Congress is back in session today after the Memorial Day recess period.
The radical left is presently deep in the middle of a full-blown attack on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans from all sides.
Here is the rundown of anti-gun measures being pushed by both chambers of Congress and the White House.
The House
Late last week, the House Judiciary Committee voted along party lines to advance the most radical package of gun control measures in recent memory.
The legislation is cleverly named the “Protecting Our Kids Act” while having no measures to do just that.
As summarized by the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA), here are some of the most egregious proposals in the omnibus.
- Banning law-abiding 18-20-year-old adults from acquiring semi-automatic rifles and shotguns.
- Prohibiting the manufacture, importation, sale, or possession of magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds, subject to limited exceptions.
- Using federal tax dollars intended for law enforcement and other public safety programs to “buyback” existing lawfully possessed magazines.
- Prohibiting the longstanding American tradition of building one’s own firearm, which has been protected by American law since our founding.
- “Safe storage” provisions that would control how individual Americans keep firearms in their own homes.
Following an emergency markup, the legislation was advanced by the Judiciary Committee by a vote of 25-19 last Thursday.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has promised to bring the package to a full floor vote this week.
Following last week’s hearing, Ohio Republican Jim Jordan, the most senior Republican on House Judiciary, didn’t hesitate to rip into the Democrats’ proposal.
“I think it’s just wrong to attack the Second Amendment liberties of law-abiding citizens, and that’s what these bills do,” Jordan told Fox News. “The answer is to make sure you have school facilities secured, and you have security officers who are trained and well-equipped to protect kids and teachers and the educational environment — not these various bills that they’ve piled into one hodgepodge package.”
The White House
President Joe Biden delivered a speech last Thursday in which he urged Congress to act on gun control measures, stating:
“Let’s hear the call and the cry, let’s meet the moment, let us finally do something.”
The White House also tweeted out a breakdown of Biden’s gun control agenda, laying it out for the American people to see, plain and simple.
The Senate
Senators are reportedly working on their own legislation in the wake of last month’s Uvalde tragedy, although no bills have officially been filed yet in the chamber.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell picked Texas Senator John Cornyn to act as the leading Republican voice in the chamber’s negotiations — which presently seem to be much less radical and more bipartisan than those taking place in the House.
According to The New York Times, Cornyn has dismissed Biden’s proposals, “such as renewing a federal ban on assault weapons, limiting high-capacity magazines or raising the age to purchase a semiautomatic rifle to 21 from 18.” Instead, he’s noted that “to come up with a solution, it is going to have to come from the Senate and, frankly, I think the White House understands that. The president is not necessarily a unifying figure in today’s politics.”
It is also worth mentioning that prior to the Memorial Day recess, the Senate brought up the nomination of Steven Dettelbach to be ATF director. I previously covered the sleazy manner in which his nomination was discussed. He was presented on the second of two panels during a Senate Judiciary hearing on “nominations” paired with five candidates for various circuit court positions. There doesn’t appear to be a plan to bring his nomination up in front of the full Senate.
Yet.
READ NEXT: Dana Loesch Rips Apart Democrats’ Radical Gun Control Proposals at Women’s Summit >>
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of American Liberty News.
Victoria Snitsar Churchill is a proud immigrant and naturalized U.S. citizen with a decade of experience in grassroots politics and community organizing.
Her writing has been featured in many online publications, including Campus Reform, The Daily Torch and The Daily Signal.
As an undergraduate at the University of Kansas, Victoria appeared in media outlets such as CBS News, TIME Magazine, The Washington Post Magazine, The Blaze and NRATV.
Victoria is also a former NCAA D1 student-athlete and Kansas College Republicans State Chair.
After moving eleven times in six years, Victoria resides in Arlington, Virginia and enjoys overpriced brunch on Sundays with her husband.
THE SECOND AMENDMENT’S ASSAULT ON FIREARMS AND SELF-DEFENSE
America was sold down the river when the 18th-century founding fathers replaced Biblical responsibilities (based upon the moral law of God) for Enlightenment rights, and nothing demonstrates it better than the Second Amendment.
Think about it: The Amendment WITH the wording “shall not be infringed” is the MOST infringed, licensed, and limited Amendment of the entire twenty seven. Furthermore, a future generation of our posterity is likely to see the Second Amendment whittled away entirely or repealed altogether. This is inherent nature and danger of optional Enlightenment rights versus non-optional Biblical responsibilities, such as the following:
“Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a two-edged sword [or today’s equivalent] in their hand … this honor have all his saints. Praise ye Yah.” (Psalm 149:6-9)
“But if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house [beginning with spiritual and physical protection], he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.” (1 Timothy 5:8)
Which is more potent: 1) An optional right, or 2) A non-optional responsibility?
Which is more likely to be infringed, licensed, and ultimately abolished altogether?
Which did the pre-Second Amendment Americans look to for their authority to bear arms, with little or nor infringement?
For more, listen to “The Second Amendment: A Knife in a Gunfight,” delivered at the Springfield, Missouri Firearms and Freedom Symposium, at Bible versus Constitution dot org. Go to our Video page and scroll down to title.
At this same location, you will also find a radio interview Larry Pratt (Executive Director of Gun Owners of America) conducted with me on this same subject. I think you’ll find Mr. Pratt’s remarks especially interesting. Go to our Audio Messages page and scroll down to T 952.
See also online Chapter 12 “Amendment 2: Constitutional vs. Biblical Self-Defense” of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective.” Click on the top entry on our Online Book page and scroll down to Chapter 12.
What’s happening sound like a lot of the things that allowed for Hitler to take over control of the German people.
Pelosi and her minions need to remember that congress can’t change or eliminate one of the constitution’s amendments. That has to be approved by the states and the citizens that live there. As long as the liberals don’t pack the SCOTUS appeals against any changes done by congress alone will win because they will be deemed as unconstitutional.
There are ways of dealing with those who would curtail Americans’ Constitutionally guaranteed rights; get off your tail feathers and Remember in November!
Let’s go, Brandon!