U.K.'s Gun Control Laws Are `Complex and Confused,' Lawmaker Panel Says

The U.K.’s 34 laws governing the control of guns are “complex and confused,” placing an “onerous burden” on police and firearms owners, a panel of lawmakers said.

In a report published today, Parliament’s Home Affairs Committee said well-designed legislation that regulates and restricts the legal supply of firearms would help to reduce gun crime. The cross-party panel recommended introducing one licensing system to cover all firearms that require a license.

While the majority of gun-related crimes aren’t committed with licensed firearms, the committee expressed concern about the use of legally owned weapons in domestic shootings. It recommended tighter police restrictions on the granting of licences to individuals who have engaged in crime.

“The terrible murders perpetrated by Derrick Bird in June highlighted gaps in the current licensing regime, notably around the ease with which convicted criminals can gain access to firearms,” Committee Chairman :S:d1&partialfields=-wnnis:NOAVSYND&lr=-lang_ja">Keith Vaz, an opposition Labour Party lawmaker, said in an e-mailed statement. “We have heard evidence of further cases in which individuals applying to obtain a license for firearms have lied about their mental health problems and have subsequently gone on to misuse their weapons.”

Bird, a taxi driver, carried out the worst mass shooting in Britain in 14 years when he went on the rampage in Cumbria, northwest England, slaying 12 people before killing himself.

There was a case for requiring the police to consult the domestic partners of applicants in making the decision whether to grant a license, while raising the fees charged so that it covers the costs of licensing, the panel said.

“Public protection is the first duty of any government and our firearms laws are among the toughest in the world,” Crime Prevention Minister :S:d1&partialfields=-wnnis:NOAVSYND&lr=-lang_ja">James Brokenshire said in response to the report. “It is right that we keep them under review and we are prepared to tighten them further if necessary. Those controls must also be proportionate and fair.”

By: Kitty Donaldson, Bloomberg

Montana’s Congressman Rehberg Takes Aim At New ATF Firearm Sales Reporting Rules

WASHINGTON, D.C. –-(Ammoland.com)- Montana’s Congressman, Denny Rehberg, today released the following statement critical of a proposed “emergency rule” by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to require federally licensed firearms retailers to report multiple sales of semi-automatic rifles.

The proposed rule was included in a recent Federal Register and specifically calls for firearm retailers to report multiple sales, or other dispositions, of two or more .22 caliber or larger semi-automatic rifles that are capable of accepting a detachable magazine and are purchased by the same individual within five consecutive business days.

“While we’ve managed to stop gun control efforts in Congress, the Obama Administration wants to circumvent the legislative process altogether in order to force its anti-gun policies on the American people.

Beyond the economic burden of more paperwork for gun dealers, this rule is predicated on the incorrect assumption that buying multiple guns is a questionable activity that warrants a red flag for government attention.

This is the exact mindset that proponents of the Second Amendment feared when an anti-gun Chicago politician moved into the White House. I’ll keep fighting to make sure the federal government respects all of our Constitutional rights.” Says Congressman, Denny Rehberg.

By: Ammoland News

 

Proposed Amendment Would Enable States to Repeal Federal Law

Under the proposed “repeal amendment,” any federal law or regulation could be repealed if the legislatures of two-thirds of the states voted to do so.

The idea has been propelled by the wave of Republican victories in the midterm elections. First promoted by Virginia lawmakers and Tea Party groups, it has the support of legislative leaders in 12 states. It also won the backing of the incoming House majority leader, Representative Eric Cantor, when it was introduced this month in Congress.

Like any constitutional amendment, it faces enormous hurdles: it must be approved by both chambers of Congress — requiring them to agree, in this case, to check their own power — and then by three-quarters of, or 38, state legislatures.

Still, the idea that the health care legislation was unconstitutional was dismissed as a fringe argument just six months ago — but last week, a federal judge agreed with that argument. Now, legal scholars are handicapping which Supreme Court justices will do the same.

The repeal amendment reflects a larger, growing debate about federal power at a time when the public’s approval of Congress is at a historic low. In the last several years, many states have passed so-called sovereignty resolutions, largely symbolic, aimed at nullifying federal laws they do not agree with, mostly on health care or gun control.

Tea Party groups and candidates have pushed for a repeal of the 17th Amendment, which took the power to elect United States senators out of the hands of state legislatures. And potential presidential candidates like Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin have tried to appeal to anger at Washington by talking about the importance of the 10th Amendment, which reserves for states any powers not explicitly granted to the federal government in the Constitution.

“Washington has grown far too large and has become far too intrusive, reaching into nearly every aspect of our lives,” Mr. Cantor said this month. “Massive expenditures like the stimulus, unconstitutional mandates like the takeover of health care and intrusions into the private sector like the auto bailouts have threatened the very core of the American free market. The repeal amendment would provide a check on the ever-expanding federal government, protect against Congressional overreach and get the government working for the people again, not the other way around.”

Randy E. Barnett, a law professor at Georgetown who helped draft the amendment, argued that it stood a better chance than others that have failed to win ratification. “This is something state legislatures have an interest in pursuing,” he said, “because it helps them fend off federal encroachment and gives them a seat at the table when Congress is proposing what to do.”

Tea Party groups in Virginia contacted him. Virginia’s governor, attorney general and speaker of the House, all Republicans, then expressed their support. The speaker, William J. Howell, joined Professor Barnett in an op-ed article proposing the amendment in The Wall Street Journal in September.

Virginia was a particularly ripe place to start the argument. The attorney general, Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II, was among the first attorneys general to try to overturn the federal health care law, filing a lawsuit minutes after President Obama signed the measure last spring.

The measure was introduced in the House by Representative Rob Bishop, Republican of Utah, who was a founder of the Western States Coalition, which advocates states’ rights.

Sanford V. Levinson, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Texas, called the proposal “a really terrible idea” because it would give the same weight to small states as it would to large ones, allowing those with a relatively small proportion of the national population to have outsize influence.

Even if it were approved, it would be extremely unlikely to have any practical effect, Professor Levinson said. “Any bill that can get through the byzantine, gridlocked process of being approved by two houses and the presidential signature is wildly unlikely to be opposed by two-thirds of the states,” he said.

Marianne Moran, a lawyer in Florida who runs RepealAmendment.org, said that legislative leaders in Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, South Carolina, Texas and Utah, as well as Virginia, were backing the amendment.

“Considering we’ve had 12 states get on board in the last two or three months that we’ve been pushing this, I think we’re getting some speed,” she said. “No amendment has ever been ratified without a broad national consensus — it’s an uphill battle — but we’ve done it 27 times as a country, and I think we can get enough states to agree.”

By: Kate Zernike, New York Times

Ohio gun bills dead for now

COLUMBUS, Ohio - Lawmakers won't get a chance to vote on a pair of controversial gun bills despite a rarely used parliamentary procedure from House Republicans that gave backers hope for passage.

Outgoing House Speaker Armond Budish, a Beachwood Democrat, said Thursday that the 99-member chamber has closed up shop for the year, which means that a pair of gun measures won't come up for a vote.

Rep. Danny Bubp, a West Union Republican, had used a discharge petition signed by a bipartisan group of lawmakers to force a vote Wednesday that pulled the bills out of committee and sent them to the House floor.

One measure would allow concealed-carry permit holders to bring guns into bars and restaurants serving alcohol while the other would allow people with misdemeanor drug convictions to get the concealed gun permits.

And while more than 50 House lawmakers were willing to allow a floor vote on the gun bills, it won't happen because lawmakers won't hold any more voting sessions this year. However, with House Republicans back in charge of the chamber next year, Budish knows the gun bills have only been temporarily holstered.

"I have a feeling we're going to see them next year," Budish said, declining to comment further on the legislation. He voted against bringing both measures to the floor.

Meanwhile, in other legislative action Wednesday, the House unanimously passed legislation that would criminalize human trafficking. Earlier this month, the Senate also unanimously passed the measure.

Currently, Ohio has laws against compelling prostitution and solicitation to deal with offenses related to human trafficking.

Sen. Teresa Fedor, a Democrat from Toledo who championed the bill, said the new law will give authorities the necessary tools to fight the growing problem of forced labor. The law also incorporates the definition of human trafficking into kidnapping and abduction offenses; creates a crime for destroying, concealing or confiscating ID documents for the purpose of human trafficking; and it designates human trafficking as an offense under Ohio's wire-tapping laws.

Gov. Ted Strickland has said he will sign the legislation that makes Ohio the 45th state to have a stand-alone penalty for human trafficking.

By: Aaron Marshall, The Plain Dealer

Smith & Wesson shares down as company sees more modest Q3 sales

(Reuters) - Shares of Smith & Wesson Holding Corp (SWHC.O) fell as much as 6 percent Thursday, a day after the company forecast weak third-quarter sales, indicating that demand for firearms in the United States is slowing down.

"The firearms industry appears to have returned to levels no longer driven by fear of increased gun control or political uncertainty," Chief Executive Michael Golden said on a conference call with analysts.

Total firearms sales for the quarter were at about $83.6 million, the company said, which was below its own estimates.

However, Merriman Capital analyst Eric Wold kept his "buy" rating on the company's stock, saying he expected order patterns to improve in the second half of fiscal 2011 and in fiscal 2012.

Wold also said the 158-year-old company is discounting its wares to attract customers, which bodes well for Smith & Wesson as channel inventories stabilize and incoming orders more closely reflect consumer demand.

Smith & Wesson shares were down at $3.83 on Thursday morning on Nasdaq.

By: Nivedita Bhattacharjee, Reuters

NRA to Pursue Aggressive Agenda During Iowa's 2011 Legislative Session!

Thanks to your support in the November 2010 elections, over 80% of NRA-PVF's endorsed candidates were elected to the Iowa legislature. The gain in pro-gun legislators will greatly improve Iowans' ability to continue to support a pro-gun agenda and build on the momentum from last session when Iowa joined the vast majority of the states with passage of its shall-issue Right-to-Carry law in 2010.

On Monday, January 10, 2011, Iowa's 84th General Assembly will convene and NRA, with support from Iowa Firearms Coalition, Iowa Sportsman's Federation, and other pro-gun activists, will pursue an aggressive agenda to make Iowa a leading pro-Second Amendment state. The following is a listing of some of NRA's top priorities in the Hawkeye State in 2011:

Iowa's Right to Keep and Bear Arms State Constitutional Amendment

This proposed constitutional amendment would provide Iowa the strongest and most comprehensive firearm rights protection of any state, guaranteeing our Right to Keep and Bear Arms for future generations. The process of amending the state constitution with these protections would require passage of the legislation in two separate general assemblies and a ballot vote.

"Constitutional Carry"

Building on NRA's "Constitutional Carry" successes in Alaska and Arizona, NRA is making a strong push for more "Constitutional Carry" states around the country, including Iowa. The proposed legislation would allow individuals who lawfully possess firearms—meaning individuals who are not federally prohibited from shipping, transporting, possessing, or receiving a firearm—to either open or conceal carry without a permit. The new shall-issue permit system would remain in place, for those who wish to carry concealed in states that recognize Iowa's permit, but residents who legally qualify would no longer be subject to the permit process to carry concealed in state.

"Shall-Issue" Carry Reform

As of January 1, 2011, Iowa will become a "shall-issue" state and have one of the strongest shall-issue statutes in the country. In an effort to continue expanding the rights of permit holders, NRA is proposing a number of changes including removing the burdensome and unnecessary retraining requirement while also expanding on the criteria to satisfy the initial training requirement.

"Personal and Family Defense Act"

The proposed legislation would allow Iowans to defend themselves and their families—removing a person's duty to retreat—from any place they have the legal right to be. Additionally, any Iowan who used justifiable force could not be held civilly or criminally liable.

Preemption Reform

Upon the passage of the new shall-issue law, some counties in Iowa sought to ban firearms from public properties including parks—effectively denying your ability to protect yourself outside your home. Fortunately, Iowa has a firearm preemption law that prohibits counties from passing ordinances that are more restrictive than state law. However, the preemption statute needs to be strengthened to prevent current and future attempts to circumvent the law. The proposed legislation rests the sole authority on these matters with the state legislature and prevents a rights-infringing patchwork of local ordinances.

Emergency Powers Reform

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, local authorities in New Orleans, Louisiana confiscated firearms from lawful owners who had no other means of protection during one of America's worst natural disasters. Since the passage of Louisiana's "emergency powers" legislation, approximately 28 states have passed similar legislation. NRA's proposed language would prevent any state or local authority from confiscating any firearms during a state of emergency—a necessary safeguard for all Iowans.

By: NRA-ILA

Gun-Rights Supporters Won Big at the High Court, But For What?

In the past few years, the U.S. Supreme Court has given gun-control opponents much to cheer about.

In 2008, the court ruled that the Second Amendment protects the individual right to possess a firearm for private use inside one's home.Two years later, the court essentially extended that ruling to the states.

But according to this recent story in the ABA Journal, the Heller and McDonald decisions have not spelled doom for cities' and states' gun-control efforts. According to the story, "while there have been challenges throughout the country to local, state and federal gun laws, few have been successful."

Part of the issue, it seems, concerns the decisions themselves. Critics say the opinions provide insufficient guidance to lower courts wrestling with gun-control laws.

"It's a huge change in our understanding of the amendment, but not necessarily a huge change in what kinds of gun control laws are constitutional," said Duke law professor Joseph Blocher to the ABA Journal.

At least 260 challenges to state and federal gun laws have been filed since Heller was decided, according to Jonathan E. Lowy, director of the legal action project at the Washington, D.C.-based Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. But in most, the gun-control law has been upheld as constitutional.

So don't be surprised if the Supreme Court decides to get involved once again in the debate, possibly to provide further clarification to lower courts. A couple that could go all the way up: Bateman v. Perdue, which concerns North Carolina's law forbidding the carrying of firearms or ammunition during an official state of emergency. And there's Nordyke v. King, which involves a county ban on firearms on public property.

By: Ashby Jones, Wall Street Journal

Redesigned SHOT Business Magazine Website Goes Live

Readers of SHOT Business, the firearms industry's leading trade magazine, will have 24-7 access to the magazine's many articles, features and columns on the newly redesigned and upgraded website www.shotbusiness.com.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation, which owns the magazine, has revised the site to provide more timely updates and a full e-version of the current edition. SHOT Business is published seven times a year through a publishing agreement with Bonnier Corporation, publishers of Field & Stream and Outdoor Life.

"For convenience and to accommodate all reading habits, magazines today must extend beyond print and provide an online experience," said Slaton White, editor of SHOT Business magazine. "The new and improved SHOT Busineses website will allow firearms retailers to keep up with all the magazine has to offer from their store, home or while on the road. NSSF has done a fine job of making the site a true extension of the magazine."

All content from the most recent issue of the magazine can be found on the website, including the regular ATF questions-and-answers section, the "From NSSF" section, the popular "What's Selling" and "Undercover Shopper" features and "New Products," among other news.

The contents of SHOT Daily, the affiliated news publication of the Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trade (SHOT) Show, will be available on the site. Beginning in the first quarter of 2011, a previous issues archive will be added.

Visitors to the site are reminded that they can subscribe to SHOT Business content through Facebook and Twitter.

By: Bill Brassard, National Shooting Sports Foundation

Republican pushes gun-rights bills to Ohio House floor; Budish may thwart effort

COLUMBUS, Ohio — A Republican state representative pulled off a rare legislative feat on Tuesday in attempt to force a vote on a pair of gun-rights bills - one that could allow firearms in bars and restaurants that serve alcohol.

Rep. Danny Bubp, a Republican from southwest Ohio, got a bipartisan coalition of 50 lawmakers to sign a petition to bring the measures to the floor.

But Democratic Rep. Armond Budish, in one of his final acts as House Speaker, might thwart the tactic. Budish could allow the lame-duck legislative session to expire at the end of the year without a vote on the bills.

Budish, of Beachwood, said Bubp's tactic - called a discharge petition - hasn't been used in more than a decade and "violates the traditions of the House."

"Leader (William) Batchelder and the Republican leadership often talk about admiring and adhering to the traditions and protocols of the House," Budish said on Tuesday. "I believe this violates the traditions and protocols of the House."

Budish would not discuss his position on the bills, which passed the Ohio Senate in May and since have stalled in a House committee. Gov. Ted Strickland has said he would sign the bills if passed by the legislature.

Senate Bill 239 would allow some gun owners to carry their firearms in family restaurants, bars and open-air arenas. It would also modify the concealed-carry law to allow gun owners to travel in their vehicles with their firearms openly displayed. The bill drew staunch opposition from the Ohio Fraternal Order of Police.

If the law passes, restaurants and bars could still decide to prohibit guns inside their businesses, said attorney Ken Hanson, who is legislative chair for the Buckeye Firearms Association. Hanson said privately owned stadiums could make the same decision. Guns would still be prohibited at publicly owned stadiums if the law passed, Hanson said.

The other measure, Senate Bill 247, would allow people with certain misdemeanor drug offenses to acquire or possess firearms.

Bubp, a retired Marine who supports broader gun rights, started a petition this week to bypass the committee process and force the bills onto the floor. Normally, a legislative committee must pass a bill before the entire House votes on it. Bubp said it was clear Democratic leadership had no interest in advancing the gun rights bills.

Batchelder, who will be House speaker next year, conceded that the petition tactic is rarely used but disagreed with Budish's opinion that it violates House traditions. He said he also signed a discharge petition in the mid-1990s.

House rules require 50 petition signatures, meaning Bubp had to recruit a handful of Democrats to join his cause because Republicans currently hold 46 out of 99 seats. Seven Democrats, six of whom lost in the Nov. 2 election, joined 43 Republicans in signing the petitions on Tuesday. Bubp said he stopped collecting signatures at 50.

The same rules that allow Bubp to force a vote also give Budish enough leeway to allow the year to end without bringing the bills to the floor.

Once the petition is validated, according to House rules, the House must vote on the floor to bypass the committee process for each bill. That vote will occur today. Then, a two-day waiting period must elapse before the House votes on the bills.

By: Joe Guillen, The Plain Dealer