The Gadsden Flag Plate is important in Iowa for two simple reasons. 1, Iowans want it. 2, As designed it’ll fund vital local 2A programs.
HF2639 – sailed through the Iowa House with a great deal of enthusiasm. Even during floor debate, Democrats came to offer the rich history of the “join us” mantra the Gadsden flag represented in the formation and keeping of this fledgling nation.
What we want and need:
A Gadsden plate, much like the other dozen+ in America that adequately relays over to an oppressive government, “DON’T TREAD ON ME”
The funding stream should be left as the original content and context and can be used for 2A education, scholarships, grants, information, action, etc.
What we DO NOT want and need:
A change to a sticker away from the full plate design is silly. Nobody wants that. Nobody will buy that. The LSA predicted 3000+ plates in circulation in just the first year. IFC hears a ton of enthusiasm for this plate. Why? Because we explained the bill content and it goes to the heart of the matter, not something else.
Those who value the historical symbolism of “Don’t Tread On Me” are unlikely to be eager to see their $50 upcharge go to some ill-defined GOVERNMENT program. Not only did the Iowa House pass this bill, but the public has been told all along what the funding would do and how it would be used. They’re clamoring to spend the money on them. Let them do it.
Additional thoughts:
Is this a new concept? No, over a dozen other states do this.
Who funds these plates? THE BUYER of the plate/tags. No taxpayer funds are being sent anywhere.
Are there plates the state has that are no longer even valid? Yes. If the argument is there isn’t room in the county courthouse, then take down one of the university plates THAT NO LONGER EXISTS and tack up the Gadsden plate – IFC will supply the nails.
Are there plates without the county listed on the bottom? YES, lots of them.
Does Iowa have several plates? No, not compared to other states. I first thought we did, but when researching I found most states have HUNDREDS of options (over 500 options in Texas alone). You can even design your own individual plates in some states.
IFC is working with Sen. Joni Ernst to protect FFL holders! 💪 On this week’s #2A4IA Warrior Wednesday, we explain what’s happening and what needs to be done to protect our 2A industry.
#2ADAY IFC interviews Cody Hinton, from Brownells, about National 2A Day! Join us on 2A Day, February 22, 2024, to Celebrate. Advocate. Join®. Enjoy freedom with a free firearm rental or limited free ammo at select ranges. Plus, a portion of sales supports pro-2A organizations ALL THIS WEEK. Embrace your rights!
If you buy from Brownells.com this week a portion of those profits go to IFC, GOA, and SAF!
Christopher Gadsden was a South Carolina delegate to the Continental Congress and it is thought he designed the flag around 1775. Gadsden likely drew on the idea Ben Franklin had put forth in the original 13 colonies with his timber rattlesnake flag as a symbol of unity 20 years earlier. Franklin knew his “Join or Die” mantra was the pure and simple truth. If the states hadn’t banded together, they would have been crushed. I’ve read many people believe this flag was the official symbol of the American Revolution, and I’d agree something as simple as “Don’t Tread On Me” was and is a simple and apt description of what not to do to any American. Ever.
Over the years the Gadsden flag has come to be a universal symbol of opposition to government overreach. And I believe I can posit to anyone anywhere that our government on every level has become intrusive – Federal, State, County, City, and Local. You can’t swing a dead cat without hitting some silly regulation that was poorly conceived, doesn’t do what was intended when enacted or authored, and ultimately hurts, rather than helps, the individual American Citizens. Iowa House File 2424 (HF2424) finally brings us this coveted plate.
As of the time of this blog, many other states have Gadsden flag license plate options. Iowa is leading the nation as one of the best 2A states – a tremendous change over the last 15 years. But, we don’t advertise it. I think we should. If Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Kansas, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia have these options, why doesn’t Iowa?
The featured image you see is a rendition the DOT offered after liaising with Senate President, Amy Sinclair in the previous year. We love it! After speaking with the Senator, she essentially said, “Run with it!” She very much wanted to see this become reality, as do we. Iowa House Public Safety Chair, Phil Thompson was enthusiastic to run the bill, and Representative Jeff Shipley and Representative Bil Gustoff walked it through the committee process.
IFC testimony on “ghost guns” was a wild ride this week. Here is what you need to know about HF488…
IFC strongly opposes this bill, which is unwarranted, unwise, and most certainly unconstitutional.
This bill seeks to mandate that state-supplied registration numbers be engraved or permanently affixed to personally made firearms, as well as to items it terms as “unfinished frames or receivers”. Those are hunks of metal of which “most” (left undefined, but presumably 50%, plus a fraction) of the machining work necessary to turn the metal into a frame or receiver of a firearm has been accomplished. The bill makes it a crime for an individual who is not a federally licensed firearm manufacturer or dealer to build a firearm for personal use without affixing this registration number. Furthermore, no such individual may even possess an “unfinished frame or receiver” that is not marked with a registration number.
It must be noted here that what the bill defines as an “unfinished frame or receiver” is NOT in fact a firearm frame or receiver. Rather, it is a hunk of metal upon which some machining operations have been performed and which AT SOME POINT may be worked further in order to TRANSFORM it into a usable firearm part.
The personal manufacture of weapons, including firearms, is an ancient and worldwide tradition that continues to this day. Whether it be a pike, a bow, a spear, a sword, or the long rifle of the American colonists used to such effect in their war for independence, the weapons were historically hand-crafted by those who would wield them or by independent craftsmen. True mass production of firearms became possible only in the first half of the 19th Century.
Even today, there are many reasons why an individual might wish to manufacture a firearm for personal use, including for maximum customization, economy, or merely the benefit of learning and practicing the skills required. There are also law-abiding citizens who don’t want government agencies keeping track of what or how many firearms they might possess. (More on this later.)
There has never been a federal statute banning the manufacture of firearms by an individual for personal use, nor for requiring they be marked with serial numbers. It wasn’t until 1968 that federal law required firearms manufacturer and dealers to obtain federal licenses and to place serial numbers on their products.
With the rise in popularity in recent years of partially machined firearms parts kits that make building one’s own firearms easier and economical, there has been a corresponding wail of concern that this so-called “flood” of guns must be stamped out, or at least controlled. The catchy propaganda term “ghost guns” was created to further this aim. In the absence of a federal statute, the Biden administration pressed the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to craft a new regulation that highly restricts these firearms parts and kits and requires registration similarly to this bill.
However, a federal district judge found that the ATF’s final rule was an unconstitutional abrogation of legislative powers granted ONLY to Congress. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has concurred and last week the ATF has been forced to appeal to the Supreme Court, where they seem likely to lose.
Furthermore, in October of 2022, a federal district judge ruled that the federal law making it a crime to possess a firearm with the serial number “altered, obliterated or removed” is unconstitutional under that Second Amendment, as there is no historical tradition dating from the founding era that would justify such a modern law.
Why do some politician and bureaucrats want to require serial numbers on firearms, including personally made firearms? They frequently claim that it is to help law enforcement solve crimes by “tracing” the chain of possession of a firearm backwards from a crime scene. However, this is an exceptionally dubious claim. Criminals very seldom leave firearms that are traceable to them behind at the scene of their crimes.
The REAL goal is REGISTRATION of all firearms. Governments throughout history have found it much easier to control an unarmed populace than an armed one. Again, the concern is not truly for criminals, but for the vastly larger numbers of honest citizens. (In fact, according to a 1968 Supreme Court ruling, criminals do not have to obtain licenses or register their weapons, as that would be an act of self-incrimination.) (Haynes vs. U.S. 390 U.S. 85, 1968)
Some real-world examples of how fruitless these traces of “crime guns” tend to be, even in jurisdictions with mandatory gun registration:
During testimony before the Hawaii State Senate in 2000, the Honolulu chief of police stated that he couldn’t find any crimes that had been solved due to registration and licensing. The chief also said that his officers devoted about 50,000 hours each year to registering and licensing guns. Registration and licensing divert police from traditional, time-tested law enforcement activities.
Licensing and registration also haven’t worked in Pennsylvania or other places. During a 2001 lawsuit, the Pennsylvania state police could not identify a specific crime solved by the registration system from 1901 to 2001, though they did claim that it had “assisted” in a total of four cases, they could provide no details.
During a 2013 deposition, the Washington, D.C., police chief said that she could not “recall any specific instance where registration records were used to determine who committed a crime.” Crime Prevention Research Center
In the meantime, we Americans must realize that registration enables confiscation and remember some examples from recent history and their horrific consequences:
Hitler used the gun registration records from the Weimar Republic to strip German Jews of their lawfully possessed firearms, then murdered them en masse
Mao Tse Tung – who killed more of his own people that Hitler and Stalin combined – systematically confiscated firearms as he consolidated power in district after district, then executed anyone found with a gun
Fidel Castro distributed guns to perhaps a million and a half Cubans, but upon seizing and consolidating power, he took them all back, again under pain of death.
Iowa Firearms Coalition urges you to kill this bill. We will always fight to ensure that government recognizes, protects, and respects the fundamental individual right to keep and bear arms. It is the right that is the ultimate guarantor of all our other rights and both the U.S. and Iowa Constitutions clearly state that it “shall not be infringed”.
Sign up now for our e-mail alert list to stay plugged into what's going on with your 2A rights here in Iowa.
IFC will never sell, rent or share your personal information, including your e-mail address, with any third parties for any purposes without your express permission. IFC may share your personal information for the purpose of delivering our e-mail to you or as required by law.
Recent Comments