21 Jul In-the-News Update [Issue: 2nd Amendment]
Once again, it is that time of year for the United States Congress to amend, debate, and pass the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA); a “must-pass” bill. Naturally, each year this bill is up for reinstatement, members of Congress come out of the woodwork to attach numerous superfluous and irrelevant amendments to the bill in hopes that they can be snuck through the legislative process, regardless of if their amendments have anything to do with the Department of Defense.
Sen. Murphy (D-Conn.) has decided to throw his hat into the ring, introducing an amendment to the NDAA that is nothing more than a gun-control power grab in sheep’s clothing that targets military service members. The amendment requires training for individuals purchasing firearms for private ownership, registration of firearms possessed on military installations, and specific storage requirements. While registering privately-owned firearms on bases is already in place, the amendment dictates how firearms should be stored, potentially conflicting with the U.S. Supreme Court’s Heller decision. The amendment also seeks to impose waiting periods for firearm and ammunition purchases on military installations.
Sen. Murphy’s amendment raises additional concerns by allowing the Defense Secretary to collect information on gun ownership, potentially leading to a national firearm registry, despite federal law prohibiting such a registry. The amendment is presented as a life-saving measure to prevent suicide and domestic violence, but it lacks clear criteria for seizing firearms. Another troubling aspect is the prohibition of privately-owned firearms on Department property by individuals not residing on the property, affecting military members living off-base and retirees who use on-base shooting ranges or engage in hunting activities.
Critics argue that Sen. Murphy’s gun control agenda sets a dangerous precedent that could extend to the general population.