Easing restrictions on carrying firearm without a CC permit

Concealed carry gun law moves through AZ legislature

The bill (HB 2630) reduces, from a class 1 misdemeanor to a petty offense, the penalty for carrying a concealed weapon without a permit, unless the violation occurs in the commission or attempted commission of certain offenses.It now moves to the full senate.

The fact sheet is available here.

A Round in the Chamber

District of Columbia v. Heller and the Future of the Second Amendment

A new shot will be fired in the development of constitutional law this term when the U.S. Supreme Court decides the meaning of the Second Amendment in District of Columbia v. Heller. Although the Court has only touched upon the Second Amendment in a few dozen cases, only once has the Court even begun to address its meaning. But the question presented in Heller requires a clear statement about its meaning. The Court will have to choose between three competing interpretations of the Second Amendment, a task made more difficult by a profoundly disappointing brief filed by the Justice Department in the case. What it does, and does not, decide will likely forever shape the future of Second Amendment jurisprudence and gun rights in America.

The excellent article, co-authored by Arizonan Sandra Froman and Kenneth Klukowski, for the Federalist Society, continues here.

A Stanford University graduate with a law degree from Harvard, Tucson lawyer, Sandra Froman is the immediate past president of the National Rifle Association.

Shootout at the SCOTUS Corral

  

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments today in the most important Second Amendment case in generations. The last time the high court has ruled on the protections to keep and bear arms was in 1939—sixty-nine years ago.

Heller challenges the District of Columbia’s strict ban on handguns, imposed in 1976.

The Heller case has even split allies such as Vice President Dick Cheney and the Bush Justice department.

Rick Moran, writing for American Thinker, describes the magnitude of the case. This is definitely one worth watching.

In the meantime, check out the facts and background provided here.

Mexican lawlessness threatens American Second Amendment rights

AZ AG Goddard teams with Mexican officials to hamstring Americans

In a misdirected effort to target Mexican coyotes transporting illegal aliens and drug smuggling rings, Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard has announced his intention to forge agreements between U.S. and Mexican prosecutors.

The East Valley Tribune reports as part of the agreements, Goddard said he will push for changes in federal gun laws to make it easier to track arms dealers who smuggle weapons into Mexico.

The change would require people who buy multiple rifles in a single transaction to file a disclosure form, similar to one now required for multiple handgun purchases. Goddard said the law would only be effective if passed at the federal level, but acknowledged that the idea is “going nowhere” in Congress.

Obviously, this alliance raised more than a few questions:  Why should Americans have restrictions placed upon their Second Amendment rights in order for Mexican officials to address criminality in their country?

Since the Mexican government aids and abets the illegal entry of its citizens into the United States, what indications are there that such activities will stop? Notorious corruption among authorities in that country is renowned.

The crime wave should be addressed from South of the border. Where is the evidence that Americans are the major culprits in Mexican criminal activity? Illegal immigration into Mexico, as well as using falsified documents, are felonies in that country.Goddard, who acknowledges the restrictions are “going nowhere,” appears to be catering to the Mexican government as a means of garnering local Mexican votes as he proceeds along his career path.

Goddard, whose father, Sam Goddard, served as Arizona governor from 1965 to 1967, was thwarted by Fife Symington in his dream to follow in his father’s footsteps. He obviously still has high hopes.

McCain takes a calculated risk with Conservative Political Action Conference

Addresses group tomorrow

Jed Babbin writing for Human Events says: According to my source, McCain has prepared a video featuring President Ronald Reagan to make the introduction. If McCain uses this video, it is very likely to backfire badly. This is the group before which Ronald Reagan said in 1975 that, “A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency or simply to swell its numbers.”

Very few of the 2008 CPAC crowd, expected to number 6,000 activists, will see McCain as the successor to Reagan and Reagan’s principles. McCain has sacrificed conservatives’ fundamental beliefs throughout his Senate career. If McCain uses this introduction, the boos will be very loud. McCain faces a real quandary. If he fails at CPAC—and doesn’t win the CPAC straw poll (he finished dead last in 2007) — the word will be out that the conservatives are off his team this year. The results of the poll will be announced at about 2 pm Saturday. McCain can do a few things at CPAC that could help.

First, he could throw away the Reagan video introduction. If he uses it at CPAC—a house that Reagan built — he could alienate a large portion of the conservatives he needs.

Second, he could say a lot more than he has so far on three key issues: Supreme Court appointments, the war and illegal immigration.

Read Babbin’s excellent assessment here.

U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear handgun case

      

In a move sure to be closely watched by both Second Amendment advocates and the gun-ban lobby, the high court has agreed to hear the District of Columbia v. Heller civil-rights case.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, independently splitting from the majority of federal courts to have examined the issue over the decades, ruled last March that the Second Amendment right was an individual one, not tied to service in a militia and that the District of Columbia’s absolute ban on handguns was unconstitutional.

Since 1976, the District of Columbia has denied its citizens the right to keep and bear an operable firearm even in their homes, effectively rendering law-abiding citizens unable to defend themselves in one of the murder capitals of the nation. Washington D.C. has become a city where only criminals and government agents are armed. Handguns are strictly prohibited and rifles and shotguns must be disassembled or trigger locked. Such restrictive laws against private possession of arms, tend to increase crime rates.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) will participate in the case through briefs as a friend of the court. Oral arguments are likely to take place in early 2008.

The case has wide-ranging ramifications and the Robert’s court will be the focus of rapt attention from those on both sides of this Second Amendment issue.