All editorials are selected by BTC's Editorial Board and may not reflect the view of the Board or BTC, however they are deemed relevant and timely to our environment....
NRA's Cox: Your right to self-defense shouldn’t end at state borders
September 6, 2011
(GunReports.com) -- NRA's Chris Cox had this to say about national carrier when he wrote @dailycaller.com this week: This Labor Day weekend, many families will pack up the car for one last road trip to the beach, lake or park before summer ends. Unfortunately, many of them will have to check their right to self-defense at the state border. Thankfully, there is legislation making its way through Congress that would fix this.
The bill is the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act (H.R. 822) and it would allow any person with a valid, state-issued concealed firearm permit to exercise their right to carry a firearm in any other state that affords that right to its own residents.
The bill was introduced by Congressmen Cliff Stearns (R-FL) and Heath Shuler (D-NC) and it currently has 242 co-sponsors and the full backing of the National Rifle Association. By any benchmark, H.R. 822 has overwhelming bipartisan support.
Read more at DailyCaller.com.
AP-MI--Packing Heat-10 Years Later, 2nd Ld-Writethru,383
1:55 PM CDT, July 31, 2011
Ten years after Michigan expanded the right of law-abiding adults to carry firearms, some of those who opposed the change say the dangers they feared didn't come to pass.
About 276,000 Michigan residents now have concealed weapons permits, according figures obtained from state police. That's up from about 52,000 people 10 years ago. The first year alone, 53,000 permits were approved, Booth newspapers report.
State police records show 2 percent of concealed weapons license holders have been sanctioned for misbehavior.
"I think you can look back and say, `It was a big nothing,"' said Ronald Schafer, Ionia County prosecutor and president of Michigan's prosecutors' association, which led opposition to the law change in 2001.
Until July 2001, people seeking to carry concealed weapons had to show a local gun board why they needed them. Since then, adults without felony records have been entitled to concealed weapons permits.
Michigan Catholic Conference President Paul Long helped lead opposition to the law change.
Asked last week about its effect, he said: "In all honesty, I don't give it much thought. It just hasn't been much of an issue."
The Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police vigorously opposed the changes, and its leaders also say the group's concerns haven't materialized.
"There haven't been as many incidents as we feared," Executive Director Tom Hendrickson said. "It really hasn't been an issue ... because so many superseding issues came along. In the total scheme of things, it just faded away."
Washtenaw County Prosecutor Brian Mackie said he still wants strengthened screening for mentally unstable applicants, but he also acknowledged that most of his concerns haven't materialized.
"We've done better than I thought," Mackie said. "We've had far fewer violations by (permit) holders than I feared we would."
A gun rights advocacy group said the past decade has vindicated its position.
"The debate is pretty much over, and we won," said Steve Dunn, a member of the board of the Michigan Coalition of Responsible Gun Owners.
Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard said that the problems with gun violence don't tend to come from licensed gun carriers.
"My position was, and still is ... that the people we have a problem with aren't the people who are willing to follow the law and go through the hoops and training," Bouchard said.
Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Second Amendment secures a right of individuals generally, not a right of States or a right restricted to persons serving in militias.
August 24, 2004 MEMORANDUM OPINION FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
I. Text of the Second Amendment and Related Contemporaneous Provisions
Second Amendment: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
English Bill of Rights: That the subjects which are protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law (1689). 1
Connecticut: Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state (1818). 2
Kentucky: [T]he right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned (1792). 3
Massachusetts: The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence (1780). 4
North Carolina: [T]he people have a right to bear arms, for the defence of the State; and, as standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power (1776). 5
Pennsylvania: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; And that the military should be kept under strict subordination, to, and governed by, the civil power (1776). 6
The right of the citizens to bear arms in defence of themselves and the State shall not be questioned (1790). 7
Rhode Island: The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed (1842). 8
Tennessee: [T]he freemen of this State have a right to keep and bear arms for their common defence (1796). 9
Vermont: [T]he people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State -- and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power (1777). 10
Virginia: That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. 11
II. Calls for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms from State Ratification Conventions
Five of the states that ratified the Constitution also sent demands for a Bill of Rights to Congress. All these demands included a right to keep and bear arms. Here, in relevant part, is their text:
New Hampshire: Twelfth[:] Congress shall never disarm any Citizen unless such as are or have been in Actual Rebellion.
Virginia: . . . Seventeenth, That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well regulated Militia composed of the body of the people trained to arms is the proper, natural and safe defence of a free State. That standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided, as far as the circumstances and protection of the Community will admit; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to and governed by the Civil power.
New York: . . . That the People have a right to keep and bear Arms; that a well regulated Militia, including the body of the People capable of bearing Arms, is the proper, natural and safe defence of a free State; That the Militia should not be subject to Martial Law except in time of War, Rebellion or Insurrection. That Standing Armies in time of Peace are dangerous to Liberty, and ought not to be kept up, except in Cases of necessity; and that at all times, the Military should be under strict Subordination to the civil Power.
North Carolina: Almost identical to Virginia demand, but with "the body of the people, trained to arms" instead of "the body of the people trained to arms."
Rhode Island: Almost identical to Virginia demand, but with "the body of the people capable of bearing arms" instead of "the body of the people trained to arms," and with a "militia shall not be subject to martial law" proviso as in New York.
There is more to read. Source: http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/2amteach/sources.htm#TOC1
Ohio: Right-to-Carry Reform Legislation Passes in House Committee
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
This afternoon, House Bill 45 passed in the House State Government and Elections Committee by a 12 to 10 vote. This legislation is a critical step forward to help ensure that Right-to-Carry permit holders are not arrested for accidentally carrying their firearm in a prohibited manner.
Introduced by state Representatives Danny Bubp (R-88) and Terry Johnson (R-89), HB 45 would eliminate the current confusing standards of carrying a firearm in a motor vehicle. In addition, the proposal would also allow permit holders to carry a firearm for self-defense in a restaurant that serves alcohol, provided they are not consuming alcohol, thus eliminating another “victim zone” in Ohio.
HB 45 will now move to the House floor for further consideration. Please continue to check your e-mails and www.NRAILA.org for updates on HB 45.
NRA's responce to President Obama regarding the President's op-ed to the Arizona Daily Star.
Wayne LaPierre at CPAC 2011
"If Tucson taught us anything, it taught us this: government failed." So says the NRA Executive Vice President in his address at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). Speaking about violence in today's society, LaPierre states "their laws don't work, their lies aren't true." He urges less government and more freedom, and ultimately calls for National Right to Carry, a concept that's "long overdue in the face of government's failure to provide for the security of its citizens." Originally aired 2/10/2011.
You invited to view content found on the National Rifle Association website.
States Consider Allowing Guns on Campus
By Kate Rogers
Published February 23, 2011 | FOX Business
Gun control is a hot-button issue across the country, and college campuses are now at the center of this growing debate.
Students and professors at Texas public universities may soon be able to carry guns on campus, according to a recent measure in the state’s House of Representatives. More than half of its members have signed on as co-authors of the measure, and the Senate passed a similar bill in 2009.
Eight other states including Arizona, Tennessee, Michigan, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Florida, Nebraska and Mississippi have pending “campus carry” legislation underway as well, according to David Burnett, director of public relations for Students for Concealed Carry on Campus.
The Campaign to Keep Guns off Campus has 275 schools in 36 different states supporting its initiative to keep colleges as gun-free zones. Andy Pelosi, executive director of the campaign, said this decision in Texas could certainly impact parents’ decisions about where to send their children to college. Nationwide there are 26 colleges with more than 70 campuses that allow concealed carry on campus, according to Students for Concealed Carry on Campus.
Having weapons legally allowed on campus negatively alters the atmosphere for students, Pelosi said.
“I think it has the potential to kill academic debate, if somebody has a gun in the classroom,” Pelosi said. “I am also concerned about the storage of weapons. Where will they be stored on campus? Also, the chances of them being stolen are quite real.”
The decision could also potentially impact a university’s insurance coverage, he said, and could result in higher premiums because the schools are more of a potential liability.
On the other hand, Burnett argued just the opposite, saying safety should always be a paramount concern for parents, and allowing concealed firearms on a college campus positively impacts the decision.
“I think that whether or not a school allows someone to defend themselves makes a big difference about where I would want to go to school,” Burnett said. “It impacts the decision process of parents, students and criminals.”
The process of applying for a firearm weeds out a majority of those who would use the weapon in an irresponsible or dangerous manner, he said.
“The point that I would impress on these campuses is that we are talking about former military, ROTC cadets, professors and other mature adults that went through state mandated requirements, exercises and fingerprinting,” Burnett said. “Not those with violent crimes, alcohol abuse or mental issues.”
Instead of allowing licensed guns on campus, Pelosi said he would much rather see a university concentrate its efforts on heightening campus security to make students feel more secure.
“I’d rather look at better lighting, better campus police—there are steps to be taken rather than putting safety in the hands of a carry to conceal weapons permit,” Pelosi said.
There is no real way to tell if the decision could potentially prevent tragedies on campus like the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007, Pelosi said.
“You could say that a Virginia Tech type of shooting could have been avoided, but those types of incidents are extremely rare, and happened on college campuses that are extremely safe,” he said. “So, I wonder why we are introducing guns into that type of a campus.”
The issue is about safety, Burnett said, and as a student it is important to be able to protect yourself against the possibility of violence or crimes.
“A college cannot guarantee my safety or the safety of students, unless they have some way of ensuring gun-free zones,” Burnett said. “Right now, they put a sticker on the door that reminds killers that it is a gun-free zone, and that hasn’t stopped mass shooting or crimes. For someone who is licensed, trained and capable to carry a firearm, they need [to do] more than just ‘play dead’ [to protect themselves] in the case of a mass shooting.”