Appeals Court Tosses Bloomberg Lawsuit: The Second Amendment Foundation said today's dismissal of a lawsuit filed against the firearms industry by anti-gun New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg should send a clear message that "courthouse demagoguery and harassment of law-abiding business is not the responsible way to fight crime." The 2-1 opinion, written by U.S. Appeals Court Judge Robert J. Miner, affirms the constitutionality of the 2005 Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. It overturns a lower court ruling by activist federal judge Jack B. Weinstein, explaining that he should have dismissed the case instead of allowing it to go forward. http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/04-30-2008/0004803701&EDATE= http://www.nssf.org/news/PR_idx.cfm?PRloc=share/PR/&PR=043008_NYC.cfm http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/04/30/weinstein-reversed-again-this-time-in-nycs-suit-against-gun-makers/ http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/cobb/stories/2008/04/30/gunsuit_0501.html --- Bloomberg Could Testify in Upcoming Trial: Nearly two years after Mayor Bloomberg launched his legal battle against 27 out-of-state gun salesmen, the city is being forced to prove that it targeted the right ones. Most of the gun dealers, whose businesses stretch between Ohio and Georgia, have agreed to let the city pay to monitor their business practices in return for the dismissal of the lawsuits. A few went out of business shortly after being sued. Three of the gun dealers, though, are going to trial over the city's claim that they have disproportionately contributed to arming criminals in New York. The trial of the first, Adventure Outdoors of Smyrna, Ga., is set to begin May 27 in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn before Judge Jack Weinstein. The court papers suggest that Mr. Bloomberg may testify. http://nysun.com/new-york/bloomberg-could-testifyin-upcoming-guns-trial --- Rules Proposed for National-Park Carry: Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne formally proposed Wednesday to scrap a longtime ban against bringing loaded weapons into national parks and wildlife areas. He said this would begin a 60-day public comment period on the proposed update to the nation's gun regulations. Under the plan, a person could carry a concealed weapon in national parks and wildlife refuges if authorized to do so on similar state lands in the state where the national park or refuge is located. (See details from The Firearms Coalition, below.) http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics/story/599831.html --- Lautenberg Amendment Case Going to Supreme Court: The case of a Marion County man will go to the U.S. Supreme Court later this year, and a Charleston attorney will become one of a limited number of West Virginia lawyers to argue in that venue...Hayes' case goes back to 1994, when he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor battery offense after a dispute with his wife. Ten years later, an argument over their son occurred over the phone between the now-divorced parents and she asked police to go to his home. When they searched Hayes home, an old Winchester rifle given to him by his father was found under a bed. Hayes didn't know it, but a 1996 amendment to federal gun laws made it illegal for him to possess the gun because of his prior misdemeanor offense... http://www.dailymail.com/News/200804300223 --- Laxity Alleged in Florida CCW Training: Some of the 500,000 people holding concealed-weapons permits in Florida qualified by using toy guns. Recent complaints to state officials pointed out that almost anyone who wants to carry a handgun to the movies, mall or church can do so. The shortcomings they cited include training that allows firing bullets without gunpowder, and passing students for merely pulling the trigger once or twice without ever loading or unloading a handgun. Quickie permit classes had become so common, the National Rifle Association threatened this month to fire any NRA-certified instructor who didn't use real guns to teach students in Florida... http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orange/orl-concealed3008apr30,0,2256061.story --- Sheriff Swaps One Thompson for 17 New Bushmasters: The gun swap arranged by Jefferson County Sheriff John P. Burns has neared completion. Seventeen Bushmaster semiautomatic carbines were delivered Monday to the sheriff's department, with slings, scopes and ammunition soon to follow. In return, Sheriff Burns will be handing over to his supplier, Amchar Wholesale of Rochester, one gun - a 1920 Thompson .45-caliber fully automatic submachine gun. Better known as a "Tommy gun," the antique has an appraised value of $30,000, the sheriff said. The new weaponry has about the same value. (The value of the Thompson was greatly inflated by a 1986 law that banned the sale of newly manufactured automatic firearms to anyone but government agencies.) http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20080430/NEWS03/52111885 --- From The Firearms Coalition: 1. Court Shoots Down Bloomberg! 2. National Parks Ending Gun Ban? 3. The National Anthem Bloomberg and NY A 3 judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has dismissed a lawsuit by the city of New York attempting to hold firearms manufacturers responsible for the costs of "gun crime" in the city. The court ruled that the suit should have been dismissed under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act passed by the congress in 2005. The 2-1 decision affirmed the constitutionality of that law and criticized Federal Judge Jack Weinstein for failing to abide by the Lawful Commerce Act when it first passed. We can doubtless expect Mayor Bloomberg to try to find some other way to blame gunowners, dealers, and manufacturers for New York's crime problems. Parks The Department of the Interior has released its long awaited regulatory reform proposals for National Parks and National Wildlife Refuges. The proposed regulations will be open for public comment for the next 60 days. It is critical that gunowners let their voices be heard on this regulation change. As I had expected, the proposed regulations are worded to be as restrictive as possible while still trying to answer the primary complaint. Specifically, the proposed change limits firearms that "may" be carried, to those lawfully carried concealed under state law. Lawful open carry is denied. The proposal also specifically exempts buildings and facilities from lawful carry and it predicates its rules upon those of similar state lands rather than general state law. So in states like Virginia, where gunowners are fighting to regain their rights in state parks, the fight would automatically extend into National Parks. If a state wants to prohibit guns in a National Park, they should have to pass a law to do it. Here is the actual text of the proposal for National Parks: § 2.4 Weapons, traps and nets. * * * * * (Added to the end of a complex litany of restrictions and exceptions) (h) A person may possess, carry, and transport concealed, loaded, and operable firearms within a national park area in the same manner, and to the same extent, that a person may lawfully possess, carry, and transport concealed, loaded and operable firearms in any state park, or any similar unit of state land, in the state in which the federal park, or that portion thereof, is located, provided that such possession, carrying and transporting otherwise complies with applicable federal and state law. The proposed reg change for National Wildlife Refuges is virtually identical except for the types of state lands that it cites as comparable. It is obvious that the bureaucrats who wrote these proposed regulations simply don't understand the fundamental principles involved. It is ridiculous that the Department of the Interior would promulgate these convoluted half-measures when a simple statement adopting the laws of the host state regarding the possession and carry of firearms would solve the problem. I think the DOI is concerned about not being able to prosecute someone they catch sneaking through the woods with a scoped 30-06 as a poacher. By limiting the exemption to "concealed" weapons, they think they are bypassing that problem and they are ignoring the other problems such a limitation creates. We have not yet formulated our official response as there are many factors to be considered and we would like to coordinate our efforts with other rights organizations. We will post our response as soon as we can get it put together. In the mean time, here is the official information about posting comments: You may submit comments, identified by the number 1024-AD70 by any of the following methods: Electronically via the Federal rulemaking portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Mail: Public Comments Processing, Attn: 1024-AD70; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 222, Arlington, VA 22203 Hand-deliver: 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 222, Arlington, VA 22203 Public Availability of Comments Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment - including your personal identifying information - may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Lawyer, (202) 208-3181, Mark_Lawyer@ios.doi.gov. I'll send out an Alert in a day or two with sample comment language. National Anthem I'm not big on those so-called "viral videos" that race around the world in unwanted e-mails, but you might enjoy this beautiful rendition of the Star Spangled Banner sung by a group of young ladies in Texas. The group is called The Cactus Cuties and includes: Madeline Powell - Age 8 Blaire Elbert - Age 10 Tatum Lowe - Age 11 Andi Kitten -- Age 11 Baylee Barrett - Age 13 They are directed by a woman named Cami Caldwell http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKCVS57j284&feature=related http://www.khou.com/news/local/stories/khou080430_tnt_chasefolo.b6bd990f.html?npc --- From AzCDL: HB 2630, an AzCDL requested bill that reduces the penalty for carrying a concealed weapon without a permit to a petty offense, was vetoed by the Governor on April 29, 2008. You can read her veto letter here: http://www.azleg.gov/govlettr/48leg/2R/HB2630.pdf . HB 2630 would have reclassified carrying a concealed weapon without a permit as a petty offense, unless the violation occurred in the commission of, or attempted commission of, a "serious offense or violent crime", in which case the CCW offense would have been a class 6 felony, or any other felony offense, in which case it would have remained a class 1 misdemeanor. In a nutshell, if you're a bad guy carrying a concealed weapon, penalties would have been stiffened. If you're a law-abiding citizen, it would have become a petty offense. Under current law, if you have not been issued a concealed weapons (CCW) permit, it is a class 1 misdemeanor to carry a concealed weapon. Everyone is treated like a criminal. Sadly, because of a couple of 1994 Appellate Court decisions, there is no clear, objective standard in statute that you can rely on to determine if you are violating the law. In her veto letter on HB 2630, Governor Napolitano says "obtain the required permit." She then says that "people who fail to do so are, by definition, lawbreakers...." She goes on to say that "serious criminals, especially gang members, often carry concealed weapons without permits." Per the Governor, there is no distinction between gang members intentionally breaking the law, and a law-abiding person's attempt to comply with a law clouded by head-scratching court decisions. If your openly carried firearm can't be seen because of the angle that the police officer is looking at you, and you don't have a CCW permit - you are the same as a gang member. If you have a CCW permit, and are sitting near someone in a vehicle that may have access to your firearm - they are the same as gang members. If a newspaper falls over the gun that is sitting on the seat of your vehicle, and you don't have a CCW permit - you are the same as a gang member. Governor Napolitano says that "...law enforcement officers must have the full array of enforcement options to use against these violators..." In other words, arrest everyone and let the courts sort it out. That sure beats separating the bad guys from the good guys. Over 98% of Arizona citizens do not have concealed weapons permits, largely because the Arizona Constitution supposedly protects the right to "open carry." Per Governor Napolitano, that's not relevant - you better get a permit if your weapon might ever be considered concealed, or else you're a lawbreaker! Information on this and other bills can be found at the AzCDL website: http://www.azcdl.org/html/legislation.html As legislation progresses, we will keep you up to date via these Alerts and at our website. These alerts are a project of the Arizona Citizens Defense League (AzCDL), an all volunteer, non-profit, non-partisan grassroots organization. Join today! AzCDL - Protecting Your Freedom http://www.azcdl.org/html/join_us_.html Copyright © 2008 Arizona Citizens Defense League, Inc., all rights reserved. -- Stephen P. Wenger, KE7QBY Firearm safety - It's a matter for education, not legislation. http://www.spw-duf.info .