Charlie T Waite

On March 14, pro-gun Sens. Kevin Cramer (R-ND) and John Kennedy (R-LA) introduced S. 821 the Freedom Financing Act, a bill to prohibit discrimination against the firearms industry in the provision of financial services. We have long been reporting on how anti-gun activists are seeking to use access to financial services as a means to punish and suppress lawful firearm-related commerce. First came Operation Choke Point, a supposed “anti-fraud” effort during the Obama administration that morphed into a campaign by federal regulators to intimidate banks and payment processers into refusing business with politically disfavored clients, including firearm-related businesses. That program was officially repudiated by the Trump Administration, but for some businesses, the damage had already been done. Anti-gunners next turned directly to the financial service providers themselves, extorting them with “social justice” condemnation for “financing” mass shootings and insisting they drop their firearm industry clients or impose gun control-like conditions on doing business with them. Several national banks did just that. Activist institutional investors in publicly-traded gun companies also tried to embarrass those companies with proxy actions designed to portray the businesses in a negative light. To date, those efforts have been largely unsuccessful. The Freedom Financing Act aims to put a stop to this discrimination by ensuring that banks participating in certain federal programs – as well as credit card companies, credit unions, and users of the Automated Clearing House Network -- cannot refuse business with law-abiding federal firearm licensees for political or “reputational” reasons. More recently, anti-gun members of Congress have reverted to Choke Point-like tactics in a continuing effort to intimidate banks and marginalize law-abiding businesses in the firearm sector. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) went so far as to berate the president and CEO of Wells Fargo Bank during a public oversight hearing for refusing to buckle to the pressure of the anti-gun lobby’s demands. “How bad does the mass shooting epidemic have to get before you will adopt common sense gun safety policies like other banks have done?” Maloney demanded to know. To his credit, the Wells Fargo executive stood firm, replying, “We just don’t believe that it is a good idea to encourage banks to enforce legislation that doesn’t exist.” The Freedom Financing Act aims to put a stop to this discrimination by ensuring that banks participating in certain federal programs – as well as credit card companies, credit unions, and users of the Automated Clearing House Network -- cannot refuse business with law-abiding federal firearm licensees for political or “reputational” reasons. It is important to keep in mind that the national banks targeted by this legislation owe their very existence in large part to government and taxpayer largesse. Among other things, they benefit from public bailouts and federally-subsidized loan programs, as well as from infrastructure financed or subsidized by the government. Private businesses generally enjoy broad discretion in setting their own policies and objectives, as is appropriate in our free market system. But exclusionary politics in the financial services industries hearken back to some of the most shameful episodes in American history. They are rightfully condemned, and have long been rightfully prohibited in other contexts. The NRA thanks Sens. Cramer and Kennedy for their leadership in this important effort and commends the bill for swift action by the Senate.

On March 20th, the Washington Superior Court rejected the defendant’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit filed by the NRA and Second Amendment Foundation against the City of Edmonds to invalidate the mandatory firearm storage ordinance passed by the City Council. The lawsuit can now proceed. Washington's state firearm preemption statute was passed in 1983 to keep firearm and ammunition laws consistent throughout the state by establishing that the State Legislature has sole authority to regulate and create laws pertaining to firearms and ammunition. These statutes help prevent a confusing patchwork of gun control laws which make it difficult for gun owners to ensure that they are following the law. Further, Second Amendment rights are guaranteed to all citizens, regardless of where they reside. State preemption statutes help protect against the infringement of citizens who live in localities controlled by anti-gun elected officials. The City of Edmonds’ ordinance is exactly the type of legislation against which the state preemption statute was designed to protect against. As passed, this ordinance restricts the self-defense rights of Edmonds residents by making it illegal for them to keep firearms in a private residence unless the firearms are kept in a "locked container," with a potential fine of up to $10,000 for non-compliant storage. As previously reported, the NRA and the Second Amendment Foundation filed a lawsuit against the City of Edmonds on August 7th, 2018 to invalidate the mandatory firearm storage ordinance that was passed in clear violation of Washington's state preemption statute. Please stay tuned to www.nraila.org and your email inbox for further updates on this issue and others affecting our Second Amendment rights in Washington.

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern on March 21 announced plans to implement new gun restrictions following the Christchurch attacks. (Drea Cornejo/The Washington Post)

Fairfax, Va. - The National Rifle Association applauded a decision by the Vermont Superior Court yesterday to allow a lawsuit challenging the State's ban on standard capacity magazines to proceed. “The National Rifle Association is pleased the court has allowed law-abiding gun owners to challenge Vermont's unconstitutional ban on standard-capacity magazines,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action. “Magazine bans do not deter criminals or improve public safety. Instead, they unconstitutionally burden the rights of law-abiding gun owners.” At issue in the lawsuit is one of the measures signed into law by Gov. Phil Scott on April 11, 2018 which bans the possession, sale, purchase, or transfer of long-gun magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds and handgun magazines with a capacity greater than 15. “The only people impacted by this ban are the law-abiding citizens who will be forced to defend themselves, their families, and their homes from violent attack with sub-standard ammunition magazines. Wednesday’s ruling is a step in the right direction. The National Rifle Association will continue to fight for the rights of Vermonters to protect themselves,” Cox concluded.

This week, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed House Bill 325 and 357 by a party line 6 to 4 vote. These bills will now head to the Senate floor for final consideration. Local municipalities in Montana have stretched the state’s preemption statutes to their own ends by passing anti-gun laws ranging from criminalizing private transfers to banning where people can lawfully carry a firearm for self-defense. These types of unnecessary anti-gun ordinances impose further burdens on law-abiding gun owners in Montana by creating different laws relating to firearms purchase and possession from one municipality to another, putting gun owners at risk of unknowingly violating a law. House Bill 325 and House Bill 357 seek to strengthen Montana’s current preemption laws by further restricting the ability of local municipalities to enact a complex patchwork of gun laws throughout the state. ***** Also this week, the House Judiciary Committee tabled House Bill 480, firearm storage legislation that could potentially make it difficult for gun owners to have their firearms ready for use in a self-defense situation. The committee has also taken no action on similar legislation, House Bill 477. Stay-tuned to NRA-ILA for more information on this and other Second Amendment issues in Montana

The Utah Legislature has adjourned from its 2019 Legislative session. Before the final gavel dropped, the Legislature passed House Bill 114 and, today, the bill was sent to the desk of Governor Gary Herbert for his consideration. This important self-defense legislation clarifies existing Utah law that there is no duty to retreat when an individual is justified in responding to an aggressor with force and ensures that crime victims will not be victimized a second time by the criminal justice system. Please contact Governor Herbert and urge him to sign House Bill 114 into law. With the end of session, multiple gun control bills were defeated having not passed by the final deadline. Those bills include: House Bill 87 relates to requirements for the “safe storage” of firearms and would make gun owners criminally liable if a minor or prohibited person gains access to an unsecured firearm. Under House Bill 87, a gun owner could be prosecuted if they leave their firearm in a location that a minor is able to gain access to it, even if they have permission to do so. Further, this legislation require that dealers provide notice of this proposed “safe storage” provision or face penalties. House Bill 190 sought to hold law-abiding gun owners liable for any felonious criminal action taken by others with their firearms. This legislation would have placed the blame on law-abiding gun owners for the potential criminal actions of others. House Bill 209 sought to authorize the seizure of firearms and ammunition from individuals without due process. Unchallenged statements made by a petitioner before a judge, alleging that someone is a danger to themselves or others in an ex parte proceeding -- prior to any formal court hearing at which the respondent can be represented by counsel and present counter evidence -- would be sufficient for law enforcement to enter that person's home and confiscate their private property. House Bill 418, so-called "universal” background check legislation, sought to criminalize almost all private firearm transfers between law-abiding individuals. Gun owners would have been forced to pay fees and obtain government approval before selling or lending firearms to friends, neighbors, co-workers, fellow hunters, competitive shooters or gun club members. This proposal would have had no impact on crime and is unenforceable without gun registration. Thank you to NRA Members and Second Amendment supporters who contacted their lawmakers in opposition to these gun control bills. Again, please contact Governor Herbert and urge him to sign House Bill 114 into law.

Last night, the Maryland House passed multiple gun control bills. House Bill 786 was passed by a 90 to 49 vote, and House Bill 740 was passed by a 94 to 45 vote. These bills now head to the Senate for further consideration, and your Senator needs to hear from you now! Please contact your state Senator and strongly urge them to OPPOSE House Bill 786 and House Bill 740. House Bill 786, sponsored by Delegate Vanessa Atterbeary, originally sought to create “Long Gun Qualification Licenses (LGQL).” Following the amendments made in House committee, HB 786 now seeks to ban the private transfer of long guns in Maryland with minimal, poorly worded exceptions. This legislation is just another step to make it more difficult for law-abiding gun owners to possess and transfer their private property. House Bill 740, sponsored by Delegate Kathleen Dumais, originally sought to establish certain crimes relating to the criminal possession or manufacture of 3D Printed Firearms and “Ghost Guns.” While significant portions of this bill were amended out, a provision was added requiring the Maryland State Police to study the feasibility of a registry for all firearms without a serial number, provide cost estimates, all by September of this year. Again, please contact your state Senator and strongly urge them to OPPOSE House Bill 786 and House Bill 740.

With less than 12 hours-notice to the public, the Senate Appropriations Committee passed gun control legislation, House Bill 1177, this morning. The bill now heads to the Senate Floor where it will receive a final vote that can occur as early as tomorrow. This is the last chance you have to contact your lawmakers in opposition to this anti-gun bill. Please contact your state Senator immediately, and strongly urge them to OPPOSE House Bill 1177. House Bill 19- 1177: This extreme risk protection order or "red flag" bill is sponsored by Majority Leader Alec Garnett (D-Denver) and Representative Tom Sullivan (D-Centennial), as well as Senators Lois Court (D-Denver) and Brittany Pettersen (D-Jefferson). It would authorize the seizure of firearms from individuals without due process. The petition can be originated by a broad class of individuals, to include roommates and anyone you've had an "intimate relationship" with. Unchallenged statements made by a petitioner before a judge, alleging that someone is a danger to themselves or others in an ex parte proceeding -- prior to any formal court hearing at which the respondent can be represented by counsel and present counter evidence -- would be sufficient for law enforcement to enter that person's home and confiscate their private property. Again, please contact your state Senator and strongly urge them to OPPOSE House Bill 1177 when it comes up for a vote.

by Katie Anderson March 19, 2019 11:56 AM

On March 20th, the Connecticut state Joint Judiciary Committee will be voting on a number of bills before them that would affect your Second Amendment rights, including bills to continue the never-ending push for more gun control in Connecticut. Details may be found here. Please contact committee members and urge them to OPPOSE Senate Bill 60 and House Bills 7218, 7219, and 7223, and SUPPORT Senate Bill 940 and House Bills 5227 and 5870. Click the “Take Action” button below to contact committee members. Anti-Gun Bills Senate Bill 60 would allow law enforcement officers to demand that Connecticut handgun permit holders present their permit if the officer had reason to believe they were carrying a handgun. Current law already allows police officers to request proof of a permit, but only when they have a “reasonable suspicion” that a crime is being committed, supported by articulable facts that criminal activity is occurring. House Bill 7218 would require any adult with a minor in their household to make their firearms unavailable for self-defense. Gun safety and storage is a matter of personal responsibility and every person’s situation is different. It is unreasonable to impose a one-size-fits-all government solution. Such poorly thought out schemes are without any consideration for personal circumstances. House Bill 7219 would essentially end the centuries old practice of manufacturing firearms for personal use by imposing requirements that far exceed those in federal law. The bill language is so broad that nearly any solid, raw materials could also be considered a “firearm.” Manufacturing or transferring a “firearm” without a serial number would be a Class C felony with a mandatory sentence of at least two years imprisonment and a fine of $5000. It would require serial numbers be applied to “firearms” in a manner requiring equipment that hobbyists do not usually have and cannot afford, and that federal regulations only require from licensed manufacturers. It also imposes a requirement that firearms made from plastic contain an arbitrary steel alloy that has no effect on the detectability. Federal law already mandates that firearms contain a certain amount of metal content. House Bill 7223 would require handguns to be stored in a locked safe whenever in an unattended vehicle. Such an unreasonable requirement would require gun owners to fit their vehicles with a locking safe separate from any carrying cases they already use to transport handguns. Pro-Gun Bills Senate Bill 940 would allow pistol permit holders to carry a handgun for self-defense in state parks and forests. So called “gun-free zones” are arbitrary boundaries that only disarm law-abiding citizens while doing nothing to hinder criminals. House Bill 5227 would prevent a patchwork of laws in Connecticut by prohibiting municipalities from enacting their own gun control regulations, making it easier for law-abiding citizens to follow the law. This would ensure that all Connecticut residents would have equal Second Amendment rights regardless of where they reside. House Bill 5870 would allow law-abiding citizens who already own registered, banned firearms and magazines to transfer them among themselves. Again, please click the “Take Action” button above to urge committee members to OPPOSE Senate Bill 60, House Bill 7218, House Bill 7219, and House Bill 7223, and SUPPORT Senate Bill 940, House Bill 5227 and House Bill 5870.

The Vermont Senate is expected to vote on this year’s biggest gun control bill as early as tomorrow. During the last couple of weeks, the Senate Judiciary Committee spent multiple days holding committee hearings and a public meeting on a package of gun bills. Gun owners turned out in force at the public meeting in Randolph Center last week. After much debate and consideration, the committee opted to start from scratch and author its own committee bill. S.169 is the new committee bill. This legislation passed the Senate Judiciary Committee last Friday on a 3-2 vote, and it is now on the Senate floor calendar. It is expected that the full Senate will vote on the bill tomorrow. Please contact your state Senator and urge them to OPPOSE S.169. S.169 contains provisions from multiple bills, both good and bad, including S.22. As written, S.169 creates a 24-hour waiting period for purchasing handguns. The committee went on to incorporate “fixes” to last year’s magazine ban, as well as remove the sunset date on an exemption for competitors at shooting competitions, and address an oversight whereby responding law enforcement from out-of-state could be in violation of last year’s magazine ban. While these “fixes” are indeed improvements over what was offered in the original bills, gun owners can never accept a waiting period on a constitutionally guaranteed right. Please contact your state Senator and respectfully ask for a “NO” vote on S.169.