Maryland – -(AmmoLand.com)- When you hear him speak, former Representative John Delaney of Maryland presents himself as a moderate Democrat on the issues. Well, folks, don’t buy it. His position on the Second Amendment is only moderate when you compare it to former presidential candidate Eric Swalwell’s desire to create a New Zealand/New Jersey hybrid of onerous restrictions on the rights of law-abiding Americans.
Delaney served three terms in the House, winning his first election in 2012 in a district that was drawn to include more of Montgomery County. The intent of the redrawn district was to take out long-time Second Amendment ally Roscoe Bartlett, who had represented the district for 20 years when it covered most of western Maryland. During those three terms, Delaney’s record was in line with the anti-Second Amendment agenda of groups like the Brady Campaign.
What is that agenda? Well, let’s look at his record, courtesy of Project VoteSmart. In 2014, he voted against efforts to stop the District of Columbia from implementing severe restrictions on the rights of law-abiding gun owners. He was little better on smaller issues as well. In 2017, he voted to retain a regulation allowing the arbitrary denial of Second Amendment rights to Social Security recipients who needed help managing their financial benefits. Later that year, he also voted to uphold a similar regulation targeting veterans.
Look, it is one thing to have someone declared mentally defective or to be committed to a mental institution by a court, which has the effect of prohibiting them from even touching a firearm under 18 USC 922. There is due process involved in that procedure that deprived them of the rights granted to them by their Creator.
But there was no due process whatsoever under the regulations Delaney voted to uphold. It was done by administrative fiat, with no chance for the person affected to contest that decision. There wasn’t even any proof that those who needed help with their finances were a danger to themselves or others. Yet while those regulations stood, thousands were made instant felons.
Delaney also voted against the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, a common-sense measure that would have required states to respect the concealed carry permits issued by other states. While the ideal would be constitutional carry in all 50 states, getting there from the current state will take a while, and the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act is a big step on that path.
Delaney didn’t just vote for gun laws, he went further. Unlike some anti-Second Amendment extremists who at least talk about supporting sportsmen like hunters, Delaney has shown hostility towards even that with his 2016 vote against the Sportsmen's Heritage and Recreational Enhancement (SHARE) Act.
Here’s what makes a candidate like Delaney dangerous to the Second Amendment: His hostility towards the rights of law-abiding gun owners, including hunters and sportsmen, is very under the radar. Unless you read the names of people who sign a letter demanding that no federal money be spent for arming teachers who volunteer to have a viable tool to defend their students, you miss much of what he does.
Like Jerrold Nadler, Delaney’s votes are just as anti-Second Amendment as those of Eric Swalwell or Charles Schumer or Dianne Feinstein. They just keep it relatively quiet. Should he become president, there is no doubt that his judicial nominations would be just as bad as those of more vocal anti-Second Amendment extremists.
About Harold Hutchison
Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.