One way the regulatory state can deprive Americans of their constitutional rights is to whittle away at them piecemeal by promulgating regulations that serve a fictitious political end. This is at the expense of the constitutional limits on power intended to protect individual liberties. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), recently adopted a rule to require a law-abiding gun owner to register and pay transfer taxes for pistol braces.
ATF made a dramatic change to the definition of “rifle” as it included any firearm that was “designed, redesigned, manufactured or remade and intended to be fired from the shoulder.” (See ATF Final Rules.) ATF will be able to determine whether firearms are subject to the National Firearms Act’s registration, reporting, transfer, and tax requirements on a case-by-case basis. The rule instantly makes gun owners technical felons for failing to register.
Alex Bosco invents the pistol brace in 2012. The mount attaches to the firearm’s rear end and anchors it in the arm. The brace allows the gun owner to shoot with one hand. Bosco designed the pistol brace to enable disabled veterans to fire an AR-15 pistol. The ATF had previously determined that pistol braces weren’t the same as shoulder stock. Shoulder stocks are tightly regulated.
ATF has now ruled that any firearm owner with a pistol brace (indicative of a violation of the unconstitutional central question doctrine) must identify themselves on the national firearms registry and transfer record, get approval from the Attorney General before transferring firearms to anyone else and pay transfer taxes.
This is another attack on the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment guarantees the right of every person to keep and bear arms. This right is one of the unalienable human rights, pre-existing government, and explicitly protected by the Constitution. Over the past several decades, Democrat leaders and now the ATF have tirelessly worked to undermine the Second Amendment. Every mass shooting is followed by a call from the President and Democrat leaders for a ban on firearms. They also label them with the politically charged term “assault weapon” which always includes the AR-15, the country’s most commonly used self-defense weapon.
These efforts are rooted in a fundamental rejection and attempt to alter the supreme law by any means other than through the Article V Amendment process required by the Constitution. These efforts are dishonest, reprehensible attempts to bypass the Constitution and infringe on the rights of the citizens.
The real reason for violent crime is not the willingness of some people to break the law. Therefore, it is essential to arrest, prosecute and convict everyone who is guilty of violent crimes with reliable assurance. Soros-backed prosecutors in America, with the full support of Democrat Party leaders and other Democrats, follow an anti-incarceration agenda, nihilistic, anarchistic agenda. This results in violence that they mistakenly attribute to the gun, rather than to any individual malefactor.
The Constitution requires that everyone be presumed innocent until they are convicted. As the Red Flag laws make it clear, we cannot assume that someone will commit a crime in the future. This is how communist countries enforce the law. This makes the person a victim of the arbitrary administration of law rather than the orderly administration. In order to be charged and arrested, probable cause must be established that the defendant is committing a criminal act.
Undeterred, Democrat leaders continue to groupthink and categorize gun owners as potential criminals based on their ability to commit crimes. However, regardless of whether or not we have guns, all people possess the ability to commit crimes. There are many ways to commit a crime: cars, knives, kitchen knives, and ropes. None of these are by their very nature instruments of criminality unless they are directed by someone. Therefore, we demand evidence of criminal intent. Firearms are not necessarily criminal. When used lawfully, firearms can be used as self-defense tools. They also protect innocent people from criminals who might threaten their lives. As with all potential violence instruments, there is a presumption of innocence. A firearm, however, is more so because the Bill of Rights recognizes the right to possess and use it for self-defense.
If Democrat leaders were honest, which they aren’t, they would admit that they can’t deny Second Amendment rights by committing small acts of usurpation. They would not be interested in enacting regulations to reduce gun rights but instead, they would seek to amend the Constitution. After deliberating the merits of this matter, the public would conclude that the Second Amendment protects individual Americans’ right to defend themselves. This will ensure that we are all free from the tyrannical perpetrators of violence.
The public is so convinced that self-defense is a personal right, that Democrat leaders chose to erode that right through incremental regulatory actions. In George Washington’s farewell address, he spoke out about the dangers of granting unconstitutional authority for usurpation to anyone who wants to pursue “good” ends. Washington stated: “If the People believe that the distribution or modification to the Constitutional powers is in any particular wrong,” an amendment should be made in the manner the Constitution specifies. However, we must not change the Constitution by usurpation. While it may in one case be an instrument of good, this is the usual weapon that destroys free governments.
