A letter from Julie Stringer caught my attention with its inaccuracies. She talks about keeping track of gun owners.
I'm not going to berate her for the opinion she has stated. I want to provide her with an accurate picture on this subjectLet's start with the Brady Bill; it now has the instant check for firearm purchases. The instant check sounds reasonable except it's nothing but a request for government permission to exercise a constitutionally protected liberty that according to the Second Amendment "shall not be infringed."
Thankfully we haven't come to the point of asking permission to give a speech, write an editorial or deliver a sermon, but that is the equivalent of the Brady law's permitting system regarding the Second Amendment.
Regarding the First Amendment, some say we cannot shout "Fire" in a crowded theater. True, but we don't issue muzzles upon entering the theater. We only punish those who abuse the liberty. So it should be in the case of the Second Amendment as well.
Ohio legislators have learned the Brady Bill is instant gun-owner registration. The names and SSNs are coded to indicate a gun owner in the federal database. None of these people are criminals. So why are their names being stored?
The McClure-Volker Act of 1986 (the Firearm Owners' Protection Act) states it is illegal for the federal government to keep a database of gun owners, yet they continue to do so.
The Supreme Court has twice ruled that Congress does not have the authority to enact gun control. The congressional claim of authority has been based on the commerce clause of Article One-Section 8. The Supreme Court has ruled that there is no commerce involved in gun control; thus the 10th Amendment requires declaring Congress' efforts at gun control unconstitutional.
Waiting periods are a prior restraint on the exercise of a protected right. The Supreme Court has ruled (Near vs. Minnesota) that government officials should only punish the abuse of a right and not place prior restraints on the exercise of the right.