• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Update On HB 402‏

AH.74

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
443
Location
, ,
HOUSE COMMITTEE COULD HEAR HB 402, NEW YORK-STYLE GUN & MAGAZINE BAN, THIS COMING THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 21!

If you care about your right to own firearms and ammunition in New Mexico you MUST plan to attend this hearing and contact lawmakers in opposition to this terrible bill.

HB 402 by state Representative Stephen Easley (D-Eldorado), bans the future possession, transfer and transport of so-called “assault weapons” or “large-capacity ammunition-feeding devices.” All such property owned in New Mexico prior to July 1, 2013 would be grandfathered, but the burden of proving ownership prior to that date is placed on the owner. Proving the date of purchase can be almost impossible and serial numbers do not exist on many magazines.

Ownership of the affected firearms and magazines could not be transferred AT ALL. The only means of disposing of them would be through a gun “buyback” or turn-in program to law enforcement – no inheritance, no allowing a friend or relative to take custody of the prohibited property, no selling or transferring the property out-of-state or even to a federally-licensed dealer. Grandfathered owners of the firearms described below would be required to store them in a locked gun safe at all times except when the guns are being transported or used. Transport would only be lawful if the firearm is unloaded, any detachable magazine is removed and the gun is equipped with a triggerlock.

The definition of “assault weapon” in HB 402 is an unmitigated disaster. It doesn’t list specifically-banned models and instead imposes a “one-feature test” for rifles, shotguns and pistols, as well as a catch-all for “a semi-automatic version of an automatic rifle, shotgun or firearm.” A banned feature for both semi-automatic rifles that can accept a detachable magazine and semi-automatic shotguns would be a “secondhand grip” OR a “protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand.” Of course, ALL rifles and shotguns feature some sort of secondary gripping surface, as by definition they are designed or made to be fired from the shoulder and gripped with two hands. So HB 402 could essentially ban ALL semi-automatic rifles that can accept a detachable magazine and ALL semi-automatic shotguns, unless they fit into one of the very narrow exemptions in this bill.

HB 402 also bans ammunition feeding devices with a capacity to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition or that contain more than seven rounds of ammunition. This is just one example of how poorly-drafted this bill is in a rush to follow New York’s lead (where gun control advocates sought to reduce the existing ten round state limit.) Additionally, HB 402 includes prohibitions on items specifically excluded in even the most far-reaching bans we’ve seen to-date: full ten-round magazines routinely used for competition and feeding devices that are curios or relics!

This is one of the worst gun control bills filed in the entire country. You can read the proposed measure yourself at http://www.nmlegis.gov/lcs/_session.aspx?Chamber=H&LegType=B&LegNo=402&year=13

It is expected that the House Consumer & Public Affairs Committee will hold a public hearing on HB 402 on Thursday, February 21, at 1:30pm or upon adjournment of the House in Room 315 of the State Capitol. You will want to confirm that it’s on the committee agenda come Tuesday or Wednesday by visiting http://www.nmlegis.gov/lcs/agecalendars.aspx. Make plans to attend this hearing and voice your opposition to HB 402. If the measure advances from this committee, it will move onto the House Judiciary Committee. Please also call and email committee members and urge them to oppose HB 402 (see listing below for committee member contact information.)

Recommendations for testimony/constituent contact:

• Keep your comments under one minute and try not to repeat previous points made.

• Be respectful and polite when communicating with lawmakers. Lists of committee members can be found here http://www.nmlegis.gov/lcs/committees_standing.aspx

• Speak to the bill and issue at hand, not a general constitutional argument. For talking points against so-called “assault weapons” bans and limits on magazines, visit http://www.gunbanfacts.com/
 

XDm

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
65
Location
ABQ
Checked the upcoming calendar this past Friday and saw nothing so I called a friend there and they heard nothing either by Saturday. I hope you're right about the date because lots of us will be checking and trying to schedule work time off and travel time.
 

AH.74

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
443
Location
, ,
That message was forwarded with permission. I'll be watching as closely as I can and will pass on any word I receive as soon as I am able.
 

WastelandMan

New member
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
1
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Hb402 / 2012 unconstitutioninal!!!! (state constitution!)

(abridged and emphasis mine!)

CONSTITUTION
OF THE
STATE OF NEW MEXICO
ADOPTED JANUARY 21,
1911


Sec. 6. [Right to bear arms.]
No law shall abridge the right of the citizen
to keep and bear arms for security and
defense, for lawful hunting and recreational
use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing
herein shall be held to permit the carrying
of concealed weapons. No municipality
or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident
of the right to keep and bear arms.
(As
amended November 2, 1971 and November
2, 1986.)

This law is clearly in violation of the State Constitution!

-Wasteland Man.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
(abridged and emphasis mine!)

CONSTITUTION
OF THE
STATE OF NEW MEXICO
ADOPTED JANUARY 21,
1911


Sec. 6. [Right to bear arms.]
No law shall abridge the right of the citizen
to keep and bear arms for security and
defense, for lawful hunting and recreational
use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing
herein shall be held to permit the carrying
of concealed weapons. No municipality
or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident
of the right to keep and bear arms.
(As
amended November 2, 1971 and November
2, 1986.)

This law is clearly in violation of the State Constitution!

-Wasteland Man.

Cannot imagive how you think the NM Constitution can violate the NM Constitution - that is the preemptive clause from the State Consitution (As amended November 2, 1971 and November2, 1986.).

Article II, sec. 6:
New Mexico has state preemption of firearms laws, so local governments may not restrict the possession or use of firearms. In 1986, Article 2, Section 6 of the state constitution was amended to say, "No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms"

http://sos.state.nm.us/pdf/2007nmconst.pdf
 

AH.74

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
443
Location
, ,
Grapeshot- he simply highlighted the wrong part. The first part is where the violations occur with this proposed law- abridging the right to keep arms, period. And he is right about it being unconstitutional, absolutely.

That is the part that annoys me the most- if the legal team allows this to even get to committee it is a travesty.
 

XDm

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
65
Location
ABQ
Hey guys try this website out it will allow you to email everyone about HB 402

http://netwmd.com/guns/

Thanks for the link!!! Is there anything other than this website that will notify us when 402 gets scheduled? Any other websites that track this and other bills? My NRA mailings are slow and lacking - I think because they are inundated with countrywide agendas.
 

RogueWarrior

New member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
343
Location
, ,
Thanks for the link!!! Is there anything other than this website that will notify us when 402 gets scheduled? Any other websites that track this and other bills? My NRA mailings are slow and lacking - I think because they are inundated with countrywide agendas.

not as far as I know But I will see what I can find
 

XDm

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
65
Location
ABQ
Looks like this bill is a GO for this Thursday. 1:30PM RM 317
 

AH.74

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
443
Location
, ,
It's an embarrassment that it's even getting this far in its current written form.

I also don't see an impact report accompanying it yet, which indicates legal and fiscal areas of concern by the reviewers.
 

XDm

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
65
Location
ABQ
weather looks sketchy in places Thursday but I'll see you guys up there anyway.
 

68jimmy

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Messages
20
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
Thanks for the update! Do you remember how the vote went? I'm sure that Chasey voted in favor of it, who else voted in favor?

donovan

by the way when did the hearing finally start?
 

XDm

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
65
Location
ABQ
Chasey(D) and Roybal-Caballero(D) voted no to tabling it. Alcon(D)/Anderson(R)/Harper(R) voted yes to tabling it.

I think something the public should be aware of and won't make the news coverage about tonight's meeting is that Gail Chasey and Patrica Roybal-Caballero admitted tonight that they deleted many many emails without reading them. Excuses about capacity issues and too much repetitive "scripted" comments were being seen early on so the two Democrats said they deleted / WITHOUT READING many public emails.
Remember this at election time.
 

XDm

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
65
Location
ABQ
and the hearing didn't start until just after 6pm.
 

RogueWarrior

New member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
343
Location
, ,
Chasey(D) and Roybal-Caballero(D) voted no to tabling it. Alcon(D)/Anderson(R)/Harper(R) voted yes to tabling it.

I think something the public should be aware of and won't make the news coverage about tonight's meeting is that Gail Chasey and Patrica Roybal-Caballero admitted tonight that they deleted many many emails without reading them. Excuses about capacity issues and too much repetitive "scripted" comments were being seen early on so the two Democrats said they deleted / WITHOUT READING many public emails.
Remember this at election time.

Now why does this not surprise me one little bit
 

AH.74

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
443
Location
, ,
XDm- thanks for the info. I appreciate knowing that- it's deplorable. Next time all emails will contain "no scripted comments, please read" in the subject header. What a bunch of clowns we have running the circus.

I waited for three hours and finally had to leave as my schedule was only so flexible.

They finally released the fiscal impact report yesterday. What I cannot understand is how a bill with so many problems as pointed out by the legal analysis can even make it to a hearing. They all but said the author was a moron, and this goes to show he really is.
 

.32acp

New member
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
9
Location
santa fe
XDm- thanks for the info. I appreciate knowing that- it's deplorable. Next time all emails will contain "no scripted comments, please read" in the subject header. What a bunch of clowns we have running the circus.

I waited for three hours and finally had to leave as my schedule was only so flexible.

They finally released the fiscal impact report yesterday. What I cannot understand is how a bill with so many problems as pointed out by the legal analysis can even make it to a hearing. They all but said the author was a moron, and this goes to show he really is.

I hope he feels like one too...
 
Top