IFC was immediately concerned to learn the three House Representatives (Hinson, Miller-Meeks, and Feenstra) that ran on pro-2A platforms had voted for the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) while it contained a specific “Red Flag” component.  Rather than having a knee-jerk reaction, we reached out to Representative Ashely Hinson’s office for clarity and context.


I could go into a story a mile long about procedural technicalities, but the short version is this…  Representative Ashely Hinson has assured IFC that the vote was necessary to push things along, and they were given assurances that the “Red Flag” components would be removed from the final version of the bill.

Sometimes the minority party cannot remove objectionable language on their own.  It was mentioned a commitment was given to remove the “Red Flag” language.  This particular “Yes” vote allowed the bill to move in the process without labeling supporters as “anti-troop” members of congress.  Apparently, the ranking Republican on the House Armed Services Committee must have received assurances the “Red Flag” components will be removed before final passage of the bill is offered.

This is the most important part…  I spoke directly with her chief of staff moments ago, and Representative Hinson WILL NOT support a version of this bill that contains “Red Flag” language.  She has taken a public stance on this and we are communicating that out to the masses.  It is always important to seek the context of any action.  See a captured image from her social media page confirming this:

Thank you to Representative Ashely Hinson and her staff for helping us understand this issue with clarity quickly.  I have not heard from Representatives Miller-Meeks or Feenstra at the time of publishing this post.  IFC will continue to monitor this situation and make known any problems we see.

In Liberty,

Michael Ware
IFC Chairman