AmmoLand.com

Victory In The House! — But The Land Bill Battle Will Continue

Washington, DC – -(AmmoLand.com)- Thanks to you, a bill expanding gun control on federal land was narrowly defeated Wednesday morning, March 11.

The Omnibus Public Lands Act of 2009, S. 22, would have drastically increased the amount of land controlled by the National Park Service, thus subjecting such land to the anti-gun regulations of the agency.

The bill was brought to the floor of the U.S. House on what is known as the “suspension calendar.” This calendar is normally reserved for non-controversial bills. As such, any bill being passed under the suspension calendar requires a two-thirds majority of those voting.

In this case, the pro-gun position prevailed by a mere two votes — meaning S. 22 is far from being non-controversial.

Although suspension bills are not normally amended, one change was allowed in a secret backroom deal between a few members.

The amendment, offered by Rep. Jason Altmire (D-PA), was intended to alleviate the concerns of gun owners.

The Altmire amendment sought to protect hunting and recreational shooting on federal land, but those steps are completely inadequate to address the concerns of millions of gun owners.

The Second Amendment protects, as the Supreme Court affirmed in D.C. v. Heller, an individual right to keep and bear arms. That right was never intended to protect only the shooting sports.

Under current regulations, firearms possessed for the sole purpose of self-defense on land controlled by the National Park Service is prohibited unless the person holds a concealed carry permit.

While millions of law-biding Americans hold CCW permits, many more do not.  It is these citizens’ rights that are going unprotected.

NPS land covers the gamut from busy thoroughfares to remote wilderness areas.  These gun free zones are dangerous, in addition to creating a patchwork of inconsistent regulations between federal and state land.

Although we won today, unfortunately the battle is not over.

The anti-gun leadership will attempt to bring this bill back to the floor in a way that requires a simple majority, rather than the two-thirds vote they needed Wednesday.

Several pro-gun congressmen will try to offer an amendment in committee to simply allow state and local law to govern firearms possession on NPS land.  This type of amendment would put more control at the local level and protect the gun rights of all law-abiding Americans.

What is expected is that the leadership will propose a new “rule” that blocks any such pro-gun amendments.

If that happens, the vote on the rule becomes the gun vote.

House leaders have not indicated when they will attempt to bring the bill back to the floor, but it could come up at any time.

Therefore, your Representative needs to hear from you once again, for two reasons. First, the entire House needs to be urged to reject any parliamentary trick that excludes language to protect Second Amendment rights on federal land.  Next, those who voted against your rights need to know of your dissatisfaction, while those who stood up for your rights should be thanked.

ACTION: Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Rep. a pre-written letter.

Note: the LAC will automatically load the correct text for individual Representatives, based upon their vote Wednesday.  Because the list has to be divided in this way, the pre-written letters are not editable by the sender.

—– Pre-written letter for those who voted pro-gun —–

Dear Representative:

Thank you for standing up for the Second Amendment by voting against S. 22, the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009.

This bill would greatly expand land controlled by the National Park Service, and thus spread the agency’s gun restrictions to even more areas.  The NPS gun ban should be repealed, not expanded.

Although the pro-gun side won today, the battle is not over.  The anti-gun leadership will try to bring the bill to the floor again, this time with a rule intended to exclude a pro-gun amendment to repeal the NPS anti-gun regulations.

If that is the case, I urge you to once again stand up for the Second Amendment and vote against the rule.

Sincerely,

—– Pre-written letter for those who voted anti-gun —–

Dear Representative,

I am extremely disappointed that you did not stand up for the Second Amendment on the issue of S. 22, the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009.

This bill would greatly expand land controlled by the National Park Service, and thus spread the agency’s gun restrictions to even more areas.  The NPS gun ban should be repealed, not expanded.

Although the pro-gun side won today, the battle is not over.  The anti-gun leadership will try to bring the bill to the floor again, this time with a rule intended to exclude a pro-gun amendment to repeal the NPS anti-gun regulations.

If that is the case, I urge you to protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans and vote against the rule.

Sincerely,

****************************

Filed under: Gun Rights News by Ammoland No Comments »

Firearms Industry Calls National Park Service Ban on Traditional Ammunition Over-Reactive

National Shooting Sports Foundation

NEWTOWN, Conn.—-(AmmoLand.com)- The National Shooting Sports Foundation strongly encourages the National Park Service to reconsider its policy banning the use of traditional ammunition made with lead components on park lands and points out that neither humans, wildlife populations nor the environment are harmed by the use of such ammunition.

“The National Park Service’s decision is arbitrary, over-reactive and not based on science,” said Steve Sanetti, president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, trade association for the firearms and ammunition industry. “Studies show that traditional ammunition does not pose a health risk to humans, or wildlife populations as a whole.”

The park service appears to have made its decision without requesting input from wildlife management and conservation groups, or ammunition manufacturers. “There is no evidence of traditional ammunition harming humans or wildlife populations that would warrant this kind of drastic policy change,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel.

Hunting is allowed in some national parks in order to reduce herd populations or remove wounded or sick animals, and NSSF maintains that traditional ammunition is best suited for these tasks. Traditional ammunition costs less, and hunters are more familiar with its performance. Hunters also are agreeable to taking voluntary measures, such as burying entrails after field dressing game, to prevent scavengers from ingesting lead fragments.

Maintaining healthy wildlife populations has always been a priority for hunters, who have contributed approximately $5.6 billion to protect wildlife and habit over the past 70 years through excise taxes paid on firearms and ammunition.

The park service’s news release does not cite scientific evidence that wildlife populations are being negatively impacted by the use of traditional ammunition, and there is no indication that park visitors’ health was affected in any way by hunters and wildlife managers using traditional ammunition.

Ammunition containing lead components has been the choice of hunters for well over 100 years, during which time wildlife populations in America have surged. While lead ingestion appears to occur in a small number of individual animals, overall populations are unaffected. Also, there has never been a documented case of lead poisoning among humans who have eaten game taken with traditional ammunition, and a recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study on North Dakota hunters who consumed game confirmed that there was no reason for concern over eating game taken with traditional ammunition.

Unfortunately, the park service’s decision to ban traditional ammunition adds to the misinformation being circulated by anti-hunting groups to promote fear among wildlife managers and hunters about traditional ammunition. The park service’s news release makes erroneous comparisons between organic lead found in gasoline and the metallic lead used in ammunition. Banning lead in gasoline and paint was related to public health concerns because of the widespread nature of these substances and ingestion of paint chips by young children. These issues are not associated with lead in ammunition.

NSSF and its member companies who possess significant knowledge about lead and its use in ammunition hope to be part of any regulatory process to encourage the park service to reconsider this hastily concluded policy before it goes into effect by the end of 2010.

Filed under: Ammunition News, Hunting News by Ammoland No Comments »