Yesterday, three important new NRA-backed pro-Second Amendment laws went into effect—two in Idaho, and one in Georgia
Idaho’s concealed-carry statute has been amended nearly 20 times since it was enacted in 1990, resulting in a convoluted, difficult-to-understand law. HB301 offers relief by clarifying certain language, providing guidance for concealed carry outside city limits, and reworking burdensome paragraphs of text into list format. As a bonus, HB301 also lowers CWL fees to $20 plus the cost of administering licenses.
HB16, which creates an Idaho Friends of NRA license plate, will allow Idahoans to display their NRA affiliation on their vehicles while supporting programs they care about. All proceeds will be used to further Idaho FONRA’s mission.
Georgia’s HB492 improves upon last year’s pro-gun reforms by clarifying who can carry concealed in government buildings, expanding the Georgia Weapons License (GWL) renewal window, and prohibiting issuing authorities from requiring fingerprints from GWL holders, regardless of county.
Teen Defends Disabled Grandparents From Home Invader
Seventeen-year-old Neal Shuster of Orlando, Fla., was at the home of his grandparents, both of whom are physically handicapped, when Reagan Quade busted through the door and ran into the house. “I just heard the door slam shut at 2 a.m. and I knew that wasn’t right,” Shuster said. Firearm in hand, he confronted Quade, who allegedly charged him. “He’s grabbing me, and my grandpa is yelling, ‘Shoot him.’ So I shot him.”
Quade was hospitalized and placed in a medically induced coma. He is expected to survive and will be charged with burglary. Meanwhile, the elder Shusters credit their grandson with saving their lives. “When someone comes in like that, you don't know what to do,” Linda Shuster said.
A “Trace” Disgrace
On Tuesday, a headline on Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun “news” site, “The Trace,” declared that “Firearms Have Killed 82 of the 86 Victims of Post-9/11 Domestic Terrorism.” The story claims that since the Boston Marathon bombers only killed three people with bombs, firearms must be more deadly as weapons of terror.
But why only count domestic terror murder since 9/11, which was decidedly non-domestic? And why only count domestic terror?
The answer is because limiting the parameters to suit your agenda is a common tactic of agenda-driven “research.” By choosing the 9/11 attack as the arbitrary start date, the author avoided the Oklahoma City bombing, which killed twice as many Americans as in “The Trace” story’s total. And by only studying domestic terror, the story could ignore 9/11’s nearly 3,000 dead—none of whom died by gunshot.
By avoiding inconvenient truths, “The Trace” was able to post a sensational headline that will likely appear in other news outlets.
Poll: Majority Of Americans Not Interested In Gun Control For 2016
don’t believe gun control will prevent mass shootings (56 percent vs. 40 percent);
don’t expect Congress to pass stricter gun-control laws soon (53 percent vs. 15 percent); and
don’t want a debate over gun control in next year’s elections (52 percent vs. 43 percent).
In the nationwide poll, Suffolk University and USA TODAY contacted 1,000 adults via cellular telephones and landlines in all 50 states June 25-29 and asked questions about topics ranging from gun control to the Confederate flag.
Although USA TODAY buried the bad news for gun grabbers in breathless coverage of the Confederate flag debate—and although Suffolk University downplayed Americans’ opposition to gun control by claiming they’re “divided”—it appears Americans’ views on the issue are clear and consistent. Leaders who ignore that fact do so at their own political peril.
D.C. Carry Applications Triple, With Good Reason
Tell people “no” enough times, and they’ll eventually stop asking. They did in Washington, D.C.: Apparently no reason qualified as “good reason” to own a gun, as law-abiding citizens were repeatedly turned away when applying for a permit.
That changed on May 18 when Judge Frederick Scullin ruled the “good reason” clause attached to the city’s carry law was unconstitutional. The result—applications surged. They jumped from 45 applications between January 1-May 18 to 140 requests between May 18-June 16.
So much for Cathy Lanier’s argument. The Metropolitan Police Department chief claimed the low numbers were due to low interest. “Our residents have been pretty clear this is not something that they wanted,” she declared. Fact is, the desire was always there. Now the means were, too.
The U.S. Court of Appeals has since issued a temporary stay on Scullin’s ruling. A final ruling is expected in the coming weeks.
LAPD Union Asks For Safe Storage Exemption
The Los Angeles Police Protective League (LAPPL), the union for the LAPD, is seeking an exemption for current and retired LAPD officers from looming firearms storage requirements under consideration by the LA City Council.
Modeled after San Francisco’s handgun storage law, it will require gun owners to lock up or disable any handgun in their home that they are not currently carrying. LAPPL Director Peter Repovich told the city that officers are specially trained to handle firearms, and, “To protect themselves and society … you have to give them the ability to respond quickly.”
We agree that police should have the capacity to ensure their safety in their homes, but why deny that right to other citizens? A carve-out for cops would be the height of hypocrisy on the part of the city council, who apparently believe average citizens should be forced to wear their gun while sleeping, reading or changing their oil.