Electric_Rooster
Plinker
In regard to HR 127 introduced by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas, as a legal and law-abiding constituent of Indiana, I not only urge, but demand that you say NO, in its entirety and to all parts of this blatant disregard and violation of mine and every Americans second amendment rights put forth in the Constitution of the United States of America. Not one of these so called “gun control” measures will actually do anything to prevent or curb the “gun violence” in America, as criminals who use guns to commit a crime do not follow the laws we already have, hence the reason they are criminals to begin with.
Under the proposed firearm registration system, requiring the make, model & serial number, the identity of the owner, where the firearm is or will be stored, and making this information available through a database available to all law enforcement, all branches of the United States Armed Forces, all state and local governments, and the general public, is not only an invasion of my privacy but leaves me open to harassment for being a gun owner. It could also lead to the possibility of my family and I being the target of criminals because my name, address and what firearms I own are accessible to criminals as well as the general public. Last but not in the bit least it could and very well may lead to the possibility of a future gun confiscation. As we have seen throughout history the first step in gun confiscation is through registration, i.e., the firearm confiscation by local law enforcement and National Guard in 2005 in New Orleans during the Katrina disaster, The Nazi regime, Australia’s gun “buy back” program, etc.
Mandatory psychological evaluations of the gun owner, family and anyone in the household, for the ownership and/or purchase of a firearm is a preposterous suggestion since psychological evaluations are largely based on the opinions and impressions of those doing the evaluations, it is impossible to ensure that someone’s political (or other) biases would not influence the results of the evaluation. Thus, these evaluations could be used, even unintentionally, to deny citizens access to a right based on political affiliation, race, demeanor, etc.
It is also clear that the mandatory psychological exam, $800 license fee, training, and firearm insurance is aimed directly at making it prohibitive for those of less financial means to exercise their fundamental right of gun ownership and self-protection assuring that only the well off and elite would be able to do so.
And finally, in this bill, we are once again seeing a politician making a demand to regulate so called “high capacity” magazines, which would make it illegal to own a magazine that has a capacity of more than 10 rounds. As anyone that has purchased a firearm can attest to, depending on the specific firearm, they may come with a 15-round standard magazine for a full size or compact handgun and a 30-round magazine for specific models of rifle. It also has not been established tin any manner that a magazine size restriction will do anything to lessen gun violence during a crime.
Thank you for your time and consideration of my opinion regarding this matter.
Under the proposed firearm registration system, requiring the make, model & serial number, the identity of the owner, where the firearm is or will be stored, and making this information available through a database available to all law enforcement, all branches of the United States Armed Forces, all state and local governments, and the general public, is not only an invasion of my privacy but leaves me open to harassment for being a gun owner. It could also lead to the possibility of my family and I being the target of criminals because my name, address and what firearms I own are accessible to criminals as well as the general public. Last but not in the bit least it could and very well may lead to the possibility of a future gun confiscation. As we have seen throughout history the first step in gun confiscation is through registration, i.e., the firearm confiscation by local law enforcement and National Guard in 2005 in New Orleans during the Katrina disaster, The Nazi regime, Australia’s gun “buy back” program, etc.
Mandatory psychological evaluations of the gun owner, family and anyone in the household, for the ownership and/or purchase of a firearm is a preposterous suggestion since psychological evaluations are largely based on the opinions and impressions of those doing the evaluations, it is impossible to ensure that someone’s political (or other) biases would not influence the results of the evaluation. Thus, these evaluations could be used, even unintentionally, to deny citizens access to a right based on political affiliation, race, demeanor, etc.
It is also clear that the mandatory psychological exam, $800 license fee, training, and firearm insurance is aimed directly at making it prohibitive for those of less financial means to exercise their fundamental right of gun ownership and self-protection assuring that only the well off and elite would be able to do so.
And finally, in this bill, we are once again seeing a politician making a demand to regulate so called “high capacity” magazines, which would make it illegal to own a magazine that has a capacity of more than 10 rounds. As anyone that has purchased a firearm can attest to, depending on the specific firearm, they may come with a 15-round standard magazine for a full size or compact handgun and a 30-round magazine for specific models of rifle. It also has not been established tin any manner that a magazine size restriction will do anything to lessen gun violence during a crime.
Thank you for your time and consideration of my opinion regarding this matter.
