In literature, a moment of truth is an experience that tests one’s mettle in such a way that it defines a person’s character. If we acquit ourselves well, we can retain our self-respect. If we fail, we may bear the scar until, if we are lucky, our experience of life gives us a redemptive opportunity. In real life, most of us face more than one of these trials.
(H.R.
127) was introduced in the 117th Congress and referred to the House
Judiciary Committee. It is one of
several Bills that have been introduced by Democrats which, if they become law,
will challenge the position of the U.S. Constitution as the supreme law of the
land and will afford many law abiding Americans a moment of truth.
The text of H.R. 127 is available at: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/127/text I emphatically urge you to read it. I am not a lawyer, and I am not competent to interpret legal language or give legal advice. With that said, I will share my impressions, as a private citizen, of how the Bill appears on the face of it, including the reasons why I think every American should oppose the Bill.
H.R. 127 provides for the licensing of the possession of firearms and ammunition. It provides for the registration of firearms, and its stated goal is to register every firearm in the United States. The Bill prohibits possessing some kinds of ammunition and high capacity (more than ten rounds) “feeding devices.” It requires law abiding Americans to be 21 years old, pass a background check, pass a psychological evaluation, complete a 24 hour training course, and obtain insurance to get a firearms license.
People in the United States will be breaking the law if they are not carrying a valid firearms license at any time they are in possession of a firearm or ammunition and the firearm is registered to the person carrying it. If the firearm is registered to someone else, and the lender must have notified the government it is loaned, to whom, and specified the inclusive dates of the loan.
No mention is made of a requirement for U.S. citizenship in the Bill.
An additional license is called for to own and display antique firearms in the home, and the owners of antique guns must follow the government’s rules about how to display them. An additional license is also required to possess “military-style” firearms. An additional 24 hours of “live fire” training is mandated to get a license to possess military-style firearms.
The live fire training will take a lot of ammo. Where will we get it when millions of gun owners are all trying to get licensed at once? The stores are sold out right now.
The licensed gun owner will be compelled to report the location where the where their firearms and ammunition are stored. No mention is made of license, registration, or training fees, but we can expect them.
The arrogance of requiring a person to follow the government’s rules about how to display an antique firearm in their own home is appalling. There is a sanctity to the home that ought not to be violated.
The Attorney General is charged with implementation and enforcement, which will probably be done by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE). Supplemental assistance may be provided by law enforcement agencies. A data base is to be created and maintained, and it will be available to the public, law enforcement, the armed forces, and state and local governments.
I would be curious to know the financial impact of this Bill on the taxpayer. I am guessing it will be greater than the revenue generated by fees.
Public access to the data base will make it easier for criminals to get guns. When the gun thieves want to know which home to burglarize, all they have to do is consult the government’s data base.
The obvious objection to the Bill is that it provides a road map for the government to confiscate registered firearms and ammunition. The mandated database will provide the government with the name and address of every “legal” gun owner in the United States. It will provide the make, model, and serial number of every firearm they own, where the guns are stored, and information about the amount and the kind of ammunition licensed gun owners possess. Thus, the Bill also creates the potential for the government to limit the amount of ammunition licensed gun owners may be allowed keep on hand. The intent to confiscate eventually is obvious.
To become a licensed gun owner, the license applicant will be required to undergo a psychological evaluation. An additional psych eval will be requisite to obtain a license to possess military-style firearms. No mention is made of how these evaluations will be paid for. The evaluations must be done by a psychologist who is licensed, and the eval must be approved by the government. The psychologist may evaluate anyone who lives with the applicant. They may interview the applicant’s ex-spouse, family members and associates about the applicant’s fitness to own a firearm.
The government must deny a license to any person who is prohibited from owning firearms by federal law or has a history of hospitalization for mental illness or suicidal issues, addiction to controlled substances, or brain disease. Persons must be denied who have been determined to have a chronic mental illness or have been determined to be a danger to self or others.
Due to the stresses of modern life, genetics, and/or laws like this one, millions of Americans take prescription medications for anxiety, depression, and insomnia. For insurance purposes, and as good practice, your doctor or mental health practitioner shows a diagnosis (like generalized anxiety disorder or major depression) on your medical records to justify prescribing your “happy pills.” Most folks who take meds for anxiety or depression do not really have a “chronic mental illness” of psychotic degree, but this Bill might be stretched by overzealous anti-gun regulators to deny a license to possess firearms and ammunition to applicants who are treated by their health care provider with psychotropic medication.
The lack of respect shown to honest, law abiding Americans by this Bill is appalling. I agree that we must do more to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and persons with significant, dangerous mental and emotional problems. Absent probable cause to believe that applicants pose a danger to self or others, however, the level of intrusiveness into the lives and privacy of applicants in this Bill is not warranted, justified, or excusable.
The Bill requires the owners of Firearms and ammunition to notify the BATFE of every gun they already own within three months after the law becomes effective. The BATFE must be notified immediately if new guns are purchased. However, the Bill gives the BATFE a year to implement it after it is passed, and they will need it. Estimates vary, but one source reports that in 2017 there were over 390 million civilian firearms in the United States, and that there were 120 firearms per every 100 civilians.* If this Bill becomes law, the BATFE will be swamped, and gun owners will have no way to comply with the law. Therefore, provisions in the Bill for implementation appear on the face of it to be seriously flawed.
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country
A license may be suspended if a person is under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for more than one year or fails to maintain firearms insurance. Individuals who are prohibited from possessing a firearm by federal or state law must surrender all firearms and ammunition in their possession to the government, whether they own it or not.
It is doubtful that criminals will turn in their firearms and ammunition just because this H.R. 127 becomes law. Criminals are criminals because they break the law, and passage of this Bill will make no difference to them. The Bill provides fairly severe penalties for unlicensed people, especially those who are prohibited by law, to possess registered or unregistered firearms. This is the only way that the Bill addresses the behavior of persons who are not law abiding “US persons.” The police will have to obtain discovery (through intelligence, arrest for a different crime, or search, etc.) that unlicensed persons (and real criminals) have guns. Then they may confiscate the guns and proffer charges.
The section of this Bill on the expiration and renewal of licenses is vague, confusing, and poorly written. I cannot summarize it here with any reasonable certainty that I am doing so correctly.
To get a license, the gun owner must obtain firearm insurance from the Attorney General. In actuality the AG will probably delegate it to the BATFE. It must insure against any liability for losses resulting from the use of a firearm. A fee of $800.00 will be assessed for 1 year of coverage.
Groups like the National Rifle Association (NRA) and the US Concealed Carry Association (USCCA) have long advocated that gun owners obtain self-defense liability insurance that will cover liability and legal fees if they shoot someone in defense of life and property. It seems to me that insurance makes sense. What does not make sense is obliging gun owners to pay too much for it by requiring the licensee to get the insurance through the government.
Overall, this Bill imposes administrative and financial burdens that will have an unequal, adverse impact on the poor, elderly, and disabled. These persons are, however, the people who are most likely to live in high crime areas. In short, it will be easier for more prosperous people who have better administrative skills to comply with the law. This Bill will expand the black market for firearms and ammunition, and it will make criminals out of otherwise law abiding people. It will disarm a lot of vulnerable people, while leaving criminals well-armed.
The bill attempts to describe military-style weapons. It specifies weapons made by specific manufacturers and some models made by them. Most of them are semi-automatic versions of firearms that are used by the military or the police, here and abroad. Many are popular weapons that are widely owned by civilians and are used for legal activities like collecting, target practice, home defense, shooting contests, and hunting.
The identification of so-called “assault weapons” has been attempted before, without success. The Bill provides a familiar laundry list of characteristics that have already been successfully disputed. These include semiautomatic rifles, pistols, or shotguns that have two or more of the listed characteristics. A few of the features are: folding or telescoping stocks, long guns with pistol grips, flash suppressers, detachable magazines, semi-automatic versions of fully automatic firearms, a fixed magazine with a capacity that exceeds five rounds, and shrouded barrels. The problem is that many of these characteristics are found on firearms that were designed for sporting use, and/or they do not increase the lethality of a firearm.
The same is true for the banned ammunition. It is this sort of thing that drives gun people crazy.
It will be against the law to transfer guns or ammunition unless the Attorney General (BATFE) is notified. The recipient must be licensed, be at least 18 years old, and be insured. You will not be able to gift a gun to somebody unless that person has notified the BATFE.
The problem is that, under this Bill, an 18 year old can’t get a license. Further, (hypothetically) we would have to notify the BATFE first before I let a friend fire a few rounds from my favorite deer rifle at a shooting range. If we didn’t, we could be charged with a legal violation.
If I want to leave my guns and ammunition to someone in my will, they will be in violation unless they are licensed and notify the BATFE prior to receipt. Also, I will be bequeathing the financial and administrative burdens of licensing and registration, psychological evaluations, training, insurance, and the associated costs and fees along with my guns.
The government and its various agencies are generally exempted from the requirements of H.R. 127.
If H.R. 127 becomes law, it provides penalties for violations that include fines up to $100,000.00 and jail terms up to 20 years. Generally, the severity of penalties should be consistent with the crime. Some of the penalties in this law are excessive, and are greater than what is needed to provide a deterrent.
CONCLUSION:
Prior to the election on 6 November 2020, Democrats said that they would promote “common sense” gun laws. To me, H.R. 127 does not seem like common sense. In fact, it makes very little sense. Yet, information available to me suggests that this is more than just an effort by the Democrats to pander to their base. I am told that there is a real danger that H.R. 127 could become law, and that it should be taken seriously.
It seems that the best course of action is to try to keep it from becoming law. To that end, I am asking that you email, call, or write your Senators and Representatives in congress, and tell them you object to the passage of this Bill, and why. Organizations that have the ability to circulate legal and verifiable petitions, are urged to do so, a.s.a.p.
Even if you are not a gun owner, even if you are repelled by guns, you should consider the big picture of what is going on here. Conservative opinions are being kept from the public discourse by “big tech.” Those who control access to the Internet are making life difficult for conservative news outlets like Fox News, NEWSMAX and the Epoch Times. Congress and the president are doing nothing to stop it. An unconstitutional Bill has been introduced in the House of Representatives that will federalize the administration of federal elections. Obama era executive orders are being reinstated that may result in the loss of your job. Years of struggle by feminists to give women’s’ sports equal status are being jeopardized. If the Democrats are allowed to take away the constitutional rights of gun owners, how long will it be before we lose our freedoms of speech, assembly, the press, and religion? If we don’t stand together now, will we stand alone later?
Christians, ask yourselves if you will stand up for Jesus with greater vigor and determination that you do for your constitutional rights? The time is coming when we will be called to do so.
Lately, too many peaceful demonstrations have been hijacked by extreme groups, and the results have not been peaceful. Consequently, I urge that there be no demonstrations unless foolproof measures are put in place to keep them from becoming violent.
If H.R. 127 becomes law, otherwise law abiding Americans will be faced with some very difficult choices. We each need to examine what we will do if that happens.
Bad boys, bad boys
whatcha gonna do?
Whatcha gonna do when they come for you? **
from “Bad Boys” by Bob Marley
