Write a commentDear Sir/Madam:
Congresswoman Tenney (R 24) has recently touted her Second Amendment Agenda by which she boasts to “preserve and uphold” what she calls the “sacred right” to bear arms. While no one wants to repeal the Second Amendment, it is well settled, legally and by popular belief, that, in the words of the Supreme Court, the Second Amendment does not guarantee an unconditional right to bear any weapon, anywhere, for any purpose. Everyone accepts the notion that the First Amendment does not allow you to yell “fire” in a crowded theater when there is no fire. Likewise, one would expect that everyone would accept the notion that the Second Amendment does not allow any civilian to own a semi-automatic assault weapon with a grenade launcher, much less openly carry it on the streets of Oswego. But a close scrutiny of Congresswoman Tenney’s Agenda beyond her political rhetoric will make you wonder.
First on her Agenda is her proposed legislation H.R. 373, the SAGA Act, which would “prohibit states from further restricting the right to buy rifles and shotguns (or impose a greater penalty or tax) than federal law.” A pause is merited here because we have always been led to believe that a core conservative principle is the concept of “state’s rights”, that is, the strong preference of state governments to enact laws that affect their citizens, not the federal government. Indeed, as it relates to Second Amendment limitations, the Supreme Court has long acknowledged this principle.
So what would Congresswoman Tenney’s proposed H.R. 373 mean to New Yorkers? It is clearly intended to preempt popular provisions of the New York’s SAFE ACT enacted in 2013 in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre. One provision of the New York SAFE Act seeks to ensure the safe storage of firearms in homes where children 16 and under reside. It requires such gun owners to secure firearms in safe storage depositories or gun lock devices to prevent unauthorized access, especially to children, and imposes penalties for failure to do so. Penalizing gun owners for failing to safely store their weapons runs afoul of a literal reading of H.R. 373. Really Congresswoman Tenney, you oppose the safe storage of firearms?
Currently, firearms are subject to the same sales tax as applied to clothing. Congresswoman Tenney’s H.R. 373 would not allow a sales tax on firearms. Really Congresswoman Tenney? Why not take aim at the sales tax on clothing, something that would help all of your constituents, especially in light of incoming tariffs, instead of trying to help gun buyers avoid sales taxes on their potentially unsecured firearms.
Finally, H.R 373 seeks to preempt a provision of the SAFE Act already upheld by the Courts that bans semi-automatic assault weapons, defined as a weapon with a detachable magazine and one other feature, such as a silencer, a bayonet mount or a grenade launcher. In upholding this provision 10 years ago, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found that these devices did not aid in hunting or self defense but simply make them more lethal. Really Congresswoman Tenney, you want your constituents to have the right to own semi-automatic assault weapons with a Silencer! A Bayonet Mount! A Grenade Launcher! What next, open carry on our streets?
Other widely supported provisions of the New York SAFE Act would likewise face preemption by this proposed legislation, such as, more stringent background checks that close federal loopholes. Congresswoman Tenney, stop pandering to lawful gun owners with your vague and hyperbolic rhetoric and be honest and transparent with them because if they knew the impact of your proposed legislation, the vast majority of them would oppose it.
Kevin Kovacs, Esq.
Oswego, New York
