Quote of the Day

John Adams was a member of the Committee of Five that were charged by the Second Continental Congress with drafting the Declaration of Independence. The other four members were Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman, and Robert Livingston. The document they produced was formally presented to Congress on June 28, 1776 and was approved by a vote the Second Continental Congress on July 2, 1776. It underwent minor revision and the final version that we know today was adopted on July 4, 1776.

In a letter to his wife Abigail dated July 3rd, Adams wrote on the Declaration and the voted resolve of the Congress of the preceding day:

The Second Day of July 1776, will be the most memorable Epocha, in the History of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated, by succeeding Generations, as the great anniversary Festival. It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more.

I suggest that we follow the advice of John Adams and celebrate the Declaration of Independence by going shooting.

GRNC Analysis Of Signed Version of NC Castle Doctrine Law

Grass Roots North Carolina just released an extensive analysis of HB 650 – the bill that amended a number of North Carolina gun laws and strengthened the Castle Doctrine. They also named names as to who was helpful in the passage of the bill and who was an impediment. Finally, they examine the rest of the gun legislation that was introduced in this session of the General Assembly, what is still alive, and what is dead.

THE GOOD, THE BAD, & THE DISAPPOINTING

“The idea of a concealed-carry in an Applebee’s bothered people…” – Republican Speaker Thom Tillis, after restaurant carry language was removed from gun legislation which passed.

[Analysis] With HB 650 signed by the Governor and scheduled to become law on December 1, congratulations are due to all who responded to GRNC alerts by calling and e-mailing the NC General Assembly. Thanks are also due volunteers of the Legislative Action Team for many hours spent at the legislature, our Director and Co-Director of Communications for dozens of alerts, often sent with little notice, to our Webmaster for alerts promptly posted, to gun show volunteers for alerts distributed to thousands of gun owners and to all others who helped win this crucial victory. Once again, you have demonstrated the value of an all-volunteer organization in defending our rights.

CHAMPS

As usual, politicians’ records are more checkered. Heroes of the General Assembly include Rep. Mark Hilton (R-Catawba, GRNC ****), who acted as primary sponsor for nearly all gun bills in the House; Sen. Buck Newton (R-Nash, Wilson, ****), who spent long hours restructuring bills to make them acceptable to leadership, and who delivered on committee hearings promised, House Rules Chairman Tim Moore (R-Cleveland, ****), for courage in giving hearings to bills not always favorably regarded by leadership, Sens. Debbie Clary (R-Cleveland, Rutherford, ****) and Andrew Brock (R-Davie, Rowan, ****), for working to support numerous pro-gun bills, Rep. George Cleveland (R-Onslow, ****) for his stalwart support in committee and during floor debates, Rep. Glen Bradley (R-Franklin, Halifax, Nash, ****) for introducing the “Firearms Freedom Act” and for supporting gun bills on the floor, and Rep. Kelly Hastings(R-Cleveland, Gaston, ****) for being the most tenacious Second Amendment supporter among incoming House freshman.

CHUMPS

House Majority Leader Paul (“Skip”) Stam (R-Wake, GRNC eval. under review) worked to weaken both Castle Doctrine and HB 650, and then paradoxically voted for final passage of both. From his proposed committee substitute for Castle Doctrine to apparently orchestrating the McGrady amendment, which removed language for guns in locked vehicles at places of employment from HB 650 (during which debate Stam employed the bizarre argument that he owns everything which crosses his property), to objecting in caucus to bringing gun bills to committee votes, Stam worked to undermine gun bills in the GOP caucus.

Beyond the usual anti-gun Democrats, others who worked to subvert your rights included Rep. Deborah Ross (D-Wake, 0-star), who tried to insert a “poison pill” into HB 111 for parks and restaurant carry, Rep. David Guice(R-Henderson, Polk, Transylvania, GRNC eval. under review) who weakened parks carry by exempting certain recreational facilities, and Rep. Chuck McGrady(R-Henderson, GRNC eval. under review), who offered the amendment to remove guns in locked vehicles from HB 650. Perhaps most pathetic was Sen. Ellie Kinnaird (D-Orange, Person, 0-star), who after initially being ruled out of order during the floor debate over HB 650, eventually managed to insert her usual anti-gun screed (albeit pointlessly) into the record, neatly lumping gun owners in with terrorists. Poor, old Ellie. She seems increasingly out of touch.

Disappointing

Frankly, we expected more from Republican leadership, specifically Speaker Thom Tillis (R-Mecklenburg, ****) and Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Berger(R-Guilford, Rockingham, ****). But it quickly became apparent that support for gun rights voters who helped “bring ’em to the dance” would be forthcoming only insofar as it could be done without sticking their necks out.

What resulted was a “thrust and parry” fencing match as we pressured chamber leaders to move gun legislation and they responded by adding and then removing bills from committee calendars, playing a “shell game” of inserting gun language into this or that bill, insisting on veto-proof majorities rather than simple majorities before bringing bills to the floor, and worst of all, removing items deemed “too controversial” from the legislation which passed.

What we got…and what we will

The result was, at best, half a loaf. We got the long-awaited Castle Doctrine, and somewhat weakened version of the parks carry GRNC has sought since 1997, and some other enhancements. Meanwhile, Tillis and Berger nixed guns in locked vehicles at places of employment, guns in locked compartments on educational property, and concealed carry in restaurants. The stated reason for the latter was poor polling on the topic. Said Speaker Tillis to the Charlotte Observer: “”The idea of a concealed-carry in an Applebee’s bothered people…”

The good news is that HB 111 – which contains restaurant carry – passed the House and remains alive for consideration when the legislature convenes next year. GRNC will be working hard on a campaign to pass it. As an opening shot, we suggest gun rights supporters contact Senator Berger and Speaker Tillis and tell them that what “bothers” them are Republican leaders who more or less immediately forgot who put them there.

WHAT HB 650 MEANS FOR YOU*

Like other gun bills this session, HB 650 went through multiple versions, meaning that if you read it, you need to ensure you are reading the correct version. The one signed by the governor may be found at:
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Sessions/2011/Bills/House/PDF/H650v6.pdf

Section 1: Thanks largely to the diligence of Rep. Hilton and Sen. Newton, we got a fairly strong version of Castle Doctrine. A few of the main points:

Legal presumption of “reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm” if the perpetrator makes a “forcible and unlawful” entry into a home, vehicle or workplace. While a few other states cover vehicles, few if any cover workplaces. Note: This presumption is “rebuttable” in court. While that might seem like a weakening amendment, it is likely to help us by ensuring the law isn’t used with criminal intent. Among cases in which the presumption does not apply are against lawful resident of the dwelling, guardians of minors removing them from the premises, and intruders who are attempting to flee.
Immunity from civil or criminal liability in cases of a justifiable use of deadly force.
No duty to retreat in any place you have a lawful right to be.

It should be noted that Castle Doctrine does not apply if the “defender” provokes the use of force (with some exceptions) or if the person against whom force is used is a law enforcement officer or bail bondsman in the performance of his or her duties.

Section 2: Repeals old castle language which applied only in the home and which is now replaced with more expansive Castle Doctrine.

Section 3: Establishes or expands concealed carry for district attorneys, retired law officers and, to a limited extent, correctional officers. GRNC did not advocate this section, but did not oppose it as a “sweetener” to facilitate passage of the overall bill.

Section 4: Exempts from criminal prosecution people who accidentally bring guns onto educational property by adding “knowingly” to the requirement to be convicted of a Class I felony.

Section 5: Slightly modifies gun laws in and around courthouses. Most important to gun owners is an exemption allowing concealed handgun permit-holders to keep firearms in closed containers within locked vehicles.

Section 6: Reduces chances of minors becoming “accidental criminals” by adding “willfully and intentionally” to the prohibition on possession of handguns by minors.

Section 7: Changes flaw in current prohibition on possession of firearms by people under “50B orders” (domestic protective orders) such that although the prohibition on possession still exists, ownership is now within the law.

Sections 8 & 9: Resolves conflict between NC statutes with respect to ownership of Title II firearms regulated by the National Firearms Act of 1934. Aligns NC law with 26 US Code.

Section 10: Adds additional identification requirements to existing law under which law enforcement officers purchasing duty weapons are exempt from handgun purchase permit statute.

Section 11: Makes it a crime to provide materially false information when purchasing a firearm, such as done during New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s “sting” operations in other states.

Section 12: Brings NC law into compliance with federal law by allowing North Carolinians to purchase rifles and shotguns in other states, including non-contiguous states.

Section 13: Adds people who have received pardons to list of felons who may have gun rights restored.

Section 14: Makes technical and conforming changes to support other sections.

Section 15: Limits use of medical/mental health history data collected by sheriffs as part of concealed handgun applications.

Section 16: Makes minor change to concealed handgun permit application.

Section 17: Shortens concealed handgun permit application period from 90 days to 45 days provided mental health checks are complete.

Section 18: Deletes finger print requirement for renewal of concealed handgun permits.

Section 19: Removes social security numbers from concealed handgun permits.

Section 20: Makes technical changes to prohibitions on duplicating or altering concealed handgun permits.

Section 21(a): Reduces penalty for minor transgressions regarding permits (e.g. failure to have a permit on your person while carrying concealed) from, in some cases, Class 2 misdemeanors to infractions.

Section 21(b): Amends statewide firearms preemption such that local governments may still ban firearms “on local government buildings and their appurtenant premises,” but may no longer ban firearms in parks. Due to the weakening amendment made by Rep. David Guice, a local government may still ban firearms in specifically named “recreational facilities” (defined as playgrounds, athletic fields, swimming pools, and athletic facilities), but gun owners may still keep firearms in enclosed compartments within motor vehicles.

Section 22(a): Improves concealed handgun reciprocity to a straight recognition law wherein any concealed handgun permit issued in another state is valid in North Carolina.

Section 22(b): Expands concealed carry for district attorneys to a broad range of areas not normally legal for permit-holders.

Section 23: Amends firearms surrender for individuals under domestic 50B (protective) orders such that although the individual still may not possess firearms, legal ownership is no longer prohibited.

Section 24: Amends G.S. 50B to remove ownership from crimes punishable as a Class H felony.

Section 25:

Enables legislators and staff to keep firearms in vehicles on state-owned parking lots. Again, GRNC does not support privileges for elite groups, but did not oppose the measure in the interest of getting the whole bill passed.

WHERE WE STAND ON OTHER BILLS

HB 63: “FIREARMS/LOCKED VEHICLES”

The good news is that although this bill is dead, the language in the bill got a recorded vote in HB 650. The bad news is that, thanks to anti-gun opposition orchestrated by House Majority Leader Skip Stam (R-Wake, GRNC 0-star), the language was amended out of the bill.

HB 111: “HANDGUN PERMIT VALID IN PARKS & RESTAURANTS”

Sponsored by Rep. Mark Hilton (R-Catawba, GRNC ****), after passing the House by a vote of 76-42 with a weakening amendment allowing municipalities to ban guns in recreational facilities offered by Rep. David Guice (D- , GRNC ), the bill headed to the Senate. There it was first referred to Rules – widely regarded as the graveyard for bills leadership has no intention of hearing. After negotiations with Rules Chair Sen. Tom Apodaca (R-Henderson, ****), HB 111 was re-referred to Judiciary II on the agreement that GRNC would wait for a hearing until after completion of the state budget. Although HB 111 will remain alive for next year, Senate Republicans are running scared from polling which reportedly shows lack of public support for concealed carry in restaurants. Meanwhile, parks carry has passed in HB 650.

CASTLE DOCTRINE (SB 34/HB 52/HB 74)

SB 34, sponsored by Sen. Doug Berger (D- , ****) is the only one of these still alive, having passed the Senate and been referred to the House. However, nearly identical Castle Doctrine language has been added to HB 650 and passed.

SB 560: “SPORT SHOOTING RANGE PROTECTION”

Sponsored by Sen. Brock, this bill closes loopholes in our existing range protection law by offering “grandfather” protection to ranges forced to relocate by rezoning, annexation or development. Although the bill suffered a weakening amendment in the Senate Judiciary II Committee, essentially limiting range relocation to within the same county, it passed the Senate by a vote of 36-13, has been referred to the House Agriculture Committee, and remains alive for consideration next year.

HB 241: “NC FIRARMS FREEDOM ACT”

Sponsored by Rep. Glen Bradley, this aggressive bill was patterned after what became law in Montana, and would have exempted from BATFE regulation any firearm manufactured and kept solely in North Carolina. Although the bill got a hearing, however, it’s time has apparently not yet come. The bill is dead.

HB 227: “PURCHASE OF FIREARMS IN OTHER STATES”

Sponsored by Reps. Mark Hollo, Mitch Gillespie, Mark Hilton and Bert Jones, this bill allowed long gun purchases from other states, including non-contiguous states. After its contents were rolled into HB 650, the now-redundant bill was gutted and devoted to other purposes.

SB 765: “NO FIREARMS QUESTIONS DURING MEDICAL EXAMS”

Patterned after the bill which recently became law in Florida, this bill, sponsored by Sen. Brock, would have prohibited pediatricians and others from probing for gun ownership among patients. Unfortunately, it never received a hearing and is now dead.

Paul Valone, President of GRNC, was interviewed by Stacy Davis of WRAL TV about the Castle Doctrine. Ms. Davis produced a balanced piece on the bill.

width=576; height=324; wral_insert_video_player_9807392(576, 324);

Is Rahm Afraid Of Alan Gura?

When the New Chicago Gun Law was passed in 2010, shooting ranges for civilians were banned. This became the basis of the lawsuit brought by the Second Amendment Foundation in Ezell v. Chicago.

Judge Kendell’s denial of a preliminary injunction was appealed by Alan Gura to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals where it appears quite likely he will win his injunction. When a judge says to you, “Mr. Gura, what would you like your injunction to say”, any reasonable person would take that as a good sign.

Against this background comes a report in the Chicago Sun-Times that Mayor Rahm Emanuel will introduce an ordinance next week to allow shooting ranges in Chicago.

The new ordinance should address the concerns raised in the lawsuit, officials say.

The proposed ordinance limits gun ranges to areas zoned for manufacturing. Outdoor ranges would be banned.

Anyone opening a gun range would have to obtain a gun permit from the city and obtain approval from the Chicago Police Department for a safety plan.

The Court of Appeals has not rendered a decision in this case and, presumably, an ordinance allowing shooting ranges would moot the case. 

NRA-ILA Gives CPD Superintendent A History Lesson

Chicago Police Department Superintendent Gerry McCarthy said that Federal gun laws were tantamount to “government sponsored racism” in a speech at St. Sabina’s Catholic Church in Chicago. Recognizing that McCarthy had a poor education in history growing up in New York, the NRA-ILA gives him a history lesson on where the real connections between racism and gun control lie.

Chicago’s Top Cop: The Racist Roots of Gun Rights?

Friday, July 01, 2011

Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy, newly appointed by anti-gun Mayor Rahm Emanuel, has wasted no time in sharing his views on Chicagoans’ individual right to keep and bear arms. Less than a month after his approval by the City Council, McCarthy attended a service at St. Sabina’s Church (a parish led by anti-gun extremist Father Michael Pfleger) and made a speech claiming that a lack of restrictive gun control laws is “government sponsored racism.”

Those with a better understanding of history will find themselves confused trying to interpret McCarthy’s logic, as decades of scholarship have proven just the opposite; that gun control, rather than its absence, has often been used as a means of government sponsored racism.

In his 1995 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy article, “The Racist Roots of Gun Control,” Second Amendment scholar Clayton E. Cramer outlines the historical case that “racism underlies gun control laws.” Cramer notes that racist gun control in America stretches as far back as 1751 with a French law in the Louisiana territory that required colonists to “‘[i]f necessary,’ beat ‘any black carrying any potential weapon, such as a cane.’”

Though Superintendent McCarthy might be excused for not looking that far back, he should certainly be aware of last year’s U.S. Supreme Court opinion in the case of McDonald v. Chicago. In a concurring opinion in that case, Justice Clarence Thomas explained that in the years preceding the Civil War, “Many legislatures amended their laws prohibiting slaves from carrying firearms to apply the prohibition to free blacks as well.” After the Civil War, little improved. Justice Thomas writes: “Some States formally prohibited blacks from possessing firearms… Others enacted legislation prohibiting blacks from carrying firearms without a license, a restriction not imposed on whites.”

Other Reconstruction Era (and later) laws were less candid. For example, an 1870 Tennessee law barred the sale of all but the most expensive pistols, effectively disarming newly freed blacks and the poor. New York’s Sullivan Law of 1911, requiring a permit for handgun possession, was largely targeted at Italians and other disfavored immigrant groups. (That law is still on the books.) And the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was denied a concealed carry permit in Alabama under a similar discretionary permitting law—even after his house had been bombed.

We suggest that in the future, Superintendent McCarthy might do a little more research before conflating respect for a fundamental individual right with its antithesis, government-sponsored racism.

Feinstein’s No Guns For Gulag Survivors Act of 2011

If one goes by the press release sent out the esteemed senior Senator from California, then any person convicted of a felony overseas for a crime that would also be a felony in the United States would not be eligible to own a firearm.

Opposition to an authoritarian state and agitating for democratic reforms is probably considered treason in countries like Cuba, the former Soviet Union, and others of their ilk. Treason is most definitely a crime in United States courts. So by Senator Feinsten’s reasoning, if you were convicted of treason and sent to the gulag for opposing a Communist state (and somehow survived), you were convicted of a felony in a foreign court thus are ineligible to own a firearm if you make it here as a political refugee.

I’m sure she and her fellow travelers would object to this example but unless she carves out an exception for political crimes then it would apply. Of course, what you have to do to be convicted of treason in the United States is not the same as what it would take in Cuba.

Feinstein: Prevent Foreign Felons From Obtaining Firearms

“Cannot continue to give foreign-convicted murderers, rapists and terrorists the right to buy firearms in the United States”

Washington—Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) today introduced legislation to close a loophole in current law to ensure that individuals convicted of foreign felonies and crimes—including domestic violence—cannot possess firearms in the United States.

Under current federal law, people who are convicted in the United States of violent felonies like rape, murder and terrorism are prohibited from possessing firearms. However, the law does not currently prohibit criminals convicted of these same violent crimes in foreign courts from possessing guns.

“America cannot continue to give foreign-convicted murderers, rapists and even terrorists the right to buy firearms in the United States,” said Senator Feinstein. “It makes no sense to have a law that forbids convicted Americans from possessing a firearm, but leaves the door wide open for foreign convicts to possess a firearm in our country. We must close this loophole before it is exploited by terrorists, drug gangs, and other dangerous criminals who threaten our communities.”

The No Firearms for Foreign Felons Act of 2011 would make it clear that if someone was convicted in a foreign court of an offense that would have disqualified them from possessing a gun in the United States, then they will be similarly disqualified from gun possession under American law.

This loophole for foreign convicts is the result of a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case of Small v. United States. In that case, the Court analyzed the 1968 Gun Control Act, which states that anyone who has been convicted of a felony “in any court” cannot possess firearms. The Court concluded the phrase only applied to American courts, despite the fact the Gun Control Act had routinely been applied to foreign felonies since 1968, the year it took effect.

As it is, many criminal offenses committed overseas including the ones that Sen. Feinstein specifies in her press release are a bar from even entering the United States legally. You cannot be given a visa for a whole host of reasons including having engaged in any terrorist activity, having been convicted of prostitution, and, of course, murder and rape. And that is just for visitors. Immigration requires an even higher bar to jump over.

Since this is the case, why introduce a bill that applies to virtually no one who is here legally? Could it be that Senator Feinstein is trying get more publicity for one of her pet causes, i.e, gun control? The multitudes of illegal aliens in her home state of California are already precluded from purchasing a firearm. In case she doesn’t realize it, that is one of the questions on the ATF Form 4473.

Sebastian at Snowflakes in Hell has more on Feinstein and “the foreign felon loophole hobby horse”.

Happy Canada Day

July 1st is what was known in the old days as Dominion Day. It is now called Canada Day. So if you see a Canadian today, congratulate them and thank them for the hard work their forces are doing in Afghanistan. Canadian Forces have been on the front lines next to American troops since the early days.

Fisking The Obfuscators

The Obfuscators, otherwise known as the Democrats on the House Oversight Committee, issued a report today entitled Outgunned which sought to shift the blame for Operation Fast and Furious from ATF to gun control laws. As I said yesterday, they are merely diversionary tactics to divert attention from the Obama appointees in the Department of Justice (and maybe DHS) who more than likely authorized this project in order to build support for more gun control in America.

It looks like CNN and the LA Times are buying into it which doesn’t say much for the intelligence and integrity of much of mainstream journalism. CNN took much of what Rep. Elijah Cummings and the rest of Democrats at the “forum” said as gospel and then reported that:

Cummings, the ranking Democrat on the committee, told a forum on illegal firearms trafficking he organized Thursday that he knew the recommendations of the new report “will face stiff resistance in Congress and beyond.”

“Before today’s forum even began, it was criticized as a conspiracy to confiscate the firearms of law-abiding citizens, which is ridiculous,” he said.

Cummings also said he and Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-New York, would introduce legislation on the reforms called for in the report.

Christine Mai-Duc of the LA Times Washington Bureau ran with an story entitled “Democrats seek crackdown on gun trafficking”. 

Cummings and Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) said that although the investigation into Fast and Furious was “very important,” they were looking for solutions to the broader problems of gun trafficking in Mexico. In an accompanying report released by Cummings, the Democrats said authorities from the Mexican federal police had told them that as many as 80% of the weapons recovered at Mexican crime scenes are traced to the United States.

On a side note, Carolyn Maloney – not be confused with the Queen Bee of gun control, Carolyn McCarthy – is a Greensboro, North Carolina native and graduate of Greensboro College. While my hometown is well rid of her and the people of New York were stupid enough to elect her, she supposedly plans to introduce legislation to “combat trafficking” despite the fact that everything involved in Operation Fast and Furious was already a Federal offense. Go figure.

Fortunately, Bob Owens in an article Pajamas Media tears down the Democrats’ report part by part. He fisks the obfuscators.

Bob notes that Rep. Cummings and the rest of his panel ignore what is at the heart of Project Gunwalker: the deaths of Brian Terry and Jaime Zapata and the weapons that were allowed to be walked by ATF. Briefly summarizing, the report downplays the serious penalties for engaging in straw purchases, it ignores the role of Obama-appointed U.S. Attorneys and their offices in not wanting to prosecute these crimes, and then they repeat the 90% myth again. They also insist on calling semi-automatic AR-15s and AK-47s “military-grade” weapons based upon their cosmetics and not their performance.

Bob concludes:

“Outgunned: Law Enforcement Agents Warn Congress They Lack Adequate Tools to Counter Illegal Firearms Trafficking” is a purely political document created to advance a dishonest gun control agenda, even in the face of 152+ deaths caused by this same sort of duplicity.

Rep. Elijah Cummings should be ashamed to have issued this report, and he should be pressed to answer for it.

 Indeed he should as should all that are associated with it.