https://www.nraila.org/articles/201 70804/second-amendment-g

It won't pass.

I'm not even American and I know shit like that never passes, the same as a blanket ban will never pass.

>>34789822
cannot find text of proposed legislation.

I know the article says it'll protect detacheable magazines and feeding devices, but then California level retardation like "it has this many addons it is illegal" will still fly.

You can have your AR, but you cannot customize it.

And possession acquisition laws can still be passed to limit you owning guns period.

Nothingburger.

>>34789822
hurr durr I'm OP I cannot even link the actually document so intelligent conversation can occur. Look at me an laugh while I suck all the cocks.

>when you already have a second amendment guarantee act called the bill of rights

its a shame our zog congress ignores that shit

>>34789822
If anti gunners don't respect a constitutional amendment what makes you think a federal law will fare better.

>>34789953
>its a shame the 9th circuit court of appeals ignores that shit

fixed that for you. lrn2civics, boy.

He ammount of divine intervention required for somthing like that to pass is way outside whatever bounds we are allowed. By some fucking miricle it DOES pass, It may lime light situations like cali for the potential of reform. Then again, lets be realistic. This is a damn hail mary into a whole nother field.

>>34789914
>>34789940
Holy shit it took me two seconds to find it

https://www.scribd.com/mobile/document/355162879/Text-of-Second-Amendment-Guarantee-Act

Even if it did pass, with how buckwild CA and NY runs their states in regards to taking a shit on the constitution and federal government, you honestly think these states won't say say "fuck you" and continue to do what they do unless the feds literally smack the shit out of these states?

All this talk on withholding federal funding from sanctuary cities/states have only really been talk so far. Until the federal government actually DOES something, these states will continue to not care.

>>34789822
>Hey states, guns are a right!
>states don't give a shit

See:

>Hey, states, marijuana is illegal!
>states don't give a shit

>>34789822
I'm mistrustful of heaping more regulations on top of clear-cut laws. It merely makes the system more complex, which plays into the deep state's strengths. That legislation might be used to discriminate against the rifles our grandchildren like, on the grounds that they aren't specifically mentioned in it and a bunch of fucked up legal precedents we can't even imagine now. (Go back to 1950 and tell somebody that the Amendment that guaranteed ex-slaves the right to vote will be used to ensure faggot marriage, because reasons. He'd laugh at you and call the loony bin to pick you up).

On the other hand, I'll take anything I can get at this point. Fuck the left, fuck antis, and fuck the Deep State. Kick the bastards in the teeth whenever possible in any way. That's the way our enemies operate.

So yeah. This is fine. But I'm not super enthused.

>gop controls congress and presidency
>can't even pass a pro-2a legislation

sad

>>34789822
The only reason the NRA would back this is because they know it will fail. They're not about to let themselves get made obsolete.

Hey, just what we need, our government telling us what our rights are, that's how it's supposed to work right

>>34792847
Naw NRA will pass this shit to unlock a hundred million former cucks who can now buy their guns.

Same reason they want to legalize suppresors and hopefully one day go after full auto bans too. So all those gun owners now have so many new accessories and full auto models/conversion kits to buy again as well as the specialty or bulk ammo to feed said accessories.

>>34792847
The NRA doesn't represent gun owners, it represents gun makers. If the corporations can't sell their fun toys to the very sizable markets of places like New York and California, then the NRA is going to get their asses in gear. I feel a lot of the bullshit the CADOJ is pulling is motivating this.

>>34790274
>fuck antis
>Phil "Rights for me not for thee" "I masturbate to shotacon trap porn and pretend I hate fags" Stone
>saying "fuck antis"
The irony, self-righteousness, and lack of self awareness you possess is astounding.
Is this what Commiefornia does to people, make them stupid?

>>34790024
This is 100% accurate

>>34793217
It's not that big of a conflict of interest. The corporations want to sell guns, I want to buy guns.

>>34790050
This
Look what happened with the Sportmans Heritage Act that had the HPA rolled in with it.
It was too good, so a Boinie supporter had to go gun down a critical sponsor for it, just before it went to committee

>>34790274

Its authored my rep here in WNY of all places, and Andrew Cuomo is already threatening to sue as its main purpose is to render the SAFE Act illiegal.

A NY rep actually trying to do something is absolutely mind blowing.

>>34789953
>zog congress
[tinfoil crinkling intensifies]

>>34795597
This. I fail to see why the "muh big corporations" argument should amount to much.

>>34790196
The federal government has no right to ban intrastate sale of marijuana. They can only touch it if it crosses state lines, at which point it becomes interstate commerce and they're allowed to regulate it. Sessions is an authoritarian traitor who doesn't respect the Constitution.

>>34796184
Nope. It's a class 1 narcotic federally. Until that changes the feds can raid and seize the assets of any and all grow operations. Why the fuck do you think it's so hard for the medical and recreational industry to even find banks willing to play ball?

>because none of them want any of their assets frozen.

Oh fuck, I just thought of something.

Put national recipricocy and the HPA (or whatever the fuck it is now) into a bill that deregulates marijuana.

>>34796280
I'm not saying that isn't the law. I'm saying the law is unconstitutional.

>Put national recipricocy and the HPA (or whatever the fuck it is now) into a bill that deregulates marijuana.
That's a damn good idea

>only mentions rifles and shotguns
>would be a good vehicle to repeal 922(o) but too pussy to go for it

>>34793217
>this bad it are helping corparashuns! D:
I really wonder why you anti-NRA dumbfucks always present the interests of gun corporations as anathema to those of gun owners. Like, are you just childishly naive or just retarded?

>>34789822
>It would protect popular rifles
And take away all the others. The government loved this "well you can get A gun so your second amendment rights aren't being infringed upon" when the second amendment is supposed to ensure that I can purchase any gun of my choosing if I can get my hands on it and a seller that is willing without the government stipulating what I can and cannot do.

Not to mention we'd be stuck with vanilla shit like California. PISTOL GRIPS BAD, ADJUSTABLE STOCK BAD, OPTICS BAD, ANYTHING TO MAKE THIS FIREARM A BETTER PROTECTIVE DEVICE BAD, ANYTHING THAT ISN'T GUNMETAL GREY BAD. BUT DO ENJOY YOUR GRIPLESS STOCKLESS AR15, HOW WE DO SO SPOIL YOU!!

and for what? So they can slowly whittle away our second amendment rights so some cuck and then retract this law because AR15s are DANGEROUS, and were left with nothing. Firearms don't need legislation, the bill of rights succinctly covers everything we need.

>>34796296
Except the Federal supremacy clause is both detailed in the Constitution and existed prior to the ratification of the 10th Amendment. Which with the way things have historically been interpreted would make the Tenth Amendment unconstitutional as it's in direct violation and opposition of an earlier, non-amendment section of the Constitution (not to mention it would give the Fed more authority and power, which the SCOTUS is all about, due to self preservation).

>>34793163
> NRA
> full auto

Lol think again, nerd. Who do you think the NRA are ran by? Old fudds with expensive machine guns. If machine guns are legal, then their investments are basically tanked in price.

>>34797523
Jesus Christ you're retarded.

Amendments aren't laws. Amendments can't be unconstitutional. An amendment to the Constitution changes the Constitution. The Supremacy Clause only affects powers the Federal government has under the Constitution.

>>34796174
subconscious invocation of knee-jerk elementary school leftist/commie teacher indoctrination that corporations are EVIL