From: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com (utah-firearms-digest) To: utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: utah-firearms-digest V2 #255 Reply-To: utah-firearms-digest Sender: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-utah-firearms-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk utah-firearms-digest Monday, February 23 2004 Volume 02 : Number 255 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 23:51:05 GMT From: Charles Hardy Subject: SB 48 assigned to house committee, calls needed SB 48 has just been assigned to the House Law Enforcement Committee. It is scheduled for a hearing this Thursday, at 4:30 pm in room 225. Please contact committee members, listed below, and let them know that paragraph 7 needs to be deleted from this bill. Paragraph 7, if it remains, will for the first time codify that businesses have the statutory authority to discriminate against gun owners. Your CCW permit will be far less useful if the grocery store, bank, shopping malls, and restraunts you frequent decide to post no gun signs and those signs have the backing of statutory authority. Messages for all representatives can be left at the main House number at 801-538-1029. Typically, the operator will take messages for 3 or 4 legislators per phone call. You can also email the members of the committee. Email addresses can be found at Charles AGENDA TO: Members of the House Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Standing Committee FROM: Rep. DeMar 'Bud' Bowman, Chair Rep. Douglas C. Aagard, Vice Chair RE: Committee Meeting DATE: Thursday, February 19, 2004 TIME: 4:30 PM PLACE: Room 225 State Capitol - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - Call to order and approval of minutes - - The following bills are scheduled for consideration: 1. HB0364 Profits from Sale of Crime Memorabilia (S. Daniels) (sca/jm1) 2. SB0048 Uniform Firearm Laws (M. Waddoups) (jlw/alh) COMMITTEE MEMBERS Rep. DeMar 'Bud' Bowman, Chair Rep. Douglas C. Aagard, Vice Chair Rep. Duane E. Bourdeaux Rep. LaVar Christensen Rep. Brad L. Dee Rep. Wayne A. Harper Rep. Patricia W. Jones Rep. David Litvack Rep. Michael T. Morley Rep. Peggy Wallace Rep. R. Curt Webb ================== Charles Hardy ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 00:56:18 GMT From: Charles Hardy Subject: Fw: Please amend and then support SB 48 I've sent the following to each member of the House Law Enforcement committee who isn't so rabidly anti-gun as to ignore it anyway. Email addresses are: Lavarchristensen@utah.gov bdee@utah.gov Wharper@utah.gov Mikemorley@utah.gov Pwallace@utah.gov Curtwebb@utah.gov ================== Charles Hardy - ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Dear Rep. XXXXXX, I'm writing to you because you are a member of the House Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Standing Committee. This Thursday, February 19th, your committee is scheduled to hear SB 48, "Uniform Firearm Laws" by Sen. Waddoups. I urge you to be present, and to support an expected, friendly amendment to the bill that will strike what is currently paragraph (7). This paragraph deals with the ability of private property owners, including those who own businesses open to the general public, to ban otherwise legally carried self-defense weapons. This is not the time, nor the bill, to have this particular debate. SB 48 is intended to deal with local government entities, including public colleges and schools enacting policies contrary to State law. Please vote to remove paragraph 7 so that SB 47 deals only with the clear cut issue of local government. The issue of privately owned businesses and self-defense rights should be thoroughly studied--perhaps by an interim committee--before any legislation to address it is brought forward. A hastily drafted and adopted amendment is not the way to address that potentially thorny issue. Please vote to remove paragraph 7 and then vote to support the amended SB 48 and send it to the full House for their consideration. I appreciate your time and attention in this matter and would appreciate knowing your position at this time. Thank you. Charles Hardy Policy Director GOUtah! (Gun Owners of Utah) ================== Charles Hardy ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 18:07:31 GMT From: Charles Hardy Subject: Sen Waddoups needs to hear from you on SB 48 I've just heard that apparantly someone has convinced Sen. Waddoups' that Sen. Bell's anti-gun amendment to SB 48 is a GOOD thing as it strengthens private property rights. That may be true, but only at the expense of RKBA. Private business owners do not gain ANY rights except the explicit ability to discriminate against lawful gun owners. Besides, this is not the right section of code to address that question and it has not received a thorough debate. The perpetually anti-gun SLTribune LIKES this amendment. Need I say more? We need to very quickly get messages into Waddoups that SB 48 is now an anti-gun bill and will be viewed as such unless paragraph 7 is stricken. Messages need to be left at the main senate switchboard at 538-1035. Please keep them short and polite. "Please don't gut CCW. Please support an amendment to remove paragraph 7 from SB 48." ================== Charles Hardy ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:08:37 GMT From: Charles Hardy Subject: Fw: [goutah] GOUtah! Alert #191 (Emergency) Please, take 5 minutes and call NOW. If the phones or busy or you are put on hold, that is GOOD. It means lots of others are doing likewise. Please, either try again or stay on the line, as the case may be. Charles ================== Charles Hardy - ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- GOUtah! Gun Owners of Utah Utah's Uncompromising, Independent Gun Rights Network. No Compromise. No Retreat. No Surrender. Not Now. Not Ever. GOUtah! Web Site: http://www.goutahorg.org To subscribe to or unsubscribe from GOUtah!'s free e-mail Alerts, send a blank e-mail message to one of the following addresses: goutah-subscribe@yahoogroups.com goutah-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Send comments to: goutah@goutahorg.org ___________________________________ GOUtah! Alert #191 - 19 Feb. 2004 Today's Maxim of Liberty: "Good people do not need laws telling them to act responsibly, while bad people will simply seek ways around the laws." - -- Plato (420 B.C.) In this Alert: Please call Sen. Waddoups NOW! Corrections regarding Alert #190. Woman assaulted in LDS house of worship. EMERGENCY ACTION NEEDED ON SB 48 We have been informed that Sen. Mike Waddoups, the sponsor of SB 48, has been convinced by person or persons unknown that the Bell amendment that was attached on the floor of the Senate (which would empower owners of public-access places such as shopping malls and grocery stores to ban legally-carried self-defense weapons) should be left in his bill. The bill gets heard this afternoon at a meeting in room 225 of the Capitol, which starts at 4:30 p.m. It is second on the agenda, so it might get heard after 5:00. Any of you who can make it to the hearing should plan on briefly speaking, with the message that you are a gun owner and that you OPPOSE SB 48 as long as paragraph 7 remains in the bill. Sen. Waddoups appeared to have been opposed to the Bell amendment until today. According to our sources, he has done a 180 on the amendment sometime in the past few hours. Please leave a brief phone message at the Capitol AS SOON AS POSSIBLE for Senator Waddoups at 801-538-1035, asking him to oppose the Bell amendment, or at the very least paragraph 7 (which contains the main thrust of the amendment). Tell him that you as a gun owner will do everything you can legally do to get SB 48 killed unless paragraph 7 gets stripped from the bill. Even a single sentence like "Please delete paragraph 7 from SB 48" or "Please kill the Bell amendment" will suffice. TWO CORRECTIONS REGARDING ALERT #190 First correction: In Alert #190, we stated that "current law does not authorize landlords to prohibit residential tenants from possessing firearms in rented homes and apartments, nor does it explicitly prohibit them from doing so" (or words to that effect). Actually, we forgot that Section 76-10-500(1)(a) of the Utah Code appears to prohibit landlords from doing this. It reads: "Except as specifically provided by state law, a citizen of the United States or a lawfully admitted alien shall not be prohibited from owning, possessing, purchasing, selling, transferring, transporting, or keeping any firearm at his place of residence ..." Second correction: In Alert #190, we stated that current Utah law contains nothing that either empowers owners of public-access property (such as shopping malls and movie theaters) to ban guns nor is there anything that prohibits them from doing so. We stated that our interpretation of the current law was that it is left as a private matter between, for example, the store owner and the customer. We inferred from this that current law would allow a store owner to evict a customer from the premises if the owner had a no-gun policy and he found that the customer was legally carrying a firearm. Our thanks to Salt Lake attorney Mitch Vilos for correcting us on this. Mitch quotes a section from the state's current trespassing law: "It is a defense to prosecution under this section [criminal trespass] that the property was open to the public when the actor entered or remained; and the actor's conduct did not substantially interfere with the owner's use of the property." Since it can be strongly argued that the legal carrying of a discretely concealed self-defense weapon does not "substantially interfere" with the operation of a grocery store or a movie theater or a gas station or whatever, we can say that, based on the above clause, it would be extremely difficult to successfully prosecute someone for trespassing on such public-access property based purely on his carrying of a concealed firearm, even if the property owner has a no-gun policy. Thus, although the law does not explicitly prohibit Home Depot from banning guns, for example, the above clause essentially strips Home Depot of any power to enforce such a ban, provided that the person carrying the firearm isn't doing anything to interfere with Home Depot's business. Our thanks to Mitch for pointing this out. We at GOUtah! are not attorneys, so it's nice to have an attorney out there who's on our side and who can point out such things to us. WOMAN ASSAULTED IN LDS HOUSE OF WORSHIP Thanks to a tip from an astute GOUtah! activist, we've learned that a 56-year-old Latter-Day Saint (LDS) woman was assaulted and severely beaten with a pipe last week while working as a volunteer in a small family history library located inside an LDS house of worship in Longview, Texas. For the full story, you can go to the website of The Tyler Morning Telegraph: http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=1994&dept_id=341384&newsid=10942310&PAG=461&rfi=9 Police are saying that the incident appears to have been a robbery attempt. When the suspect demanded money and the woman told him that there was no money in the library, he began to beat her with a pipe. Fortunately, another man in the building heard her screams and grappled with the attacker, who then fled the scene and has not yet been apprehended. The woman was rushed to a local hospital, where she underwent surgery to repair multiple fractures to her head and face, while her rescuer suffered only minor injuries. Texas law prohibits private citizens, including those with concealed-firearm permits, from carrying firearms in any house of worship, according to Packing.org (http://www.packing.org). Texas, incidentally, is where a madman went on a shooting spree inside a Baptist church in 1999, killing multiple people. While we should avoid drawing broad statistical conclusions from anecdotal evidence, we mention these incidents simply to point out that violent crime can happen inside a church. Utah law prohibits the carrying of firearms by private citizens in churches that have announced a no-gun policy, but does not prohibit it in churches that haven't announced such a policy. The LDS Church recently announced a no-gun policy for all its houses of worship, which means that self-defense weapons are now illegal in all LDS houses of worship in Utah, unless they are carried by certain government employees (see GOUtah! Alert #188). Had a similar attack occurred in an LDS house of worship located in Utah, and had the victim possessed a concealed-firearm permit, she would have been prohibited by law from having her self-defense weapon with her inside the building, just as in Texas. However, if she had been an off-duty peace officer (from any jurisdiction) or an off-duty USDA meat inspector or an off-duty prosecuting attorney or an off-duty justice of the peace or an off-duty national park ranger, or any one of a number of other off-duty government employees, she would have been legally entitled to carry a firearm in any Utah church, including an LDS house of worship or any other house of worship where guns are banned. Thus, our Legislature apparently believes that certain off-duty government employees are "more equal" than the rest of us when it comes to carrying self-defense weapons in churches that have no-gun policies. GOUtah! believes that this sort of statutory discrimination is unjust. We believe that if law-abiding Utahns are forced by statute to disarm before entering a house of worship, government employees should not be automatically exempt from this statute, with the possible exception of on-duty police officers who have a warrant to enter the building or who are responding to an emergency call. Any government employee wishing to be exempt from a church's gun ban should have to request such an exemption from church leaders, as is currently the case for private citizens. We will look into getting a legislator to sponsor a bill next year that would eliminate the automatic exemption for such government employees. _________________________________________ That concludes GOUtah! Alert #191 - 19 Feb. 2004. Copyright 2003 by GOUtah!. All rights reserved. To Subscribe, send a blank message to: goutah-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: goutah-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/goutah/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: goutah-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:08:14 GMT From: Charles Hardy Subject: HB 166 Hijacked, but then killed Rep. Hogue's HB 166, "Concealed Firearm Permit Amendments" was--as amended by the House Law Enforcement Committee, with Rep. Hogue's consent--essentially a neutral bill that added a statutory requirement for CCW instructors to teach their approved course material. This is already a requirement under administrative rules and according to USDIN, instructors HAVE had their credentials yanked for failing to teach their approved material. However, on the floor of the House today, Rep. Hogue offered an amendment to impose a MANDATORY live fire requirement. This would have significantly increased the time, cost, and hassle of getting a CCW permit while, as stats from States with training requirements varying from 0 hours to over 20 hours of formal training indicate, NOT doing a thing to improve public safety or reduce the already phenomially low rate of accidents and violations by those with permits. Carrying a gun is a heavy responsibility and almost everyone, it seems, naturally obtains what training they need for their particular situation and/or are careful to never exceed their training when it comes to the use of their weapons. Hogue's hostile amendment was adopted by a voice vote on the floor. This, of course, had the effect of turning a neutral bill into a VERY BAD, anti-RKBA, anti-CCW, anti-self-defense, bill. At that point USDIN, which had been following and sheparding this bill advised Rep. Hogue that the bill needed to be killed. On the mandatory roll call vote for the entire bill, the bill failed 24-50 with 1 member absent and Rep. Hogue voting against his own bill. Roll call vote below. Please note with Representatives voted against your right to an effective self defense. Our thanks to Rep. Hogue for defeating his own bill after it was hijacked. However, it looks like a fair number of unknown Reps are really fair weather friends when it comes to our gun rights. Many of them clearly were willing to vote against your rights when the vote was anonymous and only voted to support your rights when the light of a fully recorded vote loomed. This is not uncommon and is one reason why it is so important to look at committee votes, motions made, speaches given in an effort to influence fellow legislators, and votes conveniently missed as well as the final vote on bills in order to determine who is a real friend that will fight for our rights, and who are fair weather or even backstabbing friends who may do the right thing in an election year, when the lights are on, but will not actively defend, or even work to undermine our rights, when they think no one is looking. Remember, at election time, EVERYONE "supports the 2nd amd." It's what they do--or don't do--when they are actually casting votes (whether voice or roll call), making motions, avoiding casting votes, etc at the legislature that REALLY determines whether YOUR rights are important to those running for re-election, or whether they just want your vote and will happily ask for ride to the capital in gun owners' pick up trucks, but then expect us to park our trucks out of sight once we arrive. Charles SEQUENCE #299 STATE OF UTAH HB 166 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES BY Hogue, D. 2004 General Session of the 55th Legislature VOTE TABULATION Concealed Firearm Permit Amendments FEBRUARY 19, 2004 Stephens, M. 3:13:38 PM Concealed Firearm SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE Permit Amendments Amended YEAS - 24 Allen, S. Buxton Hendrickson Morgan Becker Daniels Hutchings, E. Moss Biskupski Dillree Jones Pace Bourdeaux Dunnigan Litvack Seitz Bowman Goodfellow McCartney Shurtliff Buffmire Hansen McGee Webb NAYS - 50 Aagard Clark, S. Harper Newbold Adams Cox, D. Hogue Noel Alexander Curtis Holdaway Peterson Anderson Dayton Hughes Philpot Barrus Dee Johnson, B. Snow, G. Bennion Donnelson King Styler Bigelow Dougall Kiser Thompson Bird Duckworth Last Ure Bryson Ferrin Lawrence Urquhart Bush Ferry Lockhart Wallace Buttars Frank Love Stephens, M. Christensen Gowans Morley Clark, D. Hardy Murray ABSENT OR NOT VOTING - 1 Mascaro ================== Charles Hardy ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:24:08 GMT From: Charles Hardy Subject: CORRECTION to HB 166 Hijacked, but then killed In the email I just previously sent, I indicated, repeatedly!?!?!, that the hostile amendment to Rep. Hogue's HB 166 was offered by....Rep. Hogue. That is incorrect and my apologies to Rep. Hogue. Obviously, a bill has NOT been "hijacked" if the sponsor offers an amendment. It was, in fact, perpetually anti-gun, anti-CCW, anti-RKBA, anti-self-defense, Rep. DANIELS who offered the hostile amendment to hijack Hogue's bill. It was then a majority of the house, voting under cover of a non-recorded voice vote, who accepted that amendment. Fortunately, under the light of a recorded vote (and an election year), a super-majority of those same Reps. then voted to kill the bill outright. Again, my apologies for the error. Charles ================== Charles Hardy ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:33:43 GMT From: Charles Hardy Subject: Fw: [goutah] GOUtah! Alert #192 It's a busy time for gun bills at the legislature. The latest from GOUtah! Charles ================== Charles Hardy - ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- GOUtah! Gun Owners of Utah Utah's Uncompromising, Independent Gun Rights Network. No Compromise. No Retreat. No Surrender. Not Now. Not Ever. GOUtah! Web Site: http://www.goutahorg.org To subscribe to or unsubscribe from GOUtah!'s free e-mail Alerts, send a blank e-mail message to one of the following addresses: goutah-subscribe@yahoogroups.com goutah-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Send comments to: goutah@goutahorg.org _______________________________________ GOUtah! Alert #192 - 19 Feb. 2004 Today's Maxim of Liberty: "...Political correctness [is] the intimidation of everyone else by the aggressively stupid." - -- David Vestal In this Alert: An anti-gun bill gets a second chance. Two great pro-gun bills in the House. GUN-STORAGE BILL GETS RESURRECTED SB 36, Sen. Paula Julander's anti-gun bill that would make it a criminal offense to store a loaded firearm in a location where a child might find it, will be re-considered on Friday, Feb. 20 by the Senate Judiciary Committee. We believe that the bill can be defeated if Sen. James Evans and Sen. Al Mansell both vote against it. Sen. Mansell has had a nasty habit in the past of disappearing right when this bill is about to be voted on by the committee. We believe that Sen. Evans can probably be persuaded to vote against it if he hears from enough of you, even though he's the one who enabled the bill to be heard a second time this session. Friday's hearing will be at 4:00 p.m. in room 414 of the State Capitol. Please flip a coin and choose one of these two senators to contact. You can simply call the Senate switchboard Friday during the day at 801-538-1035 and leave a brief message for either senator. Or, send a fax to 801-538-1878. Just ask the senator of your choice to be present when the Judiciary Committee votes on SB 36, and to vote against SB 36. Sen. James Evans (R-1) e-mail: jevans@utahsenate.org Senate President Al Mansell (R-9) e-mail: amansell@utahsenate.org TWO PRO-GUN BILLS IN HOUSE HB 294 and HB 295, both sponsored by Rep. James Ferrin (R-58), passed the House Law Enforcement Committee and will soon be voted on by the entire House of Representatives. HB 294 loosens the state law regulating the purchase of long guns (rifles and shotguns) by people from other states. Astonishingly, current Utah law is more restrictive about this than is federal law. Although the federal law prohibits you from purchasing a handgun outside your state of residence, it does not prohibit you from purchasing a long gun in another state, provided that you purchase it from a federally licensed dealer and provided that the laws of your home state do not prohibit you from buying a gun out of state. However, Utah state law prohibits out-of-state people from buying long guns from dealers located in Utah, except for residents of adjoining states (Arizona, Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho, and Nevada). HB 294 would eliminate this restriction, so that Utah law would be the same as federal law regarding this matter. Also, HB 294 eliminates the requirement for a second form of ID for gun purchases from dealers. GOUtah! strongly supports HB 294. HB 295 simplifies the concealed-weapon permit application process by eliminating the requirement for letters of recommendation. It also eliminates the requirement that the applicant provide a five-year history of employment and residence, and requires only one set of fingerprints and one photograph to be provided by the applicant, rather than two. GOUtah! strongly supports HB 295. Interestingly, the Utah Bureau of Criminal Identification (BCI) also supports HB 295. The extra paperwork required by the current law is of no use to them, because it is a holdover from the "old days" when permits were handed out on a discretionary basis. It just fills up their filing cabinets. Please contact your own state representative and ask him to vote for both HB 294 and HB 295 without any hostile amendments. Mention that you are a constituent of his. Contact info can be found at http://www.goutahorg.org, or you can leave a brief message for your representative on the House switchboard during weekdays by phoning 801-538-1029. (Example: "I'm Joe Shmo, and I live in your district. Please support HB 294 and HB 295 without any hostile amendments. Thanks.") Note: We wish to salute GOUtah! co-founder and Director Emeritus Scott Engen, who was instrumental in getting the concealed-weapon law changed back in 1995, so that anyone who meets a basic set of objective requirements can obtain a permit. This was a big improvement from the old system, under which you basically had to be an affluent well-connected white businessman in order to get a permit. _________________________________________ That concludes GOUtah! Alert #192 - 19 Feb. 2004. Copyright 2003 by GOUtah!. All rights reserved. To Subscribe, send a blank message to: goutah-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: goutah-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/goutah/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: goutah-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:55:18 GMT From: Charles Hardy Subject: NH legislature considering a real RKBA bill Notice what happens when this kind of bill is run. In addition to the obvious things, notice this testimony from the Million Mom Morons: >>Laurel Redden, board chairman of the state chapter of Million Mom March, was quoted as saying, "Instead of looking to get rid of our system of permits, responsible lawmakers should be seeking ways to improve gun laws so that only law-abiding citizens are able to secure and carry a firearm in the first place."< HERE is a MMM actually speaking, albeit somewhat sideways, IN FAVOR of "law-abiding citizens [being] able to ... carry a firearm." Nothing like properly shifting the terms of the debate. Charles http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37181 WEAPONS OF CHOICE New Hampshire to drop gun permits? Bill would allow residents to carry concealed firearm without license - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Posted: February 19, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern © 2004 WorldNetDaily.com The New Hampshire Legislature is considering a bill that would do away with the requirement to obtain a license to carry a concealed firearm. The bill, Senate Bill 454, eliminates all government involvement in a person's decision to carry a concealed pistol or revolver. Gun-rights groups are encouraging New Hampshirites to contact their state senators to urge a "yes" vote. Gun Owners of America notes the proposed law "allows Granite Staters to protect themselves, their businesses and their families." "The legislation is patterned after a system currently used in Vermont ­ which, along with New Hampshire, is one of the safest states in the country," the organization said in its appeal. State Rep. Packy Campbell, a Republican, testified last week before the Senate Judiciary Committee in favor of the bill. The lawmaker said he still has two bullets in his body from an attack while he was denied a permit to carry a gun to defend himself, reported the Manchester Union Leader. About a decade ago in Washington, D.C., a man who had attempted to rob Campbell and against whom he was planning to testify tracked him down, shot him in the head, back and arm, and left him for dead. The paper reported Campbell said at the time he had been unable to get a concealed-carry permit. "You don't have a lot of victims of violent crime come and testify on bills like this, because most victims of violent crimes are dead," Campbell said. "We have a simple right to protect ourselves. This is a very real issue for me." The bill was opposed at the hearing by the New Hampshire Police Association, the New Hampshire Women's Lobby and the Million Mom March of New Hampshire, the Manchester paper reported. Laurel Redden, board chairman of the state chapter of Million Mom March, was quoted as saying, "Instead of looking to get rid of our system of permits, responsible lawmakers should be seeking ways to improve gun laws so that only law-abiding citizens are able to secure and carry a firearm in the first place." Countered Norman Bernier of Concord, N.H., at the hearing: "Society is safer when criminals don't know who is armed." An editorial in the Union Leader argues the law would benefit those residents who need immediate protection from a threat: "Citizens who are given a sudden reason to fear for their safety would be the primary beneficiaries of SB 454. For example, this winter saw a rash of rapes in central Manchester. No one has been charged with those crimes, and the perpetrator probably remains at large. Under current law, Manchester women who want to stash a pistol in their purse for self-protection have to wait for their permit applications to go through. Advantage: rapist." The committee did not make an immediate recommendation on the bill. ================== Charles Hardy ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 21:00:31 GMT From: Charles Hardy Subject: Anti-gun bill slipping through the cracks SB 140 has passed the Senate and is now in House rules awaiting assignment to a committee. According to the Senate Journal for the 12 of February, page 589, it was Sen. Buttars himself who added the amendment that allows the DHS to consider the presence of firearms in the issuance of licenses, including those required to be a foster parent. In addition to the explicit reference to guns, by changing "shall be limited to" to "may include" it looks like the door has been swung wide open for DHS to consider almost anything else they want to. "On motion of Senator Buttars, the circle was removed from 2nd Sub. S.B. 140, HUMAN SERVICES LICENSING AMENDMENTS, and it was before the Senate. Senator Buttars explained the bill. Senator Buttars proposed the following amendment: 1. Page 9, Lines 247 through 248 247 (xii) staff to client ratios; [[and]] 248 (xiii) segregation of children from adults;and (xiv) access to firearms. Senator Buttars' motion to amend passed on a voice vote" Charles FORWARDED info =============== 2Sub SB 140 contains provisions that jeopardize the 2nd amendment rights of anyone licensed by the "Office of Licensing within the Department of Human Services" (Including Foster Homes). THIS BILL HAS PASSED THE SENATE with the following amendment and language. 62A-2-106. Office responsibilities. 231 The office shall: 232 (1) make rules to establish: 233 (a) basic health and safety standards for licensees, which [shall be limited to] may 234 include the following: 248a (xiv) ACCESS TO FIREARMS. The bill must be stopped or the amendment must be removed. ================== Charles Hardy ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 23:50:31 GMT From: Charles Hardy Subject: Demo primary tomorrow Just a note to remind you that tomorrow, Tuesday, is the Democratic primary for president. If I'm not mistaken, these primaries are "open" meaning that ANY registered voter can vote in them. I do not know of any other political party having primaries tomorrow. Gun owners may want to consider casting a vote for the most gun friendly of the Democratic candidates. ================== Charles Hardy ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:16:25 GMT From: Charles Hardy Subject: FOLLOW-UP: Demo primary tomorrow I've just heard two interesting rumors that gun owners may want to consider before actually participating in the Demo presidential primary tomorrow: 1-I have heard that voters will be required to sign a form that they will not participate in the caucus of any other party. [Republicans might ask "Where is the press outrage at this 'closed primary'"?] 2-I have heard that some GOP county (or even the State) party(ies) may not allow persons who vote in this primary to participate in the March Caucases (Mass Meetings). ================== Charles Hardy ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! - - ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 18:27:46 -0700 From: Chad Leigh -- Pengar Enterprises Inc Subject: Re: FOLLOW-UP: Demo primary tomorrow On Feb 23, 2004, at 6:16 PM, Charles Hardy wrote: > > I've just heard two interesting rumors that gun owners may want to > consider before actually participating in the Demo presidential > primary tomorrow: > > 1-I have heard that voters will be required to sign a form that > they will not participate in the caucus of any other party. > [Republicans might ask "Where is the press outrage at this 'closed > primary'"?] > > 2-I have heard that some GOP county (or even the State) party(ies) may > not allow persons who vote in this primary to participate in the March > Caucases (Mass Meetings). > What is the state law on primaries? The radio said that anyone who will be 18 as of November elections and who is a US citizen can vote in the primary. It said you did not even need to be a registered voter! This is what the radio news on KNRS said. Chad - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 01:43:11 GMT From: Charles Hardy Subject: Re: FOLLOW-UP: Demo primary tomorrow I do not know the exact State of the law, but I do know that parties can exclude those who are not registered as members of that party if they want to. I hope at least a few people go to vote to give first hand info on what does take place. Charles ================== Charles Hardy - -- Chad Leigh -- Pengar Enterprises Inc wrote: On Feb 23, 2004, at 6:16 PM, Charles Hardy wrote: > > I've just heard two interesting rumors that gun owners may want to > consider before actually participating in the Demo presidential > primary tomorrow: > > 1-I have heard that voters will be required to sign a form that > they will not participate in the caucus of any other party. > [Republicans might ask "Where is the press outrage at this 'closed > primary'"?] > > 2-I have heard that some GOP county (or even the State) party(ies) may > not allow persons who vote in this primary to participate in the March > Caucases (Mass Meetings). > What is the state law on primaries? The radio said that anyone who will be 18 as of November elections and who is a US citizen can vote in the primary. It said you did not even need to be a registered voter! This is what the radio news on KNRS said. Chad - - ________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! - - ------------------------------ End of utah-firearms-digest V2 #255 ***********************************