11 GOP senators on board with new red flag law


Many have already written about the red flag laws that seem to be gaining momentum in Congress, including John Zmirak with his “red flag laws are not common sense security measures”. These are the 21st century Jim Crow attacks on the Constitution. Due to new developments in Congress, I wish to add a few personal thoughts.

The Senate Bill

A tentative deal on gun legislation was passed in the Senate last Sunday. At least 11 Republican senators support the bill’s framework, enough to achieve the votes needed to pass. They are as follows (I’ll get to the asterisks in a moment):

Corny (TX)

Tillis (NC) *

Collins (ME) *

Cassidy (LA) *

Graham (SC)

Toomey (PA) *

Blunt (MO)

Burr (NC) *

Portman, Ohio

Romney (UT)

McConnell (KY)*

No Cakewalk

The Senate bill — as is often the case — contains some interesting provisions. It is reasonable to include background checks for minors and to increase resources for mental health. Like a sardine baked inside a beautiful German chocolate cake, however, the senators slipped in a red flag law.

This provision takes the form of grants to states that implement their own red flag laws. This may be the lesser evil compared to a federally mandated approach, but it still poses problems.

First, six of those 11 Republican senators represent states with Democratic governors (indicated by asterisks). None of them are among the 19 states that already have red flag laws. So congratulations, Tillis, Collins, Cassidy, Toomey and Burr. You all share the prize for “crazy race of the year”. In the best-case scenario, you lose the governors’ veto power over Red Flag legislation. The worst-case scenario is that these Liberal Governors issue Executive Orders in the face of an “emergency”, carried out using the funds you handed over to them.

Second, even states with Republican governors can have a hard time turning down free money. Congress throws the carrot at them. I could easily imagine governors creatively finding ways to “redirect” some of these funds. By taking the money, however, they are committing their states to implement some semblance of Red Flag law. Thus the camel puts its nose under the tent.

If these senators follow through and make this bill law, it would be popcorn-worthy to sit back and watch their recently fired ex-spouses or ex-employees go after the Nazi guns! Oh wait, silly me; I forgot. It’s “Rules for you, not for me.” They would still have their weapons and security information.

The home version

On June 8, the House passed a bill called Protecting Our Children Act. Catchy name, but don’t get too excited. This does not include the tens of thousands of children who die from fentanyl crossing our southern border, the hundreds of children who are shot every night in our cities like Chicago, Baltimore and St. Louis, the thousands of our young girls and boys trafficked as sex slaves or the nearly one million of our precious babies who will be killed in the womb this year. The bill ignores “our children” who are part of these groups.

Title 1 of this bill would increase the purchase age for semi-automatic rifles from 18 to 21, even though an 18-year-old is responsible enough to dodge bullets and bombs in a fox hole for our freedom. Five members of the Republican House support this provision: Katko (NY), Malliotakis (NY), Salazar (FL), Smith (NJ) and Turner (OH).

Five other Republicans are on board for the entire bill…all RINOs. They are Fitzpatrick (PA), Gonzalez (OH), Jacobs (NY), Upton (MI) and of course Kinzinger (IL).

Young girls are having abortions without their parents’ consent, and the libs want us to think that 8-year-olds should be able to choose to get so-called ‘gender-affirming’ hormone treatment or even surgeries by them themselves. It’s almost as if they think young people can make responsible decisions. Not quite, though: it’s only permission to do what libraries think they should be doing. No indignation there!

The Dems’ “Deer in the Headlights” look

Section 230 is titled, “Prohibition of disposing of a firearm to a person intending to dispose of another illegal weapon.” So if someone has illegally intentions, you can’t sell them a gun. Maybe Pelosi was the one who, in the viral audio, called the radio show host, complaining that deer weren’t crossing the road at DEER CROSSING signs. Apparently the deer in his area ignored these signs and crossed the road wherever they wanted!

Newsflash: Bad criminals won’t pay more attention to gun laws than deer pay to DEER CROSSING signs. In the case of the deer, you could slow down or even equip your vehicle with heavy-duty bumpers. What can we do against armed criminals? Perhaps we should arm teachers and administrators and strengthen our police forces instead of starving them of funding.

Section 301 deals with “the requirement that all firearms be traceable”. Hmm. Why would they want to be able to trace all firearms? In a perfect world, that wouldn’t be a problem. But have you heard the term “street-wise”? Many of us have become “wise to government”, especially under this tyrannical administration. We’ve seen his true colors, and we know not to trust him.

better redeem

Section 604 deals with “buy back programs”. Australia passed buy-back legislation in 1996 following the Port Arthur massacre, resulting in the buy-back of over 650,000 semi-automatic rifles that had been made illegal. In 2002, a mentally ill student at Monash University shot and killed two other students with handguns. So Australia has done it again, demanding handguns be surrendered for buybacks.

Then in 2014 came the Sydney hostage crisis, in which a gunman held 18 people at gunpoint in a cafe and killed one of them. The country passed a new law, this time buying back 51,000 unregistered firearms (with an amnesty). Two mass shootings followed. The University of Melbourne produced a study concluding that these gun laws had little or no effectiveness in reducing homicides.

The House Red Flag Bill

The next day, the House passed its own Red Flag bill that would authorize the confiscation of firearms from people deemed an “extreme risk”. Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) said, “The only question that matters is who constitutes a dangerous person, who decides and why.”

These Red Flag laws allow almost anyone to get the courts to order the removal of firearms from individuals. An ex-wife/husband, an ex-boyfriend/girlfriend, a business partner who cheated on you, an employer who fired you or just didn’t give you a vacation when you wanted, the teacher who flunked, the guy who sold you that used car that had the transmission problem, or heck, even the owner of the burger joint that made your fries too greasy. There is no end to this madness!

As they get closer and closer to our guns, I think there will be more and more Americans saying, “Go ahead, make my day.” I can’t wait for that to happen. No one wants to have to take a stand against their own government. But if we have to? Then we will have to do it.

Nolan Lewallen is a retired major airline pilot and lives near Stephenville, Texas with his wife, Kim. Nolan’s two greatest passions are the Bible and politics. His latest book, Integrating Church and State: How We’re Turning “In God We Trust” from Motto to Realitycombines the two.

Source link


Comments are closed.