefit” of the warrant requirement so as to allow his firearms to be
seized.

Heller did hold 2A is based on "Text, History & Tradition"! Both in Heller and McDonald. :munchin

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketP...us%20brief.pdf

Text, history & tradition unfortunately doesn't matter to the despots invoking Parkland as their next rally point.

Here's the closing paragraph of WH's latest missive to Congress.
Full text of it here.

3D-printed firearms and liability for police shootings
 

https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/02/3...ice-shootings/

This week we highlight cert petitions that ask the Supreme Court to consider, among other things, when a state attorney general can be pulled into court in another state and when a police officer is immune from civil liability for fatally shooting a passenger in a fleeing car.

Grewal v. Defense Distributed is a dispute between the attorney general of New Jersey and a Texas company that develops digital files used to manufacture 3D-printed guns. In 2018, the attorney general, Gurbir Grewal, sent a cease-and-desist letter to Defense Distributed, warning that distributing such files to New Jersey residents over the internet would violate New Jersey law. In response, the company sued Grewal in federal court in Texas. It sought an injunction barring Grewal from taking any enforcement action against the company, which it argued would violate the First and Second Amendments.

The Texas district court dismissed the lawsuit after finding that it had no personal jurisdiction over Grewal. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit reversed and ruled that the case could proceed. Grewal argues in his cert petition that the 5th Circuit’s decision is at odds with the Supreme Court’s case law on personal jurisdiction. He also claims that the 5th Circuit created a circuit split on the question whether state officials subject themselves to jurisdiction in other states merely by sending cease-and-desist letters across state lines.

City of Hayward v. Stoddard-Nunez arises from a police officer’s fatal shooting of a passenger in a fleeing car. In 2013, an officer in Hayward, California, attempted to stop a car on suspicion of drunk driving. After initially stopping in a parking lot, the driver refused to exit the car. Instead, he drove past the officer’s patrol car and fled the scene. The officer, who testified that the car swerved toward him as it fled, fired nine shots into the car, killing a passenger. The passenger’s next-of-kin sued the officer and the city under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, arguing that the officer violated the passenger’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable seizures.

The district court dismissed the lawsuit, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit reinstated it, concluding that a reasonable jury could find that the officer fired the fatal shot after the car had already passed him and posed little threat to the officer or the public. The officer and the city ask the Supreme Court to take up the case to resolve two issues: (1) the proper of level of generality that courts should use to assess whether an officer violated “clearly established law” for the purpose of deciding whether that officer is entitled to qualified immunity, and (2) whether a shooting of a passenger under these circumstances counts as a seizure under the Fourth Amendment.

We all are aware this argument concerning registration will be settled in the SCOTUS. Until then, a counter narrative just as powerful is the National Registration voter identification card, one that must be presented in order to vote. No exception. If they wish to register guns, then this must also be considered.

The socialist democrats would never win another election.

If you think SCOTUS will come to your rescue you’re smoking the Hopium Pipe

A list worth noting
 

Credit for this goes to AWR Hawkins in his (as usual) fine article over at Breitbart discussing the sure-to-come flailing over gun control, as called for by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

But for those who may want to find it from time to time I thought I'd include the article's list of shooting events that were conducted using firearms that had been acquired legally and through a background check. Given the task & purpose of 'the Letter' - now just over some 8 years ago - it seems worth contemplating.

Mike Lee questions Merrick Garland on the 2nd
 

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/2102/22/cnr.06.html

I don't think there were any surprises in Garland's responses. Vague, but revealing.

That just proves that ALL guns are bad - more proof that the gubmint should disarm right wing extremists the same way the Earp's disarmed the McLaury's