Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: "Shotgunning" legislation

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Linn County, Iowa, USA
    Posts
    491

    Post imported post

    After reading some of the threads here and thinking about the issue I came up with a simple idea on getting some favorable reform for Iowa's permit to carry. Part of this is thanks to Sean from Iowa Carry commenting on "eating this elephant one bite at a time". He stated that the first goal of Iowa Carry is to get the following five things for Iowa:
    - Shall issue permits, removing sheriff discretion from the permit process.
    - Appeals process, some method of contesting denials of permits to carry.
    - Uniform training and testing, requiring all sheriffs to accept a single state-wide training and testing format.
    - Recognition, putting in Iowa law a means to recognize out of state permits for the carry of self defense weapons.
    - Privacy of records, protecting the records of permits from access except those that are required for law enforcement.

    Now when Sean mention the taking this one bite at a time he wanted the above five things in one law before moving on to other issues, such as:
    - Stand your ground, shielding people from criminal and civil prosecution in self defense situations when the person is in their home, business, or any other location they are allowed to be by law.
    - Unlicensed open carry, this websites favorite topic, extending the lawful carry of self defense tools into incorporated areas and private businesses.
    - Parking lot carry, shielding people from disciplinary action by an employer and from trespass on private property for keeping a firearm in a locked vehicle.

    I'm sure there are more issues to discuss but we can start with the eight above. Instead of treating the above in two or three "chunks" like Sean from Iowa Carry (Sorry, Sean, I don't have the spelling of your last name committed to memory yet.) wants to do I suggest we treat each issue separately as an individual bill. Some of these issues can get the support from a number of groups like Iowa Carry, Iowa Gun Owners, and the NRA. Some might even get support from law enforcement. I've been told that the Iowa State Sheriffs and Deputies Association (ISSDA) is quite the powerful lobby.

    Some of these issues might be a "slam dunk" and get support from many groups, such as privacy of records on permits to carry. Others might require more of a fight, like open carry. I just suggest that we get as many people on board of each little issue on it own and present each little issue as a separate piece of legislation. Then present every little piece of legislation every legislative session until it passes.

    Does this sound like a good idea? Can we get some lobby groups to play along?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , Iowa, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    IA_farmboy wrote:
    After reading some of the threads here and thinking about the issue I came up with a simple idea on getting some favorable reform for Iowa's permit to carry. Part of this is thanks to Sean from Iowa Carry commenting on "eating this elephant one bite at a time". He stated that the first goal of Iowa Carry is to get the following five things for Iowa:
    - Shall issue permits, removing sheriff discretion from the permit process.
    - Appeals process, some method of contesting denials of permits to carry.
    - Uniform training and testing, requiring all sheriffs to accept a single state-wide training and testing format.
    - Recognition, putting in Iowa law a means to recognize out of state permits for the carry of self defense weapons.
    - Privacy of records, protecting the records of permits from access except those that are required for law enforcement.

    Now when Sean mention the taking this one bite at a time he wanted the above five things in one law before moving on to other issues, such as:
    - Stand your ground, shielding people from criminal and civil prosecution in self defense situations when the person is in their home, business, or any other location they are allowed to be by law.
    - Unlicensed open carry, this websites favorite topic, extending the lawful carry of self defense tools into incorporated areas and private businesses.
    - Parking lot carry, shielding people from disciplinary action by an employer and from trespass on private property for keeping a firearm in a locked vehicle.

    I'm sure there are more issues to discuss but we can start with the eight above. Instead of treating the above in two or three "chunks" like Sean from Iowa Carry (Sorry, Sean, I don't have the spelling of your last name committed to memory yet.) wants to do I suggest we treat each issue separately as an individual bill. Some of these issues can get the support from a number of groups like Iowa Carry, Iowa Gun Owners, and the NRA. Some might even get support from law enforcement. I've been told that the Iowa State Sheriffs and Deputies Association (ISSDA) is quite the powerful lobby.

    Some of these issues might be a "slam dunk" and get support from many groups, such as privacy of records on permits to carry. Others might require more of a fight, like open carry. I just suggest that we get as many people on board of each little issue on it own and present each little issue as a separate piece of legislation. Then present every little piece of legislation every legislative session until it passes.

    Does this sound like a good idea? Can we get some lobby groups to play along?
    Most certainly . . . as long as introduced legislation doesn't contain attacks on due process rights (like confiscating the firearms of veterans who simply suffered from PTSD in Iraq), and an increase in current penalties for carrying without a permit, raising the age limit from 18 to 21, making it an aggravated misdemeanor to carry a firearm after drinking, etc.
    Do you think Iowa Carry will sign on to these provisions?

    SS

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Ottumwa, Iowa, USA
    Posts
    32

    Post imported post

    That's an interesting idea Farmboy. I don't really know what the result of that would be. You'd have to get one or more legislators on board for the use of such a technique. Either the legislator would pass some stuff to avoid being anti-gun across the board, or they'd get so fed up with the stream of a gazillion bills that they'd relegate them to some awfull subcomittee to die. I don't think you'd get IC on board for that, at least not any time soon. They have their own method that they think is the best way, and quite a few people that agree with them. I'm not exactly sure how IGO is run (as in who really makes the decisions about methods) but perhaps you could convice them. Otherwise, start your own deal!Talk to some representatives that are sympathetic to our cause, and some lobbyists too to see how they think the technique would work.

    Ultimately, the pragmatist/idealist, comprosmising/uncompromising, or however-you-choose-to-frame-the-debate disagreement is on method, not goals. I know from your previous posts you favor the uncompromising approach, and that's cool. I too hope that we will be able to change politics enough in the next generation that we no longer have to try to work for a seat at the table. That is a concept I support whole-heartedly. That said, I think that the way our state is right now, the pragmatist approach is the way to achieve the means for self defense for the most people the soonest.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Linn County, Iowa, USA
    Posts
    491

    Post imported post

    Ethies is right, we'd need to find a legislator to introduce any bills proposed by the civil rights community. It seems as though Iowa Carry and Iowa Gun Owners both have relationships with members of the Iowa Congress so I was thinking that relationship could be used to get any bills in our favor onto the floor for debate. I believe that the simpler the bill the less likely that anything undesirable could be wiggled in as Straight_shooter fears.

    I think that taking this tactic would also be more likely to get things passed by fence sitters and anti-self-defense legislators that want to look pro-self-defense. Get these things introduced in nice little bite size pieces so that the legislators, and their constituents, can understand what is being done.

    Perhaps introducing all these bite sized pieces at once is a bad idea. I know that these legislators talk to each other while not in session and lobbyists will poll legislators on their stance on a particular topic. There are ways to find out the probability of a single issue passing and we can use that to produce a little "package" of these issues, or keep them separate, and propose them as bills. All I'm saying is that both IGO and IC are trying to get everything they want in one bill and perhaps taking it in smaller bites might be more successful in the long run.

    Oh, and I'll add one more issue to the pile:
    - Campus carry, protect the right to self-defense of adults that happen to be taking classes at state institutions.

    I find it almost insulting that people, usually gun grabbers and anti-rights politicians, call them "students" as if those attending institutes of higher learning are children. Those that are above the age of 18 are legally adults and should have all the rights, privileges, and immunities of legal adults even if they are "students".

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Linn County, Iowa, USA
    Posts
    491

    Post imported post

    A couple more issues I'd like to see taken up on permit to carry reform:

    - Get rid of annual licenses, the permit to carry should be valid for a minimum of five years.
    - Lose the distinction between "professional" and "non-professional" permits. We have the right to self defense regardless of whether or not we are on the job.
    - Getting rid of the distinction between "resident" and "non-resident" would be nice as well. The only reason I can think of that this distinction is made is because one is issued by the sheriff and the other by the state police. If we have shall issue this distinction maybe gone out of happenstance.

    Of course getting rid of the permit to carry completely should be everyone's goal but I'll take what I can get.

Posting Permissions

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