Ohio Bills Grant Civil Immunity for Defense at Non-Profits & Collection of Firearms Data Restricted

Gun Control Costs Lives in Ohio, iStock-884221290

Governor DeWine of Ohio signed House Bill 452 and Senate Bill 58  on January 8, 2025. HB 452 grants immunity from civil lawsuits when a person is acting in defense of themselves or another to protect members or guests of non-profit corporations, including churches. Those who enter property with the intent to illegally harm others are not granted immunity. The immunity section is a small part of the bill, which mostly deals with hospital security.

From House Bill 452, state.oh.us:

(B) No person is liable in a tort action for injury, death, or loss to person or property allegedly caused by the person’s act of self-defense or defense of another when performed during the commission, or imminent commission, of an offense of violence to protect the members or guests, including the person’s self, of a nonprofit corporation against the commission, or imminent commission, of that offense of violence, unless the person’s act constitutes willful or wanton misconduct.

Granting immunity for acts defending self or others, even in these limited circumstances, appears to be a response to high-level cases where defenders have been sued by aggressors. Examples include the lawsuits against Kyle Rittenhouse.

Rittenhouse was cleared of all criminal charges by a unanimous jury of his peers in Kenosha, Wisconsin.  While found not guilty of criminal charges, he is facing lawsuits from one of the people who attacked him and from the family of one of the people who he shot and killed in self defense. The Rittenhouse case was prosecuted in Wisconsin, but people and legislators in Ohio could watch the case, live as it unfolded. The law removes a worry from non-profit managers and owners about possible liability if they allow people to be armed on their properties.

HB 452 will go into effect in about six months.

Senate Bill 58 prevents the registration of firearms by governments at the state and local levels. It makes the creation of lists of firearms owners by financial entities illegal. This is to prevent financial institutions or credit card companies from requiring specific codes for firearms or firearm-related products.  They would effectively create a registration list. Senate Bill 58 also prohibits private entities from mandating firearm liability insurance as a prerequisite for the possession or purchase of firearms. Underlined words have been added to this bill.

From Senate Bill 58 state.oh.us:

Except as specifically provided by the United States Constitution, Ohio Constitution, state law, or federal law, a person, without further license, permission, restriction, delay, or process, including by any ordinance, rule, regulation, resolution, practice, or other action or any threat of citation, prosecution, or other legal process, may own, possess, purchase, acquire, transport, store, carry, sell, transfer, manufacture, or keep any firearm, part of a firearm, its components, and its ammunition, and any knife, without being required to have firearm liability insurance, and without being required to pay a fee for the possession of a firearm, part of a firearm, its components, its ammunition, or a knife.

This bill against credit card codes and the creation of registration lists is a reaction against using financial institutions to discriminate against the firearms community by “de-banking” them. De-banking is one of the schemes of those who want to disarm the population. It is a way to achieve those ends without passing legislation.  The attempt to require firearms liability insurance is another scheme to make firearms ownership onerous and financially burdensome. SB 58 makes such schemes illegal in Ohio.

SB58 will go into effect on April 9, 2025.

---

About Dean Weingarten:

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

from https://ift.tt/ecwKziB
via IFTTT

Narrative Parroting Helps ‘Reasonable’ Tennessee Gun-grabbers Influence the Ignorant

Is there anything Second Amendment advocates should have more contempt for than Fudds who throw them under the bus? (Voices for a Safer Tennessee/Facebook)

“Statewide organization asks legislators to pass gun safety laws in Tennessee,” Nashville’s WKTN-TV “reported” Jan. 8. “Voices for a Safer Tennessee… held a panel discussion on its 2025 goals.”

Note “reported” is in quotes. It’s not the first time a “real reporter” has filed a one-sided PR piece masked as news. This “journalist” ought to go far—until the publisher figures out AI can parrot talking points a lot cheaper.

So, let’s do the job the DSM didn’t do, and analyze what’s really happening here.

What are this group’s goals? And will achieving them result in a safer Tennessee?

“We must find common ground and come together to take action for a safer Tennessee,”  the group says on its website. “Our mission is to build safer, healthier communities by reducing preventable firearm tragedies across Tennessee.”

OK, nothing too controversial so far… but how? “Safer TN believes our state can support the Second Amendment and pragmatic firearm safety laws that prevent tragedy,” they assert.

Is anybody else getting an “I believe in the Second Amendment BUT” vibe yet? Got specifics?

Including up to 18-year-olds as “children” in its “firearms/leading cause of death” graph only strengthens that vibe. Still, so far we’re unclear on what it is they want, and how that will comport with “shall not be infringed.”

A public opinion poll they present by a supposed “conservative” pollster (which is a false authority logical fallacy) shows that, among the other “reasonable gun safety measures” reportedly enjoying “overwhelming [support] among all likely voters and with key demographics” (which doesn’t tell us what they actually know about the subject) are:

• Mandates to report lost/stolen guns, something no criminal can be required to do because, just like with mandatory registration, it would violate their Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination.
• Requirements to lock up your safety.
• Life-endangering and ineffectual waiting period prior restraints on claiming your right.
• Mandating registration-enabling “universal background checks” and ending private transfers.
• Due process-denying “Extreme Risk Protection Orders.”

How does any of this “support the Second Amendment”? How is it even remotely “pragmatic”?

What all this masks, of course, is that citizen disarmament has been a game of increments, with the ultimate goal being just that. And to add to the efforts of Voices for Safer Tennessee (a “gun control group run by wealthy Republican, Democrat political insiders”), we see the more overtly prohibitionists Sandy Hook Promise Action Fund has registered lobbyists with the state to advance its decidedly unsupportive of the Second Amendment agenda.

All you have to do is look at nature to see how that turns out. You don’t throw a scrap of flesh to a circling pack of jackals. Give up anything and that’s one less obstacle to overcome as they become emboldened to move in closer.

Of course they’re talking about taking your guns. Their founders have said so from the beginning, until the groups figured out hiding their motives and throwing out terms like “common sense” and “gun safety” played better with the marks they were swindling.

“I personally know and am married to a hunter,”  Voices spokesflack Katherine Merrill assures us, again resorting to false authority and the oft-used deception that the Second Amendment is about hunting. “He and all of his hunting friends agree that if someone is wanting to purchase a weapon, he’s willing, his friends are willing to go through a short background process.”

Great. Well heeled Vichycons and Fudds are on board with throwing the rest of us under the bus. So, what’s new?

“Several members stressed that they are not against guns,”  the ridiculous excuse for a report ends. “They only want people who should not have them to lose access.”

Like the 48 gangs operating in Memphis? Yeah, go tell them about locking up their guns, observing waiting periods, submitting to background checks, and keeping them out of the hands of those who smack their drugged out money-making sex slaves around. Do it in person and let us know how the talk went.

Idiots.

---

About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

from https://ift.tt/PSi6CU5
via IFTTT

The Fight Heats Up to Destroy ATF’s Illegal Gun Owner Registry ~ VIDEO

In a powerful testament to grassroots activism and legislative pushback, recent developments signal a significant challenge to what many see as overreaches by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). The focus is a massive, nearly billion-record gun registry that has alarmed gun rights advocates and spurred action from Congressional leaders.

The Unfolding Scenario

In 2022, AmmoLand News’ John Crump uncovered that the ATF was maintaining a searchable database containing over 920 million records related to gun purchases. This database, largely digital, stands in direct violation of the clear prohibitions set by federal law against such a registry, echoing fears of a slippery slope towards broader firearms confiscation—a tactic seen in other countries and long feared by American gun rights proponents.

The discovery prompted immediate action from Congress, with leaders like Senator James Risch and Representative Michael Cloud introducing the “No Registry Rights Act.” This proposed legislation aims to dismantle the ATF’s registry and restore adherence to the original intent of the Firearms Owner Protection Act, which strictly prohibits any form of national gun registry.

The Role of Advocacy and Legislative Efforts

The GOA’s efforts and subsequent legislative proposals underscore a critical point: Vigilance and advocacy remain essential in protecting Second Amendment rights and should serve as a rallying call for gun owners to engage with their elected representatives to support the efforts.

Senator Risch’s bill is more than a legislative formality; it’s a necessary step back toward the principles of liberty and privacy that are foundational to the American ethos.

By requiring the ATF to certify the destruction of all records, the bill aims to eliminate the registry’s immediate threat and prevent future administrations from reviving such practices.

The Importance of Gun Owner Community Involvement

As this situation unfolds, it’s crucial for gun owners and advocates to remain engaged. The call to action is clear: contact your representatives in both the House and Senate to express support for the No Registry Rights Act. This isn’t just about one piece of legislation; it’s about reinforcing the safeguards around our liberties and ensuring that regulatory agencies operate within the bounds of law and respect for individual rights.

Keep Up The Fight

While the fight against the ATF’s gun registry is a significant battle in the broader war to protect gun rights, it’s also a moment of potential unity and empowerment for gun owners across the nation. By understanding the implications of unchecked governmental overreach and taking collective action, the community can safeguard not only the Second Amendment but also the very principles of privacy and due process.

This issue serves as a stark reminder of the continuous need for vigilance and proactive engagement in the political process—a reminder that rights must be defended actively, not passively accepted as guaranteed.

As we continue to monitor this issue and support efforts to dismantle the ATF’s illegal gun owner registry, let us remain steadfast in our commitment to ensuring that our rights are not eroded by bureaucratic overreach. The stakes are high, and the time to act is now. Join the movement, make your voice heard, and help steer the future toward a path that respects and upholds our fundamental freedoms.

---

Support AmmoLand News

Sign up for the Daily Digest email and protect the 2nd Amendment.

• Email
• CAPTCHA
• Email
  This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Δ

---

ATF Keeping 920+ Million Firearm Records with Almost All Digitized

from https://ift.tt/mNPA65f
via IFTTT

LaPierre Pays Up $, Lawyer Brewer Resigns, Our Causes Advance : NRA Board After Action Report

Opinion

Wayne LaPierre has tendered payment of over $4 million to the NRA. The payment covers the total judgment against LaPierre issued in last year’s civil trial, plus interest.

Dallas, Texas, January 12, 2025 – The Winter meeting of the NRA Board of Directors wrapped up just after midnight last night (January 11/12/25) in Dallas, after almost a week of committee meetings and a long, sometimes contentious meeting of the Board.

The big news from the meeting was confirmation that Wayne LaPierre has tendered payment of over $4 million to the NRA. The payment covers the total judgment against LaPierre issued in last year’s civil trial, plus interest.

As I understand it, Mr. LaPierre has filed a notice of appeal on that judgment, so the NRA will need to hold onto the money until that or any other appeals are finally concluded, which could take years. The wheels of justice turn slowly.

The Board wasn’t satisfied with LaPierre’s payment though, passing a strongly-worded resolution expressing their commitment to recovering all legal fees and other expenses paid by NRA on behalf of LaPierre in relation to the lawsuit.

A few of LaPierre’s long-time friends and supporters on the Board tried to argue against “kicking a man while he’s down,” but after some debate over wording, the resolution passed on a strong majority voice vote. Like the payment already received, this claw-back commitment will not yield substantive action until all appeals are concluded, which could take years, but at least we’ve begun the process.

Another action of significance from the meeting was the dissolution of the Special Litigation Committee.

The SLC lived up to its contentious record right up to the end however, with their last official act being the filing of a notice of appeal in the New York AG case. For practical purposes, the notice has the effect of retaining the option of filing an appeal within the next 6 months. Had the NRA not filed the notice by a Friday, January 10 deadline, the window for filing appeals would have been closed permanently.

The notice of appeal was also the final major act of Brewer Attorneys and Counselors as the NRA’s outside counsel. The firm has terminated its representation of NRA, with only a few housekeeping and transition matters left to clear up.

The object of the NRA’s appeal would be the judge’s early decision to toss out the NRA’s claims of First Amendment violations by AG James. This should not be confused with the NRA’s other First Amendment case against New York, which was titled NRA vs. Vullo and Cuomo, commonly referred to as the Vullo case. That case did a side-track to the US Supreme Court, where NRA won a unanimous decision on a portion of the suit. It was then remanded back to the lower courts for further action and is still ongoing. That SCOTUS decision might put the NRA in a better position in an appeal on this case, but that is yet to be thoroughly explored.

There was significant debate over the filing of the notice of appeal during committee meetings. Unfortunately, with the deadline for filing falling on the day before the Board meeting, the full Board wasn’t able to debate the pros and cons of the action or offer an advisory vote on the issue. The Legal Affairs Committee did look into it, but it was clear that the members of the SLC had already committed to the idea of filing, so any other debate was moot.

The matter was only briefly touched upon during the meeting of the full Board, as Directors already had a very full agenda to cover. Nonetheless, debate continues, with some calling for immediate withdrawal of the notice, while others argue that the appeal should proceed.

My position on the matter is, while I disagree with the way the notice was filed, I don’t see that it creates any significant problems or harm to the Association. The NY AG has a 10-day window to file a counter-appeal, but I’ve seen no indication that she intends to do so. Frankly, the AG’s office doesn’t need NRA’s notice of appeal to instigate further action. Since the notice has been filed, I think the best course for the NRA to take now is to consult with knowledgeable attorneys, then present the Board with a comprehensive report on the pros and cons of pursuing the appeal. A final decision can be made at our next Board meeting after the Annual Meetings in Atlanta this spring.

I would love nothing more than to have a successful suit against Letitia James and New York for her politically motivated attacks on the Association, but I don’t want to spend millions of dollars on a dead end. If the lawyers conclude there’s a very good chance of a resounding win with substantial compensation coming back to NRA’s treasury, I’ll support it, otherwise I’ll advise we walk away.

That’s why I’m advocating for the NRA to take its time in either moving forward with the appeal or eventually withdrawing from the field.

Further actions by the Board included approval of several bylaw amendments and resolutions that were needed to meet the judge’s final order in the NY AG case.

There was robust debate on some of the details of these measures, but in the end, they were passed and are overall positive developments.

One of the most significant accomplishments of the meeting was the adoption of a realistic budget for the year. Last year’s budget was apparently based on some sort of magic pixie dust, with stated expectations that fell apart when confronted by reality. This year the Finance Committee and staff dug deep into the budgeting process, going line by line through each department to come up with practical and realistic numbers for the year ahead. The budget includes several new staff positions and funding for important core programs like Training & Education, the National Firearms Museum, Competitions, and Youth Programs, all of which will provide direct benefits to our members and help with recruiting efforts.

The tone and energy of these meetings was much more positive and cooperative than it’s been for recent meetings. Committees that haven’t met or been significantly inactive in years were engaged and involved, working across internal divides for the good of the organization and our members. Staffers were positive and enthusiastic, and there was a palpable optimism surrounding the entire process.

The next major milestone for the Association will be Director elections, which will begin in February.

Reformers on the Board have put forward a slate of 28 candidates to fill 28 seats that are up for election this year. Unlike years past, when I’ve advised “Bullet Voting,” this year’s campaign isn’t an insurgency effort. This year, we hold a majority of the Board and our objective is to strengthen that majority while denying seats to Directors who were culpable in the corruption of the past. Voting for less than 28 candidates increases the odds of some of those “Old Guard” candidates slipping back in.

I’ll have a detailed breakdown of the candidates and my personal endorsements available in about a week, so stay tuned.

Former NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre Has Cost the Gun Rights Movement North Of A Billion Dollars

NRA Wins Supreme Court Decision in NRA v Vullo

---

About Jeff Knox:

Jeff Knox is a dedicated political activist and the director of The Firearms Coalition, following in the footsteps of his father, Neal Knox. In 2024, Jeff was elected to the NRA Board of Directors, underscoring his lifelong commitment to protecting the Second Amendment. The Knox family has played a pivotal role in the ongoing struggle for gun rights, a legacy documented in the book Neal Knox – The Gun Rights War, authored by Jeff’s brother, Chris Knox.

Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, The Firearms Coalition is a network of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs, and civil rights organizations. The Coalition supports grassroots efforts by providing education, analysis of current issues, and a historical perspective on the gun rights movement. For more information, visit www.FirearmsCoalition.org.

from https://ift.tt/RaxF7CY
via IFTTT

Washington Gun Control Hearing Sets Tone for Legislative Session

Gun control is high on the agenda in Washington State again this year, and the first of several hearings on gun control bills set the tone for the legislative session. iStock-884168778

The first public hearing on a gun control bill during this year’s Washington State legislative session appears to have set a familiar tone for the debate on gun rights versus restrictions in the Democrat-controlled capitol, with proponents of “gun-free zone” expansion apparently oblivious of state court precedent and the state constitution.

State Sen. Javier Valdez (46^th District), a Seattle Democrat sponsoring Senate Bill 5098 and a member of the Senate Law & Justice Committee which held the hearing, was candid about his dislike for lawful carry of firearms in public places.

“I would say that, for me, if you want to keep people safe and if you have a firearm,” Valdez stated, “keep it at home, keep it there and in a safe place. I think that you’re actually protecting more kids and families by not bringing your weapon onto a public space. That’s how I feel.”

But for the approximately 700,000 Evergreen State citizens who are licensed to carry, and those who practice open carry, that’s not how Article 1, Section 24 of the state constitution works. The language is clear: “The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.”

For gun rights advocates, SB 5098, which seeks to expand so-called “gun-free zones” to include park facilities, many public buildings and county fairgrounds and facilities, is an impairment.

Into this dark water of gun control came an interesting cast of characters, including Saeran Dewar, a former student at Seattle’s Ingraham High School, who said her memories include the events of Nov. 8, 2022 when a 17-year-old student was gunned down in the school hallway.

What Dewar neglected to mention was that the confessed killer in that case was 14 years old at the time and thereby prohibited from carrying a loaded, concealed handgun anywhere in Washington state under existing state and federal law. In addition, the youth also violated the existing “Gun-Free School Zones Act,” not to mention the statutes against assault and murder.

According to KUOW, the murder weapon was a Glock 32 which had been taken from home without permission. The pistol was essentially stolen from that youngster by another teen (yet another violation of existing law) and subsequently used in another crime. KUOW reported, “the Glock passed through at least four pairs of teenage hands” before the actual perpetrator brought it to the school. A few lines later in its report, KUOW acknowledged, “Of the guns in 54 open King County cases involving juveniles, 20 were stolen. That’s likely a low estimate…”

Also testifying was a woman who has appeared before to support restrictive gun laws, Jane Weiss. A retired teacher, Weiss described herself as a “survivor of gun violence,” noting that her 19-year-old niece was a victim of Isla Vista, Calif., multiple killer Elliot Rodger. He’s the sex-deprived perpetrator who left a lengthy manifesto explaining what led him to murder six people, including three whom he fatally stabbed, a fact rarely mentioned when people discuss the crime.

Rodger legally purchased three handguns in California, complying with the state’s waiting period and background check requirements. He used only California-approved 10-round magazines, another detail typically omitted from discussions about the case. Besides, the crime happened in California, which is known for its extremist gun laws—which did not prevent the Isla Vista murders—not Washington, so its bearing on Evergreen State gun law proposals seems uncertain at best, and actually suggests making Washington’s law worse will not prevent violent crime.

Speaking on behalf of the National Rifle Association and its “tens of thousands” of members in the state, Aiohbeann Cline told the committee, “The open carry of firearms in these locations pose no actual criminal threat and concealed pistol license holders commit essentially zero crime.”

Other testimony criticizing open carry in public places included one complaint that when police were called to such an instance in one city, they explained there is nothing illegal about it.

Absent from these remarks was any reference to a 2007 case before the state Court of Appeals, Division II, known as State v. Gregory Elijah Casad in which the court ruled, “We note that, in connection with this case, several individuals have commented that they would find it strange, maybe shocking, to see a man carrying a gun down the street in broad daylight. Casad’s appellate counsel conceded that she would personally react with shock, but she emphasized that an individual’s lack of comfort with firearms does not equate to reasonable alarm. We agree. It is not unlawful for a person to responsibly walk down the street with a visible firearm, even if this action would shock some people.”

In a brief synopsis of the circumstances surrounding the Casad case, the Appeals Court noted, “Casad walked down the street in Port Angeles on a Saturday afternoon carrying two rifles partially wrapped in a towel. A woman called 911. Police responded, detained Casad, frisked him, and asked why he carried the weapons. Casad admitted that he was a felon, an admission that lead to his arrest and charges for unlawfully possessing the weapons. The trial court held that the police had no authority to detain Casad for a Terry stop and suppressed the evidence as the fruit of an unlawful seizure. We affirm.”

Elsewhere in the ruling was a reference to the trial court’s observation, “The statute does not and, under the Constitution, cannot prohibit the mere carrying of a firearm in public.”

Washington has been a hotbed of anti-gun activity for at least 15 years, the past ten of which have been marked by passage of two gun control initiatives, plus laws banning so-called “assault weapons” and “large-capacity magazines,” which are being challenged in court.

This initial hearing essentially established the battle lines for the lengthy session, which continues into April.

---

About Dave Workman

Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.

from https://ift.tt/mXwG5lp
via IFTTT

How California’s Leftist Agenda Spurs Systemic Failure & Individual Vigilance

Opinion

Adobe Stock 293708455

“When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change” ~ Wayne Dyer.

We’re seeing a predictable pattern with CA’s leftists and their “progressive,” woke agenda.

They have carefully set the stage for this drama we’re currently witnessing. We’re seeing ecumenical systemic failure- and anarchy that inevitably follows.

To say that the fire disaster in CA resulted from “failed leadership” is naive. It is not “bad planning” nor “poor oversight.”

It’s an abject failure- by choice and intent!

Anarchy, squalor, and lawlessness are consistent goals of the left because they promote the totalitarian agenda advanced by Marxists everywhere.

That will never change!

At the individual level:

The naive among us, who roll their eyes when told they have to be personally responsible for their own protection, need to look at current events honestly.

The assumption that “officials” will be available, sufficiently competent, and inclined to respond to your emergency in time to prevent harm befalling you is injudicious, presumptuous, and indeed foolish- as we see.

Fate makes “an exception” for no one!

Neo-Marxists had a taste of victory during the BHO and JRB Administrations.

They will predictably be anxious to continue to manufacture all kinds of harmful, destructive mayhem in an effort to thwart/damage/discredit the incoming DJT Administration, just as they so viciously did during DJT’s first term.

We’re seeing it already!

Many non-political innocents will fall victim in their wake.

Thus, individual awareness, alertness, and preparedness will continue to be critical for maintaining good health and preserving health and home.

We can (and should) be optimistic, but we can never relax!

/John

---

About John Farnam & Defense Training International, Inc

As a defensive weapons and tactics instructor, John Farnam will urge you, based on your beliefs, to make up your mind about what you would do when faced with an imminent lethal threat. You should, of course, also decide what preparations you should make in advance if any. Defense Training International wants to ensure that its students fully understand the physical, legal, psychological, and societal consequences of their actions or in-actions.

It is our duty to make you aware of certain unpleasant physical realities intrinsic to Planet Earth. Mr. Farnam is happy to be your counselor and advisor. Visit: www.defense-training.com

John Farnam

from https://ift.tt/ofM1rn7
via IFTTT

PA Bill Requires Gun Shows to Copy IDs and Provide Info to State

Polls show that new gun owners aren’t buying gun control rhetoric. IMG iStock-1182677191

Representative Amen Brown (D-10) has introduced a new bill (former HB 1563) in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania legislature requiring anyone attending a gun show to show an ID. The gun show promoter must make a copy of the ID and keep it for five years. If the bill passes, they also must turn over those records to the Office of the Attorney General, any county prosecutor, or municipal police department upon request. There are no limitations as to why they can request the data.

The Representative from Philadelphia claims that he introduced the bill because “ghost guns” are sold at gun shows. No 80% kits have been sold at any gun show in the Key Stone state since the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) passed their rule against unfinished frames. Even though there was an injunction against the rule, SCOTUS stayed the decision until they could rule on it in the Vanderstok case.

“Having seen firsthand how easy it is to purchase a ghost gun kit at a gun show, I recognize that we must take legislative action to keep these weapons out of the hands of criminals,” Brown wrote. “To accomplish this, I will be introducing legislation that will require all attendees at Pennsylvania gun shows to present valid identification prior to entering the show. A copy of every attendee’s identification would be made, and the operators of the gun show must maintain these copies for at least five years. Additionally, operators would be required to make these records available to the Office of Attorney General and any county prosecutor or municipal police department upon the request of the Pennsylvania Attorney General.”

Rep Brown has been at war with the gun industry for years. He was instrumental in convincing Eagle Arms to ban JSD Supply from its gun shows. His celebration was short-lived because JSD Supply’s owner, Jordan Vinroe, purchased the gun shows, changed the name to Eagle Shows, and returned his company to the shows. That enraged Brown. Since Vinroe owns almost all gun shows in the Commonwealth, this bill puts his shows into the crosshairs. Mr. Vinroe himself is a huge Second Amendment supporter who has battled anti-gunners in court.

Mr. Vinroe sees the bill as an attack on the civil rights of Pennsylvanians. He says that the bill is constitutionally dubious for several reasons. Vinroe says it infringes on an American’s First Amendment right because it deters the right to peaceful assembly. He also points out that it violates Fourth Amendment protections and a citizen’s right to privacy. He also points out that the bill probably violates the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. There will be ample grounds to challenge the bill if it becomes law.

“Former HB 1563 is a radical push to destroy your civil rights. This proposed amendment to Title 18 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes raises serious civil rights concerns by mandating the collection and retention of personal identification data from attendees of lawful gun shows,” Vinroe told AmmoLand News. “Such measures will infringe on First Amendment rights by deterring lawful assembly and participation in constitutionally protected activities. The requirement to scan and store attendees’ identification will violate Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, as it imposes an unwarranted intrusion into personal privacy. Additionally, the broad discretion granted to law enforcement to access these records raises Fourteenth Amendment concerns regarding equal protection and potential misuse of data, further threatening civil liberties.”

One of the groups that Vinroe has worked closely with in the past is Gun Owners of America (GOA), which has been sounding the alarm bells on the bill. Dr. Val Finnell is the Director of Pennsylvania for GOA. He states that the Gun Rights group downgraded Brown from an “F” to an “F-“ because of constitutional concerns over the bill.

“Amen Brown’s proposed legislation would create a registry of anyone who attends a gun show in Pennsylvania by requiring promoters to keep a copy of every attendee’s ID for five years,” Finnell said. “Brown will be downgraded from an ‘F’ to an ‘F- ‘by GOA because of his prime sponsorship of this Draconian bill.”

The good news for gun owners is that the bill is unlikely to pass, no matter what Brown wants. Even if it goes past the legislature and is signed into law, multiple lawsuits will be filed immediately.

---

About John Crump

Mr. Crump is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people from all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons, follow him on X at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.

from https://ift.tt/9Xvhj74
via IFTTT