Stop the National Hidden Handgun Bill

States currently have the authority to determine their own carry concealed weapons (CCW) policies. Most New England states show great care and caution when issuing concealed weapons permits. They also limit which out-of-state visitors can carry concealed handguns. But the gun lobby is trying to change this.

Legislation now pending in the U.S. Senate would force our communities to permit untrained individuals from other states to carry loaded, hidden handguns in public. It would allow out-of-state visitors to carry concealed firearms even if those visitors have not met the standards for carrying concealed weapons in the state they are visiting.

It would also permit residents who don't meet the ccw requirements in their own states to obtain a permit from a state with lower standards, thus circumventing and undermining their local requirements.

S. 845, the "Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009," could dramatically increase the number of individuals carrying concealed loaded handguns in public in your state.

The practical effect of this legislation would be reduce concealed carry permit regulations to the lowest common denominator. This is particularly dangerous as many states have weak laws and issue individuals permits after only a simple computerized background check-through a database that is missing millions of disqualifying criminal and mental health records.

Just how dangerous is this proposal? In 2009, there have already been three MASS shootings by concealed carry permit holders - including the murder of three police officers in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

The gun lobby is still gloating over their success with pushing concealed weapons into our National Parks. This legislation goes even further, undermines state authority and would allow armed individuals from virtually any other state to cross state lines with their deadly weapons and carry loaded guns in public.

The U.S. Senate is expected to vote on S. 845 as early as Monday, July 13. We need your help NOW to tell the Senate to stand up and say "NO" to the gun lobby and "NO" to more concealed handguns in our communities.

Please, call your U.S. Senators today and tell them to vote NO on S. 845 in any form, whether it is offered as a stand alone bill or an amendment to another bill.

To find your Senators visit:

http://www.senate.gov/

or call

202-224-3121

and ask to be connected to your Senators' offices.

THANK YOU for caring and for your time and energy.

Congress Caves to the NRA

Our national parks are our national treasures.  Our system of national parks was the first of its kind in the world and was set up to preserve, protect, and share our natural wonders and cultural heritage.  Every year millions of people seek out the tranquility and beauty of national parks to retreat from the bustle of the world.   There they find places of spectacular scenery and abundant recreational opportunities.  They also find safe places with few serious crimes.  Given the safety and tranquility of our national park system one has to ask why Congress would vote to allow deadly loaded hidden guns into our national parks.  

In a chest thumbing, “gotcha amendment” pushed by the National Rifle Association to prove their power, Senator Coburn of Oklahoma took advantage of the credit card reform bill that was designed to protect Americans from spurious credit card fees and cynically attached an amendment that allows for loaded guns in national parks.  It overturns a policy put in place under President Regan that banned concealed weapons in the parks in order to “ensure public safety and maximum protection of natural resources.”   Current regulation allows park visitors to have guns as long as they are unloaded and stowed away.  

The amendment that Congress blessed will allow loaded guns to be carried both concealed and openly.  This means it will be perfectly legal for visitors to Acadia to ride the park buses, attend ranger-led hikes and sit around campfires with a semi-automatic AK-47 strapped to their backs.  And because Maine law does not require a concealed weapons permit for guns carried openly, it also means that anyone can pick up an Uncle Henry’s, pick out the handgun or assault rifle of their choosing, buy the gun through a private sale where there will be no background check run and no questions asked, strap the gun on and head for a stroll up Cadillac mountain.  

Allowing loaded guns in our parks will raise the risk of opportunistic poaching and expose park visitors to the risk of accidental, negligent and illegal firearm discharges.  A concealed weapons permit does not guarantee safety.  Consider these two incidents in just the past two weeks.  In Michigan, a concealed weapons teacher accidentally shot a student in the face during a demonstration.   And in Texas, a concealed handgun instructor shot and killed his wife and then exchanged gunfire with police during a two hour standoff.  

The gun lobby claimed that the prohibition on concealed weapons in national parks violated their rights.  But last year’s Supreme Court ruling on the Second Amendment made it absolutely clear that the right to own a gun exists side by side with the right to regulate the purchase, possession, and carrying of guns.  

Senator Coburn stated that “Visitors to national parks should have the right to defend themselves.” But our national parks are some of the safest places in the country. In 2007, over 270 million people visited our national parks and there were only nine criminal deaths across the park system.  Compare this to what happens outside of our parks.   In 2007, in our country of 300 million people there were over 18,000 homicides, of which almost 13,000 were committed with guns.  

The NRA is in the business of selling guns and one of their best marketing tools is fear.  They tell their members to be afraid of the government coming to take their guns, they tell them to be afraid of everything and to arm themselves against this fear, and they tell legislators to be afraid of being targeted if they don’t vote the right way. 

Is Congress afraid to say no to the NRA?   Do they believe that their reelection depends on continuing to kowtow to their extreme agenda?    

The Association of National Park Rangers, the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees, the Humane Society, the Fraternal Order of Police, the National Parks Conservation Association, and the U.S. Park Rangers Lodge are just some of the organizations opposing this change in regulations.  Voters, especially those heading off to a national park this summer with their families, should be outraged that Congress didn’t listen to them instead.  

........................

See how your representative voted.  A "yea" vote is a vote to appease the NRA and allow hidden, loaded guns in our national parks.

Senate vote: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2009-188

House vote: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2009-277

State Legislators Are Playing With Fire

            There’s a new and extremely dangerous crop of gun bill springing up around the country.  This bill is specifically designed to go after the federal authority to regulate guns.  The goal is to get the new law into the courts, and ultimately before the Supreme Court, to challenge the federal authority to regulate guns through interstate commerce laws. These legislators, egged on by gun extremists and anti-federal government devotees, are playing with fire. 

            Here’s how it works:  Montana has just passed legislation that says guns manufactured in Montana, and sold to people who intend to keep these guns in Montana, are exempt from federal gun laws and regulations.  This means licensed gun dealers do not need to run background checks on people buying these specially stamped “Made in Montana” guns.  And because Montana has very few state laws pertaining to gun possession, many of those exempt from owning a gun under federal law will be free and clear to own guns under this new state law.  This includes people who have been convicted of domestic violence offenses, those currently subject to a restraining order, and children as young as the age of 14.  And of course, because state borders are open and unguarded there is little to stop people from taking these “Made in Montana” guns to other states.  Wow, talk about creating a system ripe for abuse. 

            But Montana is not the only state looking to make it legal for dangerous people and children to buy guns.  Similar legislation has been introduced in Alaska, Texas, Colorado, and Tennessee.  This week, a Texas House committee held hearings on a bill that would not only exempt Texas-made firearms, gun accessories and ammunition sold within the state from federal gun regulations but would also add the provision that the Texas Attorney General’s office defend any Texans who are prosecuted by the federal government because of this law. 

            Putting aside the fact that exempting guns from federal regulations is an incredibly bad and recklessly dangerous idea, these bills fly in the face of everything this country stands for.   They are meant to undermine our federal system of government.  If states can exempt themselves from federal gun laws what else can they opt out of?  

          Let's hope the courts act quickly and decisively to shut down this clearly unconstitutional law.  Shame on legislators for supporting these bills that are not only dangerous, but blatantly anti-American. 

 

Laws and regulations designed to protect the public health and safety work

Laws and regulations designed to protect the public health and safety work.   

A driver’s license teaches road safety, vehicle inspections keep dangerous cars off the roads, speed limits safely control the movement of cars.  Consumer product safety standards work to ensure that our food is free from poisons, cribs are safe for babies, radiation doesn’t leak from our microwave ovens.  Building codes protect the integrity of the homes we live in, the roads we drive on, the elevators we ride in.  

Every day, in ways too numerous to mention, policy makers have worked to protect the safety of our communities through laws and regulations.  But there is one area where the public is left vulnerable, one industry that our legislators fail to regulate:  firearms. 

Holes in our gun laws allow for the private sale of guns with no background checks run and no records kept.  Weaknesses in our regulations allow anyone to obtain military-style assault rifles, guns designed specifically to kill as many people as possible in a short amount of time.  Lack of oversight allows for these guns to be equipped with high capacity magazines that hold 20, 30, 50 rounds and more.  Amendments slipped in yearly to appropriations bills keep the ATF under funded, hide crime gun trace information from our police officers, and prohibit the Center for Disease Control from talking about gun control.  

Legislators at both the federal and the state level have been bullied and beaten into submission by a powerful special interest lobby.  It is understandable why the gun lobby acts the way they do.  Their goal, after all, is to sell guns.  What is not understandable is why our policy makers are content to sit back in silence while every year in the United States 30,000 people die from firearms; 70,000 people are shot and injured, leaving physical and emotional scars that last for years; over 300,000 people are victims of armed robbery or aggravated assault with a firearm; and countless others are threatened and intimidated with guns, sometimes by so-called loved ones.  

Our legislators need to be held accountable for their failure to protect the public health and safety.  They have abdicated their responsibility and have helped create a system that allows for easy, unquestioned access to firearms by felons, domestic abusers and others prohibited from owning guns.  

Every time a Dylan Klebold or a Seung-Hui Cho walks into a classroom and kills our innocent children we must hold our legislators to blame for their failure to pass the laws and regulations that would prevent these dangerous individuals from getting guns.  

On this, the tenth anniversary of the killings at Columbine High School and the second anniversary of the massacre at Virginia Tech, let us honor these, and all victims of gun violence by working to enact laws that will prevent guns from falling into the wrong hands and prevent future tragedies.

Live Free or Die (Except if you live in Washington, D.C.) H.R. 6691 - A Bad Idea

I’ve always admired the New Hampshire motto Live Free or Die. It calls forth ideals of independence and self-government. Which begs the question, why are both of New Hampshire’s congressional representatives trying to strong arm and overrule the Washington, D.C. City Council? Don’t the residents of D.C. have democratic rights?

Both Congressman Paul Hodes and Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter are cosponsors of H.R. 6691, a bill that would repeal D.C. gun laws, overturning provisions enacted by the District of Columbia City Council and endorsed by the residents of Washington, D.C. This bill is a shameless attempt by the gun lobby to interfere with local city rule and to push the NRA’s irresponsible and dangerous agenda. The D.C. Council does not need the NRA to draft their new gun regulations.

In June the Supreme Court overturned D.C.’s restrictive gun laws in the landmark decision D.C. v. Heller. While the Court ruled that the D.C. laws went too far in restricting access to handguns and that an individual right to bear arms is protected under the Second Amendment the court also ruled that this right is not absolute and that gun regulation is constitutional.

In response to this ruling and to bring the city into compliance with Heller, the D.C. Council passed an emergency resolution allowing the registration of handguns. They are currently working hard on crafting permanent gun legislation that will best provide for the public’s safety.

But the gun lobby is not satisfied with the D.C. Council’s efforts and is taking this opportunity to encourage Congress to meddle in local legislation. They are pushing hard for H.R. 6691, a bill that would not only repeal D.C.’s current gun regulations but also prevent the D.C. City Council from enacting any gun-related legislation in the future. It is an obscene attempt to prevent the residents of Washington, D.C. from governing themselves. How ironic that the only two congressional cosponsors from New England come from the state with the motto Live Free or Die.

H.R. 6691 has many dangerous provisions that go far beyond the requirements of the Heller ruling. H.R. 6691 would:

- Repeal D.C.’s ban on semi-automatic weapons, including assault weapons like the Tec-9 assault pistol and AK-47s.

- Allow D.C. residents to cross state lines to buy handguns in neighboring states. Current federal law bars gun dealers from selling handguns directly to out of state buyers because of the high risk this creates for interstate gun trafficking.

- Repeal D.C.’s registration requirements for firearms.

- Repeal D.C.’s safe storage laws.

- Prohibit D.C. from passing future gun regulations.

At a recent hearing on H.R. 6691 law enforcement officials testified that the bill would even permit people to carry loaded semi-automatic rifles such as AK-47s lawfully on the streets of D.C.

“Imagine how difficult it will be for law enforcement to safeguard the public, not to mention the president at the inaugural parade,” said Chief Cathy Lanier, chief of the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department.

D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty has asked Congress to demonstrate their "commitment to the democratic process" by allowing the city government to work on its own to comply with the Heller decision.

So why are Representatives Hodes and Shea-Porter so anxious to not only interfere with D.C. lawmakers but to enact legislation that will make it harder to protect residents and visitors of Washington, D.C.? Are they afraid that in this election year the NRA will work against them if they don’t cosponsor this legislation? Do they not understand the Heller ruling when it states “like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” How sad to see both New Hampshire representatives supporting this irresponsible and dangerous NRA agenda.

Supreme Court Rules 2nd Amendment Right an Individual Right but Not an Unlimited Right

In a landmark decision today the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment grants an individual right to keep and bear arms. District of Columbia v. Heller struck down the District of Columbia’s handgun ban but also made it clear that the Constitution allows for reasonable restrictions on access to firearms.

“Today the Supreme Court took away the single biggest excuse for not passing tough gun laws to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and dangerous individuals,” said Cathie Whittenburg, Director of New England Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence (NECPGV). “The ‘slippery slope’ argument is gone.”

The gun lobby has long argued that common sense restrictions on guns are, in fact, nothing more than initial steps down a “slippery slope” that leads to a general gun ban. By holding that the Second Amendment prohibits the D.C. handgun ban, the Supreme Court has assured gun owners that there is no such “slippery slope”.

In affirming the ability to restrict the sale and possession of firearms the Court ruled:

Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

The Court also noted that “The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools” for combating the problem of handgun violence, including the current firearm licensing requirement and “some measures regulating handguns.”

“While we are disappointed with today’s ruling and disagree with the individual right interpretation NECPGV will continue to push for reasonable, common sense gun violence prevention laws,” said Whittenburg.

NECPGV advocates for laws that require background checks on all gun purchases; limiting handgun purchases to one per month; require gun owners to report lost or stolen firearms to law enforcement officials; crack down on illegal guns and gun trafficking; and regulate military-style assault weapons and .50 caliber sniper rifles.

Incompetent to stand trial but still legally able to own guns

In 2005, Scott Buchanan was found incompetent to stand trial. Buchanan had been charged with theft, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest after an incident at the New Hampshire Division of Motor Vehicles. At the time of his arrest police seized a handgun from his car and as a condition of bail Buchanan surrendered his AK-47. Charges against Buchanan were later dropped after he was found incompetent to stand trial because of his excessive and unusual paranoia about police and the government.

Now, Buchanan wants his guns back. And he just might get them. The New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled, in a unanimous decision, that being incompetent to stand trial should not be equated with an adjudication as a mental defective under federal law, and therefore such a person should not be automatically prohibited from possessing firearms. Buchanan is now back in lower court, seeking the return of his guns.

According to court documents, being competent to stand trial “focuses upon whether the defendant has a rational and factual understanding of the proceeding against him and sufficient present ability to consult with and assist his lawyer on the case with a reasonable degree of rational understanding.” And that this is not “directly related to dangerousness or the ability to contract or manage one’s own affairs which are requirements of the federal definition of adjudicated as a mental defective.”

Under this ruling it is therefore possible for someone to be found incompetent to stand trial and still be able to possess firearms. The court can find that you don't have the rational understanding to participate in a court proceeding against you but that shouldn't stop you from owning a handgun, an AK-47, or any other type of gun. Now that’s insane.