Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Call-to-action: Hb 77 referred to house judiciary & appropriatios committees

  1. #1
    Opt-Out Members
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Clovis, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    219

    Call-to-action: Hb 77 referred to house judiciary & appropriatios committees

    THE ASSAULT ON YOUR RIGHTS HAS STARTED IN SANTA FE - REP. MIGUEL GARCIA INTRODUCES PRIVATE FIREARM TRANSFER BAN, GUN TAX & FIREARM REGISTRATION BILL

    Gun control advocates are wasting no time. On the second day of the 60-day legislative session, Rep. Miguel Garcia (D-ABQ) introduced House Bill 77, imposing sweeping regulations on firearms sales in the State of New Mexico.

    HB 77 restricts ALL private transfers of firearms – not just those taking place at gun shows – including those between family members, friends and co-workers. Any person who is not a federal firearms licensed dealer (FFL) would have to contact the New Mexico Department of Public Safety prior to transferring any firearm to any prospective purchaser, provide the department detailed information on the firearm being sold and the person to whom the firearm is being transferred, and get approval from the department before the transfer is completed. This includes transfers between relatives, friends and co-workers. In order to accomplish this, the bill sets up a state-level criminal records check system, which will be paid for by lawful gun buyers.

    HB 77 establishes a $25.00 fee on private gun transfers – $35.00 if the transaction occurs at a gun show – amounting to a tax on gun purchases. Lawful gun buyers shouldn’t be forced to pay for a system that’s being created under the guise of public safety – all taxpayers should bear the brunt of this cost. The FBI-run National Instant Check System which FFLs use imposes no "user fee" on prospective gun buyers.

    HB 77 creates a state registry of legal firearms transferors and purchasers. Private sellers would be required to provide the department the name, address, and telephone number of the transferor; the make, model, caliber, and serial number of the firearm being transferred; and the name, date of birth, race, sex and address of the buyer. DPS is required to retain a record of this information for five years. Under NICS, FBI is required to destroy all records of approved purchasers by the next business day.

    Additionally, HB 77 imposes recordkeeping requirements on private sellers, requiring them to maintain records of approved transfers for five years, and it contains no privacy protections to prevent (or detect) a person using the system to run a background check on someone for purposes other than a gun purchase.

    The measure has been referred to two committees - House Judiciary and House Appropriations, and it could soon be set for a public hearing in the first committee. Please check back here for updates on scheduled action on this measure. In the meantime, it is critical that you contact committee members, as well as your own State Representatives, and urge them to OPPOSE HB 77!

    Contact information for Judiciary Committee members can be found here:

    http://www.nmlegis.gov/lcs/committee...mitteeCode=HJC

    Contact information for Appropriations Committee members can be found here:

    http://www.nmlegis.gov/lcs/committee...itteeCode=HAFC

    To find out who your State Representative is and obtain their contact information, go to:

    http://www.nmlegis.gov/lcs/legislatorsearch.aspx

    Steve Aikens

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    143
    Thanks for the info Steve. This is worse than I ever imagined. I doubt that it will get very far in NM, but just the thought that there are politicians out there that would establish such controlling measures on legitimate gun owners is scary. Keep us informed. Let us know who we can write to.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Rio Rancho, New Mexico, United States
    Posts
    338
    6 emails sent 2 replies
    A gun Owner Is A Citizen
    Anyone Else is a Subject

  4. #4
    Regular Member XDm's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    ABQ
    Posts
    65
    As for contacting New Mexico representatives regarding House Bill 77, I would ask people to carefully consider the email sources listed as they write each of the Representatives. Many of the people in the Representative's directory list generic public email accounts for Yahoo and Gmail. Representatives often mask their government business emails in an attempt to filter down some of the incoming email or to allow them to prioritize it as they see fit. Their working government email can not be filtered and is easily reached by typing first name . last name @ nmlegis.gov. For example: Jonh Doe would be john.doe@nmlegis.gov

    For the reps that didn't list their state govt emails I also took the liberty to include it along with their public Gmail/yahoo listings when I wrote them.

    I've spent the past month writing members of our state as well as Senators and Congressman.
    I would urge people to also contact Martin Heinrich, Tom Udall, Michelle LujanGrisham, Ben R. Luján, Steve Pearce and even Patty Bushee. These people have forms on their government pages and you can just fill in the blanks for quick and easy emailings. By writing members at the Senate/Congressional level you don't limit your concerns about your freedoms to just the state and local level but instead elevate it to the national level. If you have trouble emailing members that block outside district input, contact me for a way to work around this problem.

    These people work for YOU!!! Don't be afraid to write. State Parks amendments were nothing compared to bills like HB77.

  5. #5
    Opt-Out Members
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Clovis, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    219
    Also note that it is not a good thing to use a generic form letter format. Take a moment to write something thoughtful. It will get more attention and more importantly, it wont be disregarded.

    We need your help though. Things do not look promising at this point because there was another "school shooting" in TX today around noon. Turns out it wasn't an active shooter incident but once the bell has rung.....

    Keep up the good work. I heard several comments today that you ARE getting heard.

    Thanks.

    Steve Aikens

  6. #6
    Opt-Out Members
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Clovis, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    219
    HB 77, Rep. Miguel Garcia's sweeping gun control bill will be heard on Monday, January 28, at 1:30 or upon adjournment of the House in Room 309 of the State Capitol in Santa Fe. We need as many people as possible to attend and speak in opposition to the measure.

    The committee will likely ask for a show of hands in the room for and against the bill, and then allow each person to stand up and briefly speak from their seat. Arguments should be clear, concise and not repetitive. Speak to HB 77, not to other gun control proposals in Washington or other gun-related bills filed in New Mexico.

    See you there.

    Steve Aikens

  7. #7
    Opt-Out Members
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Clovis, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    219
    DEMOCRATS VOTE AGAINST PUBLIC SAFETY; EXPANDED BACKGROUND CHECKS; AND TO ALLOW THE TRANSFERRING HANDGUNS TO TODDLERS


    SANTA FE – Today, in a Judiciary Committee hearing, 7 of 8 Democrat legislators voted in favor of advancing House Bill 77, the “Firearm Transfer Act." The bill died on a 8-8 vote with Representative Alcon (D) joining Republicans to vote against the legislation. HB 77 as amended would do the following:

    - Spend almost $1 million of taxpayer money to create a state bureaucracy that duplicates an existing federal system. That amount of money could be used to fund 21 police officers a year.
    - Reduce the penalty for the illegal transfer of a firearm form a felony to a misdemeanor.
    - In the most bizarre turn of events, the bill also allowed a parent to transfer a handgun to a minor child, but not an adult child. This conflicts with existing criminal law which makes it illegal for someone under 19 to possess a handgun.

    Representative Nate Gentry (R-30) offered an amendment that would have expanded background checks, increased penalties for illegally transferring a firearm, would have made New Mexico eligible for millions in federal funding, and would have placed a duty on medical professionals to report instances when a patient was going to harm others using a firearm. The Democrats tabled that amendment on a party line vote - 9-7.

    “House Bill 77 is a severely flawed piece of legislation that will actually reduce public safety,” said Representative Nate Gentry (HD-30). “The provision allowing the transfer of a handgun to a toddler was particularly odd. Instead of tackling the important issues of mental health and enforcing existing law, this legislation would be incredibly costly and would not even scratch the surface of solving the problem.”

    The cost, estimated at nearly $1 million in the first year, would take away from New Mexico’s Department of Public Safety. With an already undermanned State Police force, this would take vital funding from areas needed to secure public safety.

    “Instead of enforcing existing laws, Democrats voted to spend valuable taxpayer dollars to duplicate a federal system, and at the same time, reduce penalties for violators,” said Representative Bill Rehm (HD-31). “Republicans support enhancing the overall effectiveness of the federal system by improving the quality of information compiled in that database—specifically state reporting of disqualifying mental health records—and aggressively prosecuting violators of federal firearms laws.

    According to a 2012 US DOJ report, more than 72,000 people were turned down on a gun purchase in 2010 because they didn’t clear a background check. Only 44 percent of those cases were prosecuted. That is a loophole that needs closing.

    =======

    HB 77 is currently tabled. It won't stay that way long. Looks like we're headed to App & Finance Committee.

    Steve Aikens

  8. #8
    Regular Member XDm's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    ABQ
    Posts
    65
    I just got home too.. long but successful day at the House Judiciary hearing today.

    A big thanks again to the following:
    Steve A.
    Tara M. (NRA)
    Representative Rehm - they don't pay you enough!
    Representative Gentry - they don't pay you enough!
    All the Representatives who saw through the flaws and constitutional over-steppings of HB-77 and voted it down.

    Regards -

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    423
    There is some crazy stuff in there. Really- it's unbelievable.

    I watched the news last night (a rare occurrence) and they showed a clip of an interview with Garcia done after the vote. I swear my head almost exploded when he said something like it being difficult to get things done when you fly by night. Really? This is how you do things? By the seat of your pants? What an infuriating thing to say from an embarrassment of a representative.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    143
    Thanks to all those that showed up to the hearing. After watching the news and reading today's Albuq Journal, it seems as if it made an impact. I thought this was fast tracked and now it seems they are listening to reason before passing unreasonable legislation.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    new mexico
    Posts
    1

    first timer here

    Greetings:

    This is my first time here; I found the site after doing reseach on HB77. I also sent emails and made calls. Terry McMillan (Las Cruces) also voted against it - he responed to my emails and said he would vote against it.

    I emailed Phillip Archuleta (Las Cruces) several times, but it looks like he was a co-sponsor of the bill.

    I wanted to take the trip to Santa Fe, but I had to work; thanks to thoes who did make it...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •