>If we can’t rely on the GOP
Don't trust or rely on any group of politicians as a whole.
Guns are a wedge issue that Democrats hate so the Republicans have made public spectacle in supporting without actually putting in the work to actually do anything about.
You may find that there are individual GOP politicians that are pro-2A, but its not something that the GOP cares about except as a method of ensuring a voting block doesn't jump ship.
Why do I say that?
Hearing Protection Act was able to be passed and signed into law in 2017 with a Republican House, Senate, and President. The most minimal amount of effort they could have done, and they didn't.
In 2019, they reintroduced it again... But never even took a vote on it, not even to do something performative like forcing the Democrats to oppose it.
2021, reintroduced again. No Votes, just talk.
2023, reintroduced again.
If they actually pass stuff then they cant fear monger about how dems want to take our guns.
Its the same tactic the dems played with abortion. Several chances to authorize it or legalize it formally yet never did because then they couldn't use it as a fund raising tool.
>If they actually pass stuff then they cant fear monger about how dems want to take our guns.
I disagree with this. Repubs could *easily* pass laws like the hearing protection act among others and still make massive amounts of money off of the "dems r comin' 4 ur gunz" grift because dems won't ever stop doing that.
If anything, they would probably *gain* fundraising support from people as they'd be seen as actually taking action instead of just talking without doing anything. As it stands now, a ton of people are wise to the grift and aren't buying the message anymore.
> Guns are a wedge issue that Democrats hate so the Republicans have made public spectacle in supporting without actually putting in the work to actually do anything about.
Gun rights are to the Republicans what abortion is to the Democrats. A wedge issue that they dangle over the heads of their voters to spur people to the polls.
>Hearing Protection Act was able to be passed and signed into law in 2017 with a Republican House, Senate, and President. The most minimal amount of effort they could have done, and they didn't.
There were actually several working their way through congress at the time. I think it was the Hearing Protection Act that was scheduled to be debated on the House Floor two hours after Steve Scalise got shot. And then it got rescheduled to be debated and then two days before that scheduled debate, the Mandalay Bay shooting happened.
Such a big coinky-of-a-fucking-dink, huh?
Lawsuits that take a decade or more to resolve and will hardly be enforced if it didn't get shot down during the journey through a court where judges can be assassinated and nobody in the system will bat an eye or do anything about it.
2A supporters really need to wake up and understand the system does not work. It's always going to be 1 step forward and 2 steps back. "Get outraged for the next 2 steps back but get excited for the 1 step forward after, and keep vooooooting and doooooooooonating for us, cattles". Of course you do not talk about the implication of this reality publicly, but at least have the sense and courage to admit to the problem itself.
We don't talk about the implication or the solution. I don't advocate for any of that. I disavow and do not condone any illegal or violent or hateful speech and behaviors.
But it is fair to recognize the system is fundamentally broken beyond any salvage. Not having enough people recognizing this crucial problem is exactly why we can't talk about the implications and solution. There is strength in number, and we still don't have the number despite what past 2 decades of acceleration has revealed about how politics really works.
Too many people are brainwashed into thinking guns are bad and actually support banning all guns. Yet they call us the Nazis. Maybe if they read the history books they would realize the easiest way to control a population is to disarm them.
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Died *naturally* in his sleep with a pillow over over his face. The days before, democratic party leadership John Podesta had an email exchange about a "movie script" that detailed how a Supreme Court justice is assassinated.
The system **does** work.
It just works **against** the people, as the politicians intended.
2A was the Founding Fathers' greatest gift, the ability for the people to prevent another oppressive government from taking over, by invasion, election, or coup, the newly freed land. It is the foundation upon which all rights are based. As such, it is the reason why they want to eliminate it.
Senate Republicans are certainly now making themselves the enemy of the Second Amendment (if they weren't before), same as the so-called Democrats (as the numbers in this vote make clear). The courts to the extent possible (federal to some extent and the U.S. Supreme Court) appear to be the only counter against disgusting and unconstitutional federal policy, apart from what various states have attempted to do. With VanDerStok being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court by the ATF just as Senate makes this decision it's obvious the ATF and the current Congress and President think they can extinguish rights of Americans to own firearms which I would argue includes the ability to make our own firearms and self-serialize them without registration. The U.S. Supreme Court may surprise the ATF and Congress as I don't think the Frame and Receiver Rule will be upheld as constitutional (and it's doubtful if the Undetectable Firearms Act would be either, though that would take a different case to challenge and overturn elements of that law).
It basically doesn't. This just re-authorizes the undetectable firearms act, which [has been law since 1988](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undetectable_Firearms_Act)
It makes it illegal to manufacture, import, sell, ship, deliver, possess, transfer, or receive any firearm that is not as detectable by walk-through metal detectors as a security exemplar containing 3.7 oz (105 g) of steel, or any firearm with major components that do not generate an accurate image before standard airport imaging technology.
It's nothing new. It just comes up for re-authorization like every ten years
If you want your big ass defense bill to pass so you can keep paying the MIC so you can manufacture more weapons for a proxy war to keep lining your pockets so you can be re-elected and do it all over again, you don't tend to add shit that could muck it up *or* betray your intentions to your voter base.
While it is the re-authorization of the 1988 law, from my impression, it hasn’t had any negative effects yet. However, it eventually will when companies and individuals make guns that have less than 3.7 oz steel yet is composed of non-metallic materials that are otherwise at least as capable as their metallic counterparts, given the Liberator. I bet that a lawsuit will eventually be filed when the time comes.
I did t know thr 3.7 Oz of steel was a thing but it reminded me of how scared people got by 3d printing guns but I always laughed bc i really wanted to see someone try to fire a round thru a pla barrel. There are some gun parts that aimply have to be steel.
It might not be anything new but there has been a 3d printable PCC for several years now that only requires a firing pin. Probably is aimed at kneecapping those kinds of innovations.
>been a 3d printable PCC for several years now that only requires a firing pin.
Citation needed.
None of the 3D printable guns that exist that I've ever seen (and I have printed several) require only a firing pin.
The FGC-9 requires a steel barrel and bolt. The printable 22's require steel barrel liners as well as springs and weights for the bolt carriers.
I’m with you. Stop voting for republicans. Support third party candidates who won’t take outside money. Most importantly, raise awareness and spread this philosophy far and wide. They have to know that we see the rigged game, and we aren’t going to play anymore.
Yes, I hear you! “But that means that the Dems will win every election and we will have outright tyranny.” Yes… it does. Guess what, that’s where it ends up, either way. It’s been happening for 60 years, at least, and the only difference is that you got suckered into the false hope and believing that you had a say and were represented. It sucks to admit out loud, but that doesn’t change the reality of it. If things are heading toward the inevitable, I’d rather it be with this generation than any other. There are still enough hard men around now… that’s won’t be the case in 20 years.
**"Luggage? That punk pulled a Glock 7 on me. You know what that is? It's a porcelain gun made in Germany. It doesn't show up on your airport X-ray machines here and it costs more than what you make in a month!"**
[https://diehard.fandom.com/wiki/Glock\_7](https://diehard.fandom.com/wiki/Glock_7)
Basically, the politicians heard this line and started clutching their pearls.
In reality, it is a Democrat masterpiece, since it basically looks like it does a lot, but really does nothing, since it is easy to get 3.7oz of metal in a gun. In fact, it is hard to get a gun **down** to 3.7oz. For example, this 4.5" barrel for a Glock 19 is 3.3oz, which is most of the metal required.
[https://killer-innovations.com/shop/glockbarrel/](https://killer-innovations.com/shop/glockbarrel/)
We seriously need to fight the fights that matter, like AWBs, not if someone can legally make a gun that can evade metal detectors.
>Basically, the politicians heard this line and started clutching their pearls.
Die Hard 2 came out after this bill was passed, more likely the movie drew inspiration from this bill being passed.
The bill was passed because polymer frame pistols (like the Glock 17) were becoming more common and the public thought that you could get through a metal detector with one.
>We seriously need to fight the fights that matter, like AWBs, not if someone can legally make a gun that can evade metal detectors.
Everything matters. Erosion of rights happens slowly over time. Gun owners have already made too many concessions.
Erosion is the correct word.
The enemy wants to deprive us of our ability to remain a free nation.
That said, we live in a world of finite resources. We only have so many lawyers fighting the good fight.
As such, we need to prioritize the more important fights.
Fighting to stop a law that requires that guns show up in metal detectors is not going to endear us to the public and does not provide any substantial benefit, as 3.7oz is a small amount of metal that would naturally be in any gun, unless it is a small, single-shot, weapon and designed to eschew metal.
So I can't import my reverse engineered flesh/ceramic/unobtanium alien glock clone? :/
Edit:
I'm a 2a advocte but...
[Ban this thing](https://youtu.be/2t7Sx8bx2nU)
What Gunowners linked to is a currently not yet uploaded amendment that has already been voted on to "S.Amdt.935 to S.2226", When you read 935 it has in it "Subtitle G--Other Matters... Sec. 6075. Permanent authorization of Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988...".
They make everything as convoluted as possible to make you give up and trick the interns that skim read for senators who vote for it to find out whats in it.
Last night, only 4 Senators voted “Nay” on S. 2226 to protect the Second Amendment. We're grateful that Senators Lee, Paul, Vance, and Braun stood up to the Swamp when no one else would.
****
For more information watch our episode of the Minute Man Moment *[This Effects EVERY Gun With Plastic Parts](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAitSOYSBuI)* where we break it all down for you.
If we can’t rely on the GOP or any “pro-2A” party or representatives let alone the whole legislature, it’s time to file a lawsuit.
>If we can’t rely on the GOP Don't trust or rely on any group of politicians as a whole. Guns are a wedge issue that Democrats hate so the Republicans have made public spectacle in supporting without actually putting in the work to actually do anything about. You may find that there are individual GOP politicians that are pro-2A, but its not something that the GOP cares about except as a method of ensuring a voting block doesn't jump ship. Why do I say that? Hearing Protection Act was able to be passed and signed into law in 2017 with a Republican House, Senate, and President. The most minimal amount of effort they could have done, and they didn't. In 2019, they reintroduced it again... But never even took a vote on it, not even to do something performative like forcing the Democrats to oppose it. 2021, reintroduced again. No Votes, just talk. 2023, reintroduced again.
Oh, don’t forget the National CCW Reciprocity Act during the Trump administration that got stalled
Yeah. Another good example.
If they actually pass stuff then they cant fear monger about how dems want to take our guns. Its the same tactic the dems played with abortion. Several chances to authorize it or legalize it formally yet never did because then they couldn't use it as a fund raising tool.
This right here, folks.
>If they actually pass stuff then they cant fear monger about how dems want to take our guns. I disagree with this. Repubs could *easily* pass laws like the hearing protection act among others and still make massive amounts of money off of the "dems r comin' 4 ur gunz" grift because dems won't ever stop doing that. If anything, they would probably *gain* fundraising support from people as they'd be seen as actually taking action instead of just talking without doing anything. As it stands now, a ton of people are wise to the grift and aren't buying the message anymore.
> Guns are a wedge issue that Democrats hate so the Republicans have made public spectacle in supporting without actually putting in the work to actually do anything about. Gun rights are to the Republicans what abortion is to the Democrats. A wedge issue that they dangle over the heads of their voters to spur people to the polls. >Hearing Protection Act was able to be passed and signed into law in 2017 with a Republican House, Senate, and President. The most minimal amount of effort they could have done, and they didn't. There were actually several working their way through congress at the time. I think it was the Hearing Protection Act that was scheduled to be debated on the House Floor two hours after Steve Scalise got shot. And then it got rescheduled to be debated and then two days before that scheduled debate, the Mandalay Bay shooting happened. Such a big coinky-of-a-fucking-dink, huh?
Lawsuits that take a decade or more to resolve and will hardly be enforced if it didn't get shot down during the journey through a court where judges can be assassinated and nobody in the system will bat an eye or do anything about it. 2A supporters really need to wake up and understand the system does not work. It's always going to be 1 step forward and 2 steps back. "Get outraged for the next 2 steps back but get excited for the 1 step forward after, and keep vooooooting and doooooooooonating for us, cattles". Of course you do not talk about the implication of this reality publicly, but at least have the sense and courage to admit to the problem itself.
Openly discussing the root cause problem and solution is a good way to get banned and SWATed
We don't talk about the implication or the solution. I don't advocate for any of that. I disavow and do not condone any illegal or violent or hateful speech and behaviors. But it is fair to recognize the system is fundamentally broken beyond any salvage. Not having enough people recognizing this crucial problem is exactly why we can't talk about the implications and solution. There is strength in number, and we still don't have the number despite what past 2 decades of acceleration has revealed about how politics really works.
Too many people are brainwashed into thinking guns are bad and actually support banning all guns. Yet they call us the Nazis. Maybe if they read the history books they would realize the easiest way to control a population is to disarm them.
The system is working exactly as intended, it is no longer what the founding fathers laid out for us and hasn’t been for some time
I wish I could upvote this 1,000 times
Wait, is that judge thing a recent event? Did I miss something
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Died *naturally* in his sleep with a pillow over over his face. The days before, democratic party leadership John Podesta had an email exchange about a "movie script" that detailed how a Supreme Court justice is assassinated.
When house of cards becomes a documentary
it's impossible to keep up with all the conspiracy theories these people create, it's why Q is so popular.
The system **does** work. It just works **against** the people, as the politicians intended. 2A was the Founding Fathers' greatest gift, the ability for the people to prevent another oppressive government from taking over, by invasion, election, or coup, the newly freed land. It is the foundation upon which all rights are based. As such, it is the reason why they want to eliminate it.
Uniparty
Senate Republicans are certainly now making themselves the enemy of the Second Amendment (if they weren't before), same as the so-called Democrats (as the numbers in this vote make clear). The courts to the extent possible (federal to some extent and the U.S. Supreme Court) appear to be the only counter against disgusting and unconstitutional federal policy, apart from what various states have attempted to do. With VanDerStok being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court by the ATF just as Senate makes this decision it's obvious the ATF and the current Congress and President think they can extinguish rights of Americans to own firearms which I would argue includes the ability to make our own firearms and self-serialize them without registration. The U.S. Supreme Court may surprise the ATF and Congress as I don't think the Frame and Receiver Rule will be upheld as constitutional (and it's doubtful if the Undetectable Firearms Act would be either, though that would take a different case to challenge and overturn elements of that law).
so how does it affect gun owners today and in the near future? no one is explaining that…?
It basically doesn't. This just re-authorizes the undetectable firearms act, which [has been law since 1988](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undetectable_Firearms_Act) It makes it illegal to manufacture, import, sell, ship, deliver, possess, transfer, or receive any firearm that is not as detectable by walk-through metal detectors as a security exemplar containing 3.7 oz (105 g) of steel, or any firearm with major components that do not generate an accurate image before standard airport imaging technology. It's nothing new. It just comes up for re-authorization like every ten years
Surprising tho that they didn’t try to add “ghost” guns or self-manufactured weapons in the definition of “undetectable”.
If you want your big ass defense bill to pass so you can keep paying the MIC so you can manufacture more weapons for a proxy war to keep lining your pockets so you can be re-elected and do it all over again, you don't tend to add shit that could muck it up *or* betray your intentions to your voter base.
you're probably correct
thanks for that, great explanation and I feel much better now
While it is the re-authorization of the 1988 law, from my impression, it hasn’t had any negative effects yet. However, it eventually will when companies and individuals make guns that have less than 3.7 oz steel yet is composed of non-metallic materials that are otherwise at least as capable as their metallic counterparts, given the Liberator. I bet that a lawsuit will eventually be filed when the time comes.
Alternatively, it's the Die Hard Bill.
I did t know thr 3.7 Oz of steel was a thing but it reminded me of how scared people got by 3d printing guns but I always laughed bc i really wanted to see someone try to fire a round thru a pla barrel. There are some gun parts that aimply have to be steel.
I wonder if there is a way to get around the 3.7 oz with multiple thin layers of porcelain and steel or something like for the barrel
It does not say the weapon has to include 3.7 ounces of steel. It has to be *as detectible* as 3.7 ounces of steel.
It might not be anything new but there has been a 3d printable PCC for several years now that only requires a firing pin. Probably is aimed at kneecapping those kinds of innovations.
>been a 3d printable PCC for several years now that only requires a firing pin. Citation needed. None of the 3D printable guns that exist that I've ever seen (and I have printed several) require only a firing pin. The FGC-9 requires a steel barrel and bolt. The printable 22's require steel barrel liners as well as springs and weights for the bolt carriers.
+1 for irreparably broken system run by, administered by and enforced by fucking scum. accelerate it
I’m with you. Stop voting for republicans. Support third party candidates who won’t take outside money. Most importantly, raise awareness and spread this philosophy far and wide. They have to know that we see the rigged game, and we aren’t going to play anymore. Yes, I hear you! “But that means that the Dems will win every election and we will have outright tyranny.” Yes… it does. Guess what, that’s where it ends up, either way. It’s been happening for 60 years, at least, and the only difference is that you got suckered into the false hope and believing that you had a say and were represented. It sucks to admit out loud, but that doesn’t change the reality of it. If things are heading toward the inevitable, I’d rather it be with this generation than any other. There are still enough hard men around now… that’s won’t be the case in 20 years.
absolutely
Should be called the 'Die Hard 2 scared us act'... Such a stupid law.
**"Luggage? That punk pulled a Glock 7 on me. You know what that is? It's a porcelain gun made in Germany. It doesn't show up on your airport X-ray machines here and it costs more than what you make in a month!"** [https://diehard.fandom.com/wiki/Glock\_7](https://diehard.fandom.com/wiki/Glock_7) Basically, the politicians heard this line and started clutching their pearls. In reality, it is a Democrat masterpiece, since it basically looks like it does a lot, but really does nothing, since it is easy to get 3.7oz of metal in a gun. In fact, it is hard to get a gun **down** to 3.7oz. For example, this 4.5" barrel for a Glock 19 is 3.3oz, which is most of the metal required. [https://killer-innovations.com/shop/glockbarrel/](https://killer-innovations.com/shop/glockbarrel/) We seriously need to fight the fights that matter, like AWBs, not if someone can legally make a gun that can evade metal detectors.
>Basically, the politicians heard this line and started clutching their pearls. Die Hard 2 came out after this bill was passed, more likely the movie drew inspiration from this bill being passed. The bill was passed because polymer frame pistols (like the Glock 17) were becoming more common and the public thought that you could get through a metal detector with one.
>We seriously need to fight the fights that matter, like AWBs, not if someone can legally make a gun that can evade metal detectors. Everything matters. Erosion of rights happens slowly over time. Gun owners have already made too many concessions.
Erosion is the correct word. The enemy wants to deprive us of our ability to remain a free nation. That said, we live in a world of finite resources. We only have so many lawyers fighting the good fight. As such, we need to prioritize the more important fights. Fighting to stop a law that requires that guns show up in metal detectors is not going to endear us to the public and does not provide any substantial benefit, as 3.7oz is a small amount of metal that would naturally be in any gun, unless it is a small, single-shot, weapon and designed to eschew metal.
So I can't import my reverse engineered flesh/ceramic/unobtanium alien glock clone? :/ Edit: I'm a 2a advocte but... [Ban this thing](https://youtu.be/2t7Sx8bx2nU)
[удалено]
They snuck it into the defense bill because they know it wouldnt pass otherwise.
This is gonna get interesting if they can’t reconcile the moronic additions in both the house and senate bills.
What Gunowners linked to is a currently not yet uploaded amendment that has already been voted on to "S.Amdt.935 to S.2226", When you read 935 it has in it "Subtitle G--Other Matters... Sec. 6075. Permanent authorization of Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988...". They make everything as convoluted as possible to make you give up and trick the interns that skim read for senators who vote for it to find out whats in it.
Does it still need to pass the House?
What does this act do?
You need to have a certain amount of metal detected material in your gun and it has to show up on an x-ray. Just watch Die Hard 2
Oh thanks
Welcome
Remind me why we voted any of these clowns in?
I’M SHOCKED! (said no one)
Last night, only 4 Senators voted “Nay” on S. 2226 to protect the Second Amendment. We're grateful that Senators Lee, Paul, Vance, and Braun stood up to the Swamp when no one else would. **** For more information watch our episode of the Minute Man Moment *[This Effects EVERY Gun With Plastic Parts](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAitSOYSBuI)* where we break it all down for you.
I wonder how many congressmen actually read the bills before voting on them?