Category: RKBA

Armed passengers? New push underway in Missouri to allow concealed carry on public transportation

JEFFERSON CITY — Concealed-carry permit holders would be able to legally board MetroLink trains and buses with their firearms if a proposal Missouri lawmakers are weighing becomes law.

The Senate General Laws Committee heard legislation Tuesday by Sen. Bob Onder, R-Lake Saint Louis, that would allow guns on trains and buses amid continued security concerns regarding the region’s mass transit systems. The measure wouldn’t apply to Amtrak.

The hearing this week followed the fatal shooting of security guard James Cook on Jan. 31 at the Delmar MetroLink station. Eight days later, the Bi-State Development Agency, which oversees MetroLink, voted 7-2 against rearming security guards.

Opponents of rearming guards said the matter required more discussion; members disputed whether it was legal for guards to carry guns. Officials took steps to improve security last year, including increasing police presence on the trains.
GOP lawmakers have made similar efforts to allow the public to carry concealed weapons on public transit for years, to no avail.

Democrats have mostly opposed the measures, but state Sen. Steven Roberts, D-St. Louis, said Friday he would consider supporting the bill as written — if GOP proponents maintain limiting who could carry guns to concealed-carry permit holders…………..

Utah: Governor Cox Signs Permitless Carry Legislation!

****

The fledgling governor had previously said he supported the legislation, a departure from his predecessor. Former Gov. Gary Herbert had blocked legislation to do away with the concealed carry permit for years with a veto and, later, a promise of veto.

The measure, sponsored by Rep. Walt Brooks, R-St. George, and Sen. David Hinkins, R-Orangeville, takes effect May 5………….

Attacks on Second Amendment Trigger Tyranny

The election swept in a legion of Second Amendment foes. Americans can expect them to take James Madison’s statement that disarming the people is “the best and most effective way to enslave them” as less of a warning and more of a directive.

During the campaign, Joe Biden was asked by CNN’s Anderson Cooper if a Biden administration would mean “they are going to come for my guns,” and Biden responded, “Bingo.”

Continue reading “”

Indiana looks to scrap carry permits for handguns, allow ‘constitutional carry’

(The Center Square) – Sixteen other states have done it. And Indiana now looks ready to join them in getting rid of the requirement that a person have a license in order to carry a loaded weapon on them or in their vehicle.

Earlier this week, the House of Representatives held a hearing to consider allowing what’s called “constitutional carry.”

It was the first time a hearing has been held on such a bill, and the first sign in years the Republican supermajority in the Indiana General Assembly is getting behind permit-less carry.

Numerous county sheriffs testified in support of the bill.

Continue reading “”

New “Gun Trafficking” Bill Could Cripple Legal Firearms Market

Democrat Illinois Representative Bobby Rush has sponsored a bill — already referred to the House Judiciary Committee — that would criminalize many previously acceptable practices.

So purchasing a gun on consignment at your local gun store, or — while not named — on sites such as GunBroker could be defined as a straw purchase, which in turn could effectively kill the online firearms market, never mind that any state-to-state transfer must already occur between licensed FFLs, and necessarily requires a background check before the firearm can be picked up. Nor can you pawn the thing if you’re a little short of cash.

Firearms have always been something of an investment, rarely losing value and always easy to convert to cash if you must. This bill could very well end that longstanding practice.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation has several concerns as well. Communications Director Mark Oliva said the general prohibition language against purchasing a firearm on “behalf of another” is particularly troubling:

The way it is drafted now says the bill would punish innocent conduct in the case of a lawful purchaser who is not prohibited when that person buys a firearm “on behalf of” another person who is also not prohibited.

In essence, the bill would make it illegal for an entity like a Boy Scouts or Future Farmers of America marksmanship programs to buy a rimfire .22 to use in a rifle marksmanship program or a rancher to buy a firearm for a ranch hand to use against predators.

“(ii) (I) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child;

It would also puts restrictions on just how many you can buy or sell as well.

“(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to—

“(1) ship, transport, transfer, cause to be transported, or otherwise dispose of 2 or more firearms to another person … if the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the use, carrying, or possession of a firearm by the transferee would be in violation of, or would result in a violation of, any Federal law punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding 1 year;

“(2) receive from another person 2 or more firearms … if the recipient knows or has reasonable cause to believe that such receipt would be in violation of, or would result in a violation of, any Federal law punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding 1 year.

Unless you’re already a co-conspirator, exactly how are you going to know if the “transferee’s” possession of a firearm “would result in a violation of” federal law?

Not only can this stuff lead to a prison term of up to 25 years — the previous prison terms for violations were “not more than 5 years”, but it now includes “forfeiture and fines.”

Ҥ 934. Forfeiture and fines

“(a) (1) Any person convicted of a violation of section 932 or 933 shall forfeit to the United States, irrespective of any provision of State law—

“(A) any property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds the person obtained, directly or indirectly, as the result of such violation; and

“(B) any of the person’s property used, or intended to be used, in any manner or part, to commit, or to facilitate the commission of, such violation.

Section 924(h) currently reads “Whoever knowingly transfers a firearm, knowing that such firearm will be used to commit a crime of violence (as defined in subsection (c)(3)) or drug trafficking crime (as defined in subsection (c)(2)) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both.”

H.R. 30, if passed, would replace the entire section, amending it to read:

(h) (1) Whoever knowingly receives or transfers a firearm or ammunition, or attempts or conspires to do so, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such firearm or ammunition will be used to commit a crime of violence (as defined in subsection (c)(3)), a drug trafficking crime (as defined in subsection (c)(2)), or a crime under the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.), the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act (21 U.S.C. 1901 et seq.), or section 212(a)(2)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)(C)) shall be imprisoned not more than 25 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both.

Oliva said NSSF’s legal team was also concerned about one section removes exceptions for gifts.

HR 30 removes three exceptions and only includes a gift to a recipient who provided no service or tangible thing of value to acquire the firearm, or winner of an organized raffle, contest, or auction. So, that would be a cause for concern particularly for someone who chooses to gift a firearm as gratuity to a hunting guide, a bonus to an employee – as would be the case when someone retires and they are given a firearm as a gift – or an honorarium.

Like I said earlier. Jackson-Lee’s idiot bill was simply to make this idiot bill look more ‘reasonable.

Carolyn Maloney unveils gun safety legislation package

House Oversight and Reform Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) on Wednesday unveiled a legislative package of five bills focused on gun safety.

Maloney introduced the Gun Trafficking Prevention Act, which would make gun trafficking a felony and make straw purchasing — when someone buys a gun for another person who is ineligible — a felony as opposed to a misdemeanor.

She also introduced the Handgun Trigger Safety Act, which would incentivize the development of “smart-gun technology” that would only allow authorized gun owners to fire a gun. In addition, Maloney introduced the Firearm Risks Protection Act, which would require gun owners to purchase liability insurance.

House Oversight and Reform Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) on Wednesday unveiled a legislative package of five bills focused on gun safety.

Maloney introduced the Gun Trafficking Prevention Act, which would make gun trafficking a felony and make straw purchasing — when someone buys a gun for another person who is ineligible — a felony as opposed to a misdemeanor.

She also introduced the Handgun Trigger Safety Act, which would incentivize the development of “smart-gun technology” that would only allow authorized gun owners to fire a gun. In addition, Maloney introduced the Firearm Risks Protection Act, which would require gun owners to purchase liability insurance.

ALAN GOTTLIEB TALKS GUN CONTROL, RISKS TO 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHTS

Guns.com: Let’s talk about 2021. Why is 2021 the most critical year for gun owners, possibly ever, to kind of band together here and fight some of this anti-gun legislation that we’ve been seeing?

Gottlieb: Unfortunately, 2021 has become the ultimate storm, the perfect storm against gun rights with the Biden administration in the White House. He’s had a long history of being anti-Second Amendment, and the House and Senate in control of Democrats who have already come out, basically, with a lot of anti-gun legislation. As well as, we’ve got the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee talking about, it’s a high priority for him to get anti-gun bills through the committee in the Senate so it gets to the Senate floor. If these get through the Senate and the House, there’s no doubt that the president will sign those bills, and the legislation they’re talking about, it is extremely dangerous to Second Amendment rights.

Continue reading “”

Any bill from the idgit Jackson-Lee should receive ‘significant scrutiny’.

Below The Radar – Gun Violence Reduction Resources Act of 2021

While a lot of attention is rightfully being paid to the threat posed by HR 127, the Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act that we have covered earlier this month and in the last Congress, there are other bills targeting our Second Amendment rights. As of this writing, a search for the term “firearm” under legislation in the 117th Congress reveals 29 entries.

Not all of them are massive assaults on our rights. Some are relatively minor, or they seem neutral but the lead sponsor of the legislation means that they require significant scrutiny. One such bill is HR 121, the Gun Violence Reduction Resources Act of 2021. The lead sponsor is Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee, who also introduced HR 127.

According to the text of the legislation, the bill seeks to add 200 agents and investigators to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. Now, that in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing. The problem is just how these agents will be used. 200 ATF agents, in the right places, could make a big difference in the violent crimes we see in cities like Chicago and Baltimore.

The problem is that Representative Jackson-Lee doesn’t intend for some common-sense ideas for how to use those agents, like following up on arrests of violent criminals in possession of firearms and using the provisions of 18 USC 922 and 18 USC 924 to get some lengthy prison terms for them.

Let’s just look at a few from 18 USC 922:

  • 18 USC 922(a)(6) makes it a federal crime to make any false statement or to present a false ID to a FFL. Penalty: 10 years in prison.
  • 18 USC 922(d) makes it a federal crime to provide a felon a firearm. Penalty: 10 years in prison.
  • 18 USC 922(g) makes it a federal crime for a felon to possess a firearm. Penalty: 10 years in prison.

Then there are these provisions from 18 USC 924:

  • 18 USC 924(b) provides for a 10-year sentence to ship, transport, or receive a firearm in interstate or foreign commerce if they know or have reason to believe a felony would be committed in that transaction.
  • 18 USC 942(h) provides for a 10-year sentence for anyone who provides a firearm knowing or having reason to believe it will be used in a crime of violence or drug-related crime.

In the findings, she mentions how many are killed, but doesn’t discuss the problem of violent criminals. Instead, the bill claims, “Millions of guns are sold every year in “no questions asked,” transactions and experts estimate that 40 percent of guns now sold in the United States are sold without a background check of the purchaser.”

In other words, these agents will be sent, often on wild goose chases, harassing FFLs who, in all likelihood, followed the law and did nothing wrong. The actual violators of the law won’t be touched – and there are significant provisions that could work to address those who run guns to violent criminals. Those provisions have been around for a long time and could work.

So, in the scheme of things, HR 121 is not a bill Second Amendment supporters should back. Instead, they should contact their Representatives and Senators and politely urge their opposition to this bill, and to instead support legislation like the Protecting Communities and Preserving the Second Amendment Act, which actually addresses the misuse of firearms and does not infringe on our rights. Second Amendment supporters should also support the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action and Political Victory Fund to ensure that the current anti-Second Amendment regimes in the House, Senate, and White House are defeated at the ballot box as soon as possible.

Rutgers Cherry Picks States To Produce Justification For Gun Control

Since When Is Iowa, A Shall Issue Concealed Carry State, An Example Of Strict Gun Laws?

This Rutgers “study” is pure propaganda.  They chose New York as one example of a “strict gun laws” state, because it had a much lower crime rate during NYC’s “stop and frisk” policy – which just happened to coincide with the years of their study.  Unbelievably, they chose Iowa as a “strict gun laws” state!  Iowa is anything but such a state.  It does not license gun owners, nor register guns, nor have storage requirements.  Furthermore, Iowa is a “shall issue” concealed carry state that honors permits from many other states.  The worst thing one can say about the state is that it requires a permit to purchase a handgun.  Why did they bypass Illinois and pick Iowa?  Because Illinois has strict gun laws and an astronomical crime rate.

For the “lax gun laws” states, they chose Louisiana and Arkansas.  Having spent a great deal of time in the FBI’s online data site, I immediately recognized that these two states are outliers among 2nd Amendment friendly states, with high crime rates.  In fact, Louisiana has the highest crime state of the 40 plus 2A friendly states.

So, to sum up, Rutgers picked one of the best states with strict gun laws, that had stop and frisk and a state with fairly permissive gun laws as representing “strict gun laws” states.  They then picked the very worst state among the pro-2A states, along with one of the worst of these states to represent “lax gun laws” states.

It seems clear that Rutgers had the result in mind before they started…..

Las Vegas Sun Finally Releases Biden’s Anti-Gun Interview

Those who stay involved in the efforts to defend the Second Amendment have always known President Joe Biden is, to put it lightly, no friend to gun owners. During his campaign for the White House last year, the legacy media did everything they could to conceal that fact. The Las Vegas Sun recently revealed that it went so far as to bury an interview with candidate Biden that showed not just his disdain for our right to keep and bear arms, but his utter lack of comprehension of reality.

The interview took place on January 11, 2020, and was published last week—more than one year later—with the paper noting they “felt the interview was worth publishing to give readers a better idea of where Biden will lead the country.” Perhaps it would have been more helpful to their readers to have published the information BEFORE the 2020 election, rather than after, so they actually knew the views of Biden when they cast their ballot for President.

Again, people reading this already knew how anti-gun Biden is, but many others did not. We always thought that one of the purposes of the media was to get information that may not be widely known out to the public, especially when that information may better inform voters about candidates they may be considering supporting.

When seeking the Democrat nomination, Biden and his fellow candidates did everything possible to try to position themselves as the most anti-gun candidate. But after securing the nomination, Biden stopped talking about his anti-gun agenda, and most in the media stopped mentioning it. The Biden-Trump debates didn’t bring up guns, and neither did the vice-presidential debate.

The failure to discuss such an important topic seems odd, considering the Sun’s contention that “public sentiment for (gun control) is growing and support for the NRA is weakening.” If that were true, wouldn’t it be important to note the stark difference between Biden—an avowed anti-gun politician with a decades-long record of opposing the Second Amendment—and Donald Trump—a strong supporter of the right to keep and bear arms?

The truth is, most Americans do not believe in Joe Biden’s agenda of targeting lawful gun owners, and the media knows it. That’s most likely the reason this Sun interview didn’t see the light of day until now.

It may also explain why anti-gun lobbying groups spent millions on electing candidates while rarely actually mentioning gun control until they got called out on it.

Continue reading “”

These Are the Gun Safety Initiatives the Firearm Industry Has Championed Over the Last 20 Years

The term “gun safety” to most firearm owners usually translates to gun control and curtailing the Second Amendment. To the firearm industry, gun safety means actual gun safety that works within the confines of Americans’ Constitutional rights to keep and bear arms. It means education that teaches first time gun owners how to properly handle and store firearms. And it includes resources for parents to talk to their children about what to do if he or she comes across a firearm.

That’s where the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and Project ChildSafe come in.

For the last 20 years, Project ChildSafe, with the support from firearm manufacturers, has partnered with more than 15,000 law enforcement agencies to provide free gun safety kits to gun owners. Through Project ChildSafe, more than 40 million gun safety kits, which include cable locks for firearms, have been handed out to Americans in all 50 states and the five U.S. territories.

“The firearms industry is very, very interested and committed to keeping guns out of the wrong hands. We only want lawful gun owners to have guns. We don’t want guns in wrong hands. We don’t want kids to have guns if they’re not old enough or not supervised,” NSSF President Joe Bartozzi told Townhall. “The goal is to keep families safe while protecting Americans’ Second Amendment rights.”

On top of the 40 million gun safety kits, the firearm industry has given out more than 100 million cable locks. It has become standard operating procedure for the locks to be included when a new firearm is purchased.

The cable locks are a reminder for American gun owners: you don’t have to have a large gun safe to make sure your firearms are appropriately stored and out of the hands of children and prohibited possessors. In fact, the organization has created an infographic specifically for first-time gun owners that helps them figure out the locking mechanism that is best for them and their family.

But NSSF and Project ChildSafe are doing more than just handing out cable locks to those who need them. They’re also forging vital relationships and having difficult conversations.

“We have a parents’ guide for youth and mental health that we’ve developed with the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention,” Bartozzi explained. “We thought with a lot of kids being homeschooled, more kids at home, whether parents are home with them or not, there’s more of an opportunity for kids to come across an unsafe firearm. Our whole guide is to look at mental health children and to protect them.”

Specifically, the guide gives parents a guide of what warning signs to look out for and what actions to take if they suspect their child is at risk of committing suicide. It’s part of a bigger goal the AMSP has for reducing the annual suicide rate by 20 percent by 2025, known as Project 25.

The NSSF has also partnered with the Veteran’s Administration to reduce the number of veterans suicides.

Part of that is curtailing how doctors address the issue of firearms and suicides and removing the stigma of coming forward to seek help. Many gun owners are veterans who have a fear of getting help. They’re afraid of being deemed “mentally defective,” meaning they lose their Second Amendment rights for good. But that’s where NSSF comes in.

“A lot of veterans are gun owners and NSSF can talk about gun safety in a way that’s not off putting,” Bartozzi explained. “We’re teaching people how to talk guns in a respectful way, to find common ground and mutual respect.”

“There has to be a level of trust between the clinician and the patient,” he explained. “Doctors can’t automatically default to ‘Get rid of guns, don’t handle guns.’ It’s going to cause patients to shut down and that’s what we’re trying to avoid.”

Bartozzi pointed out that the firearms industry receives very little credit for working to prevent suicide. In fact, it was the firearms industry who advocated for the mental health check aspect of a background check, to keep guns out of the hands of those who could potentially be a threat to themselves or others. Instead of focusing on pushing gun control initiatives, Bartozzi said the industry is focused on “better background checks” that are more thorough and comprehensive. That’s part of a broader NSSF initiative, both at the federal and state level.

Fix NICS, which was passed back in 2018, is one of the most comprehensive pieces of legislation that will fill the holes in the background check system. All federal agencies are now mandated to report all criminal convictions to the attorney general on a semi-annual basis. States and Indian tribes are responsible for making sure their criminal convictions are accurate and up-to-date. The first semi-annual report that was dropped as a result of Fix NICS resulted in six million convictions being reported to the system, meaning fewer individuals could fall through the cracks. That fix is because the gun industry pushed for it.

To learn more about Project ChildSafe or to donate to the cause, please visit https://projectchildsafe.org/.

Washington: Senate Committee Passes Vague Carry and Magazine Ban

As previously reported, Senate Bill 5078 and Senate Bill 5038 were heard in the Senate Law and Public Justice Committee in January. During that hearing, these anti-gun measures were substituted, passed, and have been sent to the Senate Rules Committee.

Senate Bill 5078, bans the manufacture, possession, sale, transfer, etc., of magazines that “are capable of holding” or hold more than 17 rounds of ammunition. (The substituted bill increased the restricted count from 10 to 17). This includes conversion kits or parts from which any such magazine may be assembled. These so called “high capacity” magazines are in fact standard equipment for commonly-owned firearms that many Americans legally and effectively use for an entire range of legitimate purposes, such as self-defense or competition.

Those who own non-compliant magazines prior to the ban are only allowed to possess them on their own property and in other limited instances such as at licensed shooting ranges or while hunting. Prohibited magazines have to be transported unloaded and locked separately from firearms and stored at home locked, making them unavailable for self-defense. Any violation of this measure is a gross misdemeanor punishable by a maximum of 364 days in jail and/or a fine of up to $5,000.

Senate Bill 5038 makes it a crime to openly carry, on the person or in a vehicle, a firearm or other “weapon” if the person is participating in or attending a “permitted demonstration” in a public place. “Permitted demonstration” is defined to mean any behavior by at least one person expressing views or airing grievances, which is intended to, or attracts, an unspecified number of onlookers (a “crowd”).

The bill also prohibits openly carrying a firearm or other weapon within 250 feet of a demonstration in a public place after a law enforcement officer advises the person to leave. The intent of the bill is called into question because under SB 5038’s vague language, a single person openly expressing their views could be considered a “permitted demonstration” if it “intends” to draw a crowd. Senate Bill 5038 potentially causes those who are engaging in otherwise lawful activities to become criminals because of the actions of others.

At this time, no current action is scheduled for Senate Bills 5078 or 5038.

 

Why Gun Control Is A Class Issue

By Sam Hoober, Alien Gear Holsters

Believe it or not, gun control is just as much a class issue as it is an issue of the abridgement of freedoms for misguided reasons.

Naturally, those who advocate for increasingly tighter restrictions on firearms ownership insist that it’s in the name of savings lives when anyone who actually knows anything can tell right away they just want fewer people buying guns, period.

What isn’t always appreciated about the role of firearms in human history is that they democratized the use of force.

Most people have heard that old saw about “God made all men, but Sam Colt made ’em equal.” While it’s not strictly speaking completely true, it’s not entirely an exaggeration either.

Historically, the weapons of the common man (certainly in a military context, but outside of one as well) were the bow, the spear and improvised cutting or bludgeoning instruments.

The sword was the weapon of aristocracy. You can learn to use a spear in a rudimentary (but effective) fashion pretty quickly, but the sword takes time to learn and large standing armies of professional soldiers get expensive in a hurry in any century.

Sure, a pike or a spear is deadly, but imagine a peasant with a pike trying to fight a nobleman or knight who had years of time and training with a sword while said peasant was toiling in the fields.

In other words, the elites of society had an edge (so to speak) for much of human history. They were the ones who could afford to take the time to become proficient with a weapon that requires great proficiency to use well.

The gun changed the equation.

A rifle in the hands of a peasant is as deadly as in the hands of the bluest of blue bloods. They may be less effective with one than a professional soldier who trains all the time, but represent more of a threat proportionally to a modern soldier than a pike-wielding peasant did to a knight.

Look at the history of modern warfare. How many wars have professional armies failed to win against peasant insurgencies? Granted, guerilla peasant armies tend to lose far more in numbers, but they typically have more numbers to lose in such conflicts.

Winning In 2022 And 2024 Requires A Coalition

If there is one lesson that we should take from some recent events, it is that removing anti-Second Amendment extremism from the levers of power at the federal, state, and local level is going to require a lot of work. Part of that work will involve building bridges, often to those who are most affected by the failures we have seen anti-Second Amendment extremists use their calls to attack our rights to distract their ill-served constituents.

Can anyone look at the state of affairs in cities like Chicago and Baltimore, and say that the onerous restrictions on Second Amendment rights passed by Illinois and Maryland have done anything positive for the citizens of those cities? The track records of failures are obvious – and are something that should be the focal point of many campaigns by Second Amendment supporters.

While the same anti-Second Amendment extremists push bills like the Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act, they are often allowing violent crime to run rampant, while refusing to enforce laws already on the books that would make a massive difference. For all the complaints some raised about Project Exile, it served Second Amendment supporters well on two fronts: It not only blunted the push for new gun laws, more importantly, it made people safer by taking bad guys off the streets.

As things stand in America right now, there is the chance for Second Amendment supporters to build a short-term coalition based around anti-anti-Second Amendment extremism. This is not a typo. What this means is that Second Amendment supporters should work to get a large number of Americans who either don’t have strong positions on Second Amendment issues, or who have let other issues override their support for the Second Amendment on board with opposition to the excesses of Eric Swalwell, Sheila Jackson Lee, and other anti-Second Amendment extremists.

By simply highlighting the failure to enforce laws of the books centering on the misuse of firearms in violent crime, or for drug trafficking, or even “gun-running,” Second Amendment supporters have the opportunity to gain enough non-opposition in the suburbs and in urban areas to carry statewide elections. One of the biggest reasons is that anti-Second Amendment extremists are all caught up in the latest fads from academia, and not in the real common-sense solutions.

Passing legislation like the Protecting Communities and Preserving the Second Amendment Act and the Restoring The Armed Career Criminal Act at the state level – and pushing for passage at the federal level – would be the first steps to securing improvements like the Freedom Financing Act, the Firearms Interstate Commerce Reform Act, the Home Defense and Competitive Shooting Act, and the FOPA improvements Senator Daines introduced at the state and federal levels.

This will take a lot of work, but it may be worth doing.

Very possibly we’ll have a ‘twofer’ this week on Concealed Carry.

Montana: House Concurs on Permitless Carry Legislation – Heads to Governor’s Desk

On Friday, the Montana House concurred on Permitless Carry legislation, House Bill 102, sending it to the desk of Governor Greg Gianforte. Governor Gianforte has ten days to sign or veto the measure, or it becomes law on its own.

House Bill 102 will strengthen Montana’s self-defense laws by allowing law-abiding Montana gun owners to carry a firearm for self-defense throughout the state without first having to obtain a government mandated permit to do so. Further, this bill will remove some of Montana’s “gun-free zones” from the list of prohibited places and stop the unnecessary disarming of Montanans as they go about their day-to-day lives.

Now, it’s on to the Utah Goobernor so he can sign it into law.

Utah Senate Passes “Constitutional Carry” Bill

SALT LAKE CITY, Utah (Feb. 5, 2021) – Today, the Utah Senate passed a “Constitutional Carry” bill that would make it legal to carry a firearm in the state without a license. The enactment of this bill would foster an environment hostile to federal gun control.

On Dec. 22, Rep. Walt Brooks (R-George) filed House Bill 60 (HB60), which would allow anyone who is legally allowed to own a gun could carry it without a state-issued license. Currently, to obtain a concealed carry permit, Utah gun owners must be 21 years old, have no felony or drug/alcohol convictions, and cannot have been declared mentally incompetent by a state or federal court. Utah residents would still be able to obtain a concealed carry permit that could be used to carry concealed in states with CCW reciprocity with Utah.

On Feb. 5, the Senate passed HB 50 by a 22-6 vote with a few minor amendments. The House previously passed HB60 by a 54-19 vote.

Utah currently allows open carry without a permit.

“The perception is that this bill is huge,” Brooks said, “but the reality is it’s very, very focused on, ‘Can I take my legally open carried (gun) and cover it with my jacket?’”………..

 

Virginia Senate Rejects Background Checks For Gun Rentals

While Democrats in Virginia are studiously avoiding Gov. Ralph Northam’s proposed ban on modern sporting rifles, commonly-owned ammunition magazines, and suppressors during the current legislative session, they’ve still been pushing a number of gun control bills that aren’t as high-profile ahead of November’s elections in the state.

One bill brought by Sen. Creigh Deeds would have required background checks on all firearm rentals at gun ranges. The measure was authored by Deeds after two suicides at a Richmond-area gun range last year, but many gun store owners and operators objected to the legislation, pointing out that they’re already working to ensure that troubled individuals aren’t using rented firearms to take their own life.

Continue reading “”

Plan to invalidate federal gun laws wins approval in Missouri House

JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri House on Wednesday gave first-round approval to a proposal that would prevent local law enforcement from enforcing federal gun laws that aren’t on the books in Missouri.

The “Second Amendment Preservation Act,” sponsored by Rep. Jered Taylor, R-Nixa, seeks to invalidate federal laws or other actions deemed to infringe on a person’s Second Amendment right to bear arms.

Lawmakers approved the proposal Wednesday on a 107-43 vote.

Continue reading “”

Yes, there is a lot of work that needs doing in the U.S. to make it a safer place, where people can exercise their rights in peace. I just think the ‘work’ might not be to ‘Turban’ Durbin’s liking though.

Dick Durbin Previews Gun Control: ‘We Have a Lot of Work to Do to Make This Country a Safer Place’

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) previewed gun control during recent days and makes clear he thinks there is “a lot of work to do to make this country a safer place.”

Continue reading “”

Appeals Court allows guns on Missouri campuses, with a catch

COLUMBIA, Mo. (AP) — University of Missouri System employees may bring guns to campus but they cannot fire the gun or bring explosives or other weapons to campus, the Western District Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday.

The appeals court considered whether a university rule prohibiting weapons on campuses, except for employees such as campus police, conflicted with a Missouri law that said state employees cannot be prohibited from having a gun on state property if the firearm is in a locked vehicle and cannot be seen.

The case began in 2015 when Royce Barondes, a law professor on the Columbia campus, sued because he wanted to keep a firearm in his locked vehicle. The state brought a parallel case in 2016 arguing that the university rule was unconstitutional. Tuesday’s ruling applied to both cases.

Boone County Circuit Court Judge Jeff Harris ruled in 2019 that the university rule prohibiting guns on campus did not conflict with state law. The appeals court reversed that ruling, sending it back to the circuit court, The Columbia Daily Tribune reported.

The appeals court upheld part of Harris’ ruling that the university rule was constitutional.