At a Thursday briefing, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said, “As you know, the President directed the Attorney General to form working groups with key stakeholders to identify common-sense measures that would improve Americans’ safety and security while fully respecting Second Amendment rights. That process is well underway at the Department of Justice with stakeholders on all sides working through these complex issues. And we expect to have some more specific announcements in the near future.”

Carney provided no further details on the initiatives, but he isn’t the only one saying something is in the works. According to a related article on NPR.org, U.S. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) said, “I have spoken to the president. He is with me on [gun control], and it’s just going to be when that opportunity comes forward that we’re going to be able to go forward.” And longtime anti-gun activist Sarah Brady has said that in March, the president told her “I just want you to know that we are working on [gun control] … We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”

Rest assured we’ll report any significant developments in the weeks ahead.

Source: NRA-ILA

The survey asks dealers questions about their business, their reasons for being in the business, their support for gun control, and their customers.

Why is Dr.Wintemute sending the survey? Consider the source. Over the years, he has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from anti-gun organizations to conduct “studies” designed to promote gun control. Several of these so-called “studies” have tried to blame legal firearms dealers for the illegal use of guns, and proposed further restrictions on dealers’ ability to conduct business. (You can see a list of past studies on his website.)

We recommend that you do not respond to the survey, for two reasons. First, many of the questions in the survey are written so that Dr. Wintemute will be able to claim that at least some dealers support one or another form of gun control, or that they report the occurrence of situations that, Dr. Wintemute will likely claim, prove the need for restrictions on dealers and their customers. Second, participating in the survey in any way would give Dr. Wintemute credibility in the eyes of the anti-gun organizations that fund his efforts, which would only increase his chance of obtaining more money for more anti-gun research.

Source: NRA-ILA

The Department of Justice held a meeting on Tuesday – the first in what is expected to be a series – to explore how the administration might be able to rule by decree. Before the meeting, officials said topics of discussion would range from encouraging more thorough background checks and more efficient data-sharing. An administration official told Fox News: ‘The purpose of these discussions is to be a productive exchange of good ideas from folks across the spectrum. We think that’s a good place to start.’ The news follows a report last month by the Washington Post in which President Obama is quoted saying his administration was working on gun control ‘under the radar’. The comment was reportedly made during a private meeting with his staff on March 30.

The remark came in the wake of the January killing spree in Arizona that left Arizona Representative Gabrielle Giffords critically injured after she was shot at point-blank range by 22-year-old Jarod Loughner. Six people died and another thirteen people were injured in the attack, putting gun control policy back on the forefront for debate. Lawmakers have since offered several proposals for tighter restrictions.

However, the prospect of the White House fulfilling an agenda behind closed doors has sparked an outcry among opponents for tighter gun control. Gun Owners of America Director Larry Pratt told Fox News: ‘They’re doing a pretty good job. ‘As Obama has said, “under the radar”… There’s a lot going on under that radar. They’ve shown us how much they are prepared to do through regulation.’ Pratt referred to a proposal from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in which dealers in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas would be required to report multiple sales to the same person of certain kinds of rifles.

A study released by the ATF in January that examined restricting certain shotguns from being imported to the U.S. has been heavily denounced by the National Rifle Association. The write-up is based on a 1968 law that restricts imports of firearms to those used for ‘sporting purposes’.

Another proposal by longtime Senate gun control advocate Frank Lautenberg bans high-capacity ammunition clips, like the one that left Giffords wounded. It has not passed on to Congress. In March, the President addressed his concerns over gun violence to the Arizona Daily Star, supporting more thorough background checks. While stressing his support of an individual’s right to bear arms, as protected in the Second Amendment, he defended his stance, stating ‘there’s more we can to to prevent gun violence’. Gun-rights activists are criticising the efforts, citing a study released by the FBI in September that showed gun sales were up in 2009, while violent crimes of all types declined by 5.3 per cent. Figures from the National Instant Background Check System (NICS) showed 14million guns were sold in 2009, the biggest year since the system began recording data in 1998.

NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said enforcement of current gun control laws should be of primary concern. Arulanandam told Fox News: ‘The American public does not support gun control… What the American public wants is for criminals to be punished for their mistakes.’

Source: Daily Mail

We’re repeating ourselves, but, as has been the case for quite a while, the decrease in crime coincided with an increase in the number of privately owned guns—particularly handguns and detachable magazine semi-automatic rifles. For example, Americans bought over 400,000 AR-15s in 2009, and trends in AR-15 sales over the last few years suggest a similar number for 2010.

Those who have followed the gun control issue for a few years probably have noticed that with crime declining and gun numbers rising year after year, gun control groups have all but abandoned their previously perennial claims that more guns equal more crime. Even their friends in the news media don’t believe it anymore. The Violence Policy Center and, breaking with past habit, the Brady Campaign didn’t even try to claim that the decrease in crime in 2010 was attributable to gun control.

Neither did Mayors Against Illegal Guns, headed by New York City’s gun control activist mayor, Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg’s rare and welcomed silence is to be expected in this instance, however. New York City’s murder rate rose 15 percent despite its severe gun laws, while Bloomberg dedicated himself and lots of money to criticizing the less restrictive laws that are in place in other parts of the country.

Speaking of cities with less restrictive gun laws, El Paso had the greatest decrease in murder—58 percent— among cities of over 500,000 population in 2010. For those who are counting, El Paso’s estimated murder rate was 0.8 per 100,000 population, while New York City’s was eight times higher at 6.4. Across the border from El Paso, in Juarez, where the gun laws are more to Bloomberg’s liking, the murder rate is over 100 per 100,000.

Adding to the bad news for gun control supporters, the District of Columbia and Chicago—the handgun bans of which were repealed following the Supreme Court’s decisions in the Heller and McDonald cases in 2008 and 2010—experienced decreases in murder of eight percent and six percent, respectively.

Source: NRA-ILA

This past week, the Texas House and Senate approved the conference committee report on Senate Bill 321. This NRA-backed employee protection/parking lot legislation was sponsored by state Senator Glenn Hegar (R-Katy) and state Representative Tim Kleinschmidt (R-Lexington). If signed into law, this bill would prevent employers from enacting and enforcing policies to prohibit employees from storing firearms in their locked private motor vehicles while parked at work. Passage of this measure had been strongly opposed by powerful business and industry groups in previous years, but hard-working, law-abiding Texas gun owners finally prevailed this session thanks to your phone calls and emails over the last five months!

SB 321 now goes to Governor Rick Perry for his consideration. Please contact his office to thank him for his past support and urge him to sign SB 321 into law. The Governor’s office may be reached by phone at 1-800-252-9600 or e-mail by clicking here.

To view a copy of the measure as it finally passed, please click here. NRA-ILA will send out a complete wrap-up of the legislative session, which ends on Memorial Day, to NRA members next week.

Source: NRA-ILA

With two months left in the session, it may sound like the Texas Legislature has plenty of time to consider and act on legislation of importance to gun owners and sportsmen. In actuality, the deadline for the House to consider House bills is May 12, less than a month and a half away. Time last week was taken-up with action on the voter identification bill, debate on the budget is expected to last over three days this week, and the House will be considering redistricting plans and major state agency sunset legislation in coming weeks.

In 2009, NRA-backed legislation that would have allowed employees to transport and store firearms in their locked, private motor vehicles while parked at work, died in the state House Calendar Committee in the waning days of the session when Democrats filibustered the voter identification bill and Republicans failed to take procedural action to end an entire week of stalling. This session, the state Senate passed Senate Bill 321 by state Senator Glenn Hegar (R-Katy), that chamber’s version of the parking lot bill, in mid-March. There are no excuses for the House not acting on this issue this session!

House Bill 681, the House version of the employee/parking lot bill sponsored by state Representative Tim Kleinschmidt (R-Lexington), has been reported out of the House Business & Industry Committee and is currently pending before the House Calendars Committee – the body which decides if and when a bill is scheduled for a vote by the full House of Representatives. It will soon be joined in Calendars by House Bill 750, state Representative Joe Driver’s (R-Garland) bill to allow Texas Concealed Handgun Licensees – individuals who are 21 or older, have passed a state and federal criminal records check, completed a handgun training course and been issued a license to carry by the Department of Public Safety – to protect themselves on the campuses of public colleges and universities. That bill was recently reported out of the House Committee on Homeland Security & Public Safety.

Please contact the House Speaker and the following members of the Calendars Committee – politely urge them to set HB 681, the NRA-backed employee parking lot bill, and HB 750, the NRA-supported campus carry measure, on the House Calendar as soon as possible! (See Contacts)

Source: NRA-ILA

Schumer’s “fix” bypasses the question of gun shows altogether. In fact, the term “gun show” appears nowhere in his bill. S. 436 proposes that virtually all private transfers, regardless of location, be subject to National Instant Criminal Background Check System checks. The exceptions would be extremely narrow; in many cases, even lending someone a firearm would be subject to federal regulation.

Near-universal NICS checks for firearms transfers, if coupled with allowing the FBI to retain records on approved firearm-related NICS checks, as proposed by the Brady Campaign, would achieve near-universal federal firearm transfer registration. That, in turn, would move gun control supporters one step closer to their goal of registering all firearms and firearm owners.

In fact, Schumer’s bill would put information on private transfers more directly into the hands of the federal government than is currently done for dealer sales. S. 436 would require any dealer who handles a transfer between non-dealers to record information identifying the firearm and its transferor and transferee. That’s the same kind of recordkeeping required for dealer sales currently.

However, S. 436 would also require the dealer to notify the U.S. Attorney General of the transfer, presumably in the interest of expanding the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ dubiously-useful firearm tracing empire. Though the notices would not identify the transferor and transferee, it doesn’t take a clairvoyant to envision subsequent calls for the notices to identify them too.

With its usual level of candor, the Brady Campaign still pretends that it believes federal law should be changed merely to prevent “strangers” from buying guns at “gun shows” from people who are not dealers. Begin at 5:30 in this Megyn Kelly interview of Brady Campaign president Paul Helmke. (Ms. Kelly’s interview with NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre is at the beginning of the video.)

S. 436 is not just about “gun checks”

Most gun owners agree that the current background check process can be improved — primarily by improving the accuracy of the records it uses, both to ensure that gun sales to dangerous people are blocked and to ensure that qualified, law-abiding Americans can buy firearms without needless delays or denials.

Yet, although Sen. Schumer touts his bill primarily as one to change the background check process, it would also greatly increase the number of people who are prohibited from possessing any firearm, with little regard for every American’s right to due process before being stripped of a fundamental civil right.

For example, few would question the need to prevent gun possession by a person who suffers from mental illness that makes him a threat to the community. But S. 436 would also prohibit the possession of firearms by any individual required to receive mental health services, regardless of whether the person poses a danger to himself or to others or is able to manage his own affairs.

Likewise, few would dispute that more than one recent mass murder might have been prevented through earlier intervention by those who had spotted warning signs. Normally, law enforcement and mental health officials have the power to initiate a mental health evaluation when a person’s behavior causes concern, but S. 436 would go considerably further by requiring institutions of higher learning that receive federal funds to establish “mental health assessment teams” and a process by which the teams can refer students to state or local mental health authorities for mandatory evaluation.

In another provision so severe that even Brady Center president Paul Helmke says he has “concerns” about it, S. 436 would redefine the term “unlawful user or addicted to any controlled substance.”

Few would argue against the existing ban on gun possession or purchasing by habitual users of illegal drugs, but S. 436 would allow an “inference” that a person is an unlawful drug user or addict if the person has been convicted or arrested (regardless of outcome) for the use or possession of a controlled substance within the past five years; has been arrested (again, regardless of outcome) for possessing drug paraphernalia within the past five years; has had a drug test indicating illegal drug use within the past five years; or has admitted (to anyone, apparently) using or possessing a controlled substance unlawfully within the past five years.

In practical terms, this means that if a person was arrested four years ago for possessing drugs, but the charges were dropped (maybe because the police made a mistake and the person didn’t possess any drugs at all), S. 436 would still allow an “inference” that the person is an “unlawful user” — requiring agencies to report the arrest record to NICS, and even creating a threat of prosecution. As the Brady Center’s Helmke puts it, “[There is] the whole innocent-until-proven guilty concept coming into play here.”

This provision would mark a drastic change from the law as it stands today. Currently, the courts and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives interpret the Gun Control Act’s drug-related prohibition to require current or recent use. To prove that, BATFE regulations require a pattern of convictions or arrests, especially within the most recent 12 months. This narrower definition reflects what most people understand: that a single indiscretion does not always reflect a predisposition to destructive behavior, and that a person can break a pattern of destructive behavior and turn his back on drugs permanently. Schumer’s proposal would hardly be the first time gun control supporters have staked out a position based upon an ideological assumption. Instead, it’s yet another attempt to deprive people of a constitutional right without due process of law.

Source: NRA-ILA

Big business lobbyists may try to offer amendments to SB 321 on the Senate floor that would “carve out” particular industry sectors or require employees to notify their employers of their intent to lawfully transport and store firearms in their cars and trucks. Your state Senator needs to hear from you! Please contact your state Senator first thing on Monday and urge him or her to support SB 321 and to oppose any industry carve-out or notice-requirement amendments. Click hereto locate your state Senator and find their contact information.

Also, a vote on House Bill 681, the House companion bill to SB 321 sponsored by state Representative Tim Kleinschmidt (R-Lexington), was delayed until this Monday, March 14 in the House Business & Industry Committee. Please continue calling and e-mailing committee members in support of HB 681 – their contact information can be found by clicking here.

Lastly, on Wednesday, March 16, the House Committee on Homeland Security & Public Safety will consider House Bill 750, NRA-backed legislation sponsored by state Representative Joe Driver (R-Garland) that would allow Texas Concealed Handgun Licensees to protect themselves on public college and university campuses. The committee will also consider House Bill 86, a bill similar to HB 750 filed by state Representative David Simpson (R-Longview); House Bill 1167, a measure authored by state Representative Van Taylor (R-Plano) that would allow Texas Concealed Handgun Licensees (CHLs) to carry on community college and technical school campuses; and House Bill 1356, legislation sponsored by state Representative Lance Gooden (R-Terrell) that would allow Texas CHLs who are faculty, staff or employees of Texas colleges and universities to carry on campus.

Please contact committee members and urge them to support the following bills: HB 750, HB 86, HB 1167 and HB 1356. Click here for their contact information.

Source: http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=6414

H.R. 822 would not create a federal licensing system. Rather, it would require the states to recognize each others’ carry permits, just as they recognize drivers’ licenses and carry permits held by armored car guards. Rep. Stearns has introduced such legislation since 1995.

To read more about this legislation, please click here.

Source: NRA-ILA

“The reluctance of the Calderon and Obama administrations to face reality and pursue real solutions is costing the lives of law enforcement and civilians on both sides of the border,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director for the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action. “NRA has always and will continue to support any law enforcement initiative that targets criminals. Any proposal that only burdens law-aiding gun owners and retailers – as this proposal does – is a non-starter with the NRA. To put it very simply, if someone is breaking the law, go after them full bore. If they aren’t, leave them alone.”

The BATFE is demanding the authority to require all of the 8,500 firearm dealers in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas to report all sales of two or more semiautomatic rifles within five consecutive business days, if the rifles are larger than .22 caliber and use detachable magazines. Yet, under existing law, the bureau has full access to every record of every firearm transaction by every licensed dealer, whether during a bona fide criminal investigation or simply to enforce compliance with record keeping requirements. This reporting scheme would create a registry of owners of many of today’s most popular rifles – firearms owned by millions of Americans for self-defense, hunting and other lawful purposes.

“On behalf of the tens of millions of law-abiding gun owners in America, I would like to thank Reps. Rehberg and Boren for their leadership on this important issue,” concluded Cox. “Every congressman who voted for this measure seeks real solutions to this tragic and violent problem that continues to escalate. In these trying times, limited resources should not be squandered on programs that will do nothing to address the heinous crimes occurring along our border.”

Source: NRA-ILA