Eagle Firearms Rotating Header Image

Government

Turnout heavy in opposition to WA ‘assault weapon’ bill

Just cross-linking this article for those of you tracking the new “assualt weapon” ban bill in Washington State. If you actually read this bill is the most ridiculous thing I’ve seen in a long time, its so much more than an assault weapon ban..and they can’t even define assault weapon properly.

http://www.examiner.com/x-4525-Seattle-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2010m1d26-Turnout-heavy-in-opposition-to-WA-assault-weapon-bill-Bellevue-police-chief-plays-politics

[Bill 6396]

U.S. Senate To Vote On National Right-To-Carry

The U.S. Senate is now considering the National Defense Authorization Act (S. 1390). As a part of the consideration of that legislation, Senators John Thune (R-SD) and David Vitter (R-LA) will offer an amendment this week to provide for interstate recognition of Right-to-Carry permits. There is a very high likelihood of a Senate floor vote on this important and timely pro-gun reform between now and Wednesday.

Now is the time for Congress to recognize that the right to self-defense does not end at state lines. Under the Thune-Vitter amendment, an individual who has met the requirements for a carry permit, or who is otherwise allowed by his home state’s state law to carry a firearm, would be authorized to carry a firearm for protection in any other state that issues such permits, subject to the laws of the state in which the firearm is carried.

Contrary to “states’ rights” claims from opponents who usually favor sweeping federal gun control, the amendment is a legitimate exercise of Congress’s constitutional power to protect the fundamental rights of citizens (including the right to keep and bear arms and the right of personal mobility). States would still have the authority to regulate the time, place and manner in which handguns are carried.

Expanding Right-to-Carry will enhance public safety, and certainly poses no threat to the public. Criminals are deterred from attempting crimes when they know or suspect that their prospective victims are armed. A study for the Department of Justice found that 40 percent of felons had not committed crimes because they feared the prospective victims were armed. The Thune-Vitter amendment recognizes that competent, responsible, law-abiding Americans still deserve our trust and confidence when they cross state lines. Passing interstate Right-to-Carry legislation will help further reduce crime by deterring criminals, and — most important of all — will protect the right of honest Americans to protect themselves if deterrence fails.

The Thune-Vitter Amendment represents a giant step forward in the protection of the basic right to self-defense. Its passage will recognize that the rights of law-abiding Right-to-Carry permit holders should be respected, even when they travel outside their home state.

Gun control groups, including New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s “Mayors Against Illegal Guns” are running ads trying to scare your lawmakers and the American people into opposing this crucial Right-to-Carry reform. It is critical that your U.S. Senators hear from you immediately.

Please be sure to contact both of your U.S. Senators today, and urge them to cosponsor and support the Thune-Vitter interstate right to carry recipocity amendment. E-mail and call them immediately!

To find contact information for your U.S. Senators, please click here, or call (202) 224-3121.

Laws and such (cont) …

Well, quite honestly I didn’t expect such a fast response from any governmental body. Although I will say as a Washington State business operator I find all government deparments I deal with very friendly, very helpful and very honest. At least so far, my experiences with the various agencies has been good. We’ll continue to say that I was impressed at the response from the State Department of Licensing Firearms Division. A quick response to my email questions along with contact information should I want to call in and follow up.

I’ve updated my contacts page with the WA DOL Firearms information, as well as some federal agency info. Be sure to check it out.

Based on the previous post, i obtained some good information for Washington residence on what happens to the data you put on your Pistol transfer form when you buy a handgun or revolver. I found the best location for this is an addition to my Gun Buying for the Paranoid article. At the bottom I added a section about Washington State Pistol Transfers. Good information, I hope you find it helpful.

Laws and such…

Hey folks,

I’ve been getting a lot of queries about legal issues and state information. So I’ve been compiling some data as well as making some calls.

I’ve updated the State Law page to include a Washington State Summary page. This takes out the legal ease and answers a lot of questions. Be sure to check it out. I’ve also completed an Oregon Summary page now as well.

Also there’s been a lot of questions about the State Pistol form required by WA residents when purchasing a pistol. Such as where does the state store this information, is it publicly available, etc. I have a couple queries into the State Department of Licensing now, as soon as I have more information I will be happy to share it with you all.

Don’t forget we have several new and used Firearms for sale so be sure to check those out.

Gun Buying… Update (VAF)

Today I updated my document on Gun Buying for the Paranoid.

The following section was added to the federal part of the document, as I find it extremely interesting and forgot about it when I wrote the original article. Feel free to re-read the article at the above link. Below is the section that was added.

NOTE ADDED 4.14.2009 It should also be noted that per Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 25.9(b)(1),(2), and (3), the NICS (feds) must destroy all purchaser identifying information on allowed transactions within 24 hours of the FFL being notified of the transactions proceed status. What does that mean? What it means is that once the Firearms Dealer (such as EagleFirearms) completes your background check and its successful the NICS (FBI) must destroy all data in regards to the transaction with 24 hours. So after 24 hours there is no record of your purchase within federal systems at all. The only record is the form 4473 you fill out at the dealer, who keeps that. The downside to this is that just because you passed a background check today, doesn’t mean you will the next time. Any changes or mis-identifications during a background check can cause it to fail and because of the above law, there’s no records that you previously passed your check. To prevent this the VAF was initiated. You can read about it on the VAF web site if you are interested.

The VAF was initiated to allow buyers to pre-register with the NICS. You are still required to do your background checks when purchasing firearms however you are given a license # that can be used on the Form 4473 which will confirm your identity during background checks. Basically making it impossible for you to fail or be denied due to mistaken identity or identity theft. Its an interesting topic since on one hand VAF falls into the “the government is watching you and wants to license you” versus “they already know everything they need to know in some giant database in some giant data center in some giant mountain…somewhere”. If you are gun buying for the paranoid, you most likely want to take the risk of failed background check versus registering with VAF. If you are ex-military, an FFL or any other federal agent or employee, VAF will only help you because they already know all about you so you aren’t providing them data they don’t already have.

Sanity in the Legal System

The fact that these types of ridiculous Law Suits can even exist and waste valuable time and money is mind numbing, so I would like to point out this great win today, and congratulate the Supreme Court for its forethought and logical decision making.

“Fairfax, Va. – On Monday, March 9, the U.S. Supreme Court denied consideration of New York City and Washington, D.C. lawsuits, New York v. Beretta and Lawson v. Beretta, respectively, that tried to hold American gun manufacturers responsible for the acts of criminals. The Court ‘s order leaves standing a pair of decisions by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and District of Columbia Court of Appeals, both of which found that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), enacted in 2005, prevents these types of lawsuits against lawful firearms manufacturers and dealers.

In 2000, New York City, Washington, D.C. and several individual plaintiffs sued gun manufacturers, based on the idea that although they manufactured a legal product, forcing them to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in legal fees just to prove their innocence in court would drive them into bankruptcy. In addition to being based on a bogus legal theory, these lawsuits endangered American armed forces and law enforcement. During congressional debate over the PLCAA, the Department of Defense agreed with the NRA that bankrupting U.S. gun makers and making us dependent on foreign countries like France, Russia or China for small arms is a threat to America’s domestic and international security.”