Often when we see a bill being argued we analyze the bill and discuss how it is intended to be used and how it is likely to be used. WHen things happen that the bills originators did not intend we call that “The Law of Unintended Consequences.”

My favorite example of this was G.W. Bush’s “No Child Left Behind” program. My wife is a teacher. As she explained it to me, the program meant that they could no longer fail a student, “hold back” as they now call it. Every child, no matter how far behind, no matter how many sigmas below mean they might be had to be passed to the next grade.

This was the start of the great push to get everybody through high school. It didn’t matter if the student had earned a high school degree, they were going to graduate.

The harm this did to so many children is propagating through out our current society. Kids that couldn’t read, couldn’t do math, that were ignorant of just about all of history are no adults that are functionally illiterate, incapable of adding two numbers and getting the same answer twice in a row, and are pontificating on subjects where they don’t know what happened 10 years ago much less 100 or 500 years ago.

Ignorant by design.

And all because the teachers unions wanted G.W. Bush’s program to fail. This was my introduction to hating teachers unions. Prior to this, it was only a mild dislike.

In 1993, in response to the attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan, by a crazy person, the gun grabbers (Chuck Schumer) got the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 passed and signed into law. This established the NICS check program.

Under the Brady Act an FFL was required to run a background check prior to transferring a firearm.

5 business days (meaning days on which State offices are open) have elapsed from the date the transferor furnished notice of the contents of the statement to the chief law enforcement officer, during which period the transferor has not received information from the chief law enforcement officer that receipt or possession of the handgun by the transferee would be in violation of Federal, State, or local law; or

This is language, in the “Interim Provision” is there to light a fire under government bureaucrats. The FFL had one day to file for the background check with the chief law enforcement officer. The chief LEO had 5 days to get a response back to the FFL or the transfer could proceed.

The bill gave the Attorney General 6 months to identify the system they were going to build and a total of 60 months from time of passage to have a NICS system in place. This is because everybody on the gun grabber side KNEW that it would take longer than five days to do the checks that they wanted done.

The actual thought by the infringers was that the NICS system would stop people from buying firearms. It didn’t.

Oh, notice the language “Handgun”. It quickly morphed in include all firearms that are not also NFA items.

There is more language in the bill to allow the states to do their own thing as long as they did the check. And it still required the ability for the FFL to proceed if they had no response within those 5 days.

But now we are seeing a spat of bills showing up that are designed to circumvent this fail safe. The infringers argue that the default should be to NOT transfer the firearm. Just to make sure no bad person gets a gun from an FFL.

But we know what will actually happen. We have the proof already. NFA transfers and approvals take months if not years to be approved. And paperwork gets sent back for minor errors that require the application to be resubmitted.

Every location that had a permit to purchase scheme in place started slow walking applications when the panic began. South Carolina is experience huge backlogs in permits for CCWs.

If we let them add “we were busy” as a reason to delay a transfer you can darn well bet that we are going to see staffing reduced in those places. No need to be efficient or rapid. So what if it takes 6 months to approve a firearm transfer. They should just be happy they are allowed to purchase a firearm at all.

And it would not surprise me if we started to see lubricant being presented to government officials to fast track applications.

Measure 114 out of Oregon already does this. They changed a “no response” to be “wait until we allow you to proceed”. This isn’t an unintended consequence. This is intentional.

Post Bruen the states that are anti-freedom are doing their best to stop people from exercising their right to keep and bear arms.

Watch for more of this “delays should not proceed” legislation in the near future.

Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act

Spread the love

By awa

2 thoughts on “Intended Consequences”
  1. And just look how wonderful “handgun violence “ has withered away to nothing since 1993…..ya ok..

  2. New Mexico has said “Hold My Tequila, Watch This”
    YES ! New Mexico Democrats ARE coming for your GUNS
    via NMSSA – (https://mailchi.mp/sureresource/yes-they-are-coming-for-your-guns?e=1416dd6fd3)

    We have always known anti-gun politicians in New Mexico wanted to take away our firearms, that has been their goal all along with every bill introduced and law passed, but today they took a giant step forward. In HB101, which was filed today by Representative Andrea Romero, if you own a semi-automatic rifle you would have to destroy it or surrender it to the state by July 1 of this year or you would be committing a felony. The bill also makes it a felony to own a magazine that holds more than 9 rounds. Their agenda is explicit, they want to take away your firearms. If this seems like hyperbole, please take the time to read the text of the bill linked in this email. We encourage everyone to take the time now to contact your state representative and senator. Tell them you are opposed to HB9, HB50, HB72 and HB101.

    https://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/23%20Regular/bills/house/HB0101.html
    56th legislature – STATE OF NEW MEXICO – first session, 2023
    INTRODUCED BY
    Andrea Romero
    AN ACT
    HOUSE BILL 101

    56th legislature – STATE OF NEW MEXICO – first session, 2023

    INTRODUCED BY

    Andrea Romero

    AN ACT

    RELATING TO FIREARMS; PROHIBITING LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINES; PROHIBITING ASSAULT WEAPONS; PROVIDING PENALTIES.

    BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO:

    SECTION 1. A new section of Chapter 30, Article 7 NMSA 1978 is enacted to read:

    “[NEW MATERIAL] RESTRICTIONS ON LARGE-CAPACITY MAGAZINES.–

    A. A person shall not possess, manufacture, purchase, sell or transfer any large-capacity ammunition feeding device regardless of whether the device is attached to a firearm. This section shall not apply to magazines originally designed to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition that have been modified to accept no more than ten rounds and that are not capable of being readily restored to a capacity of more than ten rounds.

    B. For the purposes of this section, “large-capacity ammunition feeding device” means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition. “Large-capacity ammunition feeding device” shall not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

    C. Any person who may not lawfully possess a large-capacity magazine commencing July 1, 2023 shall, prior to July 1, 2023:

    (1) remove the large-capacity magazine from the state;

    (2) sell the large-capacity magazine to a licensed firearms dealer; or

    (3) surrender the large-capacity magazine to a law enforcement agency for destruction.

    D. Any person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a fourth degree felony.”

    SECTION 2. A new section of Chapter 30, Article 7 NMSA 1978 is enacted to read:

    “[NEW MATERIAL] RESTRICTIONS ON ASSAULT WEAPONS.–

    A. As used in this section:

    (1) “assault weapon” means any:

    (a) semi-automatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has one or more of the following: 1) a pistol grip or thumbhole stock; 2) any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; 3) a folding or telescoping stock; or 4) a shroud attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely encircles the barrel, allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the non-trigger hand without being burned, but excluding a slide that encloses the barrel;

    (b) semi-automatic pistol or any semi-automatic, centerfire or rimfire rifle with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition;

    (c) semi-automatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has one or more of the following: 1) any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; 2) a folding, telescoping or thumbhole stock; 3) a shroud attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely encircles the barrel, allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the non-trigger hand without being burned, but excluding a slide that encloses the barrel; or 4) the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at any location outside of the pistol grip;

    (d) semi-automatic shotgun that has one or more of the following: 1) a pistol grip or thumbhole stock; 2) any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; 3) a folding or telescoping stock; 4) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of five rounds; or 5) an ability to accept a detachable magazine;

    (e) shotgun with a revolving cylinder; or

    (f) conversion kit, part or combination of parts from which an assault weapon can be assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person; and

    (2) “assault weapon” does not include any firearm that has been made permanently inoperable.

    B. A person shall not manufacture, import, possess, purchase, sell or transfer any assault weapon.

    C. Subsection B of this section shall not apply to:

    (1) any government officer, agent or employee, a member of the armed forces of the United States or a peace officer to the extent that such person is otherwise authorized to acquire or possess an assault weapon and does so while acting within the scope of that person’s duties;

    (2) the manufacture of an assault weapon by a firearms manufacturer for the purpose of sale to any branch of the armed forces of the United States or to a law enforcement agency in the state for use by that agency or its employees; provided that the manufacturer is properly licensed under federal, state and local laws; or

    (3) the sale or transfer of an assault weapon by a dealer that is properly licensed under federal, state and local laws to any branch of the armed forces of the United States or to a law enforcement agency in the state for use by that agency or its employees for law enforcement purposes.

    D. Any person who may not lawfully possess an assault weapon commencing July 1, 2023 shall, prior to July 1, 2023:

    (1) remove the assault weapon from the state;

    (2) render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or

    (3) surrender the assault weapon to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction.

    E. Any person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a fourth degree felony.”

    felony.”

    Any person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a fourth degree felony.”

    felony.”

Login or register to comment.