You may wonder why we are taking time from actual bills to instead cover a House Resolution. We did cover one House resolution and one Senate resolution at times earlier this year, though, and we did so because while they didn’t have the force of law, they could still tilt the playing field – and voting for or against them means elected officials are taking a stand.
H.Res.1013 – Resolving that jurisdictions seeking to dismantle or reduce funding for the jurisdiction’s police force should not unduly burden residents who seek to defend themselves.
That is why H Res 1013 is important for Second Amendment supporters. This resolution, introduced by Representative Russ Fulcher (R-ID), not only expresses some common sense, but it also could put anti-Second Amendment extremists in a bit of a tough spot. Fulcher is in his first term in the House of Representatives, and this resolution is a very promising sign that he is not only going to be a reliable supporter of our rights, but also a skilled tactician in the advancement and defense of those rights.
Reading the text reveals just what Fulcher has done in support of the Second Amendment during this turbulent time. As many left-wing mayors and city councils cut or disband police departments, they have turned around and pushed for more gun control as violent crime rose. See Chicago mayor Lori Lightfoot as one case in point (in the case of Chicago, enforcing current federal laws could do much to end the violence).
But even when fully funded, the old maxim that when seconds count, the police are minutes away has been proven time and time again. It will be even more true when left-wing politicians slash the police budget. This reality – one that anyone with common sense – is what Fulcher’s resolution addressed.
It simply states that it is the “sense of the House of Representatives” that any jurisdiction that cuts police budgets or which shuts down police departments should not be adding “undue restrictions” on the right to keep and bear arms, and in fact should remove them. What are “undue restrictions?” Fulcher points to the Heller and McDonald rulings in the resolution, and this is where a floor vote on this resolution would put anti-Second Amendment extremists in a tough spot.
A close reading of Heller would note that it extends the protection to firearms that are commonly used for lawful purposes. This would include modern multi-purpose semiautomatic long guns and the standard-capacity magazines they use. So, in essence, the House adopting this resolution would tell places that are cutting cops to also get rid of semiauto bans, among other infringements – all so that people could protect themselves since defunded cops would likely take longer to respond.
Of course, opposing the resolution could easily be used to paint anti-Second Amendment extremists as unconcerned about people’s safety. They defund the cops, take away your rights, and what is left to protect you? Not much.
Second Amendment supporters have the chance to find out how their Representatives stand on this issue. They should not hesitate to contact their Congressman (or Congresswoman, as the case may be), politely urge them to support H Res 1013, and
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.
The post Below the Radar: House Resolution 1013 (H.Res.1013) appeared first on Patriot Rising.
