Illinois demorats propose national firearms licensing system

shall not be infringed

Press release from representative Bobby Rush, dated June 6:

“Today, U.S. Representative Bobby L. Rush (D-Ill.) and U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) introduced the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2018.  This legislation would prohibit unlicensed gun-ownership and transferring or receiving firearms without a valid firearms license, as well as direct the Attorney General to establish and maintain a federal record of sale system.

Rush first introduced this legislation in 2007 and subsequently reintroduced it in 2009 and 2013.  This bill is named after Blair Holt, a Chicago Julian High School honor student who was gunned down protecting his friend when a gunman opened fire while they were riding home from school on a crowded public transit bus.

“Americans are demanding that Congress take real action to prevent gun violence and we must address this issue head on and do our part to prevent the senseless mass killings and shooting deaths in cities across this nation,” said Rush.  “I am grateful that Senator Duckworth has joined in this tireless effort to provide commonsense solutions to the epidemic of gun violence plaguing America.  We cannot continue to stand by and abdicate our responsibilities to the very communities that depend on us,” said Rush.

“People are dying and Congress has not only the power, but also the duty to act by passing common-sense solutions like this one that would help prevent firearms from falling into the wrong hands,” Duckworth said.  “We owe it to the countless and growing number of firearm violence victims to take action.  I don’t want my daughters to have to grow up in a country that won’t protect them from firearm violence, which is why I’m proud to join Congressman Rush in this effort and we will keep pushing until all of America’s children are safe.”

Modeled in part after the Illinois Firearm Owners Identification Card (FOID) statute, the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2018 would:

  • Protect the public against the unreasonable risk of injury and death associated with the unrecorded sale or transfer of qualifying firearms to unlicensed individuals.
  • Ensure that owners of qualifying firearms are knowledgeable in the safe use, handling, and storage of those firearms.
  • Restrict the availability of qualifying firearms to criminals, children, and other persons prohibited by federal law from receiving firearms.
  • Require universal background checks for all purchases or transfers of firearms.
  • Facilitate the tracing of qualifying firearms used in crime by federal and state law enforcement agencies.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 315 people are shot with a gun every day in the United States.  Of those injured, 93 people die.

We must use all available resources to immediately tackle this gun violence epidemic and this legislation aims to do just that.  The cost of gun violence is too high, with human life and suffering that is immeasurable — that is more than enough reason for us to enact commonsense reforms like those proposed in this bill,” said Rush.”


30 responses to “Illinois demorats propose national firearms licensing system

  1. Beating the drums again we have to accept that they are not going to stop this until we either pass laws that stop stupid legislation that is unconstitutional or stop them period. If they keep going using the lame stream media they will push enough people to go and try to do something about it. All I can say is from my Cold dead hand I will protect my family till I’m dead. God gave me the right to defend me my family and anyone who can’t do it for them selves.

    Liked by 4 people

  2. Comrade Obama

    I’d always trust the motives of a black panther. I know all the brothers would obey such a restriction.

    I also know that police response can take 20 minutes at best when you have an emergency so I’ll put my trust into Col. Colt rather than a racist like Bobby Rush.

    Liked by 6 people

  3. Yes, the (now scrapped) gun registry went so well in Canada. A 2 billion dollar bath.
    Guess what? Bad guys don’t register guns.

    Liked by 5 people

  4. …and THERE’S the magic words- “commonsense solutions”. Just WHAT are these infringements on our RIGHTS expected to be the solutions TO?? It CAN’T be gun violence-that’s been tried all over the world,and it’s failed the people miserably EVERY SINGLE TIME. Just pretend their idea ISN’T UNCONSTITUTIONAL,and ignore the fact that they have NO AUTHORITY to change Constitutional Law. So while they’re at it,why don’t they just scuttle the US Constitution completely and re-write it in “Snowflake”. NO guns-(I’m SURE the criminals will be tickled to death to give THEIRS up,to make life “fair” for the innocents),,NO “Hate Speech”-and who will be deciding what is hate speech?,they might as well include something that makes it illegal to vote any way but Democrat,and why not outlaw every trace of Capitalism too-Damn-it’s a good thing these Democrats are SO SMART! Think of it-Doing the absolute WRONG things to get the results they want REGARDLESS of the destruction it would wreak on the last and only FREE NATION in the WORLD. I never would have thought of being as DUMB AS A BOX OF ROCKS as the CURE for all of America’s problems!

    Liked by 2 people

    • It all hinges on most people’s need to belong. All it takes is an accusatory comment. “But, what will we DO about this problem?”. What problem? The problem isn’t guns, its life.

      Life is full of risk. You can’t make the risk go away by making something illegal. If someone is bound and determined to cause harm, they will.

      Clearly, the parasites want us disarmed to make it safer for them to rule us. That’s the end all and be all of this whole ridiculous non-argument. They’ve pretty much gotten guns away from most people. They won’t rest until they until they have ours.

      This country has a chance at keeping theirs. It won’t happen unless they categorically say no. No more laws, no more restrictions. Just NO!

      Liked by 2 people

    • commonsense solutions = gun-grabbing

      Liked by 2 people

  5. We don’t need gun control. WE need crime control. When somebody commits heinous crimes we need to arrest, prosecute, and execute in record time. Stop with all these silly appeals when the perp is clearly responsible for what they have done.

    Liked by 3 people

    • We also need a person who can figure out how to log into NICS:

      “The Tampa Bay Times reported on Friday that the Florida Department of Agriculture “failed to conduct background checks on tens of thousands of concealed weapons permit applications” after — get this — the person responsible for the check couldn’t figure out how to log into the NICS system.”


      Liked by 3 people

      • Also:

        The person was fired.

        This is for conceal carry only not purchases. Thirteen other states don’t do NICS checks for conceal applications.

        Liked by 2 people

        • I was researching this the other day. What a mess. I have a carry license, but I think the point is, we shouldn’t “need” one. Why should we have to ask permission to defend ourselves, or for anything else for that matter?

          There is nothing in the Constitution about there being any difference between “good guys” and “bad guys”. There is only, “…shall not be infringed”.

          You actually have two things working for you here. God gives us rights. The Constitution just happens to guarantee that government won’t take your God-given right away. In places without a Constitution, they have God-given rights too. Their governments simply don’t acknowledge that.

          Only an absolute fool wound want to lose a Constitutionally protected right. As it is there is much more confusion that there should be and your political parasites refuse to honor their oaths of office.

          It is absolutely clear that these cretins don’t work for us. We just pay them. They have been given their orders by their owners. They want our guns. There is nothing they won’t do to please their owners.

          Liked by 2 people

      • I’ll bet they figured out how to submit their time card.

        Liked by 1 person

  6. We need to turn this attack on the 2nd Ammendment around on the leftist globalist genocidal maniacs and beat them to death with it. Pro 2A people need to use the enemies own ideology against them.

    To wit. Here is the question we can use to defeat them and devastate their base. Women. Especially single women. Especially single women of the “Me too” variety.

    Why do so called liberal Democrat MEN…MEN like Harvey Weinstein, disgraced ex NY AG Schneiderman et al want to DISARM WOMEN? Why do all these MALE Democrat men want to DISARM women? (we MUST use the term DISARM)Why do all these men convicted of brutally raping WOMEN or sexually assaulting, attacking, WOMEN …WANT THEM DISARMED and unable to defend themselves against an attacker.

    Or simply: Why do liberal men want to disarm women?

    Or some variation of this argument.

    The answer is self evident.

    Forget why these leftists, liberals, globalists, Democrats want to disarm MEN. Forget MEN. We know their arguments for wanting to disarm men. They use children, safety, and every possible fake argument for why they want to disarm men.


    Why are they so hell bent on disarming WOMEN?

    You present this argument, question, attack to enough people in enough forums over a long enough period of time and it will not only eviscerate their movement, momentum, and false arguments – it will permanently undermine and destroy their base ie single women.

    Not all women. Not the crazies. But enough women, esp single – vulnerable – women.

    And especially single women in cities, esp crime ridden cities etc. A variant could be used for single black women. Eg Why do Democrat MEN want to disarm BLACK WOMEN?

    Considering the large number of leftist liberal Democrat men from Al Franken to Harvey Weinstein and more who have been exposed, attacked and taken out because of their assaults against women, esp the vast amount of media coverage, including their own liberal media, this would take advantage of all that, turn it around and be used against them.

    And yet no one has thought of it yet and done so. It’s time we did so. It’s time to put them on defense.

    Don’t engage in their arguments.
    Attack them with our own.

    Liked by 6 people

  7. Hey, Illinois, take care of your state and your problems, the rest we can handle it at our level.

    Liked by 4 people

    • People like me & josephbc69 (and any other Illinoisans I may have omitted) try, but we’re out-numbered by stupidity, even amongst our own family.

      The only way to do so, would be very violent, and I’ll leave it at that.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. Again, I suspect they are not after the guns, (as they could easily axe the means of production of the firearms themselves, or the ammo) persay, but perhaps they are after the gun owners, as mentioned by other commenters, “bad guys don’t register guns” (doesn’t take a genius to figure that out, clearly, and while the insurgents/bolshevik brownshirts may actually believe that drivel, I doubt their “leaders” do.) which means that if they make laws against gun ownership those people who are good who do own guns and don’t register will be able to be lambasted as “bad guys”, or perhaps even “terrorists”, (And those that do “register”/”license” will already be registered, categorized, and filed, the enemy forces will have exact intelligence on what these people own, their capabilities, and will be able to send jack-booted thug squads equipped accordingly to “remove” them.) the laws not necessarily being for control of the weapons themselves, so much as for defamation of any “dissenters” who would own such, and thereby being a tool to use to suppress “dissent” which will probably be equated with “terrorism”.

    Looking back at history, the bolshevik/soviet garbage did employ the same tactic a bit, only excepting rifles for hunting in the more hunting centric regions, (With grocery stores etc. in the U.S. odds are alaska may be the only state that might get such an exemption in present day.) and on those grounds they already knew countermeasures for those types of rifles, should any of those Citizens actually get any ideas about opposition.

    Taking this into consideration, one wonders, what kinds of arms do firearms laws actually apply to, one wonders? What about ionic guns, or beam weaponry, electro-propulsion kinetic weaponry or other “exotic” items? Should good folks seek to try to acquire such items in addition to their existent firearms?

    Although, and this is speculation mind you, the end-goal might be to do away with “chemical” firearms altogether, reduce everyone to having electricity-based weaponry, if at all which could be rendered useless by various means, and then making electricity too “valuable” to expend, effectively making currency into currency/money so to speak, I suspect the smart meter/internet of thigns might be having this as a goal, taking into consideration “bitcoin”/cashless society pushing as well. I am surprised bitcoin isn’t being called out as an open attempt at the whole “cashless society” thing, either, where’s the outcry? Its even less real than the paper stuff we’ve got now.

    Just some thoughts.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. This says it all:

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Meanwhile, Chris “Tingles” Mathews outs leftist Democrat elitism:

    Liked by 2 people

  11. I’ve got something they can license. 😉

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Do not simply glaze over the term “qualifying firearms” here because you would be missing half the picture. Wanna take a guess at what ‘qualifies’ at the end of the day? You can bet your sweet ass it will be a super-short ‘approved’ list of probably not what you currently own for self/home defense. This will include restricted magazine capacity. Which will include restricting most handguns. A ballot initiative [IP 43] in OREGUN is trying to do this now which will classify most semi-autos as “assault weapons”. You see.. because THAT is WAY too much firepower for you to defend yourself and your family with. If it passes it would require surrender or registration.

    It’s not just “assault rifles” anymore, kiddies!

    So, look at the language. Look at how the language is practically being cut-and-pasted from state to state to the federal level and back again. We are being lambasted with this redundant shit ad infinitum & ad nauseum. And I, for one, am sick & tired of it.

    Molon Labe.

    Liked by 2 people

  13. traildustfotm

    Molon Labe

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s