imported post
Well, if we’re going to make this into a “he said – she said” thing, or a stumping ground, then I suppose I should counter the last two posts.
For those who do not know, Iowa is a discretionary issue state. There are 99 counties, and 99 different sets of rules for obtaining an Iowa Permit to Carry Weapons. (Not a “CWP” or a “CHP” – ours is a carry permit.) Once you do obtain a PCW (which in some counties is very difficult to nearly impossible), you are free to carry a handgun. Whether or not you can carry any other type of “offensive weapon” is strictly up to the Sheriff that issues the permit. Open carry is legally allowed at that point, but most Sheriffs will take away your permit for doing so. It is their discretion to do so. Also, each Sheriff can further restrict your PCW to certain locations, certain activities, and so forth.
That said, Iowa Carry (and the NRA, and the SAF) recognize that going from the current situation in Iowa to a full Alaska-style system is a long reach. All of the officers of Iowa Carry recognize the effort that IGO is pursuing, and we wish them the best of luck. However, we feel that for a short-term gain that will benefit ALL citizens of Iowa, going from the currently broken (or “almost working”) system to a system that is working in 80% of the country is the most logical and most realistic approach. And again, that opinion is shared by both the NRA and the SAF – two of the most influential gun rights groups in the country.
The NRA’s decision to come to Iowa is not really open for debate. Neither Straight_Shooter nor I know the real reason that the decision was made to show up for this legislative cycle. I have my *opinion* on why they have chosen to do so, but that is irrelevant to this discussion. The fact remains that they are here, they’ve already done a great deal of homework, and Iowa Carry has agreed to assist them in any way possible with their drive. Our leadership has seen their proposed legislation, and it offers a substantial improvement over what we currently have in Iowa.
“Everything I am hearing is that the NRA is loading it up with all kinds of "extra" restrictions, new classes of "gun crimes,"etc. With "friends" like these, who needs enemies.”
This is pure speculation on the writer’s part. Until he (or she) has seen the legislation, there is no way to for him know what is really there. Again, we have it, we’ve seen it, and it does nothing of the sort. In the meantime, making statements like the above do nothing but spread Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (“FUD”) and play to emotions instead of sticking to facts.
In regards to the vote on HF 596 last year, I would point out that during the prior year, the exact same tactic was used with Rep. Baudler’s legislation, and it died by a similar 49-49 vote. Those who know Iowa politics will see the tactic for what it truly is, and know that the “game” that is played on the floor of the House when the Standings Bill comes along ensures that it is a crap shoot at best for getting legislation passed. In fact, the 49-49 vote on either bill was not a true reflection on any particular lawmaker’s stance on gun rights. As accurately pointed out by the author, the vote was simply to suspend the rules to allow a vote on the bill.
Now, in regards to my show with Jan Michelson. Currently, the Second Amendment is a “regulated right.” Try calling into Jan’s show sometime and ask him about that. It would be wonderful if we could use the 2A as our permit, but in reality, that is simply not the case. So the question of “Does the Second Amendment give you the right to carry a firearm?” can only be answered, truthfully and in the present tense, as no. If anyone doubts that, I would ask that you try to carry your firearm and use the 2A as your permit and your defense in court. Let us all know how that turns out.
Until that fact changes, I cannot, and will not, tell anyone that the 2A guarantees a right to carry firearms. Just because I want it to be that way (and in fact believe it should be that way) does not in reality make it that way.
In the interest of state’s rights versus federal rights, the best way to fix all of this is to create an amendment to the Iowa Constitution that provides the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. It is a dangerous, slippery slope when we try to use the 14A to apply (or “incorporate”) the Heller decision to the states. Doing so allows SCOTUS to use their case law to override state’s rights. That is simply not right. Every state should have their own laws for their own citizens. That is how the framers of our country wanted it to be, and we’ve ventured way off that path. Perhaps that is something that can be accomplished in the near future. Iowa Carry is very supportive of that idea, and we’ll do what we can when the time comes to push that forward.
Also, for the record, Sheriff Pulkrabek has softened up on his anti-carry stance. While his policy is not as good as the Sheriffs of Polk, Dallas, Jones, Cedar, Linn, or other counties like that, he is not nearly as bad as the Sheriffs of Emmet, Dubuque, Louisa, or similar counties. Giving credit where credit is due, Sheriff Pulkrabek has come around somewhat in the days since our radio show together. I would suggest that publicly calling Sheriff Pulkrabek one of the “most openly anti-gun sheriffs [sic] in Iowa” is incorrect, as he is clearly not. Sheriff Pulkrabek should be commended for trying to become more understanding of a citizen’s rights. There are plenty of other Sheriffs in Iowa that are more deserving of the ire of pro-gun activists than he is.
I invite anyone who would like to know more about Iowa Carry to visit our website (
http://www.iowacarry.org) for more information.
Sean McClanahan
President
Iowa Carry, Inc.