Gun Owners of the San Fernando Valley Posts

From NRA-ILA:


California: State Assembly Committee to Hear Bill to Ban Open Carry

Monday, March 28, 2011

Please contact members of the Assembly Public Safety Committee!

In an effort for further stifle law-abiding gun owners from exercising their right to keep and bear arms, anti-gun state Assemblyman Anthony Portantino (D-44) has introduced legislation that would change the state’s gun laws and prohibit law-abiding citizens from carring an unloaded handgun openly. Assembly Bill 144 will be heard by the Assembly Public Safety Committee on Tuesday, April 12 at 9 a.m. in room 126 on the first floor of the capitol.

It is currently legal to carry an unloaded handgun into most public places within the state, including restaurants and malls, but if approved, AB 144 would make it a misdemeanor to carry an unloaded handgun in public under most circumstances.

Please contact members of the Assembly Public Safety Committee to and urge them to stand up for the law-abiding gun owners of California and oppose AB 144.

 

Assembly Public Safety Committee

Tom Ammiano (D-13) – Chairman

(916) 319-2013

Assemblymember.Ammiano@assembly.ca.gov

Steve Knight (R-36) – Vice Chairman

(916) 319-2036

Assemblymember.Knight@assembly.ca.gov

Gilbert Cedillo (D-45)

(916) 319-2045

Assemblymember.Cedillo@assembly.ca.gov

Curt Hagman (D-60)

(916) 319-2060

Assemblymember.Hagman@assembly.ca.gov

Jerry Hill (D-19)

(916) 319-2019

Assemblymember.Hill@assembly.ca.gov

Holly J. Mitchell (D-47)

(916) 319-2047

Assemblymember.Mitchell@assembly.ca.gov

Nancy Skinner (D-14)

(916) 319-2014

Assemblymember.Skinner@assembly.ca.gov

News Politics

Chuck Norris has written a new op-ed on how Obama triangulates on gun control. Here’s an excerpt…

Up until now, the Obama White House has given a wide berth to the gun-control debate, abandoning campaign promises to pursue new restrictions on our gun rights. This avoidance does not reflect any shift in position; it is merely recognition of the political reality that most members of his party have no interest in yet another political loser of an issue being crammed down their throats.

At the same time, Obama’s liberal base has grown restless and rancorous over the first two years in office, because he hasn’t done everything they wanted, at least regarding more restrictions on our Second Amendment rights. They resent the president’s avoidance of fulfilling his campaign rhetoric.

Gun-control groups have thrown tantrums for months that Obama wouldn’t champion their agenda, with one group resentfully awarding him a grade of “F.” And so only now is Obama sticking his toes into the swirling currents of the Second Amendment debate.

The Obamanistas are taking a queue from their Clintonista forebears; when in doubt, triangulate. It’s better to move part way to the goal line than to not move at all. Sure, your true-believing crazies will be upset, but the end result is the same. Move a little now, then a little more later… Eventually you get to where you and the crazies wanted to be; just not in the single leap they wanted.

News Politics

From NRAILA.org: H.R. 1093 The “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform Act of 2011”


BATFE/Federal Firearms Law Reform
H.R. 1093 The “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform Act of 2011”
Reps. Steve King (R-Iowa) and Jason Altmire (D-Pa.) have introduced H.R. 1093, the “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform Act of 2011.” The bill would roll back unnecessary restrictions, correct errors, and codify longstanding congressional policies in the firearms arena. These bipartisan bills are a vital step to modernize and improve BATFE operations.

Of highest importance, H.R. 1093 totally rewrites the system of administrative penalties for licensed dealers, manufacturers and importers of firearms. Today, for most violations, BATFE can only give a federal firearms license (FFL) holder a warning, or totally revoke his license.

H.R. 1093 would allow fines or license suspensions for less serious violations, while still allowing license revocation for the kind of serious violations that would block an investigation or put guns in the hands of criminals. This prevents the all-too-common situations where BATFE has revoked licenses for insignificant technical violations—such as improper use of abbreviations, or filing records in the wrong order.

Among its other provisions, H.R. 1093 would:

  • Clarify the standard for “willful” violations—allowing penalties for intentional, purposeful violations of the law, but not for simple paperwork mistakes.
  • Improve the process for imposing penalties, notably by allowing FFLs to appeal BATFE penalties to a neutral administrative law judge, rather than to an employee of BATFE itself.
  • Allow a licensee a period of time to liquidate inventory when he goes out of business. During this period, all firearms sold would be subject to a background check by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
  • Allow a grace period for people taking over an existing firearms business to correct problems in the business`s records—so if a person inherited a family gun store (for example), the new owner couldn`t be punished for the previous owner`s recordkeeping violations.
  • Reform the procedures for consideration of federal firearms license applications. Under H.R. 1093, denial of an application would require notification to the applicant, complete with reasons for the denial. Additionally, an applicant would be allowed to provide supplemental information and to have a hearing on the application.
  • Require BATFE to establish clear investigative guidelines.
  • Clarify the licensing requirement for gunsmiths, distinguishing between repair and other gunsmith work and manufacture of a firearm. This would stop BATFE from arguing that minor gunsmithing or refinishing activities require a manufacturers` license.
  • Eliminate a provision of the Youth Handgun Safety Act that requires those under 18 to have written permission to use a handgun for lawful purposes (such as competitive shooting or safety training)—even when the parent or guardian is present.
  • Permanently ban creation of a centralized electronic index of out of business dealers` records—a threat to gun owners` privacy that Congress has barred through appropriations riders for more than a decade.
  • Allow importation and transfer of new machineguns by firearm and ammunition manufacturers for use in developing or testing firearms and ammunition, and training customers. In particular, ammunition manufacturers fulfilling government contracts need to ensure that their ammunition works reliably. H.R. 1093 would also provide for the transfer and possession of new machineguns by professional film and theatrical organizations.
  • Repeal the Brady Act`s “interim” waiting period provisions, which expired in 1998.
  • Give BATFE sole responsibility for receiving reports of multiple handgun sales. (Currently, dealers also have to report multiple sales to state or local agencies, a requirement that has shown little or no law enforcement value.) State and local agencies could receive these reports upon request to BATFE, but would have to comply strictly with current requirements to destroy these records after 20 days, unless the person buying the guns turns out to be prohibited from receiving firearms.
  • Restore a policy that allowed importation of barrels, frames and receivers for non-importable firearms, when they can be used as repair or replacement parts.
  • Prohibit BATFE from requiring multiple sales reports on the sale of long guns by limiting BATFE`s authority to collect data that is not specifically allowed by statute.
  • Provide greater protection of gun owners` privacy by strengthening the ban on creation of any complete or partial gun registration system.
  • Authorize payment of attorneys’ fees to licensees who prevail before an administrative law judge.
  • Restrict the use of “demand letters” by BATFE to compel FFLs to turn over information outside what is allowed by statute.

The House passed similar legislation (H.R. 5092) in the 109th Congress, by a 277-131 vote. Supporters included 63 Democrats. In the 111th Congress, a majority of the House — 243 congressmen, including 63 Democrats –cosponsored H.R. 2296. Similar BATFE reform legislation was introduced in the Senate for the first time in the 111th Congress.

For more information go to:

Know Your Rights

BATFE Hearings Lead To Reform Bills

Time To Stop BATFE Abuses: Congress Pursues Firearm Law Reforms

BATFE Raids Wallingford Mobile Home

Courts Clarify Standards for Dealer Violations

H.R. 4900: The “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform and Firearms Modernization Act of 2007”

News Politics

Go check out the digital versions of your favorite NRA publications. Here’s what America’s 1st Freedom looks like…

If you’re like me, you’ve seen digital editions of existing print magazines before. And if you’re like me, you probably weren’t impressed. I’m impressed with what the NRA and their partners at ZMags have done. This is a very good online magazine interface. Anytime an article refers to some other article in another issue, there’s a link to take you there. If there’s an update to a story, a link provides that info. You can download the magazine as a pdf from the page. You can also go right to the contact information for your elected officials while you’re reading.

General News

NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre spoke to CBS News about reports that the BATFE “walked” illegal firearms into Mexico…

“They wanted to prove that there were guns flowing to Mexico, so they set up an illegal pipeline to send guns to Mexico,” speculates LaPierre. “When does it stop being law enforcement and start being a criminal enterprise? To prove there’s Islamic terrorists are they going to start manufacturing and selling explosives? It just makes no sense.”

You have to wonder what they were thinking at the ATF. Were this scandal limited to a few dozen guns, one might chalk it up to a badly run investigation. But somewhere along the way, as it goes from dozens to hundreds and then to thousands of guns, it stops looking like a simple screw up and starts looking like an attempt to manufacture a crisis.

News Politics

 Gun grabbers in Connecticut are allowing their true colors to shine through. The “Large Capacity” Magazine ban currently under consideration in the State legislature shows the level of contempt they hold for mere citizens.

Many States, California among them, have sought to limit the ability of a law abiding citizen to use a modern firearm with a “high capacity” magazine for self defense. Here in CA, the limit is 10 rounds. A magazine holding more than 10 rounds is considered an “assault weapon” here. (And allowing someone else to use, or even hold one, is called an illegal transfer!) But CA and every other State that has such a foolish law on the books has at least recognized that such devices currently held are private property and may not be confiscated by the State without compensation. Gun grabbers in CT, on the other hand, have as little regard for the private property rights of their citizens as they do their right to armed self defense.

Magazine bans fail as regulatory tools because so many “grandfathered” magazines exist. The 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Ban outlawed the manufacture or importation of “high capacity” magazines; however, those already in the purchasing pipeline on the law’s effective date were grandfathered in. As a result, thousands upon thousands were ordered by importers; far more than were actually in existence at their suppliers’ warehouses. Thus new magazines were made to fulfill the orders and legally imported. The Federal government could have outlawed these, but such an action would have required compensation as a taking under the 5th Amendment. Since Bill Clinton didn’t want to buy warehouses full of stamped sheet metal and springs, his AWB didn’t try to stop the importation of grandfathered magazines. Nor did the Federal law or any of the State laws attempt to confiscate existing magazines. This effectively neutered these laws. Gun grabbers in CT didn’t want to see their new law fail for the same reason and thus they’re OK with taking them; however, they also don’t want to spend real money to buy the magazines in question. So they’ve decided to do the taking without regard for the 5th Amendment’s just compensation requirement.

Legal News

In their editorial ATF’s Mexico gun problem the SF Chronicle gets reaches the wrong conclusion. One would think that most journalists hate being lead by the nose by government propagandists. Things must be different at the Chronicle. After decrying the AFT’s bungled Fast and Furious gunrunning operation, the editorial staff at the Chronicle concludes:

This nation should be doing what it can to halt, not abet, the flow of weapons into Mexico. A good starting point would be to accelerate the approval of a long-stalled rule to require border-state gun dealers to report multiple sales of long guns.

One would think that a good starting point would be to do the polar opposite of whatever it is that the illegal, government sponsored gunrunning operation was intended to support. In this case, remove the AFT’s ability to write whatever rules it pleases without Congressional oversight. The Chronicle staff, however, seems to have swilled too much of the anti-gun Kool-Aid to reach the correct conclusion.

News Politics

David Rittgers at National Review Online writes about “Operation Fast and Furious”, or “Project Gunwalker” as it’s known in some circles…

Congress should be able to assume that the gun-control laws already on the books are being enforced. That does not seem to be the case. Congress should find out why, and the public should bear it in mind next time Attorney General Holder or Mexican president Felipe Calderón says that a new assault-weapons ban is necessary. 

One has to wonder, since there really wasn’t an “iron river” of guns going from the US retail firearms market into Mexico, was one created? Sounds kinda tin-foil-hat-ish when you put it that way, but how else to explain why BATFE let hundreds, or perhaps thousands, of firearms into Mexico?

News Politics

News Shooting Shooting sports

Cam Edwards interviewed Richardo Sandoval of the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists on the “Fast and Furious” (Or “Gunwalker”) allegations…

Remember that this is the same BATFE that wants to further monitor the firearms purchases of law abiding Americans for the supposed purpose of preventing gun running into Mexico.

News Politics