State, local and jurisdictional-level actions related to gun-control (Post-Newtown)

[The Reaper]

Several states have required sample bullets be submitted for years, and to my knowledge, they haven't solved any crimes with them so far.

TR

[Badger52]

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. – Gun owners could carry concealed weapons in Illinois, the last state in the nation to prohibit it, under legislation that swept through the House Friday with the backing of the powerful Democratic speaker from Chicago, a city torn by violence despite what critics claim are the nation's toughest firearms restrictions.

The historic 85-30 vote would allow the carrying of concealed guns, a legislative task compelled by a federal appeals court ruling and precipitated by House Speaker Michael Madigan's turnabout.

But its obliteration of all local gun laws, including Chicago's ban on assault-style weapons, drew immediate resistance from Gov. Pat Quinn, a Chicago Democrat like Madigan. Quinn said the proposal endangers the public by pre-empting local gun laws, which have nothing to do with concealed carry, the only subject covered by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' decree.

LINK to story here.
Long row to hoe.

[MR2]

Thanks Badger.

Originally Posted by Article

"We need strong gun-safety laws that protect the people of our state. Instead, this measure puts public safety at risk," Quinn said in a prepared statement.

Senate President John Cullerton, another Democrat from Chicago, called the pre-emption provision "offensive." Cullerton said he would meet privately with his majority caucus Monday to decide how to proceed. A Senate concealed-carry plan, which overrules local control only by requiring a statewide carry program, is on the Senate floor awaiting a vote.

IMO, we need good laws not strong (or weak) laws. Unfortunately it is the bad laws/policy that Gov. Quinn and his ilk have advocated that caused the very dangerous safety issues in that state, not to mention the Supreme Court ruling against them.

[Badger52]

Ostensibly enough to override a veto.

LINK to Reuters article here.

One snippet from a similar article in OutdoorHub (eZine):

The bill will in essence change Illinois into a “shall-issue” state as well as setting up a seven-member permit review board to be appointed by the governor.

And privacy violated & permit information is leaked to the media in 3 - 2 - ...

[Ret10Echo]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Several states have required sample bullets be submitted for years, and to my knowledge, they haven't solved any crimes with them so far.

TR

Yup... The PDRM (Peoples Dimocratic Republic of Maryland) has a program....and no, I've not heard of any cases where the imaging was attributed.


Meanwhile... The petition drive to put recent gun laws on the ballot here failed to gather sufficient signatures....

Maryland's new gun control law, signed in May by Gov. Martin O'Malley, has survived its first challenge.

Organizers of a petition drive to get the law onto the ballot in 2014 failed to turn in any signatures by Friday night's deadline, said Steve Ackerman of the Office of the Secretary of State.

[Ret10Echo]

Like many other places...the Libo-urbanite-dims in a small geographical area cause the rest of the state harm.

Local officials revolt against Maryland gun control law

Friday - 6/7/2013, 12:44pm ET

WASHINGTON - There is a slowly growing revolt within rural Maryland counties against the state's new gun control package.

The measure, dubbed Maryland's Firearm Safety Act of 2013, was passed and signed this year after being championed by Governor Martin O'Malley.

Among other things, the law bans more than 45 different kinds of weapons, puts a 10-bullet limit on magazines and requires new handgun purchasers to be licensed and fingerprinted during a rigorous background check.

Lawmakers in both Carroll and Cecil counties have, in recent weeks, adopted resolutions refusing to utilize county resources to enforce provisions in the gun control package.

Full article here

Oh...and that O'mullet gastropod...he's got his starry eyes fixed on D.C.

[Badger52]

I give it not better than 1:3 but WI has joined the states making a statement about Fed overreach.

Madison — To prevent what some call a pattern of federal overreach, local and state law enforcement could be penalized for enforcing certain federal gun regulations, under a bill unveiled Tuesday.

Under the bill proposed by Rep. Michael Schraa (R-Algoma), any future federal regulation to restrict assault rifles or magazine capacity couldn't be enforced by local and state law enforcement officials. Officers who enforced a future restriction could be charged with a misdemeanor.

"If the federal government mandates a federal law that the states deem unconstitutional, then the states ultimately have the authority to not participate in that federal law," said Schraa.

The bill was proposed to protect the Constitution and make sure recent intrusions by the federal government — such as the National Security Agency's recent email and phone tapping revelations — don't infringe on gun rights, he said.

The bill would apply only to federal gun regulations passed after Jan. 1, 2013. Federal authorities would still have the ability to enforce those laws, but local and state police would not.

Remainder of the Journal-Sentinel story here, and Fox is carrying it as well. We'll see.

[Ret10Echo]

In D.C. no less

Charge dropped against man who shot attacking dog

Wednesday - 7/24/2013, 9:50am ET


WASHINGTON (AP) -- A gun charge has been dropped against a man who used an unregistered handgun to shoot a dog attacking a boy.

The Washington Post reports (http://wapo.st/15epg7Q ) that a D.C. Superior Court judge accepted prosecutors' motion Tuesday to dismiss the charge against Ben Srigley.

Here at WTOP

[tonyz]

CT - full article at link.

In Wake of Zimmerman Acquittal, Legislators Plan To Scrutinize Laws

PATRICK R. LINSEY
07/26/2013

http://m.ctlawtribune.com/module/alm...cle/1060124038

In the wake of George Zimmerman's acquittal of murder charges in Florida, Connecticut legislators plan to scrutinize their own state laws, including that concerning the use of deadly force in self defense, for racial bias.

<snip>

"We have a pretty strong self-defense statute and it's very fact-specific," said Jack Daly, police chief in Southington and president of the Connecticut Police Chiefs Association, who sees no reason to change the current law. "Basically a citizen has to make an attempt to get away, to get to an area of safety. Citizens have to make a reasonable effort to get away before they [can] use deadly force."

There are exceptions. According to the 2012 report, Connecticut is one of 46 states that incorporates the "Castle Doctrine" into its self-defense laws, with "castle" being a metaphor for a person's home. In Connecticut, General Statute Sec. 53a-19 does not require a person using deadly force to retreat if that person is in his or her residence. The law also allows persons to use deadly force in the workplace without retreating if they were not the initial aggressor.

According to the report, courts have interpreted state law as permitting the use of deadly force by a person who is privileged to be on the premises and who "reasonably believes [such force] is necessary to prevent an attempt by the [criminal] trespasser to commit arson or any crime of violence." ( State v. Garrison, 203 Conn. 466, 472, (1987))."

<snip>

[MR2]

Charge dropped against man who shot attacking dog

Snip

The boy's life was saved, but Srigley was left with legal troubles. In a deal with prosecutors, Srigley agreed to pay a $1,000 fine and register his handgun and two long guns in storage after his planned move to Maryland.

[MR2]

Originally Posted by tonyz

"We have a pretty strong self-defense statute and it's very fact-specific," said Jack Daly, police chief in Southington and president of the Connecticut Police Chiefs Association, who sees no reason to change the current law. "Basically a citizen has to make an attempt to get away, to get to an area of safety. Citizens have to make a reasonable effort to get away before they [can] use deadly force."

What these Zimmerman haters fail to understand that if is pretty hard to retreat when you have a someone sitting on top of you beating your head into concrete. Racist concrete - should have put it on trial.

[Badger52]

Long known for comparatively lenient gun laws and a demonstrably low homicide rate (as compared Chicago?) attributable to firearm abuse, moves are nonetheless underway by extreme anti-gun elements to undermine Vermont’s state preemption for firearms laws and enact draconian new edicts. Challenging them, a statewide gun rights group on Thursday demanded documents related to official proceedings and correspondences by filing of a Freedom of Information Act request.

“Our statutory informational request was submitted to the City of Burlington to gather information in the process of challenging the Burlington attack on the state preemption law, commonly known as the Vermont Sportsmen's Bill of Rights,” Vermont Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs President Clint Gray explained to Gun Rights Examiner.

“The Charter Change Committee, which was asked to draft a gun control resolution earlier this year, will present the [Burlington] council with five gun control measures on Oct. 21,” VTDigger reported on September 10. “The measures would ban assault weapons, restrict those with domestic violence convictions from obtaining a firearm, require a permitting process for concealed weapons, ban firearms from establishments that serve alcohol, and require that firearms be kept ‘under lock and key,’ separate from another locked location where ammunition is kept.”

Standing in the way of that is a section of the state’s Title 24, which declares in part “Except as otherwise provided by law, no town, city or incorporated village, by ordinance, resolution or other enactment, shall directly regulate hunting, fishing and trapping or the possession, ownership, transportation, transfer, sale, purchase, carrying, licensing or registration of traps, firearms, ammunition or components of firearms or ammunition.”


LINK to full article.

[Dusty]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...ps-in-schools/

'The Obama administration plans to spend millions of dollars to place armed police officers in schools throughout the country in a move advocated by the National Rifle Association in the wake of last December's shooting massacre in Newtown, Conn.

The Department of Justice announced Friday it's giving nearly $45 million to fund 356 new school resource officer positions. Funding will be provided by grants from the department's Community Oriented Policing Services, or COPS, office.

"Just over nine months after the senseless mass shooting at Sandy Hook, we remain committed to providing every resource we can to ensure that the children of Newtown can feel safe and secure at school and elsewhere," Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement. "And as we hold lost loved ones in our thoughts and prayers, we resolve to continue to support and protect this community — and to help them heal together."

Holder announced the department has allocated $150,000 to put police officers in schools in Newtown. The grant from the department's Bureau of Justice Assistance is intended to fund two positions, such as resource officers.

The NRA was initially criticized by Democrats for focusing so closely on school security, and rejecting gun control measures, following the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School.in which 26 people were killed. NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre in December called for armed officers to be installed in every school"

snip

[Peregrino]

And what happens when the "grants" run out? Every time the feds have done something with "grants" the "strings" have been onerous, the money runs out (right on schedule!), and local governments who seized on the "free money" suddenly find themselves scrambling (damned addicts!). TANSTAAFL!

[Ret10Echo]

The PDRM (People's Democratic Republic Of Maryland) 2nd Amendment violation rules went into effect on 1 October. I drove by the local gun dealer... The showcase shelves are empty. Most items in the store have large signs stating "Not for sale in the State of Maryland"... If it isn't a trap-skeet or goose shotgun it's gone. Stores across the border in Delaware are not selling ANY firearms (regardless of size/caliber/capacity...etc) to Maryland residents because they want to see the first lawsuit against an out of state dealer....

Gotta relocate.