Warning About New Gun Bill: “Even People With Unpaid Traffic Tickets Could Be Banned From Owning Guns”

This article was originally published by Michael Snyder at The American Dream

The Gun Bill That Is Going Through Congress Could Significantly Increase The Number Of Americans Banned From Buying Guns

By Michael Snyder

When news that a “concealed-carry reciprocity law” had been passed by the U.S. House of Representatives, gun owners all over the nation rejoiced. But what most people didn’t realize is that there had been a last minute change to the bill that could substantially increase the number of Americans that are banned from buying guns. This poison pill completely ruins the bill, and it must be voted down. What we need is a clean “concealed-carry reciprocity bill” that does not include “Fix-NICS” in it.

Let’s start at the beginning. Last week, gun owners were elated when the House passed a bill that would enable them “to legally carry concealed weapons across state lines”…

Republicans rammed a bill through the House on Wednesday that would make it easier for gun owners to legally carry concealed weapons across state lines, the first significant action on guns in Congress since mass shootings in Nevada and Texas killed more than 80 people.

The House approved the bill, 231-198, largely along party lines. Six Democrats voted yes, while 14 Republicans voted no.

The measure would allow gun owners with a state-issued concealed-carry permit to carry a handgun in any state that allows concealed weapons. It now goes to the Senate.

It would be easy to assume that since virtually every single Republican voted for this bill that it must be a good thing.

But it turns out that a change was inserted into the bill at the last moment that many lawmakers never read. According to Fox News, the bill “contained an 11th-hour change to help states and agencies enter such data as criminal and domestic-violence convictions into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System for gun purchases”.

A few member of the House immediately figured out what was going on and decided to vote against the bill.  One of them was U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert…

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) explained on Wednesday that he could not support national reciprocity because House Leadership added the gun control expansions of “Fix-NICS” to it.

“Fix-NICS” is a measure Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), and John Cornyn (R-TX) support. It responds to the Air Force’s failure to report Devin Kelley’s criminal history by expanding the number of people who will be barred from gun possession going forward.

So exactly how many people could be “barred from gun possession going forward”?

Well, according to Gun Owners Of America, even people with “unpaid traffic tickets” could be banned from owning guns under this bill…

The goal of the Cornyn-Feinstein-Murphy-Schumer bill is to force every single potential NICS name to be sent to the FBI’s NICS system.

It was prompted by reports that the Air Force did not send the name of the Sutherland Springs shooter to NICS — even though he certainly could have gotten a firearm in a wide variety of ways, even if he had been in NICS, and even though his carnage was stopped by the real solution to violence … a good guy with a gun.

The problem is that, because of this isolated horror story, the Cornyn bill could add the names of millions of additional law-abiding Americans to NICS.

You already know of the 257,000 veterans who have lost their rights because of a bad experience in Iraq.

You already know that 95% of NICS denials are “false positives.”

And you probably also know that “Fix NICS” would require that the rolls of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, and ObamaCare be trolled for recipients with PTSD, ADHD, or Alzheimer’s — that is, people who have had guardians appointed.

What you may not know is that the SECOND LARGEST CATEGORY of prohibited persons is “fugitives from justice” — and that a good portion of these are Americans who have UNPAID TRAFFIC TICKETS.

Needless to say, I would have voted against this bill, and as a member of Congress I will never compromise on the 2nd Amendment even a single inch. If you believe in what we are trying to do, I hope that you will help us to win next May.

Even though Donald Trump is in the White House, the enemies of the 2nd Amendment are still trying to sneak gun control measures through Congress, and we need leaders in Washington that will tirelessly defend our rights.

Michael Snyder is a Republican candidate for Congress in Idaho’s First Congressional District, and you can learn how you can get involved in the campaign on his official website. His new book entitled “Living A Life That Really Matters” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com.

Michael T. Snyder is a graduate of the University of Florida law school and he worked as an attorney in the heart of Washington D.C. for a number of years.Today, Michael is best known for his work as the publisher of The Economic Collapse Blog and The American Dream. 

If you want to know what is coming and what you can do to prepare, read his latest book Get Prepared Now!: Why A Great Crisis Is Coming.

From Duty to be Armed to Permission to Carry

By  Publius Huldah   12/8/2017

“If the central government has the authority to tell a state it must accept permits from all the other states, then it also has the authority to tell a state it may not accept a concealed permit from any other states. If the central government can do these things it can set up a national concealed carry permit scheme and in essence bring into existence a national arms registry. That is exactly where this is headed.”

-Attorney Richard D. Fry ¹

Some are touting the federal Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 (HR 38) as a bill which would expand our right to carry. But if you will walk with me for a few minutes, I’ll show you a better path to take.

Let us look at the applicable First Principles, to which I propose we return.

1. Gun control is not an enumerated power delegated to the federal government

Our federal Constitution doesn’t delegate to the federal government any power over the Country at Large ² to restrict our arms. Accordingly, all pretended federal laws, regulations, orders, opinions, or treaties which purport to do so are unconstitutional as outside the scope of powers delegated. They are also unconstitutional as in violation of the Second Amendment.

The only power the federal government has over the Country at Large respecting arms is set forth at Article I, §8, clause 16 with respect to providing for the “organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia”. Pursuant to this clause, Congress passed the Militia Act of 1792 which required every able-bodied male citizen (with a few exceptions) between the ages of 18 and 45 to acquire a rifle, bayonet, ammo, ammo pouch, and report to his local Militia Unit for training. ³

2. What does your State Constitution say about the right to keep and bear arms?

Each State has its own Constitution which addresses its State Militia and the right to be armed.

Now listen: No State may lawfully make any law which contradicts its State Constitution or which interferes with Congress’ power to “organize, arm, and discipline, the Militia”.

Accordingly, any State Statute which purports to require a permit before one may carry a gun is probably unconstitutional under that State’s Constitution; and is certainly unconstitutional under the federal Constitution because Congress may lawfully require able-bodied male Citizens to acquire firearms and ammo and report to their local Militia Unit for training.

Do you see?

Now let’s look at Title 18, US Code, Part I, Chapter 44, which HR 38 proposes to amend.

3. Title 18, US Code, Part I, Chapter 44 is unconstitutional

It sets up a complex federal regulatory scheme over firearms, every word of which is unconstitutional as outside the scope of powers delegated, and as in violation of the Second Amendment.

HERE it is, look through it (§§ 921-931).

4. What HR 38 actually does

HR 38 proposes to amend this existing federal regulatory scheme to insert a new provision [to be § 926 D] to require States which have a statute which permits residents of their State to apply for a permit [!] to carry a concealed firearm

to allow persons from other States:

· who aren’t prohibited by federal law from possessing firearms [!]; and

· who are carrying a photographic ID issued by a government body [!]; and

· who are carrying a concealed carry license or permit from the other State [!],

to possess or carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or “destructive device”) which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

So, even though a State Constitution, such as that for Connecticut, ⁴ prohibits the State Legislature from making ANY laws restricting firearms (such as imposing requirements for registration, a permit, government issued photo ID), a Citizen of Connecticut who exercises his constitutionally recognized right to carry without registration or a permit or a government issued photo ID, wouldn’t qualify under HR 38 for concealed carry in another State.

To qualify for concealed carry in other States, the Citizen of Connecticut would need his State Legislature to pass a law [which is unconstitutional under the Connecticut and federal Constitutions], so that he could comply with an unconstitutional federal statute [HR 38], so that he could carry in other States which also would have to pass unconstitutional laws imposing permit requirements on those who carry concealed.

Do you see how a God-given right [self-defense] is thus converted into a privilege which is regulated, granted, or denied, by civil government?

HR 38 also provides that any person carrying a concealed handgun in a State under the reciprocity provisions may also carry concealed in the public parts of National Parks and certain other lands under federal control. Lest you think this a gain, consider that: (1) The Constitution doesn’t authorize the federal government to operate national parks and such like, and (2) the federal government has no lawful authority to impose registration requirements for carrying arms anywhere.

5. What’s the solution?

Read more at the Tenth Amendment Center

If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please make a donation to support our work.  
You can donate HERE.

The post From Duty to be Armed to Permission to Carry appeared first on Oath Keepers.

Liberals Freak Out As House Approves Nationwide Concealed Carry Reciprocity

The House Judiciary Committee voted 19-11 late Wednesday for the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017. This bill would amend the federal criminal code to allow the concealed carry of guns across state lines for all concealed carry permit holders.

Should this bill become a law, states will not be able to impose their individual requirements for a concealed carry license on those who have a license to conceal in a different state. The left is already terrified.

Republicans rejected Democratic amendments that would ban violent offenders from qualifying under the law (because violent offenders cannot obtain a concealed carry permit anyway), as well as a change that would have prevented forum shopping; which means a New York resident barred from obtaining a concealed carry permit could instead send away for one from somewhere else. The bill, which has more than 200 co-sponsors, almost all Republicans, will now head to the floor of the 435-member House. A similar bill, with 38 Republican co-sponsors, is pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

All this bill does is extend the right to carry a concealed firearm IF one is licensed to do so in all 50 states, regardless of the state that issued the license.  There isn’t really a reason for liberals to freak out, yet they are.

A qualified individual must: (1) be eligible to possess, transport, or receive a firearm under federal law; (2) carry a valid photo identification document; and (3) carry a valid concealed carry permit issued by, or be eligible to carry a concealed firearm in, his or her state of residence. – H.R. 38

“This would end abuses in anti-gun states like New York and New Jersey and allow law-abiding concealed carriers to exercise their rights nationwide with peace of mind,” the NRA website states. “[The bill] would not, as some critics claim, affect how states issue their own concealed carry permits.”

U.S. Representative Richard Hudson, the North Carolina Republican who introduced the legislation, called the bill “welcome progress” in efforts to expand and protect access to firearms. 

The few states that target law-abiding concealed carriers from other jurisdictions for criminal prosecution consider the bearing of arms in public for self-defense a privilege reserved for the elite, rather than a constitutional right. When states trample on constitutional rights, Congress has the authority and responsibility to act.  –NRA-ILA

This is a small shred of hope for gun owners who seek to exercise their rights regardless of whether or not they cross an arbitrary line.