Commonwealth Second Amendment

Jamaica Plain, MA --(Ammoland.com)-  Today an appeal was filed in Hightower v. Boston in the First Circuit Court of Appeals.

The appeal seeks to overturn the lower court decision dismissing Stacey Hightower’s lawsuit against the City of Boston challenging the constitutionality of discretionary licensing in Massachusetts.

Stacey Hightower is an Air Force veteran and former Boston Police Officer. She resigned from the Boston Police Department in 2008 after 10 years of service to pursue a career in education.

The city responded by revoking her licensing to carry (LTC) firearms and seizing her personally owned firearm and ammunition.

During the district court proceedings the City readily conceded that there was no reason, statutory or otherwise, that would prohibit Hightower from owing and possessing firearms. Yet, they steadfastly insist upon their right to determine who can and cannot possess firearms in the City of Boston based upon the “interests of the Boston Police Department”.

This appeal challenges the lower court decision and the constitutionality of Chap 140 Sec 131 by making compelling arguments in support of:

• A Second Amendment right to carry (i.e. bear) arms outside the home
• Suitability as an invalid standard for licensing the exercise of a fundamental right
• The failure of discretionary licensing to meet any standard of scrutiny
• A liberty interest in the keeping and bearing arms and a property interest in the required license.

A copy of the appeal can be found here. We will continue to keep the Hightower webpage posted with developments in the case as they occur.

Please consider helping to support plaintiffs like Hightower with your tax deductible donation.

As always, thank you for your continued interest and support.

Commonwealth Second Amendment
Comm2A is a not-for-profit charitable organization as defined under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue code. Donations made to Comm2A are fully tax deductable as charitable contribution for US federal income tax purposes. All donations are greatly appreciated and will be used to support a variety of legal and educational projects. Visit: www.comm2a.org

Grass Roots North Carolina for Firearms Education

North Carolina --(Ammoland.com)-They have already drafted an ordinance that clearly violates state law.

Their ordinance employs the now typical dishonest strategy embraced by several other anti-gun municipalities.

This strategy involves tortuously redefining broad park areas to fit within narrow exclusions tacked onto the new “Castle Doctrine/Concealed Carry Permitted in Parks” law. As a result greenways, hiking trails and entire parks are slated for impermissible gun bans.

While Orange County Commissioners believe themselves to be above state law, they will happily subject you to the wrath of their municipal ordinance if you dare lawfully defend yourself and your family within their parks; including a $500 fine, six months incarceration, and permanent loss of your Constitutional RIGHT to bear arms.

Thanks to the vigilance and quick reporting of a GRNC member we have an opportunity to make the voice of reason heard before this abomination is approved.

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED: Attend Commissioners Meeting

Email Commissioners

Copy and paste email address list:

Temckee@co.orange.nc.us, syuhasz@co.orange.nc.us, bjacobs@co.orange.nc.us, gordonam@mindspring.com, vfoushee@co.orange.nc.us, phemminger@bellsouth.net, bpelissier@co.orange.nc.us

Deliver This Message

For email, use subject line: Comply with state law, do not ban guns in parks!

It has come to my attention that you intend to ban concealed carry permit holders from lawfully defending themselves in certain areas of Orange County parks. In order to do this you have planned to “redefine” certain park areas in an attempt to fit them under the narrow exclusions permitted under SL 2011-268.

This is clearly disrespectful and non-compliant with state law, and more troubling, a violation of our Constitutional rights to bear arms.

Why don’t you trust the citizens that elected you to responsibly defend themselves?

North Carolinian Concealed Handgun Permittees have shown themselves to be extremely responsible and are not a problem that you should be concerned about. Places within Orange County where citizens are not permitted to effectively defend themselves IS a problem that you should begin working to solve.

I will be following progress and will alert Grass Roots North Carolina if you make it necessary to do so.

Sincerely,

A Concerned NC voter

About:
Grass Roots North Carolina/Forum for Firearms Education is a non-profit, all volunteer organization devoted to educating the public about trends which abridge the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, and engaging in grass roots activism to preserve those freedoms. Formed in 1994 to conduct a highly successful rally for the Second Amendment, GRNC has gone on to conduct projects like “Remember in November: A Gun Owner’s Guide to Voting,” bringing concealed carry to North Carolina. Visit:www.grnc.org

Diplomatic Carry - New Ideas are Scary for Some

Gunlaws.com

PHOENIX, AZ --(Ammoland.com)- Officials travel armed. When a contingent of our officials visits any other country, they bring armed personnel in classic right-to-bear-arms manner.

Life is dangerous and the ability to protect yourself is a reasonable and prudent thing, a fundamental human right of existence, a moral imperative.

So they go armed. It’s only rational. Hillary and similar bring along enough firepower that if some of their group go one way while some head off in another, they’re both covered.

The same is true in reverse. When an ambassador from Trashcanistan comes to the United States, discreetly armed bodyguards accompany the party at all times, “laws to the contrary notwithstanding” [and this includes all of New York City]. That’s lawyer-speak for “their right to carry supersedes any other rules,” or in plainer English, “We’re above those laws.” The ambassador might decide to personally carry too. I’m guessing Hillary does not.

There’s this whole “second system” of gun possession and carry here domestically, another layer of rules on top of the common ones you must follow, operating quietly with people in the know cooperating.

Where are the laws for this exception to every gun law on the U.S. books? How does this special class of people exempt themselves from laws controlling the rest of us?

No one is harmed by their exemption. In fact, community safety increases, because assaults on those armed people are naturally deterred, even defensible if needed.

Should we the people maybe have Diplomatic Carry too?

Is a diplomat’s life truly at more risk — or worth more — than any “commoner”? How does this comply with equal protection under the law?

Local authorities understand implicitly that these armed folks aren’t going to randomly shoot people, or settle arguments with gunfire, the same as you and me when we’re armed. They enjoy proper respect (even if they come from regimes that don’t deserve it).

We on the other hand have rights denied haphazardly, even with Constitutional Carry. As good as it is, Constitutional Carry is not enough.

Americans need and deserve the next step, Diplomatic Carry.

The body politic moves slowly. After several decades of experience, police nationwide understand and operate just fine within a framework of millions of people traveling armed. As the number of people carrying arms for crime control has increased, assaultive crimes have decreased. The media generally calls this “a surprising decrease in crime that has the experts baffled.” All these people are walking around armed, expressly to forestall crime, and the media can’t understand why crime has dropped. But I digress.

Oh sure, armed forces within the U.S. — from local police to secretive agents our government is now filled with — keep a watchful eye on the armed diplomats, as well they should. They also provide backup in the event of need. The same as for us.

But in the big picture, diplomats have less need for an ever-present armed escort than the public. A rare few diplomats face death at the hands of the mobs. Thousands of citizens are murdered each year. Who needs protection more?

The freedom of Diplomatic Carry, a concept many of us can easily grasp, is mind boggling to the great unwashed. So insulated from any truth about firearms, victims of television and the government-run school system, they have imbedded ignorance that is hard to shake. Destructively misinformed kids and teachers compound the problem. I digress again.

Now, Diplomatic Carry is not going to happen overnight. Many voices will be raised in objection to such freedom.
And unfortunately, some opposition will come from people who consider themselves firearms enthusiasts. Establishing everyone’s uninfringed freedom to carry is scary, at least to some. But that’s OK. Real freedom is a house high on a hill.

Diplomatic Carry is a paradigm shift. A window into a world that could be, and ought to be, a lofty goal. Your right to your life and its protection cannot morally be denied. It is denied only by force, and there is only one viable countermeasure to force unfortunately, in this best of all possible worlds, and that’s countervailing force. I don’t like it, but there it is.

Diplomatic Carry is a new level of autonomy, of personal sovereignty. It raises the bar. In this country, the people are the sovereigns and the government is the servant. How do you justify the servants carrying arms if the masters cannot?

The only consistent position for free people to take is this: Anything short of Diplomatic Carry is infringement.

I am in the process of dissecting the legal framework that enables Diplomatic Carry, and modeling an approach for extending those principles to the public. Conceptually this is sound. Pragmatically it is an uphill climb, but as Americans we know that anything can be climbed. I’ll have early results soon in my blog, PageNine.org. Sign up to stay informed.

Copyright 2012 Alan Korwin

About GunLaws.com:
Scottsdale, Ariz.-based Bloomfield Press, founded in 1988, is the largest publisher and distributor of gun-law books in the country. Our website, gunlaws.com, features a free national directory to gun laws and relevant contacts in all states and federally, along with our unique line of related books and DVDs. “After Your Shoot” for media review is available on request, call 800-707-4020. Our authors are available for interview, call to schedule. Call for cogent positions on gun issues, informed analysis on proposed laws, talk radio that lights up the switchboard, fact sheets and position papers. As we always say, “It doesn’t make sense to own a gun and not know the rules.” Visit: www.gunlaws.com

About: Tom McHale describes himself as a conservative gun-totin’ bible-clingin’ literary assault dude who enjoys finding humor in just about anything. His web blog My Gun Culture is an irreverent, twisted look at gun news bordering on the ridiculous. It covers shootin’ stuff, loud noises, defending your own, the occasional mall ninja, and about 200 years of the American way. These are the (partially) true stories of My Gun Culture says Tom. Visit: www.mygunculture.com

Grass Roots North Carolina for Firearms Education

North Carolina --(Ammoland.com)- Could Senate Republicans have prevented the murder of Danielle Watson?

Danielle was a manager at the Flying Biscuit Café. Last weekend, while closing the restaurant, she was murdered by an ex-con recently released after doing time for armed robbery.

In a classic application of “Dial 911 & Die!” Charlotte police botched their response to her fiancés 911 call, and never even discovered her body, stabbed and left behind a dumpster, until the next day. It was the second Charlotte restaurant murder in a single weekend, highlighting the need to pass House Bill 111, “Handgun Permit Valid in Parks & Restaurants.”

Right now, concealed handgun permit-holders are prohibited from protecting their families anywhere alcohol is “sold and consumed,” which includes many restaurants. This includes not only restaurant patrons, but also restaurant workers, since the only people exempt from the ban are restaurant “owners and lessees.” For full details, see GRNC president Paul Valone’s article at: http://exm.nr/StopRestaurantHomicide

How it should end
Now contrast this with another restaurant crime, only one week later. Just across the South Carolina border, in Spartanburg, Dante Lamont Williams and another man entered the Waffle House on Chesnee Highway, both armed with handguns. But when they held customers at gunpoint, a patron who was a concealed handgun permit holder shot Williams, killing him. The other robber fled, and innocent lives were saved.

Republicans do nothing
Despite passing in the House, however, the bill is languishing in the Senate Judiciary I Committee, where Republican Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger (Guilford, Rockingham) has so far refused the bill a hearing on the premise that the topic doesn’t “poll well.” Meanwhile, as Republicans dither and fret about polls, restaurant workers are dying.

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED:
Immediately email AND call

Republican leadership:

• Sen. Phil Berger, Senate President Pro Tem, at Phil.Berger@ncleg.net and (919) 733-5708
• Sen. Tom Apodaca, Senate Rules Chairman, at Tom.Apodaca@ncleg.net, and (919) 733-5745
• Sen. Buck Newton, Senate Judiciary Chairman, at Buck.Newton@ncleg.net, and (919) 715-3030

Deliver This Message

(use subject line: STOP RESTAURANT HOMICIDE)

Dear Senator:

While House Bill 111, “Handgun Permit Valid in Parks & Restaurants,” languishes in the Senate Judiciary I Committee, restaurant workers are dying. In a single weekend, recently, Charlotte experienced two such murders, including that of 25-year-old Danielle Watson, a manager who was closing the Flying Biscuit Café when she was murdered by Mark Cox, an ex-con just released after doing time for armed robbery.

Police botched the 911 response, only finding her body behind a dumpster the next day, but it is your chamber that is preventing restaurant workers like Danielle from defending themselves: The Flying Biscuit has an on-premise alcohol consumption permit, where everyone but the “owner or lessee” is prohibited from protecting themselves with firearms.

Now contrast this with another restaurant crime, only one week later. Just across the South Carolina border, in Spartanburg, Dante Lamont Williams and another man entered the Waffle House on Chesnee Highway. Both men were armed with handguns. But when they held customers at gunpoint, a patron who was a concealed handgun permit holder shot Williams, killing him. The other robber fled, and innocent lives were saved.

Despite what newspaper editorials claim, nobody is advocating “drunks with guns.” As you well know, under HB 111, concealed handgun permit-holders will still be prohibited from imbibing alcohol.

Stop being a slave to polls, and start leading. Pass HB 111 to STOP RESTAURANT HOMICIDE. I will be monitoring your actions via Grass Roots North Carolina legislative alerts.

Respectfully,

About:
Grass Roots North Carolina/Forum for Firearms Education is a non-profit, all volunteer organization devoted to educating the public about trends which abridge the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, and engaging in grass roots activism to preserve those freedoms. Formed in 1994 to conduct a highly successful rally for the Second Amendment, GRNC has gone on to conduct projects like “Remember in November: A Gun Owner’s Guide to Voting,” bringing concealed carry to North Carolina. Visit:www.grnc.org

National Rifle Association

FAIRFAX, Va. --(Ammoland.com)- NRA will appeal yesterday’s decision by a federal court in Texas, which held that the Second Amendment doesn’t protect any right to keep or bear arms outside the home.

The decision, handed down by U.S. District Judge Sam Cummings of the Northern District of Texas, came in the case of Jennings v. McCraw, in which a group of law-abiding 18- to 20-year old adults challenged the state law prohibiting issuance of concealed handgun licenses to persons under 21, who are treated as adults for virtually every other purpose under the law.

(NRA is also a party on behalf of its members in this age group.) Judge Cummings ruled that it was unnecessary to address the state’s discrimination against young adults because “the right to carry a handgun outside of the home … seems to be beyond the scope of the core Second Amendment concern articulated in Heller [v. District of Columbia].”

Unfortunately, this is only the most recent of several court decisions that have misread Heller in that way. Heller, of course, only directly addressed gun possession in the home, for a very simple reason: The plaintiffs in that case only challenged Washington, D.C.’s limits on possession in the home, rather than its restrictions on carrying firearms outside the home.

More importantly, the Supreme Court in Heller never said the Second Amendment doesn’t apply outside the home. Rather, it said that the home is the place “where the need for defense of self, family, and property is most acute”—implying that there are other places where the need may be less acute, but still exists.

Likewise, the Court suggested that it would uphold bans on carrying guns in “sensitive places”—which implies that carrying in places that are not “sensitive” would be protected under the Second Amendment.

The NRA will appeal the Jennings decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, and to the Supreme Court if necessary. Although the Supreme Court recently declined to hear two cases addressing the right to bear arms outside the home, several others are working their way through the courts. These include the NRA-supported cases of Peruta v. County of San Diego, which challenges discriminatory permit issuance under California law and Shepard v. Madigan, challenging Illinois’ complete denial of any lawful way to carry firearms for self-defense outside one’s home or place of business. Peruta is pending in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals and Shepard is awaiting action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.

For the latest news on these and other NRA-supported cases and to subscribe to our online Legal Update newsletter, go to www.nraila.org/legalupdate.

About:
Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen’s group. Four million members strong, NRA continues its mission to uphold Second Amendment rights and to advocate enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation’s leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the military. Visit: www.nra.org

Florida Carry

Florida - -(Ammoland.com)- When Hueris Mora came to us, we did what we always do when contacted by someone who is facing gun carry charges.

We set about researching the charges and circumstances of the incident.

Florida Carry only gets involved in these cases when good people face unjust charges because they choose to lawfully carry defensive arms.

In his case, it was immediately apparent that continuing prosecution by the office of Katherine Fernandez Rundle, Miami-Dade State Attorney, was unjust at best. Our consulting attorneys statewide were in unanimous concurrence that prosecution of this case, despite the clear language of 790.053, was completely baseless. The Miami-Dade State Attorney’s Office must have also known that they were in an untenable position because they quickly agreed to take the possibility of jail time off the table.

Removing the possibility of imprisonment was not an olive branch offered in the interest of justice, it was in fact a Trojan Horse. This underhanded move was their only way to keep prosecuting the case because it had the calculated effect of taking away Mr. Mora’s public defender. Once the Assistant State Attorney prosecuting the case had effectively maneuvered to deprive Mr. Mora of legal counsel, an offer was made. An offer so common in Florida that it is considered the standard plea deal…

“You can retake the concealed course to get your license to carry back but kiss your gun goodbye.”

Hueris knew he was getting the shaft despite having done nothing wrong, so he did what nobody before in Florida (that we know of) had done. He didn’t sign the deal. This was a brave decision despite having no legal help at that time.

Florida Carry has consulting attorneys who do countless hours of pro bono work behalf of our members. Unfortunately, at that time we did not have a criminal defense attorney in Mr. Mora’s area. That’s when we reached out to Jesus “Jojo” Rodriguez. He didn’t blink. Pro bono defense of a truly worthy young man who needs our help? “Absolutely!” was Jojo’s immediate response. Our other attorneys and legal interns rallied together to provide support and Mr. Rodriguez, Florida Carry’s newest consulting attorney, drove this case home. The charge of violating Florida’s Open Carry Ban was dismissed with prejudiced. We finally won this fight that deprived Mr. Mora of his handgun for nearly six months.

Last year, when 2011 SB 234 was debated in the State Legislature, our elected leaders were told about law abiding gun owners being arrested and thrown in jail for even accidental or incidental exposure of lawfully carried firearms. The State Prosecuting Attorneys lobbyist repeatedly said that “Nobody has ever been prosecuted for open carry.” The fact is that nobody ever went all the way to trial. Many have been prosecuted; this was a case where a good man fought back. If this doesn’t meet some lobbyist definition of prosecution, we recommend a new dictionary.

Judge the case docket for yourself: http://tiny.cc/joq5l

It sure looks like prosecution to us.

The Florida Sheriff’s Association sent multiple lobbyists in uniform who said that law enforcement officers will use their “proper discretionary powers” and would never arrest someone for carrying a handgun if it became innocently unconcealed. Yet there is a 25 year history of some officers using subjective language in firearms laws to unreasonably arrest law-abiding people who choose to exercise their right to bear arms. In one such case a man lawfully carrying was permanently injured when handcuffs were put on him with such force that nerves in both wrists were severed. All because part of his handgun became unconcealed.

Early last year, Florida’s Open Carry Ban was amended to insert the subjective language asked for by the Florida Sheriffs and State Prosecuting Attorneys Lobbyist. This compromised language came with their promise that these incidents would stop. Subsequently Mr. Mora had to spend a night deprived of his freedom in jail and half a year fighting for his rights. Every month we are contacted by other law-abiding people who have been confronted, detained, and threatened with arrest because they were lawfully carrying a firearm in Florida and it “printed” through clothing or became unconcealed.

They have broken their promise and we now call on the Florida Legislature to repeal one of the most anti-gun laws in the country.

Despite the Florida Legislature’s clear intent that people who have lawfully carried handguns, which may become innocently unconcealed, face no charges. As long as the general ban on open carry exists, these arrests and prosecutions will continue unabated.

Florida Statute 790.053 is Florida’s very unusual open carry ban, it was a knee jerk reaction when passed in 1987 and it is long overdue for repeal.

We need your membership to make our work possible! Please protect your rights in Florida by joining Florida Carry Today! http://www.FloridaCarry.org/

About:
Florida Carry is a non-profit, non-partisan, grassroots organization dedicated to advancing the fundamental civil right of all Floridians to keep and bear arms for self defense as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I Section 8 of the Florida Constitution. Florida Carry stands only to represent our members and the over 7 million gun owners of Florida. We are not beholden to any national organization’s agenda that may compromise that mission.

Florida Carry works tirelessly toward striking down ill-conceived gun control laws that have been proven to provide safe havens to criminals and be deadly to law abiding citizens.

Gun Rights Policies with John Snyder

Arlington, VA -Martin Luther King, Jr. kept guns at home for personal protection.

He applied for but was denied a permit to carry a concealed firearm. He was concerned for his personal safety, as are a lot of Americans.

With constitutional carry, a law-abiding American citizen could carry a concealed firearm without government authorization.

About John Snyder:
Named the Gun Dean by Human Events, “the senior rights activist in Washington” by Shotgun News, a “champion of the right to self-defense” by The Washington Times, and “dean of gun lobbyists” by The Washington Post and The New York Times, John M. Snyder has spent 45 years as a proponent of the individual Second Amendment civil right to keep and bear arms as a National Rifle Association editor, public affairs director of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, treasurer of the Second Amendment Foundation, and founder of www.GunRightsPolicies.org.

A former Jesuit seminarian, Snyder is founder/manager of Telum Associates, LL.C., founder/chairman of the St. Gabriel Possenti Society, Inc., a director of Council for America, and serves on the boards of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and the American Federation of Police & Concerned Citizens. He is also the author of the book Gun Saint. Visit: www.GunRightsPolicies.org

Open Letter to NFOA & Nebraskans Seeking Support for Prosecutorial Carry

Nebraska Firearms Owners Association

Omaha, NE --(Ammoland.com)- President Allen and Members of the NFOA Board:

My name is Matthew Mellor, and I am a Deputy County Attorney for Seward County, Nebraska. I am writing to you to request that the NFOA lend its support to LB 802 in this current legislative session.

I proposed the language that would later become LB 802, and I am thankful to Sen. Scott Lautenbaugh for agreeing to introduce it as one of his bills. In general, LB 802 would allow prosecutors in Nebraska to carry a concealed handgun in places where such action is currently prohibited. LB 802 limits a prosecutor’s carrying in such “gun-free zones” to the fulfillment of his or her responsibilities of employment. In short, this bill would allow prosecutors to protect themselves while working to put criminals behind bars. As a prosecutor, I know that people in this line of work are sometimes the subject of very serious threats, and among other things, this bill is intended to address those threats.

I have been following the discussion of LB 802 on the NFOA’s online forum, and as I expected, there is some resistance to the bill because it is creating an exception for a specific group of people. I understand the “if I can’t carry in those places, why should someone else be able to” line of thinking, but I don’t subscribe to it. Don’t get me wrong, I firmly believe that everyone has the right to defend themselves, regardless of where they may be. The type of building they happen to be in shouldn’t matter. I do, however, know that the legislative process isn’t that clear-cut.

I am familiar with the legislative process, and there is a bit of logic to bills such as LB 802. While the ultimate goal for me and probably the NFOA, as well, would be for Constitutional Carry to become a reality in Nebraska, I know that changes to the law don’t come all at once. It took years and years of activity in the Legislature before Sen. Combs was finally able to get the Concealed Handgun Permit Act (CHPA) passed back in 2006, and it’s going to take a significant amount of time before we get to Constitutional Carry in this state.

LB 802, while being an immediate benefit to prosecutors, would also serve as a benefit to the greater concealed carry community, as one poster on the forum rightly noted. This bill is an opportunity to get the proverbial foot in the door that may one day lead to Constitutional Carry, or at least a more relaxed permit system. Sen. Lautenbaugh likely agreed to carry this bill because he thought it would not be that difficult to make an exception for prosecutors based on the nature of their work, as long as such exception was limited to their employment.

It is my position that LB 802 is merely a first step toward a more relaxed permit system, or even Constitutional Carry. Logic would hold that once more and more exceptions to the current CHPA are enacted, there will be fewer restrictions and we may get to see Constitutional Carry in Nebraska. LB 802 and bills that will be introduced in the future slowly erode the restrictions of the CHPA, and will be a benefit to all concealed handgun permit holders.

I appreciate your consideration of LB 802, and again, I ask for the NFOA to support this important legislation.

Mission -
Nebraska Firearms Owners Association (NFOA) is organized for the purpose of voicing the opinion of its membership to the Nebraska Legislature and other law making bodies within the state as well as Federal level, as it pertains to firearms. NFOA members will also make it a priority to educate residents on firearms related issues.
On the web: www.NebraskaFirearms.org or email: AAllen@NebraskaFirearms.org for more information.

AmmoLand Gun News

COLUMBUS/SANTA FE --(Ammoland.com)- Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine and New Mexico Department of Public Safety Cabinet Secretary Gorden E. Eden, Jr. have signed an agreement that permits reciprocity between their states for citizens who have valid concealed carry permits.

“I am pleased that this agreement between Ohio and New Mexico will allow Ohioans who have concealed carry permits the same rights to carry a concealed handgun in the State of New Mexico, as well as New Mexicans who have concealed carry permits to do the same in Ohio” said Attorney General DeWine.

Secretary Eden reiterated those remarks. “As proponents of the Second Amendment, the New Mexico Department of Public Safety is happy to extend concealed carry rights to licensed Ohioans, as those same rights are extended to licensed New Mexicans who visit Ohio.”

Ohio law permits the Attorney General to enter into written agreements with other states whose laws are “substantially comparable” to Ohio’s eligibility requirements for a license to carry a concealed handgun. In New Mexico, this authority falls under the New Mexico Department of Public Safety.

New Mexico’s and Ohio’s concealed carry laws are very similar to one another. Both states require a background check for long-term residents of their state or an FBI III check for short-term residents of their states, and both require training in order to be eligible for a concealed carry license.

Concealed carry permit holders will be required to comply with all of the other state’s laws regarding possession, transportation, storage and use of concealed weapons and all other applicable laws except those regarding issuance, suspension, revocation and renewal of concealed weapons licenses, which remain within the power of the issuing state.

Each state will make their verification systems available to the other to be able to check the status of the other state’s concealed carry licenses.

The agreement remains in force unless statutory authority for it is withdrawn by either of the state’s legislatures or terminated in writing by either party upon 30 days notice.

With this signing, Ohio and New Mexico each now have reciprocity agreements with 22 states.

Grass Roots North Carolina for Firearms Education

North Carolina --(Ammoland.com)- They’re angry that their “right” to infringe your rights have been taken by HB 650.

The Winston-Salem town council expressed outrage during their November 21st meeting that our state Assembly has “usurped” their “right” to disarm law-abiding citizens within city parks.

THE TOWN’S DISCUSSION WAS LACK OF GOVERNMENT REASON IN ACTION:

HB 650 was called “Objectionable”, “Unacceptable”, “Unforgivable”.

The same broken record reason for banning carry in parks was offered by Police Chief Scott Cunningham: “When a weapon is present the situation could escalate – to a fatal incident instead of bumps and bruises”.

Chief Cunningham also stated that Winston-Salem concealed carry permittees are, “very much law-abiding.”

What the Chief didn’t say is that there is no evidence that a permittee has been violent anywhere in NC. City Councilor Vivian H. Burke encouraged Winston-Salem citizens to “Occupy Raleigh” to protest HB 650. Mayor Allen Joines characterized HB 650 as having, “taken away the ability of city government to regulate its own affairs.”

It is clear that the Winston-Salem Mayor and City Council need a strong dose of reality-inducing reason to understand that the Second Amendment trumps any of their ordinances, and that it is they who serve at the Assembly’s pleasure.

And we are just the people to administer this badly-needed medicine.

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED:

Contact the Mayor and City Councilors of Winston-Salem, NC.

Cut and paste email list: danbesse@danbesse.org, vivianb@cityofws.org, denisea@cityofws.org, robertc@cityofws.org, derwinm@cityofws.org, mollyl@cityofws.org, wandam@cityofws.org, jamestjr@cityofws.org, allenj@cityofws.org

Deliver This Message

City of Winston-Salem Representatives,

It is clear from your November 21st meeting that your City Attorney rewrote city ordinances not to comply with state law (HB 650, Castle Doctrine and Concealed Carry Permitted in Parks), but to take every opportunity to “not comply” with this important freedom-promoting new legislation.

The resulting ordinance is an unreasonable infringement of Second Amendment rights that conflicts with the very intent of the new state law to provide state-wide uniformity. It also sends a troubling message of willful lack of cooperation with state government, under which you serve.

HB 650 was intended to increase the ability of law-abiding permittees to defend themselves and their families when visiting North Carolina parks. The need for citizens to be able to effectively defend themselves in Winston-Salem parks was made clear by Chief Scott Cunningham’s admission that crime is a problem in these areas. The severity of these problems across our state was made clear earlier this month by the brutal murder of Leroy Staton in Greenville’s Jaycee park. Based upon these established facts, your criticism of the Assembly’s enactment of HB 650 is inappropriate.

Chief Cunningham’s claim that disagreements will escalate to homicide is unreasonable: across the state over 330,000 permittees have had 16 years of opportunity to become violent and have not. The Chief’s concern is similar to those expressed earlier against “shall issue” laws; there was to be “blood in the street” and “lead flying through the air”. These fears have not been realized and, like concern of disagreements escalating to shoot-outs, are unjustified. The Chief himself admits that, “Concealed carry permittees are very much law-abiding.” Why do you mistrust them?

Your ordinance is illegal, irrational, unjustifiable and a clear example of disrespect for both state law and the Constitutional rights of free Americans.

It must be rescinded immediately.

I will be following progress through Grass Roots North Carolina.

Sincerely,

A concerned NC voter

GRNC is preparing to take appropriate legal action and needs to identify local plaintiffs.

• Plaintiffs are currently needed for actions within Winston-Salem, Kernersville, Greenville and Smithfield. Please contact alert@grnc.org.
• Other municipalities may be added.
• Everyone should carefully monitor municipal ordinances, particularly those recently enacted.
• Any restrictions beyond “a playground, an athletic field, a swimming pool, or an athletic facility” should be immediately reported to alert@grnc.org.

About:
Grass Roots North Carolina/Forum for Firearms Education is a non-profit, all volunteer organization devoted to educating the public about trends which abridge the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, and engaging in grass roots activism to preserve those freedoms. Formed in 1994 to conduct a highly successful rally for the Second Amendment, GRNC has gone on to conduct projects like “Remember in November: A Gun Owner’s Guide to Voting,” bringing concealed carry to North Carolina. Visit:www.grnc.org

National Shooting Sports Foundation

NEWTOWN, Conn --(Ammoland.com)- A federal judge in Denver has allowed a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Postal Service’s ban on guns in post offices to go forward, the Denver Post reports.

A Colorado couple filed the lawsuit last year, saying the ban violates their Second Amendment rights.

Avon residents Debbie and Tab Bonidy filed the lawsuit last year, saying the ban violates their Second Amendment rights.

The Bonidys say they carry handguns for self-defense and both hold concealed-carry permits, and they do not receive mail service at their remote home.

Lawsuit Filed Against Post Office Gun Ban

They say the ban, which prohibits carrying guns both in post offices and in their parking lots, makes it impossible for them to pick up their mail.James Manley, an attorney at the Mountain States Legal Foundation who represents both the Bonidys and the National Association for Gun Rights in the lawsuit, said the case could have a nationwide impact.

“This is a situation that hasn’t been challenged before, where you have members of the general public who want to exercise their right to carry,” Manley said.

About NSSF
The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the firearms industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of more than 6,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations and publishers. For more information, log on to www.nssf.org.

Grass Roots North Carolina for Firearms Education

North Carolina --(Ammoland.com)- The city council of Fayetteville NC claims to have been caught off guard by the implementation of HB 650 on Thursday, December 1st, so claims Mayor Tony Chavonne. So they meet tonight to consider the issue.

To give a flavor of the inclination of the city, Recreation Director Michael Gibson claims to respect the rights of lawful gun ownership, but illustrates a complete ignorance of the total lack of problems everywhere that legal concealed carry has been implemented by stating that he believes allowing it in areas where adults and children are together is “not a great idea” and that it makes him “uneasy.”

J.D. Pone, chairman of the Fayetteville-Cumberland Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission, makes no bones about his opposition. Pone says that he wished the city could continue to have a blanket ban on guns in all parks.

Yesterday’s Fayetteville Observer says: The item is on Monday’s consent agenda, which is reserved for noncontroversial items that require no discussion. On the night of meetings, council members can request to have items taken from the consent agenda for a debate and a separate vote.

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED:

• Attend the meeting at 7:00 pm tonight.
• Contact the Mayor and City Councilors of Fayetteville, NC.
• Cut and paste email list: mayor@ci.fay.nc.us dhaire2@nc.rr.com kbates05@nc.rr.com kdavy@ci.fay.nc.us askia25@aol.com Bobbyhurst@aol.com wjlcrisp@aol.com vapplewhiteccd7@yahoo.com tmohn@aol.com jarp@ci.fay.nc.us

Deliver This Message

City of Fayetteville Representatives,

HB 650 was intended to increase the ability of law-abiding permittees to defend themselves and their families when visiting North Carolina parks. The need for citizens to be able to effectively defend themselves in Fayetteville’s parks has been played out in parks the state over such as earlier this month in Greenville by the brutal murder of Leroy Staton in Jaycee Park.

I urge you to remove all bans of lawful concealed carry in Fayetteville parks in the spirit if not the letter of HB 650.

I will be following progress through Grass Roots North Carolina.

Sincerely,

A concerned NC voter

About:
Grass Roots North Carolina/Forum for Firearms Education is a non-profit, all volunteer organization devoted to educating the public about trends which abridge the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, and engaging in grass roots activism to preserve those freedoms. Formed in 1994 to conduct a highly successful rally for the Second Amendment, GRNC has gone on to conduct projects like “Remember in November: A Gun Owner’s Guide to Voting,” bringing concealed carry to North Carolina. Visit:www.grnc.org

Grass Roots North Carolina for Firearms Education

North Carolina --(Ammoland.com)- In a classic example of “Pass the Buck,” Greenville Mayor Pat Dunn blames city attorney for over-reaching parks gun ban.

Those who have contacted Greenville representatives about their over-reaching and illegal parks ban have all received the same canned response from Mayor Dunn: “Please know that the city council has instructed the City Attorney to rewrite city ordinances to comply with state law.”

GREENVILLE REPRESENTATIVES ARE MISREPRESENTING BOTH HB 650 AND THEIR RESPONSE TO IT!

• HB 650 was intended to uniformly permit carry in parks state-wide.
• HB 650 does not require Greenville to ban guns in parks.
• The most expedient way to “comply” with HB 650 is by simply rescinding laws banning carry in parks.
  Media reports combined with the over-reaching nature of their ban makes it clear the instructions were to ban everywhere possible.
• This type of comprehensive ban is inconsistent with the intent of HB 650 to provide state-wide uniformity.
• Twisting the off-leash dog-park into a “playground” to implement a ban is a direct violation of state law.
• Telling gun owners a half-truth about “rewriting to comply” instead of the whole truth of “rewriting to ban everywhere and still comply” is dishonest and disrespectful.

THE GREENVILLE PARK BAN DOES NOT COMPLY WITH STATE LAW AND MUST BE RESCINDED!

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED:

Contact the Mayor and City Councilors of Greenville, NC.
Cut and paste email list: pdunn2@suddenlink.net, athomasemail@gmail.com, bryantkittrell@kittrellandarmstrong.com, ksmith@greenvillenc.gov, rglover50@suddenlink.net, info@marionblackburn.com, mjoyner@clementins.com

Deliver This Message

City of Greenville Representatives,

According to Mayor Dunn, the City Council instructed the City Attorney “to rewrite city ordinances to comply with state law [HB 650, Castle Doctrine and Concealed Carry Permitted in Parks].” The part left out of this is that the instructions were to ban lawful carry everywhere conceivably permissible.

The resulting ordinance is an unreasonable infringement of Second Amendment rights that conflicts with the very intent of the new state law to provide state-wide uniformity. It also sends a troubling message of willful lack of cooperation with state government.

The effort made to indiscriminately ban carry everywhere possible has predictably led to an over-reaching ordinance that violates state law. The classification of the off-leash dog park as a “playground” in order to implement a ban is a clear example of the attempt to circumvent state law that characterizes the entire ordinance.

HB 650 was intended to increase the ability of law-abiding permittees to defend themselves and their families when visiting North Carolina parks. The need for citizens to be able to effectively defend themselves in Greenville was made clear earlier this month by the brutal murder of Leroy Staton in Jaycee park.

There has been no attempt made by Greenville city government to justify why the Constitutional rights of citizens should be limited in Greenville parks. Thus it is clear that the new ordinance is nothing more than an autocratic and tyrannical effort to deprive citizens of freedom.

As you know, the simplest and most cost-effective way to comply with state law is by reversing current bans.

Your ordinance is illegal, irrational, unjustifiable and a clear example of disrespect for both state law and the Constitutional rights of free Americans.

It must be rescinded immediately.

I will be following progress through Grass Roots North Carolina.

Sincerely,

A concerned NC voter

GRNC is preparing to take appropriate legal action and needs to identify local plaintiffs

• Plaintiffs are currently needed for actions within Kernersville, Greenville and Smithfield. Please contact alert@grnc.org.
• Other municipalities may be added.
• Everyone should carefully monitor municipal ordinances, particularly those recently enacted.
• Any restrictions beyond “a playground, an athletic field, a swimming pool, or an athletic facility” should be immediately reported to alert@grnc.org.

About:
Grass Roots North Carolina/Forum for Firearms Education is a non-profit, all volunteer organization devoted to educating the public about trends which abridge the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, and engaging in grass roots activism to preserve those freedoms. Formed in 1994 to conduct a highly successful rally for the Second Amendment, GRNC has gone on to conduct projects like “Remember in November: A Gun Owner’s Guide to Voting,” bringing concealed carry to North Carolina. Visit:www.grnc.org

About: Tom McHale describes himself as a conservative gun-totin’ bible-clingin’ literary assault dude who enjoys finding humor in just about anything. His web blog My Gun Culture is an irreverent, twisted look at gun news bordering on the ridiculous. It covers shootin’ stuff, loud noises, defending your own, the occasional mall ninja, and about 200 years of the American way. These are the (partially) true stories of My Gun Culture says Tom. Visit: www.mygunculture.com

Michigan Coalition For Responsible Gun Owners

Michigan - -(Ammoland.com)- – MCL 28.425k covers alcohol. The limit is a BAC (Bodily Alcohol Content) of .02. This is essentially a zero-tolerance standard.

It is much lower than the standard of .08 for driving a car. The law says that you may not carry a conealed pistol if your BAC is at, or above, .02. The penalties get stiffer as the BAC numbers go up:

.02 – .079: Civil infraction, $100 maximum fine. CPL revocation for up to 1 year (note that your local county gun board may elect to treat this as evidence that you are a danger to yourself or others and permanently revoke your CPL.)

.08 – .099: Misdemeanor. 93 days in jail maximum. $100 fine maximum. 3-year CPL revocation.

.10 and above: Misdemeanor. 93 days in jail maximum. $100 fine maximum. Permanent CPL revocation.

The law also contains essentially the same language as the statute controlling the Michigan’s Driver’s License with respect to tests of breath, blood, urine. So, a refusal to provide a sample upon request of a law enforcement officer who has probable cause, results in suspenstion or revocation of your CPL.

The statute also states: “(3) This section does not prohibit an individual licensed under this act to carry a concealed pistol who has any bodily alcohol content from transporting that pistol in the locked trunk of his or her motor vehicle or another motor vehicle in which he or she is a passenger or, if the vehicle does not have a trunk, from transporting that pistol unloaded in a locked compartment or container that is separated from the ammunition for that pistol or on a vessel if the pistol is transported unloaded in a locked compartment or container that is separated from the ammunition for that pistol.”

So, if you find yourself deciding to have a drink at a holiday party. You may put your pistol in what is commonly referred to as “Transport Mode” and be sure that you stay below the .08 BAC limit for operating a motor vehicle if you are going to drive yourself home.

As always, be safe! Responsible gun owners know that alcohol and gun powder do not mix. The majority of accidental discharge stories begin with a bottle being opened. MCRGO members have an outstanding safety record. Let’s keep it that way.

About:
The Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners is a non-profit, non-partisan organization. Formed from just eight people in 1996, we now have thousands of members and numerous affiliated clubs across the state. We’re growing larger and more effective every day.

Our mission statement is: “Promoting safe use and ownership of firearms through education, litigation, and legislation” Visit: www.mcrgo.org

NRA News

Fairfax, VA --(Ammoland.com)- NRA-News is a valued partner that continues to cover breaking gun rights news with a new and improved short video format in the “NRA News Minute” videos.

To view the current firearms or gun rights news video, please click above:

Cam Edwards plays back and rebuts comments on the floor of the House Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA) during debate on H.R. 822, the National Right to Carry Reciprocity Act.

Read More on these topics:

* Trigger the Vote
* Election Volunteer Coordinator

About:
Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen’s group. Four million members strong, NRA continues its mission to uphold Second Amendment rights and to advocate enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation’s leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the military. Visit: www.nra.org

National Rifle Association

FAIRFAX, Va. --(Ammoland.com)- The U.S. House of Representatives has passed an important self-defense measure that would enable millions of Right-to-Carry permit holders across the country to carry concealed firearms while traveling outside their home states.

H.R. 822, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act, passed by a majority bipartisan vote of 272 to 154.

All amendments aimed to weaken or damage the integrity of this bill were defeated.

“NRA has made the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act a priority because it enhances the fundamental right to self-defense guaranteed to all law-abiding people,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action. “People are not immune from crime when they cross state lines. That is why it is vital for them to be able to defend themselves and their loved ones should the need arise.”

H.R. 822, introduced in the U.S. House by Representatives Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) and Heath Shuler (D-N.C.), allows any person with a valid state-issued concealed firearm permit to carry a concealed firearm in any state that issues concealed firearm permits, or that does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms for lawful purposes.

This bill does not affect existing state laws. State laws governing where concealed firearms may be carried would apply within each state’s borders. H.R. 822 does not create a federal licensing system or impose federal standards on state permits; rather, it requires the states to recognize each others’ carry permits, just as they recognize drivers’ licenses and carry permits held by armored car guards.

As of today, 49 states have laws in place that permit their citizens to carry a concealed firearm in some form. Only Illinois and the District of Columbia deny its residents the right to carry concealed firearms outside their homes or businesses for self-defense.

“We are grateful for the support of Speaker Boehner, Majority Leader Cantor, Majority Whip McCarthy, Judiciary Chairman Smith and primary sponsors Congressmen Stearns and Shuler for their steadfast support of H.R. 822. Thanks to the persistence of millions of American gun owners and NRA members, Congress has moved one step closer to improving crucial self-defense laws in this country,” concluded Cox.

Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen’s group. Four million members strong, NRA continues its mission to uphold Second Amendment rights and to advocate enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation’s leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the military.

CCRKBA.org

BELLEVUE, WA – -(Ammoland.com)- The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms lauded today’s 272-154 majority vote by the House of Representatives on passage of H.R. 822, the National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011.

“We’re delighted at the outcome of this important legislation in the House,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, “especially since the floor debate brought out all of the tired old cliché arguments. Congressional anti-gunners pulled out all the stops, but their rhetoric could not derail this common sense measure.

“As so many of the bill’s proponents wisely pointed out during the debate,” he continued, “citizens do not leave their self-defense rights at a state border. Those who would argue otherwise evidently have no interest in public safety.

“What was remarkable,” Gottlieb observed, “is how many self-defense opponents suddenly discovered the cause of states’ rights as an excuse to oppose this legislation. This measure is not about state’s rights, it’s about individual rights.”

The vote found seven Republicans voting against the measure and 43 Democrats supporting it.

“How the bill fares when it reaches the Senate remains to be seen,” Gottlieb noted, “but this recorded House vote will give the nation’s firearms owners a chance to see how their Congressional representative feels about their rights under the Second Amendment, and about the safety of their families when they travel across state lines.

“House members can give all the lip service they want to the Second Amendment,” he concluded, “but it is votes like this that separate the superficial from the sincere.”

With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of the nation’s premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States. The Citizens Committee can be reached by phone at (425) 454-4911, on the Internet at www.ccrkba.org or by email to InformationRequest@ccrkba.org.

Gun Rights Policies with John Snyder

WASHINGTON, D.C.- “The House of Representatives deserves the thanks and commendation of law-abiding Americans for passing today H.R. 822, the proposed National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011, by an overwhelming vote of 272 to 154,” gun law expert John M. Snyder said here. He is the Gun Dean, according to Human Events.

“This bill, if enacted into law, would allow an individual with a permit to carry a concealed firearm issued by a state to carry in other states,” he explained. “The Senate should take up this measure as soon as possible and give it swift and positive consideration.”

“It’s an idea whose time has come,” Snyder added. “Studies show that where CCW legislation is enacted, rates of violent crime take a precipitous downturn. People with drivers’ licenses issued by a state can drive an automobile throughout the country. There is no good reason for preventing people with state-issued CCW licenses from carrying concealed around the country.

“The opposition to this proposal comes on an ideological basis and not a factual one. It’s time to overcome anti-gun die hard politicians and mainstream media personalities. It’s time to enact this and other gun rights legislation into law. It’s time to begin rolling back some of the anti-gun legislation enacted into law by Congress and some state legislatures over the last several decades.”

Snyder said, “The issue is coming to a head as public opinion surveys indicate support for unreasonably restrictive gun legislation has been declining over the last half-century or so. Support for the individual Second Amendment civil right of law-abiding American citizens is at an all-time high. So is the purchase of firearms and ammunition.

“The gun rights movement has been and continues to be on the rise. The gun control movement is on the decline, even though it has had the support of much of the mainstream media over the last several decades. This is true even though millions and perhaps billions have been spent to support it. In this country, it’s a loser. The United States is gun country. It’s time for Congress to recognize this.”

About John Snyder:
Named the Gun Dean by Human Events, “the senior rights activist in Washington” by Shotgun News, a “champion of the right to self-defense” by The Washington Times, and “dean of gun lobbyists” by The Washington Post and The New York Times, John M. Snyder has spent 45 years as a proponent of the individual Second Amendment civil right to keep and bear arms as a National Rifle Association editor, public affairs director of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, treasurer of the Second Amendment Foundation, and founder of www.GunRightsPolicies.org.

A former Jesuit seminarian, Snyder is founder/manager of Telum Associates, LL.C., founder/chairman of the St. Gabriel Possenti Society, Inc., a director of Council for America, and serves on the boards of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and the American Federation of Police & Concerned Citizens. He is also the author of the book Gun Saint. Visit: www.GunRightsPolicies.org

About: Tom McHale describes himself as a conservative gun-totin’ bible-clingin’ literary assault dude who enjoys finding humor in just about anything. His web blog My Gun Culture is an irreverent, twisted look at gun news bordering on the ridiculous. It covers shootin’ stuff, loud noises, defending your own, the occasional mall ninja, and about 200 years of the American way. These are the (partially) true stories of My Gun Culture says Tom. Visit: www.mygunculture.com

Gun Rights Policies with John Snyder

Arlington, VA - Now that the House of Representatives has passed a concealed carry reciprocity bill by a substantial margin, the Senate should follow suit and do the same.

About John Snyder:
Named the Gun Dean by Human Events, “the senior rights activist in Washington” by Shotgun News, a “champion of the right to self-defense” by The Washington Times, and “dean of gun lobbyists” by The Washington Post and The New York Times, John M. Snyder has spent 45 years as a proponent of the individual Second Amendment civil right to keep and bear arms as a National Rifle Association editor, public affairs director of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, treasurer of the Second Amendment Foundation, and founder of www.GunRightsPolicies.org.

A former Jesuit seminarian, Snyder is founder/manager of Telum Associates, LL.C., founder/chairman of the St. Gabriel Possenti Society, Inc., a director of Council for America, and serves on the boards of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and the American Federation of Police & Concerned Citizens. He is also the author of the book Gun Saint. Visit: www.GunRightsPolicies.org

Gun Owners of America

Washington, DC --(Ammoland.com)- The House passed national concealed carry reciprocity legislation on Wednesday evening by a vote of 272-154.

The bill, H.R. 822, is intended to allow persons who hold a concealed carry permit from one state to also carry anywhere in the country, with the exception of Illinois and Washington, D.C.

Though the bill passed by a wide margin, it was not without controversy on the pro-gun side of the debate.

In previous alerts, GOA has pointed out several flaws in the legislation:

• It forces Vermont residents (who do not need a permit to carry) to either obtain an out-of-state permit or to push their state to pass a more restrictive concealed carry law than it now enjoys;
• By requiring permits for reciprocity, the bill undermines efforts at the state level to pass constitutional carry (i.e., Vermont-style carry);
• In restrictive “may issue” states, the bill allows for non-residents to carry firearms in the state while most residents would still be prohibited, and;
• The bill is yet another example of Congress distorting of the Constitution’s Commerce Clause.

Representative Justin Amash (R-MI), who voted against the bill, addressed this last point in a statement, calling H.R. 822 “an unconstitutional bill that improperly applies the Commerce Clause to concealed carry licensing.”

Another freshman Representative, Rob Woodall (R-GA), noted that the right to carry a concealed firearm is already protected by the Second Amendment.

“If the Second Amendment protects my rights to carry my concealed weapon from state to state to state, I don’t need another federal law,” Rep. Woodall said. He went on to remind his colleagues of the original intent of the right to keep and bear arms.

“I don’t believe the Second Amendment was put in the Bill of Rights to allow me to shoot targets [or] hunt for deer and turkey. I think the Second Amendment was put in the Bill of Rights so that I could defend my freedom against an overbearing federal government.”

Anti-gun Amendment Passes
One extremely troubling amendment to the bill was slipped in on a voice vote. Sponsored by Republican David Reichert (“C” rated by GOA), the amendment instructs the Government Accounting Office to:

“Conduct a study of the ability of State and local law enforcement authorities to verify the validity of licenses or permits, issued by other States, to carry a concealed firearm.”

Nowhere in the Constitution is there even a hint of authority for the federal government to “study” the exercising of a right. Even worse, you can be sure that anti-gunners will use any excuse, including this study, to push for some type of national carry license.

The bill now heads to the Senate, where GOA is already working with key Senators to address ALL of the problems with the bill. GOA is also working with Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) on legislation, H.R. 2900, that takes a constitutional approach to concealed carry recognition.

You can click here to send you own Representative a message urging him or her to become a cosponsor of H.R. 2900.

About:
Gun Owners of America (GOA) is a non-profit lobbying organization formed in 1975 to preserve and defend the Second Amendment rights of gun owners. GOA sees firearms ownership as a freedom issue. `The only no comprise gun lobby in Washington’ – Ron Paul

Gun Owners of America

Washington, DC --(Ammoland.com)- On Tuesday, the U.S. House voted in favor of a procedural motion to allow concealed carry legislation to come to the floor for a vote on Wednesday.

The bill, H.R. 822, is intended to honor the American peoples’ right to keep and bear arms when traveling from state to state.

But while well-intentioned, H.R. 822 contains several flaws.

Vermont Gun Owners Cut Out of Bill

For starters, the bill does not protect Vermont-style carry. Residents of that state do not need a permit in order to exercise their right to carry a firearm. But in order to benefit from the reciprocity bill, Vermonters would be forced to obtain a permit.

When GOA pointed out this problem, supporters of the legislation said Vermont residents can “just get an out-of-state permit.”

But that answer is unacceptable.

Why should existing liberties be sacrificed in the rush to pass a faulty bill? Why should a state with exemplary gun laws be, in effect, “punished” for being too pro-gun?

Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) offered a real solution to this issue with his bill, HR 2900. Rep. Broun’s bill protects the Vermont law and those of states that follow Vermont’s lead.

Click here to email your Representative

Protect Constitutional Carry
Constitutional Carry, wherein citizens can carry a firearm without first having to prove their worthiness to the police or government bureaucrats, is spreading to states around the country.

Alaska, Arizona and Wyoming now have Constitutional Carry laws based on the Vermont model. Montana passed such a law that covers 98% of the state, and Texas passed a “constitutional carry lite” law that applies to firearms carried in a vehicle.

These new laws represent the efforts of hundreds of thousands of grassroots gun owners working in their states to restore their constitutional rights.

The bill coming to the floor on Wednesday will deter such efforts by requiring state residents to possess a permit in order to be able to carry interstate.

The Broun bill is Constitutional Carry-friendly and would not undermine the work underway in many states to pass laws similar to Vermont’s.

Pass the Best Bill Possible

Supporters of H.R. 822 argue that this bill is the best that can be passed. That pragmatic argument is simply not true.

In 2009, a Senate bill virtually identical to H.R. 2900 garnered 58 votes. And that was before the last election, which improved the Senate significantly.

The “best bill possible” is the one that already has the votes in the Senate to pass. The supporters of H.R. 822 instead chose to move a weaker bill in the chamber where gun owners have more support.

Supporters of H.R. 822 also want NO amendments (even ones that are pro-gun) to pass to the underlying bill. But an amendment is exactly what is needed to correct the deficiencies in this bill.

Contact Your Representative Right Away

Please take action quickly, as this bill is set to come to the floor on Wednesday afternoon.

GOA has provided a prewritten message you can send asking your Representative to cosponsor H.R. 2900 and to urge the House leaders to fix the flaws in the concealed carry reciprocity bill.

Click here to email your Representative.

About:
Gun Owners of America (GOA) is a non-profit lobbying organization formed in 1975 to preserve and defend the Second Amendment rights of gun owners. GOA sees firearms ownership as a freedom issue. `The only no comprise gun lobby in Washington’ – Ron Paul

Liberty University Vastly Improves Gun Policies

Virginia Citizens Defense League

Covington VA --(Ammoland.com)- Liberty University (LU) has just changed their firearms policies to be more in line with the University’s name.

Not perfect by any means but most definitely a whole lot better!

The timing is interesting: VCDL is in the middle of its Operation Campus Safety campaign AND I will be speaking at the University on December 5th (I’ll be speaking at the new College Constitutional Conservative Christian Coalition club meeting).

Probably a coincidence, but interesting nonetheless.

Liberty is a private university and is not bound by the recent Supreme Court decision nor the Attorney General Cuccinelli opinion on CHP carry on university property.

The new policy allows guests with CHPs to store guns in their vehicles or to have them outside buildings, but not carry them into the buildings. Faculty, staff, and students can seek permission from the LU PD to do the same. LU PD can also authorize certain faculty and staff to have guns inside buildings and stored in a secured container in their office.

Also, students, faculty, and staff with or without CHPs will now be able to store their guns with the LU PD.

Here is the announcement. I see one possible mistake: in the list of universities that allow students and others with CHPs on campus – University of Virginia doesn’t fit that mold exactly. If they are referring to just “others” with CHPs carrying outside of buildings, then UVA is valid, as would be any public university or college in Virginia. Currently CHP holders who are guests can carry inside the buildings of most public universities and colleges in Virginia, regardless of any school policies to the contrary. The exceptions are VCU and GMU.

VCDL applauds this important step forward by LU. That stands in stark contrast to UVA and some other universities, which are rushing to take a step backwards.

www.liberty.edu/index.cfm?pid=4153

About:
Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. (VCDL). VCDL is an all-volunteer, non-partisan grassroots organization dedicated to defending the human rights of all Virginians. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a fundamental human right. Visit: www.vcdl.org

About: Tom McHale describes himself as a conservative gun-totin’ bible-clingin’ literary assault dude who enjoys finding humor in just about anything. His web blog My Gun Culture is an irreverent, twisted look at gun news bordering on the ridiculous. It covers shootin’ stuff, loud noises, defending your own, the occasional mall ninja, and about 200 years of the American way. These are the (partially) true stories of My Gun Culture says Tom. Visit: www.mygunculture.com

Texas State Rifle Association

Houston, Tx --(Ammoland.com)- Contrary to email alerts from the usual group of nay-sayers, HR 822 dealing with National Reciprocity for those with a state-issued concealed handgun license is a very good bill.

John Snyder with www.gunrightspolicies.org calls HR 822 an “idea whose time has come”. He offers the state-issued drivers license as an example of how the bill works. States will continue to have full control over their laws and the issuance of their license. Only travel between states will be improved.

HR 822 would not create a federal licensing system and would not interject the federal government into the states’ laws regarding where a licensee could or could not carry.

HR 822 will increase licensees’ mobility and serves to by-pass the legalese and minor tweaks that currently prevent further reciprocal agreements between states.

There is no camel, no tent, and definitely no Trojan horse!

HR 822-NRA Bill supported by TSRA

Opposition to HR 822 comes from the usual ideological groups; none armed with facts, all with “feelings”. The gun rights movement continues to be on the rise as the desire for personal safety options increases.

Other opposition comes from small but noisy groups far from the congressional arena.

Texas currently has over a half-million concealed handgun licensees and the figure continues to grow. We are a mobile population wanting safety as we travel in Texas and in other states.

HR 822 Expected to Pass
NRA-supported HR 822 should hit the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives for a floor-vote this week and is expected to pass. It could make the U.S. Senate early in 2012.

Go to www.tsra.com for information and plan to attend the Annual Members Meeting in Mesquite Feb. 24, 25, 26 in Mesquite.

Saturday, Feb. 25th, Keynote Speaker’s Luncheon features Texas Lt. Governor David Dewhurst. Dewhurst has brought a decade of successes to Texas gun owners.

Join, renew, or upgrade your membership at www.tsra.com or call 512-615-4200 during business hours. We’re only as strong as our membership. In addition, give to the Political Action Committee fund to support and elect pro-gun candidates in coming elections.

And remember, Keep the Faith

About:
The Mission of the Texas State Rifle Association is to protect and defend the inalienable rights of the individual Texan to acquire, possess, transport, carry, transfer ownership and enjoy the right to lawful use of firearms for self preservation, for the defense of family and property and the common defense of the Republic and the individual liberties of the people. Visit: www.TSRA.com

National Rifle Association

FAIRFAX, Va. --(Ammoland.com)- Earlier, the Joint Committee for the Review of Administrative Rules (JCRAR) voted in a 7 to 2 bi-partisan effort to address and eliminate portions of the emergency rules promulgated by the Department of Justice (DOJ) to implement Wisconsin Act 35, the new concealed carry law.

The Committee’s action focused on several portions of the emergency rules offered by Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen’s DOJ that exceeded his statutory authority and ignored clear legislative intent.

One of the most important actions involved the Legislature eliminating many of the onerous requirements associated with the information that must be provided on a license applicant’s training certificate (no training certificates issued anywhere in the country met the DOJ criteria prior to the announcement of the emergency rules).

Another involved the elimination of the requirement that all training classes be a minimum of four hours. This is an issue the Legislature debated during the process that culminated in the passage of the new law and it is clear that it never intended for the DOJ to impose any specific curriculum or length of training class requirements.

The NRA applauds members of the committee for ensuring the legislative intent and letter of the law is respected by the DOJ as it implements this essential self-defense law. Assembly Leader Scott Suder (R-69) deserves special thanks for his outstanding leadership in this rules review process.

Please contact and thank members of the JCRAR committee and Assembly Majority Leader Scott Suder and thank them for ensuring the opportunity of Wisconsin residents to defend themselves and their families is not arbitrarily restricted.

About:
Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen’s group. Four million members strong, NRA continues its mission to uphold Second Amendment rights and to advocate enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation’s leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the military. Visit: www.nra.org

USA Carry

Tampa, FL --(Ammoland.com)- Today, Nov, 1, 2011, Wisconsin’s concealed carry laws went into effect.

Residents of Wisconsin can now apply for their concealed carry permits.

According to the WI DOJ, they also accept permits from the following states (unless you are a Wisconsin resident):

Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington, Wyoming, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands

Wisconsin residents can now download the application here. We have updated our Wisconsin Concealed Carry page to list all of the training requirements. We have also updated our Concealed Carry Maps to show the states they allow.

The WI DOJ has also created a website that has links to the application, training requirements, address changes, out-of-state recognition and reciprocity, and an FAQ.

About USA Carry
Launched in 2007, USA Carry has become a popular resource for the concealed carry community. Some of the resources include concealed carry laws for each state, permit maps, instructor lists & classes, active forums and more. They also provide concealed carry news and related articles. Visit www.usacarry.com

About: Tom McHale describes himself as a conservative gun-totin’ bible-clingin’ literary assault dude who enjoys finding humor in just about anything. His web blog My Gun Culture is an irreverent, twisted look at gun news bordering on the ridiculous. It covers shootin’ stuff, loud noises, defending your own, the occasional mall ninja, and about 200 years of the American way. These are the (partially) true stories of My Gun Culture says Tom. Visit: www.mygunculture.com

Wisconsin Gun Owners

Wisconsin --(Ammoland.com)- Gun owners wishing to apply for a Wisconsin concealed carry permit may visit the Wisconsin Department of Justice website to print an application, which became live today.

Click Here for the WI DOJ Concealed Carry Page

Applications, proof of training and the $50 application fee may be mailed to:

A Wisconsin Hunter Education Certificate qualifies as sufficient training under this law. A duplicate may be purchased for $3.75 and printed using the Wisconsin Conservation Licensing System through the Wisconsin DNR.

Click here to obtain a duplicate.

Visit the WI DOJ webpage for additional FAQs on training requirements.

Businesses who don’t want the patronage of gun owners are now posting No Guns Allowed signs, as required by law. Please bookmark the WGO Don’t Buy List page and report any anti-gun businesses so we can disseminate this information to gun owners.

A Few Words on Constitutional Carry
When WGO was founded less than a decade ago, we were the sole voice fighting for Constitutional Carry (referred to then as “Vermont-style carry”) in Wisconsin.

And while some groups jumped on the Constitutional Carry bandwagon earlier this year when everyone assumed the newly-controlled legislature could easily pass it, many of these individuals or groups have become suspiciously quiet on the issue lately, and seem happy to accept today’s new permit law as a permanent inevitability.

But we have other plans.

It is one thing to give lip service to something when victory seems within easy reach.

It’s a completely different matter to fight when the going gets tough.

With that sentiment, we’ll let the other groups claim victory. For our part, we’d simply like to welcome you - and invite them - to Phase II of the fight to restore our inalienable right to bear arms.

Stand by for details on Constitutional Carry soon … and thanks for your support of gun rights in Wisconsin.

About:
WGO works for grassroots gun owners, not politicians. While many gun lobbies fight for “reasonable gun control,” WGO sets a higher standard: Defining the terrain of pro-gun political battle. Sure, many groups claim they’re “pro-gun” – all the while they provide cover for anti-gun deals cut by politicians – but only WGO truly informs gun owners, remaining committed to a 100% pro-gun position. We oppose all gun control – regardless of the political party – and work tirelessly to restore the Second Amendment. Visit www.wisconsingunowners.org

Appleton Wisconsin Police on Concealed Carry

Wisconsin Gun Owners

Wisconsin --(Ammoland.com)- Capt. Rudy Nyman of the Appleton Police Department discusses the implementation of Wisconsin’s new concealed carry law.

Capt. Rudy Nyman of the Appleton Police Department discusses the implementation of Wisconsin’s new concealed carry law.

Note: We are not endorsing Captain Nyman’s comments, but rather posting this so you can be aware of the attitudes of police toward concealed carry permit holders.

Note also that Capt. Nyman says that all public buildings in Appleton will post to prohibit concealed carry (a citywide de facto suspension of constitutional rights).

That means there will be suspension of constitutional rights (both state and federal) in our government buildings (those owned by taxpayers) throughout Appleton.

This hearkens back to the days of segregation. And it could be taken as “Martial Law Lite.”  But no matter how you take it, WGO will be tackling these outrageous city-level gun bans and creation of criminal safe zones by our aldermen one by one.

What’s one way you can help us repeal these local gun bans? Join us in this battle:

Whatch Now

About:
WGO works for grassroots gun owners, not politicians. While many gun lobbies fight for “reasonable gun control,” WGO sets a higher standard: Defining the terrain of pro-gun political battle. Sure, many groups claim they’re “pro-gun” – all the while they provide cover for anti-gun deals cut by politicians – but only WGO truly informs gun owners, remaining committed to a 100% pro-gun position. We oppose all gun control – regardless of the political party – and work tirelessly to restore the Second Amendment. Visit www.wisconsingunowners.org

Gun Rights Policies with John Snyder

Arlington, VA - Joe Biden just does not get it.

He confuses support for a jobs bill with the ability of people to resist murders and rapists.

He ought to support national reciprocity for the carrying of concealed firearms with people with state CCW permits.

Joe Biden should be in support for the national reciprocity of concealed firearms as the right of self defense does not end at your front door.

Watch Video Above for more thoughts on confused Joe.

About John Snyder:
Named the Gun Dean by Human Events, “the senior rights activist in Washington” by Shotgun News, a “champion of the right to self-defense” by The Washington Times, and “dean of gun lobbyists” by The Washington Post and The New York Times, John M. Snyder has spent 45 years as a proponent of the individual Second Amendment civil right to keep and bear arms as a National Rifle Association editor, public affairs director of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, treasurer of the Second Amendment Foundation, and founder of www.GunRightsPolicies.org.

A former Jesuit seminarian, Snyder is founder/manager of Telum Associates, LL.C., founder/chairman of the St. Gabriel Possenti Society, Inc., a director of Council for America, and serves on the boards of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and the American Federation of Police & Concerned Citizens. He is also the author of the book Gun Saint. Visit: www.GunRightsPolicies.org

National Rifle Association

FAIRFAX, Va. --(Ammoland.com)- Last week, the House Judiciary considered amendments to H.R. 822, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Bill, and defeated all anti-gun amendments offered in an effort to weaken or gut the legislation.

The legislation is an important pro-gun reform that will provide for the recognition of carry permits in all states that issue permits. (For detailed information on the legislation, click here http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=189&issue=003.)

The bill, as originally written, was successfully amended at the outset of the markup with a substitute that added a number of important protections. Foremost, it amended the language so that visitors to states that have laws requiring licenses just for possession of a handgun, do not need a possession license, which is often unavailable to nonresidents.

The substitute also made clear that in states with local jurisdictions that restrict carrying or possession, visitors will not need to apply for special permits from those jurisdictions.

Opponents of the bill proposed a number of anti-gun amendments that sought to use misdemeanor convictions to disqualify people from the benefits of the bill. All of these efforts were defeated, rejecting the anti-gun efforts to weaken the bill. Clearly, the majority of committee members believe that revocation of fundamental constitutional rights is not a legitimate punishment for misdemeanor violations.

One pro-gun amendment was defeated as well. Rep. Louis Gohmert (R-Texas), a steadfast supporter of the Second Amendment, brought an amendment that would have allowed permit holders to carry firearms in the District of Columbia. As written, H. R. 822 does not apply reciprocity to jurisdictions that completely ban Right-to-Carry.

While the amendment was well intentioned, as Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas) pointed out, the bill “does not confer any expansion of the right to bear arms on the residents of the District of Columbia,” and the Gohmert amendment would only have benefited visitors. It was the feeling of the majority, including nearly all those who support the bill, that H. R. 822 is not the proper vehicle for dealing with the serious problems presented by Washington, D.C.’s harshly restrictive gun laws.

As Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said, “this is a debate best saved for another day and another bill.”

NRA has fought for many years to restore the Second Amendment rights of D.C. residents and will continue to work toward that goal by fighting for passage of H.R. 645, the Second Amendment Enforcement Act.

An amendment was also added calling on the Government Accountability Office to conduct a study of the impact of this legislation. Unsurprisingly, opponents of the bill voted against the amendment, probably fearing that it will show, like previous government and academic studies, that the many objections they make to lawful Right-to-Carry are without basis. The study will have no impact on the reforms included in the legislation and will have no effect on concealed carry laws. This study will not delay the implementation of the bill, because it will not take place until after the legislation has taken effect.

The committee will take up the legislation and vote on final passage when Congress returns from its recess. This legislation will be an important advance in the protection of the fundamental right to self-defense, whether at home or traveling through most of America.

Full House consideration of the legislation is expected to happen in the next few weeks. Please contact your member of Congress today and urge their support for H.R. 822 and opposition to any amendments anti-gun legislators are expected to bring to weaken the legislation. You can find contact information for your elected officials by using the “Write Your Representatives” tool at www.NRAILA.org, or you can call your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121.

About:
Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen’s group. Four million members strong, NRA continues its mission to uphold Second Amendment rights and to advocate enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation’s leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the military. Visit: www.nra.org

Wisconsin Firearm Owners, Ranges, Clubs & Educators

Wisconsin --(Ammoland.com)- Governor Scott Walker reluctantly approved the Emergency Concealed Carry Rules promulgated by the Wisconsin Department of Justice (DOJ).

While the Governor has many of the same concerns that were expressed by NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox in his letter to Attorney General Van Hollen, he understandably did not want to further delay the ability of citizens of Wisconsin to carry concealed handguns for self-defense.

His rejection of the Emergency Rules would have resulted in a significant delay on implementation of the new law that takes effect on November 1.

Governor Walker stated, “We’re hopeful that the Department of Justice improves the permanent rules substantially before sending them to the Administration and the legislature for approval.”

The NRA will continue to work with the state legislature to ensure that this happens.

Unfortunately, DOJ has chosen to overstep its authority by imposing conditions on prospective concealed weapons license applicants that the legislature never adopted or intended. As part of the Executive Branch of state government, DOJ’s role is to faithfully implement the laws adopted by the legislature, not dramatically change them. If the Emergency Rules are allowed to become permanent, they will set a dangerous precedent that perverts our system of government and its principles associated with the separation of powers.

When the Legislature adopted Act 35, the concealed weapons law, two provisions were very clear. There was to be no minimum number of hours of firearms training required in order to satisfy the training mandate and any qualifying firearms training or safety class that a prospective applicant has taken at any time in the past would be accepted.

Through its Emergency Rules, the DOJ has effectively negated both of these provisions. First, the Rules require a minimum of four hours of training. Both houses of the legislature contemplated amendments that would have required a minimum number of hours of training and specific curriculum. These amendments were rejected.

Secondly, DOJ had deviated from the examples set by other states with virtually identical statutory language by micromanaging the information that must be provided on training certificates submitted by applicants. No training certificates anywhere in the country contain the information that the Wisconsin DOJ demands. This renders all existing certificates insufficient for submission with a citizen’s license application. DOJ could have easily established a system that would have allowed existing training certificates to be submitted while ensuring that the requirements of the concealed weapons law are met.

It is now time for you to act! The Emergency Rules will now be sent to the legislature for approval or rejection. Please contact your state representative and senator and ask that they reject the Emergency Rules and work to ensure that that the permanent rules ultimately reflect the clear letter of the law and the legislature’s intent. In the meantime, the Emergency Rules will remain in effect so as to ensure that there is no delay in the November 1 implementation of this essential new law. Contact information for your state representative and senator can be found by clicking here.

About:
Wi-FORCE promotes and protects the shooting sports, hunting, and the lawful ownership and use of firearms in Wisconsin. We coordinate match schedules of member clubs, sanction the state championship matches, monitor and recommend legislation, and provide training and educational programs for our members, competitors and Wisconsin shooters. Wi-FORCE supports the interaction and education of all individuals and groups interested in the shooting sports and the natural right of citizens to own arms. Visit: www.wi-force.org

Gun Owners of America

Washington, DC --(Ammoland.com)- The House Judiciary Committee will soon be voting on legislation that will guarantee the right of citizens to carry firearms out-of-state.

And the vote could come as early as today or tomorrow!

GOA has alerted you to H.R. 822 — introduced by Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL) – and explained the weaknesses in his bill. Many of you have taken action on our alerts and informed your Representative that there is a better approach.

That approach has been championed by Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia, the author of H.R. 2900 — or the Secure Access to Firearms Enhancement (SAFE) Act.

The Broun bill has several advantages:

• It would allow residents of California, New Jersey and other “may issue” states to get out-of-state carry permits (say, from Florida or Utah) and carry in their home states — an benefit they would not enjoy under the Stearns’ bill;
• Broun also protects the right of gun owners in non-permit states like Vermont and allows them to carry out-of-state without a permit; and
• Finally, the Broun bill does not rely on an expansive, erroneous interpretation of the Commerce Clause. Passing gun legislation that uses the Commerce Clause for authority could undercut efforts at promoting Firearms Freedom Act legislation throughout the country which specifically declares the Commerce Clause has no authority over the production of intrastate guns.

We need to continue putting heat on Congress, now that this reciprocity legislation is beginning to move. You’ve already sent your emails, but now it’s time to change things up and send postcards. If the House committee passes the Stearns bill, then it will probably come to the floor of the House some time next month.

So there is plenty of time to inundate Representatives’ offices with postcards and mail — urging them to support H.R. 2900 — or to amend the Stearns bill so that it contains the gun owners’ protections in the Broun bill.

So, GOA members, please be looking for the latest mailing from GOA headquarters which should begin arriving this week. And please take the enclosed postcard and send it to your Representative. Then, take the extra two postcards and have pro-gun family members and friends send them, as well. That will multiply your efforts by 200%.

Also, did you see the Violence Policy Center’s “research” which supposedly debunks concealed carry? Click here to see GOA’s most recent Fact Sheet, which blasts the VPC faux report and sets the record straight.

About:
Gun Owners of America (GOA) is a non-profit lobbying organization formed in 1975 to preserve and defend the Second Amendment rights of gun owners. GOA sees firearms ownership as a freedom issue. `The only no comprise gun lobby in Washington’ – Ron Paul

Nebraska Firearms Owners Association

Omaha, NE --(Ammoland.com)- A funny thing happened on the way to the courtroom, the City of Omaha blinked. They have proposed a major revision to their firearms ordinance which is available for download here. If you take the time to read this proposal you will see if falls way short of their stated goals and then creates several new legal issues for them.

We need as many members and readers as possible to attend the Omaha City Council hearing on October 18th to show that this proposal fails to protect lawful firearms owners rights.

Let’s break this down, section by section, to review the problems in this proposal to better understand these failings.

In section one the proposal adds the language: “the owner, possessor or transporter holds a valid permit issued by the State of NE.” This statement fails the City’s stated purpose. Language in the Nebraska Concealed Handgun Act already recognizes permits issued by other states; Omaha’s proposed language fails to do so. Moreover, this added text is unnecessary because four years ago the City voted to allow persons in compliance with State law to carry in the City.

Section two continues the problem from section one by using the same language to allow persons with a Concealed Carry Permit to avoid registration. Again this issue has been preempted by the State and the city is in error.

In section three we find that, contrary to claims by some City Council members, this new proposal is not relaxing any current laws. In fact, another proposed change actually doubles the amount of time a person would not be allowed to register a concealable firearm if they previously had a violation of Omaha’s firearm ordinances. Additionally, the proposal goes well beyond State and Federal law and adds more misdemeanors to the City’s list that would disqualify people from being able to register firearms. Another change in the proposal raises the “Omaha Gun Tax” by 50%.

Also in section three appears to be an attempt to dismiss the current Federal lawsuit against the City. The City’s firearm registration ordinance prohibits certain people from registering firearms. The current proposal removes the ordinance’s existing line, “Is not a citizen of the United States,” and replaces it with “Is an alien not lawfully admitted under a non-immigrant visa (illegal alien).” If this seems hard to read, that’s because it contains a double negative. The courts will handle this statement the same way your 5th grade English teacher would: by removing the negatives. So then it will read, “Is an alien lawfully admitted under an immigrant visa (illegal alien).” Due to poor grammar, this revision still prohibits legal resident aliens from registering firearms and fails to address the issue in the current lawsuit when read as it is actually written.

Section four adds Voluntary Registration for those with Concealed Carry permits to register their firearms for free. This creates a violation in equal protection since not everyone would be able to qualify for this exemption from paying the “tax.”

If this proposal was a serious attempt to reconcile differences between City, State, and Federal law, then the City should have started with their definition of a “Concealable Firearm.” In Omaha, the definition is “a firearm having a barrel less than 18 inches in length.” The rest of the State and the Nation definitines that as a firearm having a barrel less than 16 inches and designed to be operated with one hand. This simple difference in definition places many commonly owned 16-inch barrel rifles in Omaha into the category of a “Concealable Firearm.” Even though the Omaha Police Department does not register these rifles, a resident in possession of one of these common target or sporting rifles could be charged in violation of Omaha’s registration requirements.

Unaddressed also is the unenforced requirement to get a permit from the Chief of Police to purchase a concealable firearm, where the rules for issuing such permit no longer exists; the State has taken over that responsibility and assigned that duty to the County Sheriff. Technically, no one may purchase a concealable firearm in Omaha since they cannot get a permission slip from the Chief of Police.

As you can see the problems with this proposal are as long or longer than the proposal itself and the NFOA needs your assistance in keeping this proposal from passing as written and introduced. If you can attend the hearing please do so., Please share this information and invitation to attend the public hearing with all your hunting and shooting buddies.

The more people there the louder our voice will be.

Regards,

Nebraska Firearms Owners Association

Omaha, NE --(Ammoland.com)- Andreas Allen, President of the Nebraska Firearms Owners Association (NFOA), discusses the proposed changes to Omaha’s Firearms Ordinances.

Last Tuesday the Omaha City Council proposed an ordinance change brought forth by the Omaha Police Department (OPD) and the Mayor’s office.

The City claims they have been working on this proposal for five months and that it has nothing to do with the recent lawsuit the Nebraska Firearms Owners Association (NFOA) has filed in partnership with the Second Amendment Foundation and Armando Pliego Gonzalez concerning legal resident aliens.

After reading this proposal, however, it’s apparent that it was put together hastily and was done very poorly. Not only did the City try to change the current rule prohibiting legal resident aliens from handgun registration, the new proposal also offers numerous restrictive changes to Omaha’s firearm registration ordinance.

According to a letter dated September 30, 2011, OPD and the Mayor’s office claim the purpose of this proposal is “to make the City ordinances consistent with State and Federal laws.” Yet, in two separate sections the proposal adds the language: “the owner, possessor or transporter holds a valid permit issued by the State of NE.” This statement fails the City’s stated purpose.

Language in the Nebraska Concealed Handgun Act already recognizes permits issued by other states; Omaha’s proposed language fails to do so. Moreover, this added text is unnecessary because four years ago the City voted to allow persons in compliance with State law to carry in the City.

‎Contrary to claims by some City Council members, this new proposal is not relaxing any current laws. In fact, another proposed change actually doubles the amount of time a person would not be allowed to register a concealable firearm if they previously had a violation of Omaha’s firearm registration ordinance. Additionally, the proposal goes well beyond State and Federal law and adds more misdemeanors to the City’s list that would disqualify people from being able to register firearms.

Another change in the proposal, also out of line with State and Federal laws, raises the “Omaha Gun Tax” by 50%.

The next problem with the proposal is the attempt to dismiss the current Federal lawsuit against the City. The City’s firearm registration ordinance prohibits certain people from registering firearms. The current proposal removes the ordinance’s existing line, “Is not a citizen of the United States,” and proposes in its place, “Is an alien not lawfully admitted under a non-immigrant visa (illegal alien).” If this seems hard to read, that’s because it contains a double negative. The courts will handle this statement the same way your 5th grade English teacher would: by removing the negatives. So then it will read, “Is an alien lawfully admitted under an immigrant visa (illegal alien).”

Due to poor grammar, this revision still prohibits legal resident aliens from registering firearms and fails to address the issue in the current lawsuit when read as it is actually written.

If this proposal was a serious attempt to reconcile differences in City, State, and Federal law, then the City should have started with their definition of a “Concealable Firearm.” In Omaha, the definition is “a firearm having a barrel less than 18 inches in length.” In the rest of the State and the Nation, the definition is a firearm having a barrel less than 16 inches and designed to be operated with one hand.

This simple difference in definition places many commonly owned 16-inch barrel rifles in Omaha into the category of a “Concealable Firearm.” Even though the Omaha Police Department does not register these rifles, a resident in possession of one of these common target or sporting rifles could be charged in violation of Omaha’s registration requirements.

There are changes needed in Omaha’s firearm registration ordinance, especially with respect to the current lawsuit regarding legal resident aliens, but the City’s current proposal does not accomplish this or their stated purpose. If the City of Omaha decides they truly want “to make the City ordinances consistent with State and Federal laws,” then the NFOA is willing to assist the City in fixing the inconsistencies in Omaha’s firearms ordinances.

Nebraska Firearms Owners Association is the largest firearms rights organization in the state of Nebraska, and membership is free for all Nebraskans concerned with their right to keep and bear arms; simply sign-up at www.nebraskafirearms.org/join. We are local firearms owners who have a personal interest in protecting firearms owners’ rights in Nebraska.

Mission -
Nebraska Firearms Owners Association (NFOA) is organized for the purpose of voicing the opinion of its membership to the Nebraska Legislature and other law making bodies within the state as well as Federal level, as it pertains to firearms. NFOA members will also make it a priority to educate residents on firearms related issues.
On the web: www.NebraskaFirearms.org or email: AAllen@NebraskaFirearms.org for more information.

Contacts:

Andreas (Andy) Allen
President NFOA
P.O. BOX 419
Syracuse, Nebraska 68446
(402)321-5520

This cartoon is now history for Arizona -- the bans are removed from our laws. (New Jersey you are welcome to it)

Gunlaws.com

PHOENIX, AZ --(Ammoland.com)- It’s hard to express the feeling I have, now that the 25th edition of The Arizona Gun Owner’s Guide is in print.

And this milestone — which I could not have imagined when I started back in 1988 — is the least of it.

This is the Constitutional Carry edition — vibrant freedom to keep and bear arms in my home state! The best gun laws in the world.

All the updates and bits and pieces are smoothly woven together, especially new self defense and uninfringed carry. Some of the results even surprised me. Except for prohibited possessors and prohibited places, it is now practically impossible to carry illegally in this state. Government is out of your face, out of your pockets, out of the picture when it comes to bearing arms. It was pure joy to delete all the infringements, the mandatory red tape, mandatory approvals, paperwork, criminal database requirements, DPS trainer approvals…

I even lost a cartoon! It took me quite a few attempts to finally realize I can’t rewrite this caption — Arizona has outgrown this image, because there are no more “only when it’s legal” rules! I left the image in only to make that point.

The price remained unchanged, only $14.95, cheaper than a lawyer, and there’s a 40% discount on six copies or more — get together with friends or your club and buy a batch, Christmas is coming, makes a great gift, nice colorful redesigned cover. Now that training isn’t forced upon you it’s more important than ever to make sure everyone gets educated.

The following excerpt from the opening of Chapter 2, now my favorite part:

Arizona has become a shining example of freedom for the nation, now that most restrictions and interference on either open or discreet carry of firearms have been removed. With passage of Constitutional Carry in 2010, just about any method of bearing arms here is legal. The main limits are in the lists of prohibited places, people banned from firearms altogether, rules for youth and certain illegal arms.

Arizona has respected uninfringed open-carry freedom since statehood in 1912. A law-abiding adult here, not just residents, could always carry a firearm wholly or partially visible, with no need for classes, government applications, recordkeeping, registries, taxes called “fees,” paperwork, testing, fingerprinting, listing in online criminal databases, permission slips, photos, or other interference or red tape. This has a name you’ve heard–it’s called freedom.

This freedom served the state well, though it got confusing during the late 1990s when some activist court cases questioned what “visible” means. Those problems have been eliminated by new law. Now, the same open-carry freedom this state has always enjoyed is available for people who carry discreetly, a somewhat more suitable method now that urbanization, increased population and a media-fueled cultural shift has made the open carrying of arms less unobtrusive. After 16 years of CCW permits (1994-2010) evidence was overwhelming that CCW registration schemes were costly and didn’t make you safer.

Firearms may be carried either openly or discreetly in Arizona, loaded or unloaded, by any adult legally in the state, who is not banned from possessing arms. Special rules for youngsters, and places where guns may not be carried, are described later. We have in essence extended the Second Amendment right to bear arms to the entire planet.

Arizona Gun Owner's Guide 25th Edition

I will have copies at the Crossroads Gun Show, Oct. 29-30, at the Cardinals football stadium in Glendale, see me there (and walk around on the game floor!) I also have some statewide travel planned, tagging along with my friend and tax-control advocate Tom Jenney of Americans for Prosperity, http://www.aztaxpayers.org, on his upcoming speaking tour to congressional and legislative districts. Drop me a line and we’ll arrange to meet if we can:

December 1, 2011 Casa Grande Thursday; details TBA
Policy Speakers: Tom Jenney, Director, AFP-Arizona; others TBA
Political Districts: CD 1, LD 23

December 9, 2011 Lake Havasu Friday; details TBA
Policy Speakers: Tom Jenney, Director, AFP-Arizona; others TBA
Political Districts: CD 2, LD 3

Dec 10, 2011 Bullhead City Saturday; details TBA
Policy Speakers: Tom Jenney, Director, AFP-Arizona; others TBA
Political Districts: CD 2, LD 3

December 10, 2011 Kingman Saturday; details TBA
Policy Speakers: Tom Jenney, Director, AFP-Arizona; others TBA
Political Districts: CD 2, LD 3

December 11, 2011 Wickenburg Sunday; details TBA
Policy Speakers: Tom Jenney, Director, AFP-Arizona; others TBA
Political Districts: CD 2, LD 4

December 16, 2011 Quartzsite Friday; details TBA
Policy Speakers: Tom Jenney, Director, AFP-Arizona; others TBA
Political Districts: CD 2, LD 3

December 17, 2011 Yuma Saturday; details TBA
Policy Speakers: Tom Jenney, Director, AFP-Arizona; others TBA
Political Districts: CDs 2 & 7, LD 24

About GunLaws.com:
Scottsdale, Ariz.-based Bloomfield Press, founded in 1988, is the largest publisher and distributor of gun-law books in the country. Our website, gunlaws.com, features a free national directory to gun laws and relevant contacts in all states and federally, along with our unique line of related books and DVDs. “After Your Shoot” for media review is available on request, call 800-707-4020. Our authors are available for interview, call to schedule. Call for cogent positions on gun issues, informed analysis on proposed laws, talk radio that lights up the switchboard, fact sheets and position papers. As we always say, “It doesn’t make sense to own a gun and not know the rules.” Visit: www.gunlaws.com

AmmoLand Gun News

Eatontown, NJ --(Ammoland.com)- Cavalry Scout Jamie J. Kiklis was assigned to the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment in Tal Afar, Iraq during June of 2005.

Part of the mission was to take a terrorist stronghold. While engaging the enemy in the pursuit of the objective, Kiklis was hit twice from enemy rounds fired from a terrorist’s AK-47. One bullet struck him in the abdomen and the other struck him in the thigh. Kiklis then crawled into an uncleared room and proceeded to conduct did his own medical treatment and “pulled security” with his Beretta 92 9mm pistol. While bleeding and trying to ignore the excruciating pain, his fellow soldiers “put the Bradley” through the building creating a potential escape route. He gathered all his strength and hopped out on one foot, while heavy enemy fire of bullets and grenades came in from everywhere.

Calvary Scout Jamie J. Kiklis

Roughly 10 days prior getting shot by the enemy, Kiklis had been wounded by two daisy chained IEDs. For his service to his country, he received 2 Purple Hearts, the Bronze Star with Combat Distinguishing “V” for Valor, 2 Army Commendation Medals, an Army Achievement Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Army Service Ribbon, and Combat Action Badge. These are just to name some of the decorations, medals, badges, citations, and campaign ribbons awarded to him.

Kiklis knows first hand that a pistol can save lives. After his honorable discharge from the military due to his combat wounds he came home to New Hampshire and applied for and received from his local Chief of Police a New Hampshire Carry License. In December of 2008 he went to visit his girlfriend in Massachusetts. Being so accustomed to carrying a sidearm from both his military experience and living in New Hampshire, he forgot that he had his handgun with him and crossed the border into Massachusetts.

He had pulled to the side of the road to text his girlfriend (now his wife) to inform her that he was lost and going to be late. This war hero with a valid New Hampshire Carry License then encountered the police in Massachusetts. The police discovered Kiklis’ sidearm and arrested him for being in violation of Massachusetts notorious gun laws.

After a long, stressful and embarrassing ordeal of court appearances and spending thousands in legal fees, he eventually had no choice but to plead guilty to violating the Massachusetts’ law of Carrying a Firearm without an I.D. He was placed on probation for two years and had to give up his New Hampshire Carry License and not possess firearms as part of his “punishment” dished out by Massachusetts. After his probation was discharged early because of his (not surprisingly) excellent behavior. He reapplied to get his New Hampshire Carry License issued back to him.

His reapplication for his license was denied by the Chief because:

The investigation done in connection with your application reveals that you have a criminal record, specifically your arrest and conviction of Carrying a Firearm without an ID Card in Somerville Massachusetts.

He hired the Nappen law firm to appeal this denial. The appeal was successful. On July 14, 2011 the District Court issued the following Order:

After hearing the Court finds that the Defendant failed to provide clear and convincing proof, as required RSA 159:9-C, that would justify the denial of the Petitioner’s license application. Therefore pursuant to RSA 159:6-C, the Defendant is directed to issue said license to the Petitioner.

Kiklis was thrilled to get his New Hampshire Carry License back. However, he had been put through the meat grinder of the Massachusetts criminal justice system. He had to go though a further court process in his home state to regain his rights. This after he served and sacrificed for his country to protect all of our rights, including the Second Amendment.

Unfortunately states like Massachusetts do not respect the individual’s Constitutional right to keep and bear arms, even those persons with a lawful carry license issued by a neighboring state.

Gun control victims like Jamie Kiklis should not lose their freedom, property, hard-earned dollars and self-respect for actions that are 100% legal in one state and unreasonably criminalized in another. National Right‑to‑Carry Reciprocity will stop states like Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Maryland, California, etc. from turning honest, licensed citizens into criminals and putting them through a legal nightmare. The patchwork quilt of gun carry laws must be stitched up by Congress with a National Right‑to‑Carry Reciprocity law.

This is vital to protect honest citizens like Cavalry Scout Kiklis from being abused by xenophobic and unreasonable gun control laws.

About:
Evan Nappen (www.efnappen.com) is a criminal defense attorney who has focused in firearms and weapons law for over 23 years. He is the author of New Hampshire Gun, Knife, and Weapon Law and the New Jersey Gun Law Guide. He is a director and the General Counsel of Pro-Gun New Hampshire, Inc. (http://www.pgnh.org/).