Iowa Firearms Carry Bills – Status

Iowa Firearms Carry Bills – Status
by Sean McClanahan

Clive, IA –-(AmmoLand.com)- We have gotten some positive feedback on our bill from both the NRA and VCDL.  Some of the changes suggested by them have been incorporated into the bill, making it at even stronger piece of legislation.

We also met with Rep. Baudler last week, in an attempt to merge our bill with his.  Right now, it does not appear that will be happening.  His bill, in its current form, does not do enough to protect your rights. Unless that happens, we will not be joining forces with him this year. Here are the primary differences between Baudler’s bill and ours.  This is a bit lengthy, but it’s important for everyone to know exactly what we are fighting for.

—Discretion in 724.7

Baudler’s bill contains wording in 724.7 that reads:

“… and state the reason for the issuance of the permit, and the limits of the authority granted by such permits.”

Essentially, this continues the current practice of asking an applicant why a permit is requested, and it gives the Sheriff the ability to place restrictions on permits. This is wrong. There is no reason that anyone should have to give a reason for the application of a permit. By requiring a reason for issuance, a person is presumed to be unworthy of a permit until proven otherwise. The burden of proof should be on the Sheriff to prove that the citizen is unfit to obtain a permit. That would be called “innocent until proven guilty.” Likewise, part of the problem as it currently exists in Iowa has to do with the obscene restrictions that are placed on some permits. (Examples are available on our website.) We cannot continue to allow any Sheriff to place restrictions on a permit that do not conform to a statewide standard or law. It is totally ludicrous that residents in one county can obtain a PCW that has no restrictions on it, while over the county line, citizens there receive permits that have restrictions such as “Invalid in restaurants that serve alcohol” or “Valid only when carrying $500 or more.” There are certain restrictions on carrying a weapon in Iowa. All of these restrictions are spelled out in Section 724, and those are the only restrictions that need to be placed on any holder of a PCW.

Rep. Baudler stated that he might be willing to drop this language, and instead, push for two restrictions to be listed on every permit: “Valid for Handguns Only” and “Not Valid When Violating Iowa Law.” There are problems with both of these proposed restrictions.

“Valid for Handguns Only”
Including this demand would make it illegal for you to carry anything except a handgun. While it can be argued that nobody receives training for anything other than handguns, the flip-side to that argument is that nobody really NEEDS training on anything other than handguns.

You see, nobody expects you to be a highly skilled, top-notch marksman with your handgun. You need to prove that you know how to safely handle and operate your handgun, and that you can reasonably expect to put rounds on the target. That same kind of training carries over to rifles and shotguns. The basic rules of firearm safety and target acquisition apply to any firearm, from a snubby revolver to the most powerful rifle. As a law-abiding citizen who has a PCW, if I choose to put a Kel-Tec Sub2000 carbine or a shotgun in my trunk, I should be allowed to do so with no consequences. Likewise, nobody expects you to be an expert with other weapons, like a knife, or a taser, or an ASP baton. It is reasonable to say that any citizen can pick up any weapon other than a firearm and with a small amount of time, handle the weapon properly and safely.

Really – how hard is it to use a knife? I have no doubts that a highly skilled knife fighter could filet many of us before we even knew what was happening. Just like a highly skilled pistol marksman would put up a very difficult fight for many of us who carry a pistol for self-defense. Iowa has a Permit to Carry Weapons. It is a freedom that we cannot allow to slip away.

“Not Valid When Violating Iowa Law”
This is a much stickier restriction. This is being proposed by Rep. Baudler to counter the arguments given by the Sheriffs that sometimes, there are people that they just know shouldn’t have a permit because they are under investigation for some reason. If they approve a permit application, then the Sheriffs feel that they are issuing a permit to people who just shouldn’t have one due to the activities for which they are being investigated. If they deny the permit (and have to list the reason for denial), then the people being investigated would find out about the Sheriff’s activities, and potentially ruin the investigation.

The intention here is good, but here’s the problem. How many of you have been caught for speeding? If you were carrying a weapon with this restriction on your permit, and you were pulled over for speeding, would you then be carrying illegally? The answer is yes. You would potentially be looking at a jail term for simple speeding. The argument that has been given is that no LEO would ever take it to that extreme, and that scenario is not in the true spirit of what this part of the bill is trying to address.

But it can happen. ANY time you do something that is in violation of Iowa law, and you happen to be carrying, you now add the potential of having an illegal weapons charge tacked on. That is not the way to fix this problem.

The way to fix this problem is to do – nothing. In the Sheriff’s rare scenario (and they do admit that it very rarely happens), the right thing to do (and really, the Constitutional thing to do) is issue the permit. Again, innocent until proven guilty is a phrase that is stuck in my head for some reason. A Sheriff MIGHT have an investigation going on someone, and that person MIGHT be involved in some sort of illegal activity. But until such time that charges can be formally filed and the person arrested, that person still has all of his or her rights. The argument that “the person is a criminal, and by golly, we don’t want criminals walking around with guns” doesn’t hold water either. If the person being investigated is creating such a hazard to the community that the Sheriff doesn’t feel that issuing a permit would be in the interest of public safety, then the person shouldn’t be in the community in the first place.

Issue the permit
So the answer is simple. Issue the permit. Finish the investigation and either arrest or clear the person in question. If cleared, no harm, no foul. If arrested, the permit becomes invalid anyway. And if the person has a true criminal mindset, obtaining a permit is not really going to change that person’s intent to carry a weapon. Any LEO worth his or her salt will assume that EVERY person is carrying anyway, for officer safety’s sake. A piece of paper will not make a true criminal any more or less likely to carry a weapon.

Iowa Carry’s version of the bill has no mention of any type of reason for issuance or ability to restrict in 724.7. If an applicant meets the requirements of 724.8 and 724.9, the permit is issued. We cannot, and will not, support anything less.

–Qualifications in 724.8

There are two sub-sections in 724.8 that Rep. Baudler does not remove from his bill. They are:

“5. The issuing officer reasonably determines that the applicant does not constitute a danger to any person.”

and

“6. The person has never been convicted of any crime defined in Chapter 708, except ‘assault’ as defined in section 708.1 and ‘harassment’ as defined in section 708.7.”

Sub-section 5 is very dangerous. Taken in context, there is nothing wrong with the requirement. Taken out of context, it is a very hazardous requirement that is open to subjective interpretation and abuse. It can be argued that a person carrying a weapon is a danger to any person! Leaving this sub-section in place permits a Sheriff to use a level of discretion that we are not willing to accept, as it has the ability to allow a Sheriff to abuse the permitting process.

Sub-section 6 is something that is just plain bad. The anti-gun side has picked up on this section of the law, and they use it against us all the time. We actually agree with them – applicants who have a proven history (convictions) of assault or harassment should not receive a PCW. It would be best if this sub-section were totally removed.

Rep. Baudler believes that removing these sub-sections is impossible, because it changes current law. We disagree, because we’re already seeking to change the law with other modifications to Chapter 724. Iowa Carry’s version of the bill removes subsections 5 and 6, and replaces them with a new sub-section 5 that reads:

“5. The person is not currently adjudicated mentally incompetent.”

Taken together with the current sub-sections 1 through 4, this is a very objective test of whether or not a person is eligible to receive a PCW.

–Live Fire Shooting Test in 724.9A

The only difference here is the amount of time allowed between passing a safety course and passing a live fire shooting test. Rep. Baudler’s bill provides a maximum of 14 days. The Iowa Carry bill provides 90 days. After talking things over with Rep. Baudler, the current wording probably needs to be cleaned up a little. Each bill provides a candidate the chance to qualify up to three times in one day. We both agree that shooting for qualification three times in one day, for the maximum number of days provided, is excessive. In Baudler’s bill, this would potentially give someone up to 42 attempts to pass the live fire test. In the Iowa Carry bill, 270 attempts. This is way too much. We believe we have worked out a compromise, where the wording will be change to allow NO MORE THAN 3 attempts to pass the live fire test. We will drop our time period to 30 days. We hope that Baudler will make the same modifications to his bill. If so, we can get past this section.

–Restriction or Denial in 724.11

In Rep. Baudler’s bill, the Sheriff must provide a reason for restriction or denial in 724.11. In the Iowa Carry bill, we have removed all ability for a Sheriff to restrict, so the word restriction does not show up anywhere in the section. If the offensive wording is removed in 724.7, there is no reason to have the word restriction in this section.

In-conclusion
There are other areas where the Iowa Carry bill does not mesh up with Rep. Baudler’s bill. However, none of those are significant enough to be considered “show stoppers.” Rep. Baudler believes that his bill, if passed, would provide a “baby step” toward our eventual goal of getting true, objective Shall Issue for the citizens of Iowa. As I have attempted to show here, that is not the case at all. Baudler’s proposed bill still maintains the ability for a Sheriff to restrict a permit and ask for a reason for issuance. Since his bill (and ours) both provide for an appeals process, he feels that the best way to go about this process is to make the minor tweaks that he has in his bill, then take Sheriffs to court over their restrictions or denials. In other words – make the citizen prove that he is worthy of a permit.

We firmly disagree with this. The burden of proof should be on the state, not the citizen. Any citizen who can pass the requirements of 724.8 and 724.9 should be issued a permit with no restrictions, and no reason for issuance given. This process works for citizens in nearly 80% of the country now. It is time for Iowa to join them.

There are still a number of other things we are working on behind the scenes.  I hope to have more information to pass along in the next couple of weeks.

About:
Iowa Carry is the ultimate resource for firearms carry information in the State of Iowa. Here you will find all the information you need about weapons carry laws and the fight to bring Shall Issue to Iowa.

Iowa Carry is an affiliate group of the Second Amendment Foundation. Please take some time and look around and learn about our cause. We need to work together to ensure, that like 40 other states, Iowa adopts a law increasing personal protection for all its citizens. Visit: Iowacarry.org