It's a bill that would ban handgun rosters

I live in California and we desperately need this.

Right now Decisiondesk is calling it 92.4% odds the GOP takes the house. It's already dead certain they have the presidency and Senate.

I live in Alabama, under a decent GOP congressman that my wife has ties to (long story). I'm only an hour away from MTG's district in northern Georgia.

Ok. What could we get them to do in terms of bills or other actions?

Let's start with "other actions"...

1. Formally ask the US-DOJ whether delays past 90 days or fees past a couple hundred bucks violates the "no excessive delays or exorbitant fees" provisions of the Bruen decision at footnote 9?

2. Formally ask whether a US gunnie can be forced to get 17+ carry permits to get national CCW coverage, or does the $20k that would cost violate the hell out of Bruen footnote 9?

The right letters from DOJ attorneys on these issues in response to congressional inquiries could make it impossible to convict us in state court if we pack after 90+ days post-application or if we're packing across state lines. If prosecuted, the police trying it could face federal charges.

Think that's impossible? Right now, what happened if a cop arrests somebody just for being a minority, or gay or a particular religion? Right - federal civil rights enforcement. If a cop arrests you for complaining at a city council meeting, yes, feds can arrest them along with whoever ordered the arrest.

Guys, carry is a basic civil right after Bruen. This is on the table.

We need to enforce that.

Next. We can also force universal carry permit reciprocity via federal law. Worst case, as long as you have a permit from any state that involves 8+ hours of training, every state and territory has to honor that.

Everyone should hold the R’s accountable and start applying pressure to your lawmakers to repeal the unconstitutional NFA…. then we can move to abolishing the three letter agencies, whose sole purpose is to enforce this bullshit. They should not exist. Hoover was a freak.

From the number of posts calling for major pro-gun legislation following the GOP winning the Presidency and the Senate (House still undecided as I type); it seems clear that many don't understand how the process works.

TL;DR: Not gonna happen due to the filibuster

THE HOUSE If the Dems take the House it doesn't matter (although it seems the GOP will keep the House). No pro-gun bills would pass the House. But even if the GOP keeps the House....

THE FILIBUSTER

The filibuster is the reason that we won't see major improvements in gun laws via legislation at the federal level following these wins.

In order for a vote to occur in the Senate they first have to have a vote of CLOTURE to "end debate" on a topic/bill. That requires SIXTY votes. As of now we only have 51 GOP votes IF they all vote for the Cloture Motion. And there's no guarantee they all would.

As I type some Senate races are undecided. However, even if the GOP took them all they still wouldn't reach the 60 needed but maybe 54. That would mean getting at least 6 Dems to break from their party while losing zero GOP members. Just not going to happen.

In short, no pro-gun bills will reach Trump's desk.

Now, maybe, possibly, some small gains might be found via amendments to some other "must pass" bill. However, the Dems would likely hold that up as well and blame the GOP for being "radical on guns" and "attaching an unrelated issue" to a must pass bill. This is what the Dems do all the time, but the Media will continue to carry water for the Dems and any delays (or shutdowns) will be blamed on the GOP even if it's the Dems refusing to vote/pass a bill.

THE COURTS

This is where we might win. The GOP will control the Senate and POTUS. That means that pro-gun (originalists) can be appointed to open judicial seats the federal level. Granted the Dems will try to fill them all before January 3, 2025 (when the Senate changes hands).

But then for the next two years (at least) the GOP holds the Senate and can fill vacancies. In 2026 there will be 33 Senate seats on the ballot and it's possible some flip to Dems losing the GOP control of the senate.

Critical would be for Thomas to retire and be replaced by a Trump nominated Justice. Thomas is 76 now. As much as I like him for his pro-gun stance who knows how long he'll live. And if the Dems take the Senate in 2026 then we won't get a pro-gun replacement.

Alito is only two years younger than Thomas. So, we should look for him to retire and be replaced in the next two years as well.

There is no guarantee either will retire. But we can hope so that we don't end up with a situation where the Dems did with Ginsburg who assumed Hillary would win and the Dems would have the Senate.

If we could get Trump to put St. Benitez on SCOTUS that would be great for gun rights.

PROPOSING PRO-GUN LEGISLATION

Many will say (are saying) that the GOP should at least try. That they should indicate their support by advancing bills that are pro-gun. This is just performative and is very likely harmful.

Pro-gun bills will get the sponsors labeled as "extremists." Maybe those in "safe" seats can get away with it, but those in "competitive" seats who vote for such a bill will have is used against them in future elections.

Just look at the issue of Abortion. The Dems campaigned heavily on opposing a "national abortion ban." Saying that if GOP Senate Candidate X wins then Trump will sign a national abortion ban.

Never-mind that the Dems would stop such a bill via the filibuster, if it even go to that point. Or the Trump promised to veto such a bill (and he's one politician that has kept more of his promises than others).

And then there are the constitutional issues

Nevertheless, the "masses" fell for the lie that a single GOP Senator winning would lead to a federal abortion ban.

Likewise, they will fall for criticism of a GOP Senator/Representative being an "extremist" for any minor pro-gun position such as national reciprocity and supporting the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution. And this would cost some of them their seats.

So, for those that have read this far, I'm NOT saying we shouldn't hope for anything or that we shouldn't try for anything. I'm saying that we have to look at the political realities and focus on minor things we might get via legislation on the federal level while pushing more at the state level.

And we need to support legal challenges to bad laws that are currently on the books. And focus on getting pro-gun judges and justices on the various benches across the country.

If I can drive in all 50 states, I should be able to carry too. Thanks for coming to my ted talk.

I get it "no politician cares about your rights. It's not worth trying".

Okay, now that we got that out of the way - for people who like to try, who can we all (as gun owners) reach out to as early as possible to, including tagging on social media influential people close to the new house/senate elects to push pro-2A propositions/bills through?

Future SCOTUS picks too?

EDIT: Zoomer attention spans missing the point of the post. Not WHAT you want repealed as a focus, but WHO has influence to reach out to/tag in social media. Yes, there has to be laws to focus on repealing/adding (e.g. states can't ban standard cap mags/AWB/sensitive areas) but that won't matter if we don't have the influential people.

On the ballot tomorrow are a few 2A-related voter referendums.

Memphis, TN

The city proposes three gun control measures that likely conflict with state preemption.

Three of the Memphis questions have to do with gun control measures in the city limits. The first one has to do with having a valid permit to have a handgun. It also asks voters to decide whether handguns can be stored in a vehicle.

The second has to do with limiting access to assault weapons, with the exceptions of at gun ranges or on private property. Assault weapon owners who have a permit can continue carrying on private property.

The third referendum asks if there should be an order of protection, or red flag, law included in the city’s charter. If passed, this law would allow a loved one, law enforcement, a doctor or school official to block someone who could pose a threat from buying a firearm.

FL

This is a Constitutional Amendment to preserve the right to hunt and fish.

CO

Colorado's state measure up for vote that involves guns was brought by Colorado lawmakers, who need voter approval to levy a 6.5% excise tax on firearms and ammunition.

I'm not the biggest advocate for guns, since all I hear about are school shootings and I think most home intruders can effectively be deterred with a machete instead of a firearm.

One of the biggest arguments I hear about 2A is that it helps preserve rights, but I see loads of countries without a 2A equivalent and they seem to be living as free (or unfree, however you see it) as we do here, but without guns.

I've seen enough freedom outside the US and enough injustices/invasions of freedom here to just think that 2A doesn't really do much except drive up homicide rates, serve as a wedge issue, and allow some adults to enjoy a dangerous hobby. Am I missing something?

Thousands scanned by computer, 113 unarmed people stopped and forcefully searched, yet not a single gun found in this experiment.

AI-powered weapons scanners used in NYC subway found zero guns in one-month test found zero guns in one-month test

NEW YORK (AP) — A pilot program testing AI-powered weapons scanners inside some New York City subway stations this summer did not detect any passengers with firearms — but falsely alerted more than 100 times, according to newly released police data.

By The Associated Press October 24, 20242:28 pm

NEW YORK (AP) — A pilot program testing AI-powered weapons scanners inside some New York City subway stations this summer did not detect any passengers with firearms — but falsely alerted more than 100 times, according to newly released police data.

Through nearly 3,000 searches, the scanners turned up more than 118 false positives as well as 12 knives, police said, though they declined to say whether the positive hits referred to illegal blades or tools, such as pocket knives, that are allowed in the transit system.

https://www.audacy.com/1010wins/news/local/ai-powered-weapons-scanners-in-subway-found-zero-guns

Unfortunately I already bought an annual policy with them by the time I realized, but the insurance company "Lemonade" donates money to March for Our lives. Specifically they sponsored 7 activists to "speak out against gun violence" last year which we all know just means advocating for more gun restrictions.

This is part of their program where they donate some of your unclaimed money to an organization of your choice.

I chose the SPCA and there's a lot of other choices aside from MFOL, but having them as an option tells me Lemonade is against gun ownership and I think not giving your money to anti gun companies when you have other options is important to do if you value your rights.

Anyways, I'll be going with a different company next time I need renters insurance.