Critics are warning that the Obama administration is readying for a “final assault” on Second Amendment rights as the Justice Department plans to move forward on a long list of new gun rules, according to the Hill.
The report says the agency has proposed the regulations to enact before Obama leaves office.
“It’s clear President Obama is beginning his final assault on our Second Amendment rights by forcing his anti-gun agenda on honest law-abiding citizens through executive force,” Luke O’Dell, vice president of political affairs at the National Association for Gun Rights, told the Hill.
The agency’s plans, released by Unified Agenda, a list of rules that federal bureaucrats are working on, apparently are to focus on people who do not qualify for gun ownership, and stem from Obama’s pursuit of regulations following the school shooting in Sandy Hook.
Obama failed, repeatedly, to get many of those ideas through Congress in the wake of Sandy Hook, and issued 23 executive actions pursuing his aims.
The Hill said the proposals will include limits on pistols, requirements for gun storage and more.
It said while gun control groups supported Obama’s call for additional restrictions, Congress has refused to go along.
One of the controversial plans is to ban gun ownership for those who may have been involved in even minor cases of domestic disturbance.
“That could be a person who spanked his kid, or yelled at his wife, or slapped her husband,” warned Michael Hammond, of Gun Owners of America.
Another strategy is to prohibit the mentally ill from owning firearms, but again the definitions are proving to be the devil, as returning soldiers who talk about Post Traumatic Stress Disorder sometimes are being classified as unqualified for gun ownership.
“The Obama administration is trying very hard to disqualify people from owning a gun on the basis that they are seeing a psychologist,” Hammond told the Hill.
The National Rifle Association also has weighed in on that issue, with a statement that said, “A person who experienced a temporary reaction to a traumatic event or who has trouble handling household finances may well be treated the same as a violent psychopath.
“Not only is this unjust and stigmatizing, it creates disincentives for those who need mental health treatment to seek it, increasing whatever risks are associated with untreated mental illness.”