While most of the nation is focused on how the recent election has changed the balance of power in Congress and who will lead various federal agencies under a second Trump presidency, the profound effect the election had at the state and local levels should not go unnoticed.
Many legislatures are out of session until their new members are sworn in after the first of the year. But that’s not the case in the crucial swing state of Michigan. Prior to November, Democrats held the governor’s mansion and majorities in both chambers of the state legislature. After votes were counted, results showed that Republicans this year successfully took back control of the House of Representatives, denying Democrats a trifecta.
Unfortunately for Michiganders, the legislators who were recently fired by their constituents aren’t in any hurry to relinquish their power. As the misguided saying goes, “you can do anything you want on your last day.” Under the direction of Democrat party leadership and Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, legislators have thrown out any ethical concerns they might have had and are attempting to rush through the remaining bills on their wish lists as they head out the door.
Among the many bills proposing new restrictions, limits, and bans on Second Amendment freedoms, one particularly outrageous and illogical measure stands out.
Curtailing Individuality
Senate Bill No. 1134 was introduced to ban so-called “deceptively colored” firearms. Now, many have probably admired or even owned a fair share of unique firearms over the years. But most probably never considered in their wildest dreams that someone might think it was somehow “deceptive” to express individual creativity, artistic taste or individuality through the color scheme or design painted on a firearm.
The ban isn’t restricted to firearms themselves. In fact, it even includes what the bill sponsors consider “deceptive coloring product[s].” While the sponsors clearly want to restrict access to components and accessories that are a unique color of any kind, they also want to prevent an individual from purchasing or possessing a firearm with a colorful frame, barrel or stock and are willing to go to extreme lengths to ensure that’s the case.
Under this bill’s extremely broad definitions, it could be argued that it would be illegal for a gunsmith or even an individual to possess colorful paints or coating materials, an internet-based business to sell them within the State of Michigan, or even for a shipping company to transport them across state lines.
The enforcement challenges involved in going after anyone who possesses any colorful paint or ceramic coating intended for use on metal, wood or even plastic on the chance the products to be used on a firearm are unimaginable.
Here are just a handful of firearms that the sponsors of this bill aim to eliminate in Michigan:
- Modern sporting rifles ceramic coated to commemorate a favorite sports franchise, alma mater, fraternal organization or founding document
- American flag-themed revolvers and other handguns
- Shotguns with red, blue or gold-colored receivers or barrels
- Competition rifles with colorful stocks
- Firearms with a camouflage pattern if they don’t meet specific criteria
- Youth rifles and shotguns shipped standard from the manufacturer with brightly colored stocks that many parents purchase for safety reasons
While there are ridiculous exceptions in the bill such as permitting individuals to own any firearm with a grip that is ivory or ivory-colored, other firearms would have to be permanently rendered unable to “be readily converted.” It’s unclear whether the legislation’s authors have ever used a can of spray paint before, but making it impossible to paint a firearm seems like an unreasonable and poorly thought-out requirement.
So, who will a ban on colorful, artistic, and aesthetically appealing finishes impact the most?
Female firearm owners will be disproportionally impacted. Hunters with camouflage patterns on their firearms are another major group. From there, the restriction cuts a wide swath across firearm owners of nearly every generation, social circle, financial status, ethnicity, shooting discipline and reason for owning a firearm.
This bill would do absolutely nothing to improve public safety but it would absolutely hinder freedom of expression and pursuit of happiness for all law-abiding Michiganders. This bill is sponsored by the same type of gun control-supporting Democrats that slam tables saying black rifles are dangerous and are only for military and police. State Sen. Dayna Polehanki expresses her disdain for MSRs on her own party website. She expressly shows her lack of understanding of firearms in this post. No wonder she thinks custom-colored guns are somehow deceptive.
It seems obvious that the stated goal is merely a cover for what advocates actually want to accomplish with this illogical ban. Their real aim is an attempt to take away the excitement associated with being able to express individuality through the color of a firearm just like one might do with the style of clothes, hat, truck, tattoos or hairstyle.
Make no mistake, the firearm industry and the individuals it serves are under attack today and isn’t relying on a few ballot box successes to keep our freedoms safe.
Moriah Day is Director, Government Relations — State Affairs for the National Shooting Sports Foundation
Pathetic!
So I guess this is a two-fer, violate the first AND second amendments. The best part is, they know it’s BS and are just trolling with more lawfare knowing full well they will never be held accountable as this winds its way through the courts just burning more money in our pockets. By this logic, is anyone who owns a rattle can and a gun in violation of this proposed law?