NRA: States Fighting Back Against Right-to-Carry Gun Opponents
By Wayne LaPierre, NRA Executive Vice President
While gun-control advocates seem to have declared war on Right-to-Carry, legislatures across the country are taking steps to reform state laws in ways that will benefit those who lawfully exercise their right to bear arms.
Already this year we've seen several states pass Right-to-Carry reform measures that will ensure law-abiding gun owners can dine with their families in restaurants can store their lawfully owned firearm locked in their car while they are at work, and can exercise their right to carry without media harassment or publication of their personal information.
And in Iowa, the legislature took a major step forward this year, significantly revising the law regarding concealed carry. If Governor Culver signs the resulting bill, Iowa will go from a "May-Issue" state where the right to carry depends on the whim of the issuing authority, to a "Shall-Issue" state where gun owners who meet the statutory requirements can't be denied their license for vague and arbitrary reasons.
This would make Iowa the 41st state with "Shall-Issue" laws regarding the right to bear arms. There are still two states (Wisconsin and Illinois) that don't have any Right-to-Carry laws on the books, but support for RTC in those states is growing by leaps and bounds. The will of the people is clear, and legislatures around the country are listening.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
This is good news for Freemen of the United States. When the battle over the citizens rights are logically talked over and then actually the "leadership" allows "their" politicains to vote we usually win. When emotions cause law makers to pass laws they usually are not good laws.
the_car_man
..and (otherwise) Legal concealed carry should ONLY be forbidden where there is a compelling safety reason AND a guarantee of compliance, which should meet the following requirements:
1) Everyone including Law Enforcement Officers (LEOs) NOT specifically on duty (and specifically authorized) at that location must be disarmed -- no exceptions.
2) A secure perimeter and controlled check-points with metal detectors and/or body searches MUST be used to enter the location -- no exceptions, no bypasses.
3) A secure, guarded lockup must be provided for those who are legally carrying to check their firearms -- this includes LEOs -- so that no one is disarmed going or coming from the secure location.
When these three criteria are met is is pretty safe to say that a compelling state interest is being enforced, although even then there might be marginal cases.
About the only locations meeting these requirements are PRISONS and similar facilities.
I understand what you're trying to say. However, I find it to be quite sad that we have to make Gun Free Zones into Prisons. Only once we've stripped people of their civil rights and decency can we truly have Gun Free Zones which do not breed TARGETS for madmen.
In the end is it worth it?
I'd rather we lost the Zoning in several places and re-read what "Shall Not Be Infringed" means. We've reached a pivotal moment in the US. Criminals and the disturbed denizens of our cities are brazen enough to outright attack Law Enforcement - men and women with families just like the rest of us. The most tangible solution is for people to become familiar with the ways in which they may defend themselves.
That won't happen until we've graduated to educating people instead of demonizing tools which have the capability of aiding survival just as much as taking lives. Some see the glass half empty; some see the glass half full; drink from the bottle of liberty and stop over-analyzing other people's opinion.
If it isn't your taste, don't drink.
Nice letter, Wayne.
Thank you for all you do to help us. We will continue to battle the ignorant and the uneducated. See you in Harrisburg at the end of the month!