Follow-up Re: [Independent View] Legislation Still Under the Radar Would Devastate U.S. Gun Owner Rights

A reader pointed out that "according to the bill, law enforcement would only be empowered to conduct inspections of places where firearms are stored for purposes of manufacture, distribution or sale.  If they were to attempt to 'inspect' homes, that is a direct violation of 4th Amendment and would be so egregious as to get the act thrown out in the first court case." I appreciate my reader's pointing this out.

True, I know that under the 4th Amendment such inspections, if challenged in court (which they would and should be if they were part of the bill) would be unconstitutional. Unless, by some convoluted thinking the court would somehow piggyback their decision onto the Anti-terrorism laws and through a devious legal "fiction" find an exception to the 4th Amendment. Further, though Section 403 of the legislation applies only to places of business or manufacture, might not these unannounced inspections of businesses be construed as searches of private premises without warrant? Unless that would be justified under the interstate commerce authority as part of regulation of alcohol, tobacco and firearms. Would be interesting to hear more opinions on this.

SEC. 403. INSPECTIONS.

In order to ascertain compliance with this Act, the amendments made by this Act, and the regulations and orders issued under this Act, the Attorney General may, during regular business hours, enter any place in which firearms or firearm products are manufactured, stored, or held, for distribution in commerce, and inspect those areas where the products are so manufactured, stored, or held.

My reader also called attention to the stringent federal licensing and identification requirements for gun owners which this legislation would impose. He says that he "particularly dislike[s] the federal licensing and identification requirements, not to mention the fee for registering every year." So do I. 


He further comments: "No guarantees that the AG is required to issue the license, and the fee--where else have people's rights been trampled by charging them a fee to exercise them?  Oh yeah, Poll Taxes back in the Jim Crow days.  Those were illegal too." I agree. Once such broad powers are given to the Attorney General, who can say how far the federal Justice Department will go in infringing on our 2nd Amendment rights? Conceivably quite far.   --   S. Lane

See Independent View Post - Blair-Holt Firearm Licensing and record of Sale Act  (posted 9-24-09). 
S. Lane


Further information on Blair-Holt Firearm Licensing and Record Sale Act of 2009) and S 1317:

Personal Liberty Digest - Legislation Still Under the Radar Would Devastate U.S. Gun Ownership Rights

Blair-Holt Firearm Licensing and Record Sale Act of 2009) and S 1317would be a devastating blow to Second Amendment rights.

HR 45, introduced by Rep. Bobby Rush, would make it illegal to own a gun unless you are fingerprinted and can provide a driver's license and Social Security number.

Additionally under HR 45, a person buying a gun would have to undergo both a physical and mental evaluation before making a firearm purchase. It also would require guns be secured from access by children under age 18, and would empower law enforcement officers to come into your home to check compliance.

S 1317, introduced by Sen. Frank Lautenburg, would give the attorney general the right to block gun sales to people on terror watch lists. A third bill, HR 2647, contains a companion clause to S 1317 that gives the attorney general the authority to determine who belongs on terrorist watch lists.