Exposing the Deception: How the Protecting Communities & Preserving the Second Amendment Act of 2025 Infringes on Gun Rights

The attacks on the right to keep and bear arms have been going on in this country for more than 100 years in clear violation of the Second Amendment’s crystal clear language.  The latest attack is coming under the Protecting Communities and Preserving the Second Amendment of 2025.  Of course, this is being put forth by two of the biggest fraudulent, controlled opposition Republicans in the Senate, Charles Grassley and Ted Cruz.

Joe Wolverton, II comments on this bill at The New American.

The Protecting Communities and Preserving the Second Amendment Act of 2025 is being promoted as a pro-Second Amendment measure, but a closer examination reveals a starkly different reality. Despite its seemingly protective title, the bill contains numerous provisions that undermine the fundamental right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment. This article will expose the insidious elements embedded in the bill, highlighting the deceptive nature of its language and the potential consequences for law-abiding gun owners.

The Deceptive Framing of the Act

Proponents of the Protecting Communities and Preserving the Second Amendment Act of 2025 assert that the bill strengthens gun rights by modernizing firearm commerce and enhancing background checks. However, the reality is far from this rosy depiction. Under the guise of protecting public safety, the act imposes federal mandates that centralize control over firearm transactions and mental health data, setting dangerous precedents for gun ownership regulation.

Mandatory Mental Health Reporting

One of the most alarming provisions of the bill is the requirement for states to provide at least 90 percent of mental health records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) or face significant funding cuts. This provision threatens the privacy rights of gun owners and sets the stage for a federal database that could be used to disqualify individuals from exercising their Second Amendment rights based on subjective mental health criteria. States that fail to comply risk losing substantial federal funding, forcing them to choose between constitutional fidelity and financial viability.

Federal Overreach in Firearm Commerce

The act purports to modernize firearm commerce by amending section 922 of Title 18, United States Code. However, the changes primarily expand federal oversight of interstate firearm transactions, allowing greater federal intrusion into what has traditionally been a state-regulated domain. The redefinition of terms like “temporary location” could pave the way for increased restrictions on private gun sales and transfers, infringing on states’ rights to regulate commerce within their borders.

Red Flag Law Provision: A Direct Attack on Due Process

Perhaps the most insidious aspect of the bill is the introduction of a red flag law provision. This section allows law enforcement to temporarily confiscate firearms from individuals deemed a threat based on reports from family members or law enforcement. While proponents argue that such measures are necessary to prevent violence, the reality is that these laws violate due process. Under this provision, individuals can lose their Second Amendment rights without ever being charged with a crime or even being present to defend themselves in court. This erosion of due process is a clear violation of constitutional rights and sets a dangerous precedent where accusations, rather than convictions, determine one’s ability to exercise fundamental liberties.

Task Forces and Increased Penalties

The bill also establishes regional firearms-trafficking task forces under the Department of Justice, effectively broadening federal power to investigate and prosecute cases involving gun sales. These task forces are empowered to investigate not just felons, but also any cases in which firearms are believed to be purchased for unlawful purposes. Furthermore, the act increases penalties for “lying and buying,” imposing up to 10 years of imprisonment for violations. Such punitive measures disproportionately target gun owners, rather than addressing the root causes of gun violence.

Read the rest…

Article posted with permission from Guns in the News