Permit to Buy

The Delaware legislature is trying again to infringe on American citizens’ right to keep and bear Arms; the Know Betters of the legislature are renewing their drive to require the State’s citizens—who, for those Progressive-Democrats not keeping up at home, also are American citizens—to get the State’s permission just to buy a firearm.

A proposal filed Wednesday in the state Senate would require prospective handgun owners to complete a state-authorized firearms training course and submit an application that would include fingerprinting and an extensive background check. If approved, Delaware’s Department of Safety and Homeland Security would issue a free 180-day permit.

A permit just to buy. The duration of this…requirement…is laid out in the proposed bill:

A handgun qualified purchaser permit is valid for a period of 180 days from the date of issuance….

I have no conceptual objection to requiring training on the firearm, so long as neither the training itself nor the cost of it, are constructed as barriers to the getting and subsequent keeping and bearing, and so long as any license (not permit to buy) is issued on a will-issue basis.

I do object to fingerprinting the prospective firearm keeper and bearer of his weapon. No government has any business keeping track of which of its citizens have weapons and which of them do not. That’s a need only with regard to criminals, and acquiring a firearm is not, by definition, a criminal act.

But beyond that, these worthies are carefully ignoring the key phrase in our Constitution’s 2nd Amendment [emphasis added]:

…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Plainly, getting Arms, including the purchase of one or more of them, is a necessary precondition to the keeping and bearing of them. Restrictions on buying a firearm—which is what a State-granted permission slip, of any duration, is—is just that infringement. No permit to buy, no matter its construction, is legitimate; such permission slips start out unconstitutional and they are incurably so throughout their existence.

 

The bill on offer can be read here.

Lobbying

Even Senators do it on occasion. Senator Joe Manchin (D, WV), a few years ago (and only now appearing in some of the press) lobbied Alejandra Castillo, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Economic Development, to approve the Appalachian Climate Technology Now coalition’s application for as much as $100 million in Federal funds for

creat[ing] an industrial cluster around a number of climate resilience technologies while focusing on the development of resilient infrastructure and site readiness, attracting, training and retaining a skilled workforce, fostering entrepreneurship and startups, and building community capacity[.]

The coalition ultimately was awarded nearly $63 million in grants for the purpose.

ACT Now is a West Virginia-base entity. So far, so good; it’s entirely appropriate for Senators to front for their constituents.

ACT Now also is a coalition that includes, among others, the Charleston Area Alliance, which is chaired by Jack Rossi. Rossi also is listed as the Treasurer of the Joe Manchin for Senate campaign. Still so far, probably so good; Senators are allowed to lobby for constituents that are in some way connected to the Senator.

When Manchin wrote his lobbying letter to Castillo, he neglected to mention his connection to Rossi. Oops.

That far, no good. Manchin should have done the full disclosure bit and freely mentioned the Rossi-Manchin relationship, and he should have done so up front, in that letter and in any preceding and subsequent communication with Castillo and anyone else with whom he spoke on the matter.