Over the past few decades the federal government has done a great disservice to then second amendment. Their constant interference has led to slow restrictions on our gun rights, the kind which are resulting in some Americans who should be allowed to own a gun from never getting the weapon they need to save their life.
Truly all gun laws should be managed by the state as a true republic would allow for these kinds of legislative measures.
Unfortunately we’ve moved so far away from the ideals of the founding fathers that doesn’t seem like it’s ever going to happen.
However some states no the responsibility to protect their citizens’ gun rights rests solely with them. And this is why Ariozna is passing laws now to help nullify possible laws passed in the future.
A bill to establish an interstate compact restricting member states from adopting gun transfer requirements tougher than existing federal law is headed to the governor.
The measure to create the Uniform Firearms Transfer Compact to help block future laws with relation to the transfer of guns – such as mandates for background checks on private gun sales – passed the House 35-24 in March and the Senate 18-11 last week. The Compact would trump events such as a voter referendum in member states to enact universal background checks.
Backers see it as an ace in the hole against former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown group supporting ballot-driven background check expansions in a number of states – including neighboring Nevada.
“It’s problematic, it’s troublesome, that a person with lots of cash in their pockets could come into Arizona, put a referendum on the ballot and have the money to really market that referendum to the point where it might be passed, where folks who are not paying a great deal of attention might help pass it,” said bill sponsor, Rep. Bob Thorpe, R-Flagstaff.
Thorpe’s measure, HB 2524, would enact the compact and prohibit any member states from creating or imposing any fees, taxes, penalties, mandates or regulations, or any civil or criminal liabilities, additional to already existing federal laws with relation to the transfer of firearms.
Member states would be locked in for 10 years but could withdraw upon unanimous consent of all states in the compact.
Notably, some of the most vocal opposition to the measure has come from Bloomberg-backed groups.
Last year the House passed a similar measure that was derailed through the work of the Dorn Policy Group, paid for by Everytown, who successfully lobbied Senate leadership to stall the legislation until time ran out in the session.
The same groups are urging Gov. Doug Ducey, a Republican, to veto the more successful rebooted proposal this time around.
“The legislature has failed to do exactly what they are hired to do: put the safety of our communities first and stand up for their constituents,” said Geneva Haber, with Mom’s Demand Action in Arizona, in a statement. “Instead, the Arizona legislature bowed to the gun lobby and passed a bill that would undermine the rights of their own constituents – and even themselves. House Bill 2524 would force Arizona to be at the will of other states and tie the hands of elected officials when it comes to passing any laws related to the sale or transfer of guns.”
The bill was backed by a myriad of gun rights groups including the National Rifle Association and Arizona Citizens Defense League.
The Arizona proposal is perplexing to some Second Amendment scholars.
“If passed, this legislation could effectively tie lawmakers’ and voters’ hands on gun control. Indeed, that appears to be its sole purpose,” Adam Winkler, a professor of constitutional law at UCLA, explained to Guns.com previously. “There is no serious political push for expanded background checks in Arizona today, so this law is geared toward preventing such law from being enacted by future legislatures or ballot measures.”
Ducey, who has not weighed in on the proposal before him, has 10 days to sign the bill into law, veto it or do nothing and allow it to become law without his signature. The Legislature can override the governor’s veto with a 2/3 vote, which could prove problematic considering the narrow House margin of approval earlier this year.
In one sense it’s encouraging to see a state straighten up and refuse to be bullied by the federal government, especially when it comes to the second amendment. On the other hand the second amendment flatly prohibits all antigun laws so the fact they exist in the first place is quite disheartening.
Again, it’s refreshing to see these legislators have the foresight to do what they can now to prevent the federal government from meddling with out sacred gun rights.
Do you think the law will be passed? Tell us in the comments below.