Pricing You Out of Your Rights — Illinois’ Latest Gun Control Push

The city of Chigao has long been at the forefront of restricting gun rights to it's citizens.

Those pushing gun bans try to keep you from exercising your rights in a myriad of ways. Sometimes it is with legislation, sometimes with lawsuits, and other times it’s by making them unaffordable. That is what this new proposal out of Illinois is attempting to do.

If it is allowed to pass, it will redefine what it means to exercise a constitutional right. The new piece of legislation, dubbed the Responsibility in Firearm Legislation (RIFL) Act, is being pushed as a “public safety” solution. What this act does is create burdens no other constitutional right has.

It will place massive financial penalties on the firearms industry. The plan would require gun manufacturers to obtain a special license beyond the Federal FFL license they are already required to have. It forces them to pay fees tied to firearm-related injuries regardless if their items are used improperly.

This bill also forces them to distribute that money to individuals classified as “victims of firearms” regardless of circumstances or how the firearm was designed. While in theory you could say this sounds simple and ok the reality is much more sinister. This bill is designed to punish manufacturers for crimes utilizing their products by people illegally using them.   

The comparison would be passing a law that holds the Ford Motor Company liable for each and every crash, DUI, and criminal misuses of their product. If someone operates a vehicle while impaired, is that the manufacture’s’ fault or the operator? A sane person would say the operator.

The numbers this bill is requiring is staggering. The proposed fee poll from this bill is up to $866 million annually. We know from how economics works that those costs don’t stay with manufacturers. In order for them to survive they have to pass them on to consumers.

There are estimates that suggest that firearm prices could increase by $1,600 or more per gun just to help cover these fees. This is the end goal. It is not about building a pool to help victims recover from criminal use of firearms but pricing you and me out of owning them.

The reality is this will hurt those of lower economic status in the United States the hardest. These are the very people who live in higher-crime areas and face longer police response times. They are the people that need self-defense tools the most. But this bill is telling them that you can’t afford your rights.

The Founding Fathers did not right the principals of the United States to only apply to those who could afford it. That does not mean these principals have been justly applied throughout our history. There are many failings in U.S. history where we denied rights to our own citizens.

Whether it was based on race, color, or creed the U.S. has a long history of denying people their God Given birthrights. There has been wars and civil rights movements inside the U.S. in an attempt to rectify it. This bill is set to undo all that hard fought for ground.

The Mindset Behind It

One of the bill’s supporters, a Chicago trauma doctor, put the mindset for this bill plainly when he said poor people don’t benefit from owning firearms. This is an inaccurate statement. Poor people in the U.S. are the ones that are often victimized by others and are most likely to be denied from exercising their right to self-defense.

This whole statement is not about truth, but personal opinion guised in public policy. The whole hope is that you and me become completely reliable upon the government in everything we do, including self-defense. Once that happens, the government can force upon us whatever it deems fit with little to no recourse for push back.

The Reality on the Ground

Otis McDonald is responsible for the Supreme Court affirming that the right of self-defense is for all Americans.

There are real world examples of this that we have witnessed play out. Take Otis McDonald a man living in a high-crime Chicago neighborhood. He was robbed multiple times and threatened repeatedly. He lived in an area surrounded by the threat of constant violence.

All Mr. McDonald wanted was the ability to defend himself. Unfortunately, Chicago initially denied him that right. His fight for his rights led to McDonald v. City of Chicago. This fight led to the Supreme Court ruling that made clear that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to self-defense. It especially protects that right inside one’s own home.

This bill backed by Chicago anti-2A politicians isn’t just about cost. It is about government shifting blame to people who did not cause the violence in the first place. Instead of the city of Chicago targeting violent offenders and repeat criminals, they are attempting to protect the broken justice systems that they put in place.

The only people that this bill targets is law-abiding citizens, and the manufacturers that building and distribute products for lawful purposes. The hope by these officials is to criminally punish those for something that someone else does with their product without their consent or direction.

Ignoring Federal Law

There’s another issue here that should be addressed. This law clearly attempts to sidestep the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). This law was passed, with bi-partisan agreement by the way, to ensure that manufacturers were protected against frivolous lawsuit when people abuse their products.

In cities like Chicago and here in Minneapolis, the reality is crime is concentrated in specific areas. These areas are often why minority and low-income communities are hit hardest. The police presence is often overworked which leads to increased response times.

There is even one reported case where a homeowner waited over four hours for police after a break-in. That homeowner was told by the dispatcher to consider defending herself. The truth is, law enforcement cannot be everywhere at once. They are limited in numbers thus, we are always our best first responders.

This showcases the contradictions from these political leaders. Government often struggles to provide timely protection and crime remains concentrated in vulnerable communities. However, they tell law-abiding citizens they don’t need firearms and are attempting price them out of owning them. This shows this is not about safety.

This about the whole end goal of increasing restrictions. The Second Amendment, like the rest of the bill of rights, isn’t supposed to be a luxury. It’s not reserved for the wealthy. Rights are inequitably for everyone full stop. Policies like this are attempting to turn rights into something only a few can afford. This simply cannot be allowed to stand.

Here at 2 If By Sea Tactical we strive to bring you the best experience in the firearms world.  As we continue to grow the media arm of 2 If By Sea, make sure you keep tuning in to our Youtube and Rumble channels and right here at “The Patriot’s Almanac” to stay informed on the latest happenings in the firearm world! But we are not lawyers, so this isn't legal guidance. We are proud to be Southern Minnesota source for all things 2A.

Stay sharp, stay informed, and stay ready.