The First State Firearms Freedom Association is a group dedicated to protecting the rights of all firearms owners in Delaware.
Their website states, "It doesn’t matter what your level of firearms enjoyment or use might be. Sporting, hunting, or defensive use; rifles, shotguns, or pistols. FSFFA is here to protect YOUR rights.
Criminals do not and will not obey laws that ban certain types of weapons and magazines, or areas that are designated as 'gun-free zones.' Law abiding citizens in Delaware who carry and use firearms are not the problem, and they should not be penalized for the actions of others.
If you believe that it is your right to own and carry firearms commonly in use today, and you are tired of politicians who continually believe that infringing on your rights is the only way to address acts of violence committed by criminals who use firearms, we need your support."
Their mission: A grass-roots organization devoted to the preservation and protection of firearms rights for the citizens of Delaware.
They are constantly monitoring legislation at the federal level to ensure that the firearms rights of Delaware citizens are not further restricted by the federal government.
Below is the list of legislation that they are watching right now.
Common Sense Legislation to End Gun Violence
This proposal is far too open-ended and far reaching to support.
In addition, any talk of banning semi-automatic rifles and standard capacity magazines will be opposed by the FSFFA. Just as it is by the NRA and other pro-2nd Amendment groups.
We do not need another ban. We need enforcement of laws that we have right now, no plea deals, and tougher sentencing - especially on repeat offenders.
As for violent acts, politicians need to look at and censor extreme violence in movies and video games. If they want to ban something, ban what inspires these horrible acts.
Extreme violence in film is not art, it only incites more violence like what we have recently seen in Newtown Connecticut and Aurora Colorado, it must be dealt with.
H.R. 21: NRA Members’ Gun Safety Act of 2013
H.R. 21 would extend the Brady Law background check procedures to all sales and transfers of firearms.
The bill would also require the reporting of thefts within 48 hours; require that all states that allow residents to carry concealed firearms institute a permitting process requiring that the applicant demonstrate good cause for requesting a permit, and that the applicant is “worthy of the public trust” to carry a concealed firearm in public; and allow the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or deny a firearm (or explosives) permit to persons known or "suspected" of terrorist acts.
This bill is designed to end our right to carry. This bill was named the NRA Members' Gun Safety Act by a Democrat politician who is both anti-gun and anti-NRA. It is a hoax to make people think it is in the best interest of NRA Members.
H.R. 34 would institute a licensing scheme and require a license in order to possess any handgun or any semiautomatic firearm that can accept any detachable ammunition feeding device (except antiques).
H.R. 34 would also require firearms thefts to be reported within 72 hours after the theft or loss is discovered, create new child access prevention laws, and essentially create a federal version of California’s Dealer’s Record of Sale (DROS) system. A system that benefits only criminals because it makes firearms essentially inaccessible to those in harm's way.
Failure to comply with H.R. 34’s requirements would subject a person to criminal penalties if passed.
H.R. 35 seeks to repeal the Federal Gun Free School Zones Act (GFSZA) (codified at 18 U.S.C. § 922(q)).
The GFSZA currently prohibits possession of a firearm within 1,000 feet from the legal boundaries of a school with certain exceptions.
Obviously this has not stopped those there to do harm to our children, but instead restricts the protection that our children can receive.
H.R. 65 increases the age for ownership, sale, purchase, and possession of handguns, handgun ammunition, semiautomatic assault weapons, and large capacity ammunition feeding devices to 21, and enhances penalties for possession of the aforementioned items.
Remember that our young men and women fighting for our freedoms overseas were able to enlist in America's military services at age 18 (or at 17 with their parent's signature).
This bill would effectively stop any decorated American serviceman or woman under the age of 21, who may have just returned home from defending us on the battlefield, from being able own, sale, purchase, and possess handguns, handgun ammunition, semiautomatic assault weapons, and large capacity ammunition feeding devices.
As a Veteran who was a Marine Sgt (E-5) at the age of 20, and who returned home from overseas at the age of 19, I find this an assault on all of those members of our armed forces - under the age of 21 - who have given so much to our nation.
The bill also requires anyone under age 18 to be accompanied by an adult when attending a gun show and makes it illegal for firearm dealers to sell, transfer, or deliver any firearm to any person (other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer) unless the transferee is provided with a secure gun storage or safety device.
Additionally, with certain exceptions, H.R. 65 makes adult firearm owners guilty of a crime if a juvenile uses their firearm to cause death or serious bodily injury to the juvenile or any other person.
If passed, H.R. 93 would make it illegal for a person who has been notified by the Attorney General that the Attorney General has made a determination to revoke the person’s federal firearms license or deny a renewal thereof to:
(1) transfer a business inventory firearm (a) into a personal collection OR (b) to an employee or, if the licensee is a business, an individual who possesses the power to direct the management and policies of the business.
H.R. 93 would also make it illegal for a person whose federal firearms license was revoked or not being renewed to receive a firearm that was a business inventory firearm of the person as of the date the person received notice of the revocation/denial from the Attorney General.
After the license has been revoked, it would then become illegal for the person to transfer business inventory firearms to any person other than a law enforcement agency. The aforementioned provisions would not apply “with respect to a license revocation or denial determination that is rescinded.”
H.R. 117 would establish a federal system for the licensing and registration of all handguns owned, possessed, or controlled in the United States, and make it a crime for a person to own, possess, or control a handgun unless the person has obtained a license and registered the handgun with a Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency.
This law abolishes our 2nd Amendment Right. This law would make us all subjects of the Federal Government, it will make it a crime for a person to own, possess, or control a handgun unless the person has obtained a license and registered the handgun with a Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency.
In essence, because handguns are mainly used as defensive weapons, our right to keep and bear arms for personal defense reasons would be completely turned over to the Federal and State governments.
H.R. 117 would not apply in states that have a system for the licensing and registration of handguns owned, possessed, or controlled in the State as long as that licensing and registration scheme meets certain requirements.
In past attacks, when criminals have been presented with armed resistance - or even the threat of armed resistance - they have ended their attacks.
Creating "Gun Free Zones" in our schools creates an environment where criminals are free to carry out an attack with little to no resistance being presented until law enforcement arrives - usually many minutes after the attack started, and after many people have been injured or killed.
Criminals already disobey "Gun Free School Zones" now.
Removing this restriction would allow citizens who are permitted to carry firearms in locations surrounding the school the ability to carry a firearm at the school.
This would in turn make it more difficult for an armed criminal to carry out an attack without facing resistance. We should all be in favor of repeal of the Gun Free Zone Act.
H.R. 137 would require a background check for every firearm sale and “ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system.”
The bill also changes the definition of the term “adjudicated as a mental defective” for National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) purposes to include the definition found in 27 C.F.R. § 478.11 as well as “an order by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, in response to mental illness, incompetency, or marked subnormal intelligence, be compelled to receive services including counseling, medication, or testing to determine compliance with prescribed medications; and not including testing for use of alcohol or for abuse of any controlled substance or other drug.”
The bill would also require that federal court information be made available to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) and increase penalties for states that do not make data electronically available to NICS.
First, this act creates a National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) for gun-owners only!
Please understand that we do not have such a Database for Child Molesters, Rapists, Murderers, or even Terrorists. Any sort of Database would be called profiling!
Yet, there are those in the Federal government who now want a National Database for the names and personal information of law-abiding citizens.
Yes, citizens who have done nothing wrong in the way of committing a crime in any way shape or form.
And second, if this sort of Orwellian totalitarianism passes, than any person who has ever had counseling for anything, whether it be counseling for stress related their job or some other reason including marriage counseling and anxiety reduction program, would have their name go into that Database.
And yes, furthermore, this act goes into a citizen's medical records to find out if he or she has ever been given any sort of medication.
If a citizen has received medication for an illness such as say anxiety, then they will lose their rights under the 2nd Amendment and the Bill of Rights.
Personally speaking, if this is passed, then I can tell you from first hand experience that many who need counseling will refuse to get it out of fear of losing their gun ownership rights.
For example, I know many Veterans who will refuse to get needed counseling regarding their military experiences if they just think they will lose their right to owning a firearm if they do go to counseling.
This is worse than a Scarlet Letter! This marks law abiding citizens and takes away their rights, even if they have done nothing but maybe get some assistance for something as simple as sleep problems.
This should be fought with all means possible. It is an infringement on our rights and our privacy.
Restricting or prohibiting standard (or "large") capacity magazines will not solve the crime problem.
Criminals will get around this restriction by using two or three low capacity magazines as opposed to one standard capacity magazine. It takes very little time to change the magazine on any modern firearm.
Therefore, criminals can create the same amount of carnage with several low capacity magazines as with one standard capacity magazine.
H.R. 141: Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2013
The "gun show loophole" is a myth. There is no loophole.
The private sale and transfer of firearms is unregulated, just as the private sale between two individuals of all other goods are unregulated.
Anytime a company is involved with the sale or transfer of a firearm, a form is completed and a background check is performed.
Criminals do not typically purchase firearms at gun shows, and this legislation will do little to stem the tide of gun violence in the country.
H.R. 142: Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act of 2013
This bill would require the face-to-face purchase of ammunition, the licensing of ammunition dealers, and the reporting of any purchase of bulk ammunition - any purchase greater than 1000 rounds.
Bulk ammunition is not a crime problem.
In fact, very few criminal incidents have ever involved the use of more than 30 rounds.
Since this bill would do nothing to reduce crime, we must consider that the true intention of this bill is to make it more difficult for law abiding citizens to obtain ammunition.
If the government cannot regulate our firearms, they see their next option, their next best thing, is the total regulation of ammunition. Make it impossible for civilians to obtain ammunition or reloading supplies!
And yes, since the Federal government is also trying to stop citizens from getting Reloading supplies, has anyone ever heard of some street punk reloading his own bullets? No, they don't! This is designed to attack our rights pure and simple!
If passed, H.R. 226 would allow individuals who surrender specified “assault weapons” to receive a $2,000 federal income tax credit.
In order to apply the credit, the firearm must be lawfully possessed, the firearm owner must provide written acknowledgment of the surrender, and the credit may only be used for one firearm.
Since this has no effect on criminal types who do not lawfully possess their firearms, this is an enticement by liberals to disarm those who think they will be criminals if other legislation is passed.
H.R. 227: Buyback Our Safety Act
H.R. 227 would establish a gun buyback grant program wherein the Assistant Attorney General could issue funding grants to state and local law enforcement agencies for gun buyback programs provided certain criteria are met.
Additionally, H.R. 227 would provide for $15,000,000 in funds to be appropriated to carry out for the period of fiscal years 2014 through 2018.
The bill would also require the Attorney General, through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Justice Programs, to enter into an arrangement with the National Academy of Sciences to “develop standards for identifying, and identify, guns that are the most likely to be used in violent crimes and establish a pricing scale for purchasing guns so identified through gun buyback programs receiving grants under this section.”
First, this bothers me because we are in the midst of fiscal problems - and here it is that the government wants to throw away our tax dollars on guns that have been proven to be stolen in most cases.
And second, and more importantly, will there be any checks and balances to see if the money is used as it is designed to do - and if or when it is used, will the data be made public even if it disproves the anti-gun argument that so-called "assault weapons" are a problem?
H.R. 236: Crackdown on Deadbeat Gun Dealers Act of 2013
H.R. 236 increases the number of times that the Attorney General is allowed to inspect or examine the inventory and records of a licensed firearms dealer, importer, or manufacturer (FFL) to ensure compliance with record keeping requirements from once during any 12-month period to three times.
If passed, H.R. 236 would also increase the penalties for false statements, misrepresentations, or generally otherwise failing to maintain proper records from up to one year in prison to up to five years.
The bill also gives the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives the ability to hire at least 50 more personnel in order to carry out the additional inspections, and removes the prohibition against the Attorney General denying or revoking the firearms license of any dealer if that revocation or denial is based in whole or in part on facts which formed the basis of criminal charges relating to the dealer’s violation of federal firearms laws when that dealer was not found guilty under certain circumstances.
H.R. 238: Fire Sale Loophole Closing Act
H.R. 238 would restrict the ability of a person whose federal firearms license has been revoked, whose application to renew such a license has been denied, or who has received a license revocation or renewal denial notice, to transfer business inventory firearms.
H.R. 321: Firearm Safety and Public Health Research Act of 2013
H.R. 321 would essentially create an exception to the 2012 Consolidated Appropriations Act (Public Law 112-74)’s ban on National Institutes of Health funds being used to advocate or promote gun control in order to allowing funding of “research on firearms safety or gun violence.”
First State Firearms Freedom Association has no position on this legislation at this time. But they assure us that they will update their position once they have studied the legislation.
What it sounds like to me is an effort of the Federal Government to get the records from every State. It's all about Big Brother at its worse!
H.R. 332: To provide victims of gun violence access to the same civil remedies as are available to those injured through other means.
H.R. 332 essentially undoes the protections that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act grants those in the firearms industry by declaring that “[a]n action against a manufacturer, seller, or trade association for damages or relief resulting from an alleged defect or alleged negligence with respect to a product, or conduct that would be actionable under State common or statutory law in the absence of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, shall not be dismissed by a court on the basis that the action is for damages resulting from, or for relief from, the criminal, unlawful, or volitional use of a qualified product.”
The bill also makes the contents of the Firearms Trace System database discoverable and admissible in a civil action in any State (including the District of Columbia), federal court, or administrative proceeding.
In other words, this law, if enacted, would makes it easier for liberal groups and individuals to sue gun makers, gun shops, gun shows, and even gun groups in court. It is something that almost killed our firearms industry previously.
H.R. 339: To require the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to make video recordings of the examination and testing of firearms and ammunition, ...
This bill would require the BATFE to create video recordings of firearms and ammunition testing, and to make those recording available in criminal proceedings.
H.R. 410: To provide that any executive action infringing on the Second Amendment has no force or effect, and to prohibit the use of funds ...
I agree with the FSFFA when they say that it is unfortunate that this legislation is even being considered, but like the FSFFA, I endorse this legislation.
In a recent poll, it was found that a majority of Americans do not trust the federal government and believe their rights are being threatened by Obama.
While House Bills are being looked at right now, below you will find a few Senate Bills that are being proposed. Yes, their abuse of authority is constant.
S. 22: A bill to establish background check procedures for gun shows.
S. 22 would introduce new restrictions on gun shows and their operators/promoters, including, but not limited to: requiring gun show promoters to register with and pay a fee to the Attorney General in order to hold a gun show; requiring that gun show promoters verify the identity of each vendor participating in the gun show by examining a valid identification document containing a photograph of the vendor; requiring certain documents to be signed by each vendor before commencement of the gun show; and, new record keeping requirements for gun show operators.
S. 22 would also require that all firearm transactions taking place at gun shows go through a licensed firearms dealer, that a background check take place with each transaction, and that firearm dealers conducting firearms transfers at gun shows follow certain record keeping requirements.
S. 33: Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act of 2013
S. 33 would make it illegal to sell or transfer standard (or "large") capacity magazines.
Magazines lawfully possessed prior to the bill's passage would remain legal.
Prohibiting standard capacity magazines will not reduce criminal activity, as the overwhelming majority of firearms crimes occur with the use of only a dozen rounds or less.
This legislation will not impact criminal activity; it will only impact lawful possession of accessories that are currently owned by law abiding citizens.
S. 34: A bill to increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of firearms or the issuance of firearms and ...
We have not yet studied this bill in detail. However, if the legislation will allow the AG to deny firearms or explosives licenses to *suspected* dangerous terrorists, this would undermine the legal concept of innocent until proven guilty.
Nobody should have their rights removed without due process.
S. 35: A bill to require face to face purchases of ammunition, to require licensing of ammunition dealers, and to require reporting regarding bulk purchases ...
As with HR 142, this bill would require the face-to-face purchase of ammunition, the licensing of ammunition dealers, and the reporting of any purchase of bulk ammunition. Bulk ammunition is not a crime problem. In fact, very few criminal incidents have ever involved the use of more than 30 rounds. Since this bill would do nothing to reduce crime, we must consider that the true intention of this bill is to make it more difficult for law abiding citizens to obtain ammunition. If the government cannot regulate our firearms, the next best thing would be the regulation of ammunition.
While we have yet to review this bill, we would be opposed to this legislation. The federal government does not belong in the business of regulating the permitting process in any of the states.
Like the FSFFA, I oppose new restrictions on firearms that are legally owned by citizens today.
New restrictions on firearms and components will not solve the problem of gun violence in today's society.
As said before, we do not need another gun ban. We do need enforcement of laws that we have on the books right now, less plea deals, and tougher sentencing - especially on repeat offenders.
Please get involved, our rights are at stake!