Anti-gun Pennsylvania lawmakers last week approved five restrictive gun control measures in the House Judiciary Committee, setting the stage for all five to be considered by the full House of Representatives.
On Jan. 17, the committee approved House Bill 335, HB 336, HB 777, HB 1157 and HB 1190, all of which would trample on Pennsylvanians’ Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
HB 335 would ban so-called “accelerated trigger activators.” While the measure likely targets bump stocks, the language does not specify that. Instead, the legislation bans any “part or combination of parts designed and intended to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi-automatic firearm to simulate the rate of fire of a machine gun.”
HB 336 is the so-called “assault weapon” ban, and it takes in a lot of territory. According to the bill’s language, it bans ownership or transfer of a gun if “the firearm is a semiautomatic rifle that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least two of the following: (A) A folding or telescoping stock. (B) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon. (C) A bayonet mount. (D) A flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor. (E) A grenade launcher.”
HB 777 unjustly punishes hobbyists by restricting privately made firearms, a time-honored tradition practiced even before the founding of our nation. The measure defines a privately made firearm as: “A firearm or firearm frame or receiver, assembled or otherwise produced by a person other than a Federal firearms licensee that does not contain a serial number or other identifying markings placed by a Federal firearms licensee at the time the firearm was produced.”
HB 1157 further complicates the topic of mental health by attempting to speed up reporting of mental health adjudications, commitments and treatment. However, according to an analysis by NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA): “This bill is so poorly drafted it actually makes it unlawful to report mental health adjudications until 72 hours have passed. It would presumably also block reporting during ongoing treatment (until the treatment is “complete”).”
Finally, HB 1190 bans 3D printed firearms. Ironically, the measure’s definition of a 3D-printed firearm actually addresses computer programs and files, not guns. The bill’s definition is specified as, “Any computer or other electronic file distributed for any firearm or part of a firearm that is intended or capable of being manufactured or printed by a 3-D printer.”
Not so ironically, all five of the measures were approved in committee by a 14-to-11 vote—straight party voting with all Democrats on the committee voting yes and all Republicans voting no.