Guns and Ammo Enthusiast Blog A blog for and by Guns and Ammo Enthusiast's

Utah joins the growing list of state telling feds hands off our guns and ammo

On Friday, Utah Governor Gary Herbert finally signed into law SB11, the Utah State-Made Firearms Protection Act. The bill passed both the House and the Senate, then sat on Herbert’s desk for 10 days while the governor debated whether he would sign or veto the bill. Had the governor neither signed nor vetoed the bill by Saturday, it would have automatically gone into effect as law. Herbert said the decision to sign came after careful review of the potential fallout from the controversial legislation.

“There are times when the state needs to push back against continued encroachment from the federal government. Sending the message that we will stand up for a proper balance between the state and federal government is a good thing,” the governor said. “But in these challenging economic times, when Utah families continue to struggle and our Legislature must account for every dollar it spends, we must also be thoughtful about the cost of that message.”

SB11 creates statute that allows guns and ammunition manufactured and sold in Utah to be regulated by the state of Utah, not by the federal government. At its heart, SB11 is a states’ rights bill, not a weapons bill. It lashes out at the federal government and attempts to regain some of the control and power the federal government has usurped from the states through overreaching use of the Interstate Commerce Clause.

Senator Margaret Dayton, the bill’s sponsor, said the bill is all about control. But asserting control will likely come with a constitutional challenge. The bill was modeled after Montana’s Firearms Freedom Act, which passed last year, and has since gone into litigation. Litigation was brought against the federal government by a private group who asserts that current interpretation of constitutional law, as it regards to the Interstate Commerce Clause, is incorrect. The federal government has filed a motion to dismiss the matter, which is awaiting a hearing. Tennessee is the only other state that has adopted a similar law.

Governor Herbert has consulted with the state Attorney General and other legal advisers, who assured him that the state can take a stand on this issue of controlling intrastate commerce without incurring onerous legal expenses.

“The attorney general has assured me that, should a legal challenge be filed against the state, his office can take a variety of actions to ensure the defense of this legislation will have a minimal cost to the people of Utah,” said Herbert. “I am satisfied that Utah can stand confidently with other states that are taking a stand against the federal government’s overreach in this area.”

If we can not have Switzerland style gun laws, why not Wyoming’s attempt at firearm law?

One small step for Wyoming, one giant leap for gun rights

Wyoming is on the verge of passing two key pieces of gun rights legislation.

HB-95, The Wyoming Firearms Freedom Act, and HB-113 “Alaska-style” permit-less concealed carry, are facing an up-or-down vote before the Wyoming State House of Representatives.

On Tuesday, National Association for Gun Rights Director of Operations Luke O’Dell was on hand to testify before the Wyoming State House Judiciary Committee on behalf of both HB-95, the Wyoming Firearms Freedom Act, and the HB-113, “Alaska-style” permit less carry.

You may be asking yourself, “Why do I care, I don’t live in Wyoming?”

It’s simple: The higher the bar is set, the more pro-gun pieces of legislation pass across the country, the stronger the gun rights movement gets.

Passage of permit-less “Alaska-style” concealed carry in Wyoming would be a huge step forward toward true firearms freedom. Only in Alaska and Vermont can law-abiding citizens carry concealed firearms for their own protection without getting Big Brother’s approval. Should Wyoming join their ranks, the right-to-carry will have taken a major step forward.

Additionally, Wyoming’s Firearms Freedom Act was written with much stronger language than similar legislation in other states. Wyoming’s bill included penalties for state law enforcement enforcing Federal laws which contradict Wyoming state law.

I’m happy to say that Wyoming Gun Owners, a partner of ours, has been leading the charge for both pieces of legislation.

Now it’s our turn to help out.

If you live in Wyoming, or know someone who does, please have them contact their Wyoming legislator and tell them to vote “Yes” on HB-95 and HB-113.

You can find contact information for Wyoming State Legislators here.

If you’re not from Wyoming, go ahead and drop them a line anyways. Tell them that you support their efforts to advance freedom in Wyoming.

And if you’d like to help Wyoming Gun Owners pass this legislation by making a donation, click here.

For Liberty,

Washington State supreme court ruled on the side of reason visa vie cun rights and the second amendment

Thursday the Washington State Supreme court rulled that the Second Amendment does actually incorporate to the states. Basically the founds of our great nation intended that the second amendment WAS intended for the states not only the federal government. So the second amendment was meant to apply to the to the people and the states. This ruling is thanks to the Second Amendment Foundation. Good job guys.

an Idaho lawmaker wants Washington D.C. to keep its mitts – and its laws – off guns and ammunition manufactured in his state

In yet another shot from Idaho over the federal government’s bow, an Idaho lawmaker wants Washington D.C. to keep its mitts – and its laws – off guns and ammunition manufactured in his state.

Rep. Dick Harwood, from St. Maries, introduced the “Idaho Firearms Freedom Act” Thursday in the House State Affairs Committee.
Montana passed a similar bill last year, saying guns made and kept within its borders are exempt from national gun laws. Gun advocates sued in federal court to validate the law, while U.S. attorneys want the case to be dismissed.

Meanwhile, Tennessee passed the same law and legislators in a couple dozen other states are considering following suit.
Harwood, who comes from rural northern Idaho where suspicions of federal agents runs high among some, called this a “sovereignty issue.”

Washington State Senate Judiciary hearing on SB 6396 today report. I was there.

During the hearing today on SB 6396 a statistic was used. More people in the state of Washington have been killed by firearms in the last 10 years the every American soldier in all the wars in the 20th century. According to my calculations American soldiers killed from 1900 to just Vietnam is roughly 707,516. According to Google there were approximately 6,549,224. In 10 years that is a lot of Washington state residents. It is also roughly 3 times the amount of people killed in all of the USA in the same time period. How the hell is that possible? Can someone explain how that works? Got to love today’s democrats who just pull numbers and statistics out of their ass’ to fit their needs. To bad it doesn’t face up against reality, and the truth.

FEDS RESPOND TO FIREARMS FREEDOM ACT LAWSUIT MOTION TO DISMISS “EXPECTED”

MISSOULA – The United States has made its first response to a lawsuit filed in federal district court in Missoula to test the Montana Firearms Freedom Act (MFFA), passed by the 2009 Legislature and signed into law by Governor Schweitzer.

The MFFA declares that any firearms, ammunition or firearms accessories made and retained in Montana are not subject to federal regulation under the power given to Congress in the U.S. Constitution to regulate commerce “among the several states.” The MFFA is a states’ rights challenge on Tenth Amendment grounds, with firearms serving as the vehicle for the challenge.

This lawsuit to validate the MFFA was brought by the Montana Shooting Sports Association (MSSA) and Second Amendment Foundation (SAF). The suit names U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder as defendant, and is referred to as MSSA v. Holder.

The first response to the lawsuit by the United States is a Motion to Dismiss, submitted January 19th and considered to be a standard procedural maneuver in lawsuits against the U.S government . This motion seeks to avoid the legal merits by asserting that the Plaintiffs lack standing to sue, that a justiciable controversy does not exist, and that prevailing case law is against Plaintiffs.

MSSA President Gary Marbut, also a Plaintiff in the lawsuit explained, “The first import of this response is that the legal game is now on. There was some concern that the defendants would forfeit the game with no response in an effort to prevent this important issue from being adjudicated properly. We are now beyond that hurdle.” However, the Motion to Dismiss by Washington also seeks to sidestep proper adjudication.

If we the people do not stop the tyranny NOW all freedom will be lost! SB 6396

How can I make this claim? It’s simply. The second amendment is the one that protects all other rights and freedoms. For without our rights to keep and bear arms by the citizenry, there is nothing to stop a tyrannical governing class from removing all other rights. So what is all this about? A slow movement to eliminate firearm rights is afoot.
It has happened in California to a lesser extent with their gun laws. In Washington state the state legislature is trying to make ALL semi automatic firearms a felony to own and posses. Almost all shotguns and riffles as well.

• Every semiautomatic AND PUMP-ACTION rifle and shotgun that has a detachable magazine and has a pistol grip located rear of the trigger (yes, that is just about all of them) is defined as an “assault weapon” and is banned under SB 6396!


• If you and your child/children are out in the woods plinking with his or her Ruger 10-22 and there are more than 10 rounds in the magazine, you are a FELON!


• If you are a Concealed Pistol License holder and your semi-auto self-defense pistol contains more than 10 rounds, you are a FELON!


• The use of firearms defined as “assault weapons” (see first bullet point) are banned for use in hunting!


• Competitive shooters will be impacted as any semi-auto pistol that has a detachable magazine and is equipped with a muzzle brake or compensator is defined as an “assault weapon!”


• If you own a firearm(s) defined as an “assault weapon” on the date this bill becomes law, you can keep it if you are willing to allow your Sheriff to come into your home once every year to ensure you store your firearm(s) appropriately!

Senate Bill 6396 is proof that the gun-ban groups and politicians are not interested in only banning semi-automatic firearms that happen to look like military firearms. This bill shows where they really want to go with their agenda! This gun ban scheme will only punish law-abiding citizens and will do nothing to curb crime or keep criminals from obtaining firearms illegally. This is not only another attack on our Second Amendment rights in Washington State, but an attack on your Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches of your home!
Apparently it’s not the obama administration directly that we need to fear as far as our gun rights go. It’s their operatives in the states legislatures who will do the work for them. Here is the problem. Throughout history for a government to take full control of it’s people, the first thing they MUST do is to remove all weapons from public hands. Is that the plans of the democrat party? You decide. My opinion is yes. However, that is just my opinion. So where does that leave us? At the same place as we become at the start of the article. The fact is that no man or woman with good conscience living in the state of Washington should be for Senate Bill 6396. Seeing as we have decided no one in the state of Washington can be for the bill what’s left for you to do? Get outraged. With the outrage contact every state legislator and the governor of the state and tell them to vate against Senate Bill 6396. Get up in arms, e-mail, call, contact, go visit, send regular mail, tell them this bill can not go through. Not just for Washington state, but for America. Because if this bill pass’ in Washington it will not be soon before it comes to your state.

This is another bill in Washington State that is so stupid you just have to read it

Look out gun show goer’s in Washington State. Gun shows will soon come to an end with HOUSE BILL 2477!
AN ACT Relating to liability for the criminal use of firearms sold at gun shows or events; and adding a new section to chapter 9.41 RCW.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON: NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. A new section is added to chapter 9.41 RCW to read as follows:
(1) A person who sells, delivers, or otherwise transfers, at a gun show or event, a firearm to any person whom a criminal background check
in accordance with RCW 9.41.090 and 18 U.S.C. Sec. 921 et seq. would have revealed was ineligible under RCW 9.41.040 to possess a firearm, is strictly liable for damages for the injury or death of another person that results from the criminal use of that firearm by any
person.
(2) For the purposes of this section, “gun show or event” means a place or event, a gun trade show, gun collectors’ show, flea market, or auction, other than a permanent retail store, at which three or more individuals assemble to display, sell, lease, or transfer new or used firearms or firearm components to the public and that is not exempt
from collecting sales tax under RCW 82.08.0251. “Gun show or event” includes the entire premises provided for the gun show or event, HB 2477 including parking areas near the gun show or event that the sponsor knows or should reasonably know will be used for parking for the gun show or event.

Washington State gun grabbers gone insane with SB 6396

This is the most draconian anti gun law ever suggested. Here is the basic breakdown. “Assault Weapons” would be banned in the state of Washington if SB 6396 passes. Why is this so bad? Here is the new definition of “assault weapon” according to the bill itself. “”Assault weapon” means:
(a) Any semiautomatic pistol or semiautomatic or pump-action rifle or shotgun that is capable of accepting a detachable magazine, with a capacity to accept more then ten rounds of ammunition and that also possesses any of the following:
(i) If the firearm is a rifle or shotgun, a pistol grip located rear of the trigger;
(ii) If the firearm is a rifle or shotgun, a stock in any
configuration, including but not limited to a thumbhole stock, a folding stock or a telescoping stock, that allows the bearer of the firearm to grasp the firearm with the trigger hand such that the web of the trigger hand, between the thumb and forefinger, can be placed below
the top of the external portion of the trigger during firing;
(iii) If the firearm is a pistol, a shoulder stock of any type or configuration, including but not limited to a folding stock or a telescoping stock;
(iv) A barrel shroud;
(v) A muzzle brake or muzzle compensator;
(vi) Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the hand that is not the trigger hand;
(b) Any pistol that is capable of accepting a detachable magazine at any location outside of the pistol grip;
(c) Any semiautomatic pistol, any semiautomatic, center-fire rifle, or any shotgun with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition; (That is ALL semi auto pistol sold today)
(d) Any shotgun capable of accepting a detachable magazine;
(e) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder;
(f) Any conversion kit or other combination of parts from which an assault weapon can be assembled if the parts are in the possession or under the control of any person.
(21) “Detachable magazine” means a magazine, the function of which p. 5 SB 6396 is to deliver one or more ammunition cartridges into the firing chamber, which can be removed from the firearm without the use of any tool, including a bullet or ammunition cartridge.
(23) “Muzzle brake” means a device attached to the muzzle of a weapon that utilizes escaping gas to reduce recoil.
(24) “Muzzle compensator” means a device attached to the muzzle of a weapon that utilizes escaping gas to control muzzle movement.
(25) “Conversion kit” means any part or combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a firearm into an assault weapon.”

So what does this mean? The only modern firearm that will not be classified as an “assault weapon” is a revolver. Reread this and think about it. Do you really think all of these firearms should be banned? Does it make sense? Criminal’s by their very nature do not follow the law. So if you ban all these firearms from the law abiding, the only ones who will have them are criminals.

Some Kentucky state representatives are working on adding Kentucky to the growing list of states that tell the ATFE and the feds to kiss off in 2010

Three Kentucky lawmakers have pre-filed legislation to be considered in the 2010 regular session that would strengthen the gun rights of Kentucky citizens.

Kentucky State Rep. Stan Lee (R-Lexington) pre-filed a bill in the House on Nov. 6 that would exempt firearms and ammunition made and used in Kentucky from federal law.

BR348, (HB87 when the session begins) named the Kentucky Firearms Freedom Act, would, “Create new sections of KRS Chapter 237, relating to firearms, firearm accessories and ammunition that are made in Kentucky, marked made in Kentucky, and used in Kentucky, to specify that these items are exempt from federal law; provide that the exemption does not include machine guns, silencers, exploding ammunition, or firearms with a bore over one and one-half inches.”

The bill builds upon the foundation of state’s rights under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. The first section of BR348 opens:

The General Assembly declares that the authority for Sections 1 to 6 of this Act is the following:
(1) The tenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of Kentucky certain powers as they were understood at the time that Kentucky was admitted to statehood on June 1, 1792. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the Commonwealth and people of Kentucky and the United States as of the time that the Kentucky was admitted as a state of the United States on June 1, 1792;
(2) The ninth amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees to the people rights not granted in the constitution and reserves to the people of Kentucky certain rights as they were understood at the time Kentucky was admitted as a state of the United States on June 1, 1792.

The legislation makes up part of a national movement known as the Firearms Freedom Act. Montana was the first state to propose this type of legislation, declaring that any firearms made and retained in-state are beyond the authority of Congress under its Constitutional power to regulate commerce among the states. The Montana legislature passed its bill Oct. 1, 2009.

The Tennessee legislature passed a similar bill in July of 2009. The Tennessee Senate passed the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act by a 22-7 vote. The House approved the bill 87-1. The legislation became law without Gov. Phil Bredesen’s signature.

Lawmakers in Alaska, Texas, South Carolina, Minnesota and Florida have introduced similar legislation.

Two other Kentucky representatives have proposed a bill reaffirming gun rights.

Last August, Rep. Bill Farmer (R-Lexington) and Rep. David Floyd (R-Bardstown) pre-filed a Concurrent Resolution that affirms Kentucky citizens’ gun rights under the Second Amendment.

BR124 urges support for the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and urges Congress not to enact any law that would infringe on the right to bear arms under the Constitution of Kentucky.