More on Background Checks by Tom Reynolds
SCOPE has been writing about the background checks on ammo and the new fees. There is so much going on behind the scenes that it is difficult to keep current with the latest information. However, a bit of background is in order.
Passed as part of the SAFE Act, the ammo background check mandate was delayed for years because the state police could not implement it.
If the new background checks are implemented on September 13th, as scheduled, New York will be the second state (behind California) to require ammunition background checks.
Per Bearing Arms web site, California’s ammunition background check requirement, has led to tens of thousands of false denials for legal gun owners.
California’s law is the subject of a federal lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez must rule whether the law is an infringement on Second Amendment rights.
Although not identical to California, NY’s law is also likely to face a lawsuit after the background checks actually start taking place. Once the state police are running checks on every purchase of a box of ammunition, people will have ‘standing’ to sue.
A letter protesting this state action has been sent to Kathy Hochul from some of New York’s Republican congressional delegation*. It is signed by Congresspersons Claudia Tenney, Elise Stefanik, Nick Langworthy and Brandon Williams.
In addition, a resolution condemning the CCIA has been introduced in the House by NY congresswomen Elise Stefanik and Claudia Tenney as well as seven others from other states**.
These efforts raise attention to the issue but Hochul isn’t big on listening to Republicans from her state...or any state…or listening to the Supreme Court.
One of the strategies of the left, as to gun control, seems to be to introduce as much legislation in as many places as they possibly can. Introducing ammo background checks in multiple states is only one example. This costs the gun grabbers nothing as they are on the taxpayers’ dime and are in blue states where there is not much chance that they will be defeated at the ballot box or impeached. Citizens challenging these laws costs the citizens hundreds of thousands of dollars to get through the appeals system. Basically, NY State (and California and Illinois, etc.) want to bankrupt their opponents into silence. So, they are not only going after the 2nd Amendment but also your 1st Amendment right of Free Speech.
The best answer to this is to spread the word on how our 2A rights are being threatened in order to motivate 2A and 1A defenders to go to the ballot box before they lose their rights, completely.
*The link to the letter to Hochul follows:
51119baa-96a9-4b3c-a1c5-4c7b4934dbe5.pdf (constantcontact.com)
**The important part of the House Resolution follows:
Whereas there have now been multiple New Yorkers suing the State of New York over the CCIA to protect their constitutional rights: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that—
(1) New York State’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act violates the rights of New Yorkers under the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and is unconstitutional;
(2) the courts should immediately strike down the Concealed Carry Improvement Act as unconstitutional; and
(3) all States should pass legislation supporting Second Amendment rights instead of trying to restrict or undermine Americans’ constitutional rights.
