United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- One reason legislation will fly in under the radar is because it is not flashy. There is no catchy title, and it often just gets filed. There may not be many cosponsors – if any. But some of these bills could make a huge difference. One such bill is HR 5301, introduced by Representative Kevin Hern (R-OK).
Hern did not even issue a press release with this legislation. The text takes two pages, and that is arguably due to the formatting on the first page. There’s no title. All it says is, “To amend title 18, United States Code, to permit certain individuals complying with State law to possess firearms.”
So, what is this bill about? All it does is provide a huge boost to those who exercise their Second Amendment rights in the 16 states that have constitutional carry through an amendment to the Gun-Free School Zones Act. What is that boost? It modifies the law to reflect the reality that in those constitutional carry states, there is no need to have a concealed carry permit.
The problem, when the Gun-Free School Zones Act passed, it didn’t take into account constitutional carry.
The current law, found at 18 USC 922(q)(2), outlaws carrying a firearm unless “the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license.”
So, in those 16 states, it would just take an anti-Second Amendment extremist in a U.S. Attorney’s office to decide to prosecute a gun owner who was not doing anything wrong – all on that technicality. That is not a good situation at all.
Hern’s legislation changes the convoluted language of the current law to something much simpler, saying that now, the exception would apply to anyone “in compliance with the law of the State and political subdivision in which the school zone is located.”
This removes the jeopardy attached to those who are within state law in the constitutional carry states. Now, if you are in compliance with state and local law, you are no longer at risk from the Gun-Free School Zones Act if you exercise your rights.
One thing Second Amendment supporters should think about: A bill like this can often be slipped into a bigger piece of legislation, like the annual appropriations legislation, especially in the conference committee where the House and Senate resolve their differences.
Loyal AmmoLand readers should get in touch with their Representative and Senators, and politely urge them to support HR 5301, to improve the situation vis-à-vis the Gun-Free School Zones Act in the constitutional carry states. They should also take the time to thank Representative Hern for this good piece of legislation. Carrying in accordance with local and state laws should not place someone in jeopardy of losing their rights due to an anti-Second Amendment federal prosecutor.
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.
100% safe-zone article, solid (if light) reporting with no BS. Good info, keep that coming.
Congratulations on not shitting on one of Harold’s articles. Although you did manage to get in that minor little dig anyway. Maybe there’s hope for you yet.
Contrary to your overinflated opinion of yourself, I am not a blind hater of Harold. I call BS when it’s deserved, and there was no ‘dig’ here. You just have your head so far up in full rectal defilade that you can’t discern manure from shinola. But what else can we expect from a shill like you?? I’m sure that when the jackbooted thugs show up to take your guns, you’ll be deepthroating that police leather like a pro.
As much as I appreciate my people trying to do the right thing on one hand I know it’s just politics as usual. It’s never going to make it outta committee.
These are commercial makers. He can now say “I introduced legislation that was pro 2A ……..”. On the other side of the aisle Kendra Horn is doing the same thing on tv last night stating “I introduced health care legislation….”. Both know it ain’t going nowhere.
They are just padding resumes.
Nobody expects politicians to do more, or do honestly, anymore. And as long as RINOs cuddle up to jack@sses there won’t be much difference either.
The language of the Second Amendment is quite clear (if you have a legitimate elementary school education). Why, in the name of freedom and liberty does it require any additional legislation or interpretation by communists wearing robes? These state, locality, and municipal restrictions are clearly illegal. We should be arresting the people that legislate them or attempt to enforce them!
Why does it require legislation? Because Libs don’t care that it says so in the Constitution, they’ll just turn away so that they can’t read what you’re pointing to, put their fingers in their ears and sing, ‘LA-DEE-LA-LA-LA” at the top of their lungs so they can’t hear what you’re saying.
In their world, it doesn’t exist unless there’s a LAW that our Masters have passed.
@CE, Yes, There in an ongoing conspiracy to ignore the pre-emptive character of the Second Amendment, by judges, legislators, and bureaucrats, since 1933. Actually, I think it all began with cowtown city councils declaring, ” No guns in town.”
The current reality of the situation requires it.
Thank You for providing us with information on these important bills, Harold!
Have you ever heard of the “DICK ACT OF 1902”
It made all gun control laws & restrictions unlawful in the United States according to this unrepealable law Passed by Congress. Let’s start using the “DICK ACT OF 1902” against these deep state idiots.
@PETE, that stuff about the Dick Act is misinformation that has been floating around the internet for quite some time. Even a cursory peek a the Dick Act on Wikipedia will show you that that tripe that someone put on the internet is wrong.
The Dick Act of 1902, officially the Militia Act of 1903, does no such thing. There isn’t a single word in it about “gun control” or weapons restrictions of any kind. Not one. The Act did one thing and one thing only. It created the “organized militia” (henceforth known as the National Guard) and defined the “unorganized militia” (all other citizens not in the National Guard or the regular Army). As for being “unrepealable” that’s complete nonsense. Any law or statute can be repealed. The Dick Act itself was amended quite a few times over the years. There was a… Read more »
The Dick Act, officially the Militia Act of 1903, did no such thing. There’s not a single word, not one, about “gun control” or weapons restrictions in it. What it did, the only thing it did, was to create the “organized militia” (henceforth known as the National Guard) and to define the “unorganized militia” (everyone else not in the National Guard or regular Army).
As for “unrepealable” laws, that’s just nonsense. Any law or statute can be repealed or amended. Perhaps you recall the 18th Amendment? The Dick Act was amended several times over the years. Instead of falling for that fake email that showed up almost 10 years ago, you should have checked it out on your own. Like this link:
https://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m2/kopel-hardy-dick-act-myth.htm
Stop spreading false information.
Whoever the idiot was who dreamed up gun free zones actually dreamed up a killing field. Criminals do not obey laws. So just what good does anyone think putting a guns banned sign on the door have any effect on someone bound to rob or kill within that restaurant, or whatever building it may happen to be. All they do is stop some law abiding citizen from carrying there which is a detriment to law enforcement because constitutional (concealed) carry assists law enforcement because the criminal does not know who is carrying and who is not. Do we not already… Read more »
@wjd, Making Gun Safety part of the curriculum would set up an interesting dichotomy between state and federal law. To teach gun safety you have to bring a gun.
The Montana Shooting Sports Association already wrote and passed into law Montana’s exemption from the “Gun Free School Zones” act back in 1997. Federal law makes it a Federal crime to travel within 1,000 feet of a school grounds if you have a firearm in your vehicle that is not both unloaded and locked away. Since Montana schools are on the main streets, this federal law makes criminals of a majority of Montana citizens over the course of the year. Thanks to MSSA, state law is now in place that exempts anyone in Montana who is protected by Montana’s constitutional… Read more »
What’s really slipping under the radar is that this would also clear up the problem for out of state visitors. Current law requires the permit/license be issued by the state/locality, not just recognized by it.
Yeah. We wouldn’t want to see Harold get caught up in Ammoland’s own “cancel culture” atmosphere now, would we? I’m sure he appreciates your support.
…
Don’t sweat it Will; these little dogs only care about one thing, and that’s being in full rectal defilade to Harold.