“An Alabama lawmaker says he is introducing legislation he hopes will strengthen Alabama’s gun laws,” Montgomery’s WSFA 12 reported Friday.

Republican Rep. Reed Ingram “feels” the state’s 2022 permitless carry law, where “anyone over 19 years old can carry a concealed handgun without a permit, background check or training,” is a “bad bill.” Now “he intends to file a bill that would instead require someone to be 21 to conceal carry. They would also have to pass a hunter safety course or get a permit from the sheriff’s office.”

So, per Ingram, the Second Amendment is evidently about hunting and getting permissions from government enforcers.

Unsurprisingly, the bill is backed by Montgomery County Sheriff Derrick Cunningham, who along with Ingram extols the “virtues” of requiring ID, ostensibly because “when we stop people, everyone has a fake name they use and we can’t question it.”

They both might want to brush up on Alabama Code Title 13A. Criminal Code § 13A-9-18.1, which states:

(a) A person commits the crime of giving a false name or address to a law enforcement officer if the person gives a false name or address to a law enforcement officer in the course of the officer’s official duties with intent to mislead the officer.

(b) Giving a false name or address to a law enforcement officer is a Class A misdemeanor.

The other reason given?

“This bill will take it to where if you don’t have an ID, the law enforcement have the option to take the gun and hold it until they come in and show their ID,” Ingram asserted. He also claimed, “this would eliminate violence without punishing responsible gun owners.”

That sounds like something Shannon Watts would say.

So, it lets cops presume you are guilty until proven innocent by taking away your rightful, supposedly Constitutionally protected property, and not giving it back to you until you can do so? And that doesn’t punish you?

And how will it “eliminate violence” since the law doesn’t authorize criminals to have guns, and, significantly, it doesn’t stop them from acquiring them, either. Ingram is parroting the same “Dodge City over fender benders/blood in the streets” nonsense the antis have been bleating about since concealed carry permits first started gaining popularity. Desperate because they sense they’re losing with 29 states now offering verisons of their own, they’ve turned up the volume and ramped up the hysteria on permitless carry.

Again significantly, the experience with not requiring permits to exercise a right once more demonstrates that non-criminals behave that way regardless of the laws, peaceably. Recent evidence for that comes from Ohio, where dire warnings from the usual suspects, predictably, turned out to be a big nothingburger.  And overall, per a March Ammo.com analysis:

“53% of the 21 states with restrictive concealed carry laws have violent crime rates higher than the national average. 55% of states with a violent crime rate below the national average have permitless carry.”

Then, for someone so bent on making law-abiding citizens prove their trustworthiness, Ingram does an about-face on illegal aliens, having authored a bill that passed the House in April, to reward illegal immigrants, who violated our laws and entered the country without the state IDs he says are so necessary for citizens, by allowing them to attend state colleges.

His reasons, per WAFF 48?

“Alabama’s workforce is suffering.”

So, he’s another cheap labor Republican “businessman” sellout. And he couches it in weasel words to make it seem like he cares, by adding “that he wants to make it clear this amendment is for immigrants who want to become citizens and contribute to the state’s economy.”

That’s just what another gun prohibitionist, Chuck Schumer wants: a “pathway” [read ‘superhighway’] to citizenship” for the tens of millions of illegals strategically attracted into this country by politicians with good reason to be confident they’ll overwhelmingly vote Democrat.

“I’m a Republican and very conservative,” he assured the media before pulling another old political con, showing everyone his big “but” and making excuses that prove he’s not. Someone who understands what being “very conservative” means would not sell out gun owners, whose interests he’s supposed to represent, by heaping prior restraints onto “shall not be infringed. And he would not simultaneously be a useful idiot for the socialist Democrats. They’v made their intent for the “bourgeoisie” that Ingram and his rope-selling capitalist cronies represent crystal clear. .

The enemy inside the gates, whether he’s maliciously subversive or just plain dense, can do a lot more damage than the ones on the outside who are at least honest about their demands to evsicerate your rights.

About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.