Waivers of Gun Rights: A New Shot at Gun Repression

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF THE NRA-ILA)

 

Waivers of Gun Rights: A New Shot at Gun Repression

Back to Top

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2018

Waivers of Gun Rights: A New Shot at Gun Repression

Lawmakers in California must have temporarily exhausted their store of ideas for legislating against law-abiding gun enthusiasts. After years of padding the bureaucracy with ever more complicated rules, restrictions and bans for people who legally own and enjoy guns, lawmakers are now considering a measure to strike a preemptive declaration against gun ownership.

The California bill, AB 1927, introduced by Assembly Member Rob Bonta, D-Oakland, directs the state’s Department of Justice to “develop and launch a secure Internet-based platform to allow a person who resides in California to voluntarily add his or her own name to the California Do Not Sell List.” This list would be uploaded to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), meaning the system would affect a person’s ability to acquire a firearm not just in California, but anywhere in the country.

On registering, a person has the option of providing the state with the names and email addresses of up to five contacts, who have the right to be notified as soon as the registrant seeks a restoration of the right to acquire guns. The bill makes it a crime to knowingly sell or transfer a firearm to a person on the list (and a licensed gun dealer is liable to lose their dealer’s license, too). “Receipt” of a firearm is “unlawful” for anyone on the list, although the bill specifies that mere possession is not prohibited (“possession after the moment of receipt is not unlawful and the fact of possession may not be relied upon to prove a violation” of the law).

While getting on the Do Not Sell List may be as simple as a few clicks of a mouse, getting off the list is challenging different matter entirely. The registrant must file a petition with a court to have his or her name removed. All persons on the registrant’s contact list are entitled to advance notice of the date, time, and location of the court hearing. And although a person may register on the list for any reason (or no reason at all), a court is authorized to remove a registrant off the list only after he or she establishes, by a “preponderance of the evidence that he or she is not at elevated risk of suicide.” The evidence needed to satisfy this standard isn’t specified, but it’s safe to assume that a mental health evaluation and testimony from a mental health professional will be required. Once a court grants the order, the state must remove the person from the NICS Index and expunge all records related to the person’s registration on the list.

A similarly inspired bill to allow a “voluntary waiver of firearm rights” is pending in Washington State.  S.B. 5553allows anyone to file a waiver document with the court, and to include the name of a “person to be contacted” if a voluntary waiver is later revoked. All waivers are fed into a state police database used to determine eligibility to purchase a handgun. The person is free to revoke the waiver at a later date, but the waiver must stay in effect for a minimum of two weeks (seven days, plus another week in which the police must delete the waiver from the database). The bill makes it a felony to provide a gun to a person where there is reasonable cause to believe the person is subject to an active waiver, and a licensed dealer is prohibited from selling or transferring a gun to such persons.

The apparent rationale behind these bills is to provide those at risk of suicide with a way to declare themselves “prohibited persons” for the purposes of future gun purchases. Assemblyman Bonta describes his bill as giving “people the power to create a potentially life-saving barrier,” and the summary on the Washington proposal claims it will prevent suicide by helping “people in crisis maintain their autonomy while saving their lives.”

Overlooking several practical issues, the bills’ effectiveness isn’t likely to match the declared sentiment of advocates.

The California bill requires that the “Internet-based platform” for the list “credibly verif[y]” the identity of those who sign up online. Neither bill, though, has a corrective procedure to remove anyone included because they share a name and birthdate with someone properly listed, or because of some other error. The only way the bill provides for getting de-listed on California’s registry is convincing a court not that there’s been a mistake, but that the registrant has a non-elevated risk of suicide.

Waivers of constitutional rights “must be voluntary and must be knowing, intelligent acts done with sufficient awareness of the relevant circumstances and likely consequences.” In Washington State, persons contemplating a waiver should be aware that the waiver remains effective even after it is revoked because the police have a week to process the revocation, with ensuing legal consequences. Because of the time lag between actual revocation and the update to the police database, a person who seeks to obtain a gun after revocation but during that period is liable to be reported to a separate police database of people who attempt to acquire guns while prohibited under state or federal law.

The most distressing thing about these bills is the focus on the method while bypassing the underlying, core problem of the person’s suicidal impulses, depression, or other mental health emergency. Experts estimate that the vast majority of persons who commit suicide suffer from a mental illness at the time of their death. The same mindset impelled “gun violence restraining order” laws in California and Washington State, aimed specifically at disarming persons at risk of harming themselves (but only with a gun). Regardless, Assemblyman Bonta, resorting to the favorite catchphrase of the gun control movement, describes his bill as “a common-sense measure” to allow people to “self-restrict their ability to purchase a firearm.”

While lawmakers continue to look for new ways to restrict gun rights, people seeking help may find there’s a lot of talk about promoting health through “innovative” prevention strategies for at-risk individuals, without much in the way of actual help.

Congress Votes To Strengthen Our 2nd Amendment Rights To Protect Our Own Families

(THIS IS AN EMAIL I JUST RECEIVED FROM MY U.S. CONGRESSMAN ANDY BARR THAT I HOPE WILL INTEREST MANY OF THE LAW ABIDING CITIZENS IN OUR COUNTRY WHEN IT COMES TO SELF AND FAMILY PROTECTION SECURITY ISSUES)

 

Home About Services Media Center Contact

Legislative Update

 

Dear Friend,

I am writing to update you on recent legislation the House of Representatives has passed, with my support, to defend the Second Amendment and to promote reciprocity between states in order to allow the legal carry and transport of concealed firearms.  Your communication is a vital part of our legislative process and I appreciate hearing your thoughts on this issue.

As a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, I feel very passionately that the government must not infringe upon Americans’ constitutional rights by preventing law-abiding citizens from carrying or transporting firearms across state lines.

That is why I felt it was important to vote in favor of H.R. ­­­38, the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, which was endorsed by the National Rifle Association (NRA), the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), 24 State Attorneys General, and the Gun Owners of America (GOA).

The Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act would allow an individual possessing a valid state-issued Concealed Deadly Weapon License (CDWL) the ability to carry in all 50 states (as well as the District of Columbia) as long as he or she obeys all state laws in which the individual resides and travels through.  This legislation would also ensure that valid concealed carry permits issued in one state are valid in any other state that also recognizes its own residents’ right to carry concealed.  If a gun owner is arrested for illegal concealed carry, this legislation puts the burden of proof on the state to prove that the accused did not comply with law.  I am proud to support H.R. 38 and other bills to uphold gun rights, and I will continue to help ensure that Congress does not advance measures that undermine the Second Amendment.

I know that law-abiding, responsible gun owners make essential contributions to public safety and that attacking the Second Amendment – as some in Washington are all too quick to do – is bad policy.  Responsible gun ownership constitutes a vital part of our nation’s heritage and remains essential to the rights of Americans to defend themselves and their families.  This is an important constitutional protection that I will always step forward to defend.

Sincerely,
Andy Barr

(Philosophy/Poem) Protect With Both: Your Bible And Your Gun

Protect With Both: Your Bible And Your Gun

 

Taking the breath away from another should never become easy

When a stranger comes to your door do you always ooze kindness

Self-famous Leaders take all of the rights, away from their slaves

Only the Wolves should have fangs, we others should bow down

Governments say that they are for the good of man, they mean them

 

The fool and the ignorant say there is no God that we have to obey

Everyone is a Spiritual Being who came from God and will go back

The so-called Left can not see the Spiritual ignorance they are in

Some folks on the Right want to use a tank to hunt down Bugs Bunny

The Left nor the Right are able to see that Freedom lies in the middle

 

Someone has always tried to deny the Works of a Divine Being, a God

There are always some who would give all your freedoms away, for peace

Why some Politicians so eager to have all their constituents unarmed

The foolish they try to kill God and education, at school and Peoples homes

A Free People only stay free by the Grace of God and their strength of Arms

 

California Democrats: If They Can’t Steal Your Guns, They Won’t Let Citizens Have Ammo

(THIS ARTICLE IS COURTESY OF ABC NEWS)

Court Revives Lawsuit Against California Bullet Stamping Law

The ruling by the 5th District Court of Appeals in Fresno overturned a lower court ruling rejecting a lawsuit challenging the law by two firearms trade associations, the National Shooting Sports Foundation and the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute. The appeals court sent the case back down for further consideration.

Supporters of the law signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2007 touted it as the first such law to go into effect in the nation and said it would help law enforcement solve gun crimes by allowing them to link bullet casings to guns. The law requires new handgun models to have a microscopic array of characters in two spots that identify the gun’s make, model, and serial number and that are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the gun is fired.

Gun rights groups say it is not possible to “microstamp” two areas of a gun. Only the tip of the firing pin can be microstamped, and current technology doesn’t allow the stamp to reliably, consistently and legibly imprint on the cartridge primer from that part of the gun, they said.

“We are pleased by today’s ruling because it means we will now be able to prove in court that this ill-considered law must be enjoined because it is literally impossible to comply with its requirements, and the law never requires the impossible,” Lawrence Keane, senior vice president and general counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, said in a statement.

A call to the state attorney general’s office for comment was not immediately returned.

The law was supposed to take effect in 2010, but was delayed because of patents on the technology, including at least one that had been bought up by a gun rights group to delay the law’s implementation.

It doesn’t impact guns already on the state’s official firearm roster. Only new or modified semi-automatic handguns sold in California must be equipped with the technology.

Keane said in an email that no new models of pistols have been introduced in California since the law took effect.

Sponsored Stories

Gun Rights Were Designed To Protect The People From Their Government

 

The Europe that our fore fathers left back in the 15, 16 and 17 hundreds was a landscape of tyranny put upon the people of the lands by their governments. Back in those days the people were not allowed to have any fire arms. Only the Royals, Feudal Lords and the Armies were allowed to have any fire power, not the people. So, anytime you had a mad man or woman who was your Landlord or the current Prince, Duke, King or Queen (evil women do exist you know) the people had no way to fight back against their aggression. When the State has all of the power that means that the people have none. If you lived in a country like England, France or Spain and you have a (Lord) who wished to take your land, your daughters, your sons, there was little you could do. You have probably heard the term bringing a knife to a gun fight, that is about how much chance the people had when those with power over them decided to rape, murder or steal from them.  Then there is the issue of cases like Ruby Ridge Idaho in 1992 when federal agents from among other “policing agencies” like the FBI  who murdered a 12 year old boy by shooting him in the back and his unarmed mother in the face killing her. If the family had not had fire arms, they would have all been murdered, and yes that does mean all the children also.

 

Federal agents were ordered there with the order given to “if it is breathing, kill it”. This is the way to make sure that there is no other side of a story getting told, simply kill everyone. The man who was at the center of this was supposed to be a white supremacist who had contacts within a like-minded group of people. This man was told to sell an illegally altered shotgun to this group, this would then give the government the “reason” to raid this group of people. The man in question said no, the government’s response was a directive to the FBI man in charge to “if it breathes, kill it”. These illegal acts upon American citizens was directed under a Republican administration (George H.W. Bush). Just a year later in Waco TX under a Democratic administration (Bill Clinton) there was another case of the American “policing agencies” gone insane. There the American government murdered over a hundred men, women, and children. After these two horrible events nothing happened to the ones who gave the orders to murder these innocent people or to the ones who murdered them. With both of these cases the very top, and I do mean the very top of the government agencies should have been prosecuted for mass murder, possibly even to the point of both presidential administrations (both Presidents) being removed from office, nothing happened to any of them. Just how much do you personally trust that all levels of the governments around you are honest?

 

Our fore fathers had enough sense to know that the only way to have freedom was if the people had a way to protect themselves from internal and external aggression. No matter how much fire power a government has the human leaders of the government know that they themselves can be brought down by a little gray pill. If those in power know that the people have no power to remove them from office as it would be if say only two political parties were allowed to share all the power between themselves and the people had no munitions to end their reigns of terror the people become nothing but slaves and cannon fodder to those in power. There are many reasons to keep fire arms in your home and one of those is self-protection from intruders who wish you and/or your family harm. No, this does not necessarily mean that all government employees are out to kill and steal from you but it is a means to try to keep you and your loved ones alive if crooked politicians or police departments do decide it is your day to die.

 

Guns are also a means to put food on your families table and or to rid your personal property of animals that you don’t want on your property. Just a few years back a rancher in Montana shot and killed a charging grizzly bear on his own property the result was that the feds fined him $2,000 for doing that. I guess the alternative would have been for the rancher to have stuck his head between his legs and kissed his behind goodbye. You or I as humans are not ever going to out run one so I guess that rancher should have volunteered to be bear poop. You know that is what the politicians would have done if it had been themselves out in that field with that bear, right? There are many predators in this old world, some on two legs, some on four.

 

There is also another reason that We The People were to be armed citizens, it is called invasions from nations or factions of people, lets say a religious culture who want to enslave or wipe out a town, city or even the whole country. If our government is really our government then they have nothing to fear from the citizens as the citizens will use their weapons to help back up and support our troops and law enforcement departments. Think about this for a moment, if you are going to raid a home, town or country it is much safer for you the aggressor if none of the above have any firearms. The nation becomes much easier to conquer if the population can’t fight back against the aggressor. I as a veteran took an oath to protect my country and my family from all threats, both foreign and domestic. Do you notice that it is the government that keeps trying to take away our ability to protect ourselves, why do you think that is?

Phuro! Be inspired! BLOG

Van inspiratie tot transformatie

Maulik Pandit

Do It For You

Believe

I am not perfect but I am limited edition~RM

Down The Rabbit Hole

How long is forever? Sometimes just one second

Author's Canvas

Where writing is celebrated

Barstool Buddha

Everything Is Subject To Change.

UTLOT

A Blog Of Blogs

DREAMS AND ESCAPES

For the nth time, I wish I could put into words the thoughts burning in my mind. I do not know how you could take interest in reading all these muddled thoughts.

radhikasreflection

Everyday musings ....Life as I see it.......my space, my reflections and thoughts !!

%d bloggers like this: