2A Newsletter Week of June 28th

In this week’s news, Washington joins the anti-gun states by becoming the 10th to ban assault weapons, targeting over 50 models including AR-15s and AK-47s. U.S. Representative Jamie Raskin introduced H.R. 8764, a dangerous bill aiming to disclose firearm trace data and block contracts with manufacturers, unfairly penalizing lawful businesses. Meanwhile, U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy continues the attack on our rights by declaring gun violence a public health crisis, pushing for universal background checks and an assault weapons ban.

Photo Source: Shutterstock via Allexxandar

Washington Joins Anti-Gun States: 10th to Ban Assault Weapons

Washington State has joined the ranks of anti-Second Amendment states by passing a sweeping ban on the sale, manufacture, and import of assault-style semi-automatic weapons. House Bill 1240, signed by Governor Jay Inslee, went into immediate effect, targeting more than 50 gun models, including the iconic AR-15s and AK-47s.

Governor Inslee, during the signing ceremony, dramatically claimed, “These weapons of war, assault weapons, have no reason other than mass murder.” This rhetoric is not only misleading but also ignores the fact that millions of law-abiding Americans use these firearms responsibly for self-defense, sport, and hunting.

But the assault on gun rights doesn’t stop there. Washington has also introduced a 10-day waiting period for all gun purchases, further delaying the ability of citizens to exercise their Second Amendment rights. Additionally, new liability provisions will hold gunmakers and sellers responsible if their firearms are misused, shifting blame away from the criminals who commit violent acts and onto the lawful businesses that supply these legal products.

Washington is now the 10th state to enact such prohibitive measures on assault-style weapons. This growing trend of states passing similar bans signals a concerted effort to undermine the Second Amendment at the state level. States like California, New York, and Connecticut have long been at the forefront of restrictive gun control policies, and now more states are following suit.

California implemented its assault weapon ban in 1989, one of the earliest in the nation. The state prohibits the possession, manufacture, sale, gifting, transport, and import of assault weapons, with exceptions for weapons owned before the ban, provided they are registered.

Connecticut's ban dates back to 1993 and was expanded in 2013. The state bans the possession, sale, gifting, transport, and import of assault weapons, with exceptions for pre-ban ownership certified by the state.

Delaware's assault weapon ban, enacted in 2022, restricts the possession, manufacture, sale, transfer, and receipt of these firearms. Exceptions are made for weapons lawfully owned before the ban, allowing transfers to family members.

Hawaii's ban, in effect since 1992, is unique as it only regulates assault-style pistols while not applying to long guns like modern sporting rifles. It bans possession, manufacture, sale, transfer, barter, trade, gift, or acquisition of these firearms, with pre-ban ownership and registration exceptions.

Illinois' ban, effective in 2023, covers the possession, manufacture, sale, import, delivery, and purchase of assault weapons—lawful ownership before the ban is permitted with registration before a specified date.

Maryland implemented its ban in 1994, expanding it in 2013. The state restricts the possession, sale, transfer, purchase, receipt, and transport of assault weapons, except for pre-ban ownership and registration.

Massachusetts' ban has been in place since 1994, covering the possession, sale, and transfer of assault weapons, with exceptions for lawful ownership before the ban's effective date.

New Jersey banned assault weapons in 1990, prohibiting possession, manufacture, transport, shipping, selling, and disposal of these firearms. Exceptions are made for officially licensed owners and pre-ban ownership with subsequent registration.

New York's ban, established in 2013, covers the possession, manufacture, transport, and disposal of assault weapons. Lawful ownership before the ban is allowed if the firearms are registered.

Washington's recent law bans the sale, manufacture, import, and distribution of assault weapons. Possession remains legal for those who complete mandatory safety training courses. The state also implemented a 10-day waiting period for gun purchases and holds gunmakers and sellers responsible if their firearms are misused, shifting blame away from the criminals who commit violent acts and onto the lawful businesses that supply these legal products.

The trend indicates a disturbing shift towards more restrictive gun laws that fail to address the core issues of crime and violence. Instead, these laws focus on penalizing lawful gun owners and the firearms industry. It is crucial for those who believe in the right to keep and bear arms to stay vigilant and proactive in defending their rights.



Photo Source: Shutterstock via Philip Yabut

GUN CONTROL POLITICIAN EMBARKS ON SHAMEFUL ‘NAME-AND-SHAME’ AGENDA

There seems to be no limit to how far some gun control politicians will go to smear the firearm industry. Instead of focusing on holding criminals accountable for their horrific crimes when they misuse firearms, they choose the easier path: shifting the blame. They aim to absolve criminals of their wrongdoing and instead hang the proverbial noose on an industry that adheres to the law.

U.S. Representative Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) recently introduced H.R. 8764, the Clean Firearm Procurement Act. Despite its misleading name, this legislation is a glaring example of the flaws in Washington, D.C.’s political gun control agenda. The bill proposes that the U.S. Attorney General disregard current laws prohibiting the disclosure of sensitive firearm trace data and publish a public list of firearms most commonly misused by criminals in violent crimes.

The bill goes even further by empowering the Attorney General to block any contracts with firearm businesses listed as the manufacturers, distributors, or sellers of these firearms. This legislation ignores that firearms are manufactured, distributed, and sold lawfully by federally licensed companies. All retail transfers are conducted through face-to-face transactions with a signed Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Form 4473, which requires verification through the FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).

This legislation is not only absurd but also dangerous. It threatens to weaponize firearm sales to federal agencies and potentially block federal funding to law enforcement to satisfy a political gun control agenda, all because criminals commit horrific crimes. It also aims to bypass the Tiahrt Amendment, which protects sensitive firearm trace data from being shared outside law enforcement for investigations. This would deprive federal agencies—including the FBI, ATF, Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Protective Service, U.S. Marshals Service, CIA, State Department, FAA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, IRS, National Park Service, U.S. Capitol Police, U.S. Secret Service, and even the U.S. Postal Service—of the ability to procure firearms needed to sustain their missions.

Rep. Raskin claims his bill targets “bad-apple gun dealers,” but it does nothing of the sort. It unfairly blames firearm manufacturers and retailers, who have no connection to the crimes committed with the firearms they lawfully produce and sell. This blame-shifting tactic is intellectually lazy and ignores the actual perpetrators of crime.

A striking analogy is that of blaming vehicle manufacturers and dealers for vehicular homicides, manslaughters, and criminal negligence. The auto industry isn’t responsible for the criminal misuse of their products, just as the firearm industry isn’t responsible for crimes committed with their legally sold products.

Rep. Raskin’s bill relies on the ATF’s Demand 2 program, which targets retailers with 25 trace requests from the ATF within a year, where the time from retail sale to trace is three years or less. This program discloses data from the ATF’s National Tracing Center Firearm Tracing System (FTS), which previously violated the Tiahrt Amendment by releasing sensitive firearm trace data to USA Today. The public is aware that the Washington, D.C., Metro Police Department is on this list.

During a period when there were no commercial federal firearm licensees (FFLs) in D.C., the Metro Police Department became the sole FFL, facilitating firearm transfers until private businesses obtained licenses. This was not due to any wrongdoing by the Metro Police, but because criminals later misused firearms that were legally transferred.

ATF reports indicate that licensed firearm retailers are not the problem. The ATF found just 136 cases of illegal firearm trafficking linked to an FFL over five years, representing only 1.6% of all 9,700 cases. With 134,516 FFLs at the end of 2021, this equates to just 0.1% of all FFLs being implicated in alleged illegal trafficking.

A closer look at who is responsible for firearms falling into the wrong hands reveals significant missteps, notably under President Joe Biden. His hasty withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan resulted in $7.12 billion worth of military equipment, including 258,000 rifles, 56,000 machine guns, and 31,000 grenade launchers, falling into Taliban hands. This includes substantial quantities of munitions and military hardware, highlighting severe security oversights.

Moreover, the U.S. government’s role in allowing firearms to cross into Mexico during Operation Fast & Furious, which led to the death of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and numerous innocent lives in Mexico, underscores another major failure.

Rep. Raskin’s bill is a blatant attempt to circumvent the Tiahrt Amendment, which protects sensitive trace data from political misuse. Former ATF Acting Director Michael Sullivan has criticized efforts to rescind this law, warning that it would jeopardize ongoing investigations and the safety of law enforcement.

Rep. Raskin’s “name-and-shame” bill is not about tackling the real issues of gun violence or supporting law enforcement. It’s a political ploy designed to appease special interest gun control groups, potentially at the expense of federal agencies' ability to protect the American public. This bill is a disgrace from its inception, and it’s time to call out this shameful agenda for what it is.



Photo Source: Shutterstock via Lev Radin

US Surgeon General declares gun violence a public health crisis

In a move that should surprise no one familiar with the anti-gun agenda of Washington, D.C., the U.S. Surgeon General, Dr. Vivek Murthy, has declared gun violence a public health crisis. This declaration, coming amid a series of mass shootings, underscores what Murthy claims is an urgent need for action.

Dr. Murthy's recommendations are predictable and misguided:

• Ban on Assault Weapons and Large-Capacity Magazines: The usual targets in the gun control playbook, despite evidence that such bans do not reduce overall violence.
• Universal Background Checks: An already flawed system that often fails to prevent criminals from obtaining firearms but imposes more hurdles for law-abiding citizens.
• Industry Regulation: More red tape and restrictions on an industry that already operates under stringent federal oversight.
• Public Space Restrictions: Yet another attempt to limit the rights of lawful gun owners to carry for self-defense..

One of the most ludicrous aspects of Murthy’s declaration is the inclusion of 18- and 19-year-olds in the category of “children.” By manipulating statistics to inflate the number of “child” gun deaths, Murthy’s advisory attempts to create a more dire picture than reality warrants. This disingenuous tactic is a transparent effort to sway public opinion and push through draconian gun control measures.

These proposals cannot be implemented without Congressional approval—a body that has historically resisted such overreach. Some states, eager to follow the Surgeon General’s lead, may consider adopting similar measures, further eroding Second Amendment rights.

Unsurprisingly, the medical community, including the American Academy of Family Physicians, has rallied behind Murthy’s advisory. This support aligns with their long-standing stance that gun violence is a public health epidemic—a position that ignores the root causes of violence and focuses instead on the tools used.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) and Republican lawmakers have rightly criticized Murthy’s advisory as an extension of the Biden Administration’s war on law-abiding gun owners. Randy Kozuch, NRA president, pointed out that this is part of a broader campaign to undermine the rights of responsible gun owners.

Murthy’s approach to gun violence mirrors past public health campaigns against smoking. However, equating firearms to cigarettes ignores the fundamental difference: the right to keep and bear arms is constitutionally protected. This is not about public health; it’s about control.

Dr. Murthy's declaration is another step in the ongoing effort to shift the narrative on gun violence, portraying it as a public health crisis rather than a complex societal issue. This advisory represents a significant push towards more restrictive gun control measures, despite the clear constitutional protections afforded by the Second Amendment.