{"id":686,"date":"2012-05-01T09:35:51","date_gmt":"2012-05-01T13:35:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/monachuslex.com\/?p=686"},"modified":"2012-05-01T09:35:51","modified_gmt":"2012-05-01T13:35:51","slug":"senate-bill-s1813-does-not-allow-the-irs-to-take-your-guns","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/monachuslex.com\/?p=686","title":{"rendered":"Senate bill S1813 does not allow the IRS to take your guns"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>Gun owners are as\u00a0susceptible to urban legends as any other group of people on the internet. \u00a0In fact, they may be more\u00a0susceptible\u00a0since there are so many convoluted attempts to use backdoor means to obstruct the right to keep and bear arms that nothing seems impossible.<\/p>\n

Having said that, the latest urban legend to gain traction in the gun rights community is the claim that Senate Bill S1813<\/a> allows the IRS to strip you of your gun rights and carry permit based upon back-taxes owed.<\/p>\n

This is not true.<\/strong><\/p>\n

I was first made aware of this urban legend last week when I was forwarded an email from a concerned gun owner who had read Anthony Martin’s Conservative Examiner column<\/a> in which Mr. Martin passed on the claim reported at Before It’s News<\/a> that the bill would grant the IRS the ability to “authorize the removal of \u00a0the right to own firearms.”<\/p>\n

I should note for the record that I am not attacking Mr. Martin. \u00a0He acted responsibly and couched his report in very\u00a0skeptical terms\u00a0given the source of the original report. \u00a0He noted that:<\/p>\n

“[T]he part of the bill that has gun rights activists worried is on pages 1320-1324. This subsection is entitled, “Firearms.” While the wording is in obscure legalese, it seems to be saying that the person designated as “the Secretary” is given broad powers over permits and the revocation of permits. And this power is described under the section that specifically deals with firearms.<\/p>\n

Lawyers may debate whether or not the wording of the bill gives the IRS the power to suspend gun rights. But government watchdogs have become alarmed over the tendency of legislation to be written in such a manner as to create broad leeway for interpretation, meaning that nebulous wording often leads to an interpretation of the law that confirms the suspicions of many citizens that the federal government is relentlessly engaged in power grabs aimed at limiting the Constitutional rights of Americans.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Mr. Martin was right to be\u00a0skeptical. \u00a0The bill, which is a\u00a0reauthorization of multiple Federal-aid\u00a0highway and highway safety\u00a0construction programs, does attempt to give the IRS the controversial ability to revoke the passports of those significantly in arrears on their taxes. \u00a0But what it does not do is give them any rights to control taxpayer’s gun rights.<\/p>\n

In fact, the only thing correct about the Before It’s News claim is the page number. \u00a0Here is my response to the person who emailed me originally:<\/p>\n

1) \u00a0There is such a bill.<\/p>\n

2) \u00a0It does have a page 1320<\/p>\n

3) \u00a0The word ‘firearm’ does appear on that page<\/p>\n

4) \u00a0It is on a section dealing with special permits for the transportation of hazardous materials<\/p>\n

5) \u00a0It says that firearms transported by individuals for personal use or in commerce are NOT<\/strong> subject to the hazardous materials special permit requirements. \u00a0This is a PRO-GUN provision in the bill.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

But Mr. Martin was not the only reputable commentator to be taken in by the claim. \u00a0I received a followup email yesterday noting that even the administrator of Congressman Tom Tancredo’s blog has posted the claim<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The lesson to be learned here is, where internet claims are concerned, follow the sage wisdom of President Reagan; “Trust … but verify.”<\/p>\n

UPDATE:<\/strong> \u00a0The NRA, which has significantly more reach than this column, is also trying to dispel this rumor<\/a>.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Gun owners are as\u00a0susceptible to urban legends as any other group of people on the internet. \u00a0In fact, they may be more\u00a0susceptible\u00a0since there are so many convoluted attempts to use backdoor means to obstruct the right to keep and bear … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[62],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-686","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-myths-misconceptions"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/monachuslex.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/686","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/monachuslex.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/monachuslex.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/monachuslex.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/monachuslex.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=686"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/monachuslex.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/686\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/monachuslex.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=686"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/monachuslex.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=686"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/monachuslex.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=686"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}