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”.
School Safety – The Iowa Firearms Coalition (IFC) is deeply committed to improving the protection of Iowa’s students and educators. This topic has been an IFC priority for several years and we have weighed the advantages and limitations of the various security options currently being discussed. The issue is complex and multifaceted, and we can’t offer a single, definitive answer. However, IFC believes we can help you explore some different perspectives and consider potential next steps.
Don’t unnecessarily limit the options: The current discussion seems limited to certain approaches like SROs and/or armed staff. It’s important to acknowledge the potential drawbacks of being limited to only these options, as well as the extent to which insurance company pressure is an inhibiting or determining factor
Invisible fence of protection (?): The current primary concept of school security seems to be that by prohibiting responsible adults from possessing normal tools of self-defense (principally firearms) anywhere on the property of a school, we have erected an invisible fence of protection for those children and staff within. But one must question the rationale behind this choice and whether it truly serves the best interests of safety. In fact, the “honor system” Iowa uses in schools now places everyone within them at risk. Stickers and signs announcing a “Gun Free Zone” deter only the law abiding, not those with evil intent. In fact, they are clearly counterproductive, as those planning mass-murder overwhelmingly choose just such areas for their attacks. Iowa only adopted this posture in 1995. It has not worked and should not be considered irreversible. Previously, Iowa hadn’t erected these “No Self-Defense Zones”, nor did this nation have a history or tradition of preventing responsible citizens from being armed at a school.
Common sense approaches: IFC suggests exploring existing approaches used outside schools, which could broaden the discussion and potentially lead to more effective solutions. Many states are changing their laws to allow citizens with permits to carry to do so within schools (AL, NH, OH, OR & UT). The otherwise draconian (and surely unconstitutional) federal Gun Free School Zones Act, allows persons with a permit to carry to be armed at and in a school. Studies in multiple states have proved that citizens who hold a permit to carry commit crimes at such an exceptionally low rate that even sworn law enforcement officers do so at a rate that is six to ten times higher. These are not the people to be concerned with.
Additional perspectives to consider:
Root causes: Addressing the root causes of violence and creating a safer society overall could be more impactful than focusing solely on school security measures. This might involve tackling issues like poverty, mental health, access to firearms, and fostering a culture of respect and non-violence.
Community involvement: Engaging the broader community, including parents, students, teachers, and mental health professionals, in developing solutions could lead to more comprehensive and sustainable strategies.
Alternative approaches: Exploring other potential solutions beyond SROs and armed staff, such as improved security protocols, mental health support programs, conflict resolution training, building positive school climates, and allowing legally permitted adults to carry defensive weapons in schools, could all be beneficial.
Next steps:
Research and learn: Gathering information from various sources, alternative security measures, and the impact of insurance company policies, can inform your perspective. Certainly, consultation with IFC, with their Educator Academy, NRA with their School Shield Program, John Lott and his Crime Prevention Research Center should be a focus.
Remember, there’s no easy answer to this complex issue. By considering different perspectives, engaging in open dialogue, and advocating for solutions based on evidence and common sense, we can work towards creating a safer environment for everyone in schools.
Brenna Bird – Iowa’s Attorney General speaking with our partners at NSSF. Listen to this patriot speak and if you don’t have an Attorney General in your state like this, find one, and elevate them to office! I’ll bet you wished Brenna Bird was your state AG!
AG Bird has been a tireless supporter of the Second Amendment and one of the few who has continued to follow through on campaign promises. Too many others find reasons or excuses that preclude them from actually doing the things they told the 2A community they wanted to do. Nobody here is foreign to the concept of a campaign promise, but we are sensitive to the retreat from the continual push and protection the Second Amendment requires. Put your passion, your activism, and your hard-earned money behind folks who continually and tirelessly work to ADVANCE and PROTECT your civil liberties.
How many elected officials give specific recognition to the 2A community for their support? You’ll want to pay special attention @7:40!
This video was recorded at the NSSF SHOT Show this year. Pay close attention to what is being said and the core grasp AG Bird has on the problems. Too few do. Even fewer act on it.
(The featured image is from the 2A Day IFC holds at the Iowa Capitol each year. AG Bird was a speaker at our event and took a quick picture with Gabby Franco, our featured speaker.)
(DES MOINES, Iowa) – The Iowa Firearms Coalition (IFC) welcomes the introduction of the “Students First Safety Act,” HSB675, a bill that creates a pathway for Iowa school districts to arm trained staff.
The bill will be brought before the Public Safety subcommittee on Monday.
“If you see a fire starting in your home, do you grab the fire extinguisher and put it out, or just dial 911 and wait for the fire department to arrive after it’s totally engulfed?” said IFC President and Des Moines area police officer, Dave Funk. “IFC is grateful to the legislature for bringing this bill forward, addressing issues of critical importance.”
While IFC is encouraged legislators are taking steps to protect Iowa’s children in the classroom, the existing proposed legislation leaves room for improvement. IFC looks forward to working with lawmakers to refine the bill to include:
Protection for all Iowa school districts, not just the largest and wealthiest in the state.
A training program for all willing educators.
Closing the insurance discrimination loophole, which has allowed for insurance companies to hold the safety of Iowa children hostage at the expense of woke corporate policies.
Two school districts in northwest Iowa had planned on implementing armed staff as soon as the 2024 school year but withdrew their plans once Des Moines based EMC insurance notified the districts that their insurance policies would not be renewed if the plan went into effect.
“We’ve had meetings with the schools, we’ve had meetings with the insurance companies. I’m working with the Senate to make sure we have a collaborative bill we can do something with,” said Rep. John Wills (Dickinson County).
IFC further recommends legislators use “Time and Math” when debating the bill and to look beyond School Resource Officers (SROs) as the only solution to protecting students. While IFC acknowledges the important role of SROs in Iowa schools, in particular how they provide mentorship to students, it is unrealistic to think that a single peace officer is always going to be at the right place at just the right time when evil strikes.
IFC has been working with retired Army Officer and schoolteacher Ed Monk to bring a fact-based approach to the Capitol in the wake of the tragedy at Perry High School. Monk was further part of a team of experts that led the Iowa Educators Academy, an intensive IFC program that taught more than a dozen school administrators and staff members on how best to respond to a crisis, last year.
“If you don’t stop a threat within thirty seconds to one minute, you often see double digit victim counts,” said Monk. “You want the lowest possible victim count and that means an immediate response. You can’t argue against Time and Math.”
IFC is calling on Iowans to contact their local representatives and senators and demand they find a solution to insuring school districts that understand the reality of Time and Math.
The Iowa Firearms Coalition, Iowa’s official NRA State Association, is a 501(c4) nonprofit and is Iowa’s only effective pro-Second Amendment rights organization.
Linn County Pistol Club will be hosting a sectional on March 10 at Linn County Izaak Walton. This will be a .22 caliber 90 shot match, and scores are submitted to NRA to be compiled into the national indoor pistol championship. There will also be a 30 shot team match. The program is attached with sign-up info. We will have 2 relays at 9:00 and 10:30 in the morning for a total of 16 shooters. If needed we can add an afternoon relay. Make sure to sign up early to reserve your spot.
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