A Reckless Move: How This New Gun Law Endangers Communities
On March 11, 2025, Representative Michael Cloud (R-TX) introduced a new gun law bill the Protecting the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Act, a bill designed to prevent the federal government from enacting firearm regulations during declared national emergencies. While the bill is framed as a safeguard for constitutional rights, in reality, it creates significant barriers to addressing public safety crises and curbing gun violence in the United States.
Blocking Necessary Public Health Responses
Gun violence is a leading cause of death in America, particularly among children and young adults. In 2024, the U.S. Surgeon General took a bold step by declaring gun violence a public health crisis—a recognition of the devastating toll firearms have on communities across the country. The advisory aimed to encourage policies that could reduce gun-related injuries and deaths, just as similar approaches have been used successfully to curb smoking, traffic fatalities, and other public health concerns.
Yet, rather than acknowledging the urgency of this crisis, Rep. Cloud’s bill would strip the government of its ability to respond effectively. By explicitly prohibiting national emergency declarations from being used to implement gun safety measures, this legislation prioritizes ideological concerns over public well-being.
A New Gun Law Bill That Ignores the Reality of Gun Violence
Supporters of this bill claim it protects Americans’ rights, but what it truly does is tie the hands of policymakers in addressing gun violence during times of crisis. Emergencies—whether they be mass shootings, domestic terrorism, or civil unrest—require swift action. The ability to temporarily regulate firearm access during these events could save lives.
For instance, in the aftermath of mass shootings, common-sense measures such as emergency background checks or restrictions on certain firearms could help prevent further tragedy. Public safety officials must have the tools necessary to act quickly when threats arise, yet this bill would ensure that such action is off-limits.
Government Overreach or Common-Sense Protections?
The bill’s supporters argue that preventing emergency gun regulations is a matter of protecting constitutional rights. However, the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that the Second Amendment allows for reasonable firearm restrictions. Just as other rights, such as free speech, have limitations when they endanger public safety (e.g., inciting violence), gun rights must be weighed against the safety of the broader population.
Rep. Cloud compares potential gun regulations to government mandates imposed during COVID-19, claiming the bill is necessary to prevent government overreach. But this comparison is misleading. The ability to regulate firearms during emergencies is not an attack on personal freedom—it is a necessary tool to address specific dangers. Refusing to allow any restrictions, regardless of the circumstances, is an extreme stance that prioritizes unfettered gun access over the lives of American citizens.
Who Benefits from This New Gun Law Bill?
It is worth asking who truly benefits from this new gun law legislation. The bill is backed by organizations like the National Association of Gun Rights (NAGR) and Gun Owners of America (GOA), both of which have consistently opposed even the most modest gun reforms. The interests of the gun lobby are clear: to prevent any limitations on firearm access, regardless of the consequences.
Meanwhile, the American people—who overwhelmingly support measures like universal background checks and restrictions on high-capacity magazines—are the ones left vulnerable. This bill does not serve the interests of the majority but rather caters to a narrow group determined to block all efforts to address gun violence.
A Step in the Wrong Direction
The Protecting the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Act is not about protecting rights—it is about preventing necessary safety measures that could protect lives. At a time when gun violence continues to devastate communities across the country, policymakers should be working toward solutions, not creating more roadblocks.
Rather than passing legislation that limits the ability of leaders to act in times of crisis, Congress should be focusing on proactive measures to reduce firearm deaths and make communities safer. If protecting lives is truly a priority, then rejecting this bill should be a simple decision.
Take Action
If you believe that public safety should come before partisan politics, contact your representatives and urge them to oppose this dangerous bill. It’s time to demand policies that address the real issue at hand—keeping Americans safe.
Ignoring Gun Violence Is a Death Sentence—Governors Must Act Now
