What Would a Gun-Grabber Do? A Derpy Dilemma

(Example only. We don’t know who this person is.)

Consider, for a moment, the dilemma faced by your average gun-banner. Let’s call him “Derp.”

After having struggled through the perils of getting his shoes on the correct feet, breakfast into the inside of his mouth, and getting most of his buttons into their assigned holes, Derp now has to figure out how to push his anticonstitutional agenda on a national scale. Derp is facing something of an uphill battle. The Supreme Court now has a majority of “originalist” judges, who are unlikely to rule against the Second Amendment. Both houses of the legislature are (narrowly) held by pro-gun representatives. And as for the executive branch … well, there’s a large orange obstacle in the way there too.

So if Derp wishes to grab guns, he’s going to have to recalibrate his approach. Once he gets done making breakfast for his wife and her boyfriend, he waits for a friendly text from the new hero of the DNC, David Hogg. He makes sure to send a few bucks to ActBlue, so the organization can then use his identity to hide hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations from illegal sources. He remembers that the reason he needs to do this is that he’s not going to get any more taxpayer funds through USAID to buy protesters, and that memory makes him very angry indeed.

And what do we do when we’re a brainrotted gun-grabber and we’re angry? Why, hit back and hit hard with a TikTok dance!

Once he’s wiped the sweat from his delicate, trembling brow, Derp checks his texts again for today’s marching orders. What will he see? Well, let’s let the National Shooting Sports Foundation tell the rest of the story.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Gun Control’s Focus Shifts to State Capitals

By Jake McGuigan

Focusing on Congress, especially when lawmakers are talking about gun control, is to be expected. Washington, D.C., is the center of gravity when it comes to policymaking in the United States. Big debates, big legislation and big policy agendas are decided that have sweeping authority across the United States.

For some, it can be excruciatingly slow. That’s what the Framers intended. Congress was never meant to be quick on decision-making. Instead, the process of drafting laws, enacting legislation and setting policy was intended to be deliberative. The idea was that lawmakers should put thought into the lasting impacts their passionate rhetoric might invite.

This Congress won’t be any different, especially when it comes to firearm policies. Congress is narrowly split in both chambers. That means meaningful legislation will likely not gain the support needed. That can be frustrating for pro-gun legislation but helpful when it comes to blocking gun control.

That’s why gun control proponents have shifted their focus to 50 new targets.

State legislatures move much more quickly than Congress. While federal lawmakers have two calendar years to advance their bills, state legislatures – in some cases – have just two months. That means things move quickly and this year shows why gun control is moving their efforts to the states instead of Congress.

Just 10 states hold year-round legislative sessions. The rest are a mad dash for state policy agendas. This year might be the best evidence of how gun control advocates are shifting their focus to getting their agenda items across the finish line.

Hardware Bans

Gun control lawmakers in Colorado are continuing to press ahead with Senate Bill 3, their attempt to ban semiautomatic firearms that can accept detachable magazines. That bill has taken on a series of alterations and has morphed into a bill that would essentially require a permit-to-purchase through a county sheriff. That’s problematic for them because it contains subjective criteria that the U.S. Supreme Court rejected in the Bruen decision.

Colorado isn’t alone in trying to ban guns. New Mexico has Senate Bill 279 that also considers banning semiautomatic firearms that can accept a detachable magazine. Opponents say that this is “the most wide, sweeping, overreaching legislative proposal we’ve seen nationwide.” The bill has passed one state Senate committee and is being considered in another. There are just days left in the session.

Rhode Island is another state looking to outright ban Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs). House Bill 5436 would ban the possession, manufacture, sale and purchase of MSRs. Rhode Island lawmakers have made previous attempts at passing similar legislation. This year, Gov. Dan McKee added money to his state’s budget proposal to bolster the effort. Local firearm retailers told media this law would be their end of their business. NSSF is fighting all of these measures.

Targeting Industry

At least two states are considering laws that would attempt to circumvent the Protection of Law Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). Both Connecticut and New Mexico are debating bills to expose the industry to lawsuits for violent acts committed by criminals that have no association with firearm manufacturers. Connecticut is considering HB 7042, a bill to permit crime victims, the state attorney general and even municipalities to bring lawsuits against firearm manufacturers when they don’t impose “reasonable controls,” without defining what that term means.

New Mexico’s SB 318 is similar. These bills would open Pandora’s box to politically-motivated lawsuits designed to bankrupt the firearm industry via legal fees alone. These are the same municipal lawsuits that were brought against the industry in the late 1990s and early 2000s that gave rise to the bipartisan PLCAA, with which Congress stepped in and put an end to lawfare – or using the courts to advance agendas that the legislatures expressly rejected.

That’s not all. Connecticut and Delaware lawmakers are considering legislation to track the credit card purchases of law-abiding gun and ammunition purchasers, following the Orwellian lead of California, New York and Colorado. Connecticut is considering it HB 7037 and Delaware is considering House Bill 45, which was heard in House Judiciary Committee. The bills would require credit card companies and payment processors to assign a firearm and ammunition-specific Merchant Category Code (MCC) to violate the purchase privacy of those who lawfully exercise their Second Amendment rights.

Currently, 19 states have laws prohibiting the use of a firearm-specific MCC and legislation was introduced in Congress to ban their use to track law-abiding gun and ammunition purchasers. Delaware’s bill contains a provision that authorizes the Department of Justice to bring civil actions against those who violate the proposed law and a $10,000 fine. NSSF opposes these onerous bills.

Federalism Explained

None of this is by accident. In fact, this is what the Framers intended. Federalism is the concept that’s embodied in the U.S. Constitution. It is a power-sharing agreement between the states and the federal government. The idea was that the federal government should be limited in its power while each state exercises its own authority within its own borders.

Federalism also gave rise to the idea that the states are the “laboratories of democracy.” That was a phrase popularized by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis when he dissented in the 1932 New State Ice Co. v. Liebman decision, when he wrote, “a state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.”

Just like science, these experiments in democratic rule often begin in state legislatures. Those that are successful are repeated and inform federal policy. Those that fail, well… fail. That experimental failure is limited to just that state instead of the whole country.

Right now, there are a whole crop of gun control experiments being planted in state capitals. They have potential to gain root and not just harm the firearm industry and the rights of law-abiding citizens in those states but potentially grow into federal policy. That’s why NSSF is busy not just in Congress but also in the states.