Democrats have pushed yet another troubling gun control bill through the House Judiciary committee, setting it up for a floor vote. The bill is H.R.8361 – Preventing Suicide Through Voluntary Firearm Purchase Delay Act.

This proposed law would create a new NICS database of people prohibited from obtaining firearms. Not criminals, or those adjudicated mentally ill; it’s to be a database of those stupid enough to voluntarily surrender their 2A rights. OK, perhaps those crazy enough to beg Daddy Government to protect them from themselves should not have guns. But you won’t see me “volunteering” for this. More on that point in a moment.

First off, the bill’s name — Voluntary Firearm Purchase Delay — is an outright lie.

When an FFL makes the NICS call, and the feds find your name on this list, the dealer is not told to delay the purchase. There’s no waiting period. It’s an outright denial just as if you were a convicted felon; the dealer is to be told that it would be unlawful to transfer a gun to you. Which is probably exactly what the dealer is going to assume (and might even call the cops on you).

And it would be unlawful, because this bill amends 18 U.S. Code § 922(d) to add voluntary idiots to the list of prohibited persons.

Personally, if anyone had asked for my input — and persuaded me that any such law was necessary (ha!) — I’d have gone a different route: Instead of adding suckers to the prohibited list and issuing denials, the dealer would simply be told that the would-be buyer requested that he not be allowed to buy a gun. Then it would be up to the FFL to decide, with specific language exempting them from any liability for not violating the buyer’s 2A rights.

The next issue is how one would get into that database. There are two ways.

First, fools can present a gov-issued photo ID in person (“where” isn’t explained), and give up their rights.

Secondly, someone can email a copy of a driver license along with a letter from a mental health professional that includes the “name and license number of the professional and the name and date of birth of the individual.”

Maybe I’ve got a couple of ‘noids showing, but…

Who has a copy of your driver license? Did the bank make a copy when you opened your account? Did some online or brick store make a copy when you bought an age restricted product? Or maybe an employer (or potential employer) wanted a copy to comply with E-Verify. I’ve done all of the above.

Just imagine someone with a copy and a grudge… maybe against you, maybe the 2A in general. They’ve got your name and date of birth. But that darned mental health pro’s name and license number…

I did one single web search, taking less than 30 seconds, that gave me the name, address, and license number of a random clinical psychologist. Problem solved. Interesting what you can find online; it’s probably good that I try to be an honorable person.

Another interesting point: When you — or some less than honorable scumbag — requests that you become a prohibited person, you/him can include up to five email addresses to be notified if you do attempt to buy a gun, or try to get off the naughty list. Maybe even “registry@atf.gov.”

Getting off said naughty list sounds simple enough. You just make the request — with the same documentation that got you on it — and the feds are supposed to remove you.

Three weeks after they acknowledge receiving your request. Maybe that is the “delay” they meant.

Or you can look up a mental health pro as above, and fake the letter. That’s supposedly going to get you out of the database in 24 hours. Lemme bookmark that psychologist I found…

Frankly the only good not as horrible part of this is that database victims are only prohibited persons under 18 U.S. Code § 922(d), not section (g). So you won’t instantly make yourself (or someone else) a criminal simply for currently possessing firearms. Unless they tack on an amendment.

Now for the bad news. I think this garbage has a fair chance of passing. H.R.8361 had two original sponsors; one a rabid Dim-wit as you should have expected, and one Repugnantcan. As you also you should have expected. Reps tend to like infringements for “law ‘n order” and this is only “voluntary.” If the Dims can move this to the floor and force a vote this session, before the new Rep bare majority takes over, it’ll go to the Senate, where…

“law ‘n order” and this is only “voluntary.” I think they’ll get the votes.

And then what other rights will they look at “voluntarily” criminalizing?

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Gab Pay link (More Tip Jar Options)