Related articles
The AP recently had an article about what they referred to a "loosening" of gun control laws this year. Even the title suggests some lack of objectivity on what is otherwise a reasonably accurate piece. I can't imagine an article about "loosening" of First, Fourth or Fifth Amendment laws.
The AP credits the NRA with the changes in the laws, but, as we'll explore later, there is more of a grass-roots interest in changing the laws. The NRA, alone, can't pass the laws themselves.
Changes to the law:
- Arizona, Florida, Louisiana and Utah have all passed laws making it legal for employees to keep their hunting rifle in the cars at work
- Disney, however, citing an exemption to the Florida for businesses in which "the primary business conducted is the manufacture, use, storage, or transportation of combustible or explosive materials" does not allow its employees to have firearms anywhere on the premises. Bet you thought they were just about Mickey and Tinkerbell, didn't you.
- Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, South Carolina and Virginia have passed laws keeping the names and addresses of firearm permits holders private.
- In Memphis, the Commercial Appeal printed the names and addresses of permit holders.
- In Roanoke, Virginia, the Roanoke Times printed the names and addresses of permit holders in Virginia. The list was quickly removed after the name and address of the editorial writer was printed by a gun-rights group.
- A similar law was defeated in Oregon.
- Washington has had a privacy law for years.
- It is interesting to note that when the names of Registered Sex Offenders are printed, only the block of residence is printed.
- Montana, Arizona and Kansas have included firearms possession in those civil rights returned to felons who have had their convictions expunged or otherwise had their civil rights restored.
- Montana and Tennessee, citing the Tenth Amendment rights, have passed legislation allowing their residents to purchase firearms produced in their state to be exempt from federal restrictions.
- Federal control of firearms is allowed by the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, which empowers the federal government "to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States"
This next year in Washington, there is already a discussion of an "Assault Weapon Ban", as was discussed recently.
Thoughts? Leave a COMMENT.
Want to follow the discussion, SUBSCRIBE.
Comments
I thought it interesting that the author mentioned "loosening" of First, Fourth or Fifth Amendment laws. Either we have the right to bear arms or we don’t. Running to the local police to get a concealed weapons permit is the first step towards a police state. We do not require police permission to exercise our First, Fourth or Fifth Amendment rights, why do we require police permission to exercise our Second Amendment rights? Where in the second amendment is it stated we are required to go to the police to get permission to bear arms, concealed or otherwise. When our government passes a law in the future forbidding private citizens rights to bear arms, the police will know right where to go first, the so called “right to carry” list.
The part of the commerce clause "and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes" should be removed. Commerce between States should only be between the States. We do not need a nanny keeping track of everything. Less regulation equals more freedom.
Now, those gun owners who refused to get off the couch and vote for Independents or Republicans are seeing what they have lost with liar-in-chief Obama squatting in the Oval Office, n'est ce pas? Vote, you lazy hunters and people who want to protect their families? None of us will ever be safe as long as there is one lying Democrat in any office!
Hank, did you know that the courts up to and including, the U.S. Supreme Court have specifically held that laws issued by cities requiring people to apply for permits in order to excercise their First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and religion are UNCONSTITUTIONAL! Yet all over the country and here at examiner.com it seems that most everyone (except you) has accepted that states have the "right" to "allow" those they deem acceptable to excercise their constitutional right to carry weapons. Game over.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!