SB 1065 Allows delays of firearm purchases

SB 1065 VOTE:NO – Died in Committee

Posted on Track their vote

This bill authorizes transfer of firearm by gun dealer or private party after 14 days (an additional delay of 11 days over current law) if Department of State Police is unable to determine whether recipient is qualified to receive firearm, as long as gun dealer or transferor does not know or have reason to believe recipient is disqualified from completing transfer. Specifies requirements for course or class taken to demonstrate competence with handgun for person applying for concealed handgun license or renewing concealed handgun license. Modifies definitions relating to relationship status that pertain to types of court orders and misdemeanor convictions that cause person to be prohibited from possessing firearms.

Personal Choice and Responsibility
This bill contains a couple of good things like mandatory reporting between State Police and US Attorneys' offices, and providing protections afforded those with concealed handgun licenses to honorably retired parole and probation officers, but we cannot support this bill with the restrictions on citizens' ability to keep and bear arms which are outlined below.

Limited Government
When government restricts or outright denies a right enumerated in the bill of rights of the United States Constitution, that is the pinnacle of government transgression which cries out for limitation. Gun owners and dealers agreed to the 3-day possible delay when the National Instant Check System came on line in the 1990's, in exchange for abolition of 'waiting periods.' Even a 3-day denial of a law abiding citizen's rights is unconstitutional but they essentially agreed to not push it as a compromise. But a compromise is not an invitation to government to transgress further. Those putting this measure forward have produced no supporting evidence that another 11 days of delay would make any difference to any crime rate. It could cost an innocent person their life however, if they are facing a threat and need to be able to defend themselves. This is a restriction on citizens' right to keep arms which has no supporting evidence or cause. On the additions to training requirements for obtaining or renewing a concealed handgun license, again, those putting this forward have produced no evidence that competence of concealed carriers has ever been an issue, anywhere, and they can't because it has not. Concealed carriers have been shown to have arrest and conviction records which are lower than the average for police officers, and when they do have to draw their firearm they have also shown judgment and in the rare cases where it is necessary, marksmanship which also rivals police. There is no justifiable reason to add these restrictions on citizens' right to bear arms.

No tags for this post.

Comments are closed.