Latest news with #Gun-A-Rama
Yahoo
30-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Citing ongoing lawsuit, committee opts to defer proposals to alter Maine's 72-hour waiting period
Guns are shown at Caso's Gun-A-Rama in Jersey City, New Jersey, which has been open since 1967. (Photo by Aristide Economopoulos/NJ Monitor) Maine lawmakers will wait to take action on proposed legislation regarding the state's 72-hour waiting period for firearm purchases. The Legislature's Judiciary Committee unanimously voted to carry over LD 208, a proposal from House Minority Leader Billy Bob Faulkingham (R-Winter Harbor) to repeal the law passed just last year that requires someone who sells a firearm to wait three days before delivering it to the buyer. However, the committee was divided on whether to carry over an identical bill, LD 1230, with Democrats voting in support and Republicans opposed. The votes taken Friday were not an absolute, but rather a request of the presiding officers who have the final say on what will be carried over. After the waiting period took effect in August, opponents filed a lawsuit in November claiming it violates the Second Amendment rights of people who have passed background checks. Earlier this year, a U.S. District Court judge sided with the gun rights advocates and temporarily paused the waiting period. Maine Attorney General Aaron Frey appealed the decision, but a federal appeals court last week refused to reinstate the waiting period while the lawsuit unfolds. Over the past few weeks, Senate co-chair Anne Carney (D-Cumberland) encouraged the committee to carry over Faulkingham's bill and kill the other proposal to streamline the committee's work and allow time for the legal process to play out before making any changes. However, multiple Republicans on the committee said they did not want their names on the record as voting against the bill. 'I'm not going to have my name on that report and follow me forever,' said Rep. Jennifer Poirier (R-Skowhegan), though she agreed it's important to carry over one of the bills in case changes need to be made. Stuck at a stalemate, Carney suggested Friday that the committee vote to carry over both bills, but Republicans also raised concerns with this approach. Committees are only allowed to carry over a limited number of bills from the first to second session, so some Republicans were concerned carrying over identical proposals would waste one of those slots and lead to Senate president and speaker of the House of Representatives killing one of the bills. 'Why can't we have a conversation on the floor?' asked Rep. Rachel Henderson (R-Rumford), encouraging the committee to advance LD 1230 this session Rep. Adam Lee (D-Auburn), who voted to carry over both proposals, said his understanding was that the committee decided to not work on either bill while the lawsuit is ongoing. Since the committee hasn't fully workshopped the bills, Lee said sending one to the chamber floors wouldn't make sense. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Washingtonians will need state permit to buy guns under new law
Guns are shown at Caso's Gun-A-Rama in Jersey City, New Jersey, which has been open since 1967. (Photo by Aristide Economopoulos/NJ Monitor) Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson on Tuesday signed into law a controversial policy requiring gun buyers to first pay for a new state permit. Starting in two years, House Bill 1163 will require those interested in purchasing guns to apply for a five-year permit through the Washington State Patrol. Applicants must pay a fee and have completed a certified firearms safety training program within the past five years, with limited exceptions. 'Gun violence in Washington state breaks apart too many families and kills too many children,' Ferguson said. 'We must put commonsense reforms into place that save lives.' Ferguson, a Democrat, advocated for gun control in his three terms as Washington's attorney general. The permit system, set to take effect on May 1, 2027, goes beyond the state's existing background checks, which also require proof of completion of a firearm safety course. Washington also has a 10-day waiting period after a gun dealer requests a background check before they can hand over the gun. State authorities will have to approve one of these new permits if the applicant meets the criteria, as long as they aren't the subject of an arrest warrant or barred from having guns in the first place. The state patrol must issue the permit within 30 days, or 60 days if the applicant doesn't have a state identification card. If an applicant feels the state wrongly denied them a permit, they can appeal in court. The state patrol expects the new program will cost just over $20 million in the 2027-29 budget cycle. Fees collected for fingerprinting and background checks would offset the cost. The system could bring in over $35 million in the 2027-29 biennium, according to the latest fiscal analysis. The measure passed the Legislature along party lines, with Democrats in support. Democrats say the law will strengthen the state's efforts to limit gun violence and suicides. The bill's prime sponsor, Rep. Liz Berry, D-Seattle, said the law has been a decade in the making. 'I am a mom of two young kids, and I'm someone who has lost someone I love to gun violence,' she said Tuesday. 'This bill is transformative for our state, and we're not done. We've got more to do.' Republicans and gun owners counter that the law is an unconstitutional barrier to the right to bear arms, which is embedded in the state and U.S. constitutions. Some critics insist the law will face court challenges in light of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2022 in which the justices ruled new gun laws need to be aligned with the nation's 'historical tradition of firearm regulation.' About a dozen other states have such permit-to-purchase systems. Courts across the country have largely upheld them. This month, the state Supreme Court upheld a similarly divisive ban on the sale of high-capacity ammunition magazines in a 7-2 ruling, but didn't grapple with whether Washington's law stayed true to the historical tradition. Opponents of that law vowed to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on Second Amendment grounds. The new permit-to-purchase law was the primary piece of gun control legislation lawmakers approved in Olympia this year. Failed measures would have restricted bulk purchases of ammunition and firearms, imposed an excise tax on firearm and ammunition sales, added new requirements for weapons dealers and further limited the public places where people can carry firearms.
Yahoo
01-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Secretary of State backs bill allowing towns to ban guns at polling places
Guns are shown at Caso's Gun-A-Rama in Jersey City, New Jersey, which has been open since 1967. (Photo by Aristide Economopoulos/NJ Monitor) Adding to the list of gun legislation before lawmakers this session, the Legislature's Judiciary Committee held a public hearing for a series of proposals about the business practices of licensed dealers, prohibiting firearms at voting places and more. Earlier this session, the committee heard proposals to modify the state's concealed carry laws that were ultimately voted down. The committee is also working on legislation that could update the definition of a machine gun, as well as bipartisan proposals about firearm hold agreements. And during a vote last month, Democratic lawmakers on the committee were split on what to do with a proposal to ban the possession of large-capacity magazines. Here's a closer look at the latest proposals and what the public had to say about them. In the spirit of Maine's emphasis on local control, Rep. Poppy Arford (D-Brunswick) introduced LD 1743 that would allow municipalities to adopt an order, ordinance, policy or regulation that limits or prohibits firearms within its buildings and voting places and at public proceedings. The municipalities would be required to post the rule in a prominent location outside of all buildings. Though local and state government proceedings can be contentious, Arford said people shouldn't be deterred from engaging in those meetings or voting out of fear of someone bringing a firearm. Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, who is also running for governor next year, said towns should have the option to regulate firearms in polling places because there is often anxiety over threats to election workers that data collected by her office shows persist. 'This may not be right for every municipality, but for some, it could be the right option, and we believe they should have the option,' she said, speaking in favor of the bill. Bellows was asked if she was concerned over this proposal restricting one right for the sake of exercising another. She said this didn't concern her, comparing it to the First Amendment limitations that already exist at polling places so as to not influence other voters. Opponents argued that people intent on committing crimes aren't deterred by gun-free zones. Working a patrol shift in Piscataquis County, Rep. Chad Perkins (R-Dover-Foxcroft), who is a former law enforcement officer, said he was accosted by two people. He needed help, as his nearest back up was 15 minutes away, when a nearby community member came out to help Perkins get both individuals into custody. After the situation settled down, Perkins went back to thank the individual who helped him and found out that he was barred from his Second Amendment right to bear arms given the felony conviction on his record from a burglary he committed when he was a teenager. Perkins has met others in a similar situation, which is why he proposed LD 1009, a 'restorative justice bill' that would provide an avenue to restore civil rights for a person convicted of a nonviolent felony after they have repaid their debt to society. The legislation stipulates that those rights can't be restored until 10 years after any imposed sentence is completed. Perkins was asked if he would support a different approach to defelonize those nonviolent crimes, but he declined saying there needs to be a price to pay to bring justice for victims. However, the representative is open to the committee amending the aspect of his proposal that lays out the process to have one's rights restored so long as it maintains the intent of the bill. The bill language currently excludes drug offenses from the list of convictions eligible for a person to have their rights restored. Perkins was asked about this and said he would not object if the committee decided it wanted to allow someone with a possession conviction to be included. Maine lawmakers weigh proposals to beef up firearm storage, hold agreements The legislation currently asks the Department of Public Safety to review applications for a person to have their rights restored by looking at criminal history and other pertinent information. The department would then notify the courts, which would ultimately issue the order restoring the right. The department opposed the bill because of limited resources that would make it difficult to take on the additional workload. While the judicial branch testified neither for nor against the proposal, a representative pointed out that there is not a current electronic mechanism for the department to communicate this sort of information with the courts nor does the bill leave room for any judicial review. While praising the professionalism of the vast majority of gun shop owners in Maine, Rep. Amy Kuhn (D-Falmouth) introduced a bill to help federal firearm licensees comply with regulations and feel more equipped to safely do their jobs. LD 1821 would require the Department of Public Safety to adopt rules specifying minimum security requirements for shops. This could include alarm systems, surveillance cameras and record retention. Kuhn said other states have adopted similar measures, but she didn't want to copy from them completely. Instead, she hoped to give the department a chance to craft rules that take into account the small business landscape in Maine. The bill also outlines required signage that would need to be posted by firearm dealers and at gun shows about background check requirements, suicide prevention resources and firearm safety course information. While proponents of the legislation said it offered a chance for differing views to work together on common firearm safety goals, multiple gun shop owners said it would be impractical and a cost burden, particularly the proposal for shops to keep surveillance footage for multiple years. Additionally, the Sportsman's Alliance of Maine argued that the bill was unnecessary because many of the requirements either conflict or overlap with existing federal requirements. 'ATF's got this covered,' said Executive Director David Trahan, referring to regulations developed by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Kuhn told the committee she was going to create a chart showing which requirements already exist in federal or state law to more clearly illustrate which of the bill's proposals are new. The Department of Public Safety, as well as the Maine State Police, opposed the bill because the agencies said they do not have the capacity to undertake a rulemaking process or enforce the proposed provisions. Though guns are deeply rooted in Maine's culture, Rep. Holly Stover (D-Boothbay) said they also pose a risk to public health, which is why she sponsored LD 1379. She referenced the announcement last June from then-U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy declaring gun violence a public health crisis. The proposal would require firearm dealers and gunsmithers to post warnings stating the risk of firearms to public health and that access to them increases the risk of suicide, domestic violence fatalities and unintentional deaths. Stover argued this would not serve as a ban, but as an awareness and prevention measure similar to the labels found on tobacco products or alcohol that meet consumers at the point of sale. She also characterized this as one component of a comprehensive approach needed to prevent deaths and injuries from firearms. However, Justin Davis, state director for the National Rifle Association, said that idea has been used as a 'political football' in recent years. He argued that Stover's proposal would deter first-time buyers, rather than steer them toward gun safety training for responsible ownership. 'That's not gun safety, that's gun avoidance,' Davis said. After asking the committee to kill one of her bills that contained a drafting error, Rep. Melanie Sachs (D-Freeport) introduced LD 411, which would require most forfeited guns in the state to be destroyed. Current law requires that firearms used in a murder or homicide be destroyed. Other firearms that are forfeited in the event of a crime are often auctioned off by the state. Sachs argued the bill does not demonize firearms, but seeks to address the difference between firearms used in crimes and those used responsibly. When asked about cutting off forfeited firearm auctions as a revenue stream from the state, Sachs pointed to the fiscal note on the bill that showed the minor cost incurred by the bill could be absorbed in the existing budget. Trahan, of the Sportsman's Alliance of Maine who also spoke against this bill, said he would submit an amendment for the committee to consider that would redirect the revenue from state hosted firearm auctions to safe storage measures. Also testifying against the bill, Davis cautioned the committee against thinking that people who want to purchase firearms at a lower price — like they usually are at these auctions — do so with the intention of committing a crime. No one spoke in support of the bill during the committee meeting Thursday. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
21-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Oregon lawmakers consider gun control bills amid legal battle over Measure 114
Guns are shown at Caso's Gun-A-Rama in Jersey City, New Jersey, which has been open since 1967. (Photo by Aristide Economopoulos/NJ Monitor) As legal challenges to a voter-approved gun control law continue, Oregon lawmakers are considering a set of additional restrictions on gun purchases that are among the most controversial measures of the legislative session. The three bills, each of which advanced from committees on party-line votes, would increase maximum fees to apply for gun permits, codify Measure 114's ban on magazines with 10 or more rounds, mandate dealers be licensed by the Oregon Department of Justice, install a 72-hour waiting period to avoid impulsive purchases and ban devices that allow faster firing of guns. Advocates and legislative Democrats who back the bills say they're crucial for public safety as gun deaths continue to rise. The overall gun death rate in Oregon increased 31% from 2013 to 2022 and firearms were the fifth leading cause of death among children and teens ages 1-17, according to federal data compiled by Johns Hopkins University. Oregon's firearm death rate is near the national average and higher than California and Washington, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But Republicans including Rep. Rick Lewis, R-Silverton, argue the Legislature has already done too much to regulate guns. In recent years, Oregon has passed laws banning untraceable 3-D printed guns, requiring secure storage of guns and allowing courts to temporarily remove firearms from people at risk of harming themselves or others. 'Every session since I've been here we've had at least one gun bill and it never seems to be enough for this body,' Lewis said before voting against one bill. 'I've received probably well over a thousand emails from people in opposition to this.' Voters narrowly passed Measure 114 in 2022 to ban magazines with 10 or more rounds and end a loophole that allows firearm dealers to sell guns without a background check if it's not completed within three business days. It also mandated that anyone who buys a gun in Oregon obtain firearms safety training and a permit to purchase a firearm. Less than a month after it passed, Harney County Judge Robert Raschio blocked the measure on the basis that it infringed on the Oregon constitution's Article 1, Section 27, which says 'people shall have the right to bear arms for the (defense) of themselves.' The Oregon Court of Appeals overturned Raschio's decision last month, but the law remains on hold after gun owners appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court last week. House Bill 3075, sponsored by Rep. Jason Kropf, D-Bend, would codify Measure 114's ban on magazines with 10 or more rounds, provide a 180-day grace period for owners to dispose of their high-capacity magazines and increase maximum permit fees from $65 to $150 and maximum renewal fees from $50 to $110. It would also increase the maximum time authorities have to make a decision from 30 to 60 days from the date of the permit request. The bill, like Measure 114, would also close the 'Charleston loophole,' named after a 2015 shooting at a Black church in Charleston, South Carolina. The shooter, a self-admitted white supremacist, was ineligible to purchase a gun because of a drug charge but was allowed to buy one anyway because authorities took more than three business days to conduct a background check. If the bill is adopted or Measure 114 takes effect, background checks would have to be completed before authorities grant any permits. A completed background check is necessary to make sure only people who are safe with firearms can possess them, Kropf said ahead of an April 8 committee vote on the bill. 'A lot of the work that we are doing on these bills mirror what I learned as a kid: how to be safe with a firearm and how to make sure that safe people have firearms,' he said. Under House Bill 3075, gun owners must have also completed gun safety courses in the 5 years previous to applying for a permit. Opponents including the Oregon Hunters Association argue that would burden longtime gun owners. 'Many of our members obtained these licenses many years ago, completed hunter education (including firearm safety), and have responsibly used firearms throughout their lives,' Oregon Hunters Association representative Paul Donheffner said in written testimony. The House Judiciary Committee advanced the bill on a 5-3 vote along party lines. Because legislative fiscal analysts estimate it would cost about $14.6 million to implement during the next two-year-budget cycle, the budget-writing Joint Ways and Means Committee has to approve it before the House can vote on it. House Bill 3076, also sponsored by Kropf and other Democrats, would establish a state-level licensing system for gun dealers. They currently have to be licensed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, a process that involves fingerprinting, background checks and an interview, according to the ATF website. If the bill passes, Oregon would join 16 other states that require dealers to obtain an additional state-level license to sell firearms. 'When gun dealers follow best practices, they are one of our first lines of defense against gun trafficking, gun homicides and failed domestic violence,' Kropf said. 'This (bill) allows us to set those best practices and standards for safety and security with our licensed firearms dealers.' A 2024 study from the Alliance for a Safe Oregon found that most guns used for crimes in Oregon came from legal gun dealers, and the average gun dealer in the state is inspected by ATF only once every ten years. 'The gun industry will tell you that (dealers) are heavily regulated … that's wildly untrue,' alliance executive director Jess Marks said. House Republicans oppose House Bills 3075 and 3076. 'These bills force additional, expensive regulations on law-abiding citizens that many of them cannot afford,' said Rep. Greg Smith, R-Heppner. 'Writing a blank check to the Department of Justice to enforce what's already codified in federal law is bad policy.' The House Judiciary Committee advanced the bill on a 5-3 vote along party lines on April 8. The Joint Committee on Ways and Means must approve it before the full House can vote because establishing the licensing program would cost an estimated $5.8 million. Senate Bill 243 would introduce a mandatory 72-hour minimum waiting period from when a permit is requested to when it can be granted. It is meant to discourage impulsive purchases, which have been linked to higher rates of gun suicides and several mass shooting incidents including the 2022 shooting in Uvalde, Texas. Currently 10 states, including California and Washington, have waiting periods of up to 10 days before gun purchases. The bill would also ban rapid fire activators, devices that turn semi-automatic rifles into fully automatic rifles, making them deadlier, such as the one used by the shooter of the 2017 Las Vegas, Nevada massacre, which claimed the lives of 60 people and injured more than 400. Early versions of the bill also raised the minimum age to own a firearm from 18 to 21 but that provision has been eliminated. The bill would prevent many deaths because of how lethal firearms are, Marks said. Oregon has a high firearm suicide rate compared to other states, 'and a significant portion of those deaths are impulsive,' she said. Marks supports finding a balance between Second Amendment rights and regulations meant to protect potential victims of gun violence. 'We should respect Oregon firearm owners while putting first the safety of our kids and communities,' she said. Most gun rights groups in Oregon oppose the bill. The 72-hour waiting period constitutes an 'unnecessary delay for law-abiding citizens who wish to exercise their right to bear arms' and could 'create logistical challenges for gun dealers and buyers, leading to potential economic impacts on small businesses,' according to Rick Coufal, a firearms instructor and member of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action who submitted written testimony against the bill. The Senate Judiciary Committee passed the bill on a 4-2 vote along party lines on Wednesday, April 9, and the bill is awaiting a Senate vote. Gun control legislation in Oregon and other states comes as President Donald Trump's administration begins to roll back Biden-era gun control measures, including a policy that removes federal licenses of firearms dealers found to have repeatedly violated federal regulations. Republican lawmakers have also introduced legislation to make obtaining firearms easier, including a joint resolution to enshrine the right to carry concealed firearms into the Oregon constitution. A group of bipartisan legislators has also introduced a bill to allow them and their staff to carry concealed firearms in the Capitol building. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
17-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
New Mexico gun possession statute withstands constitutional challenge
Guns are shown at Caso's Gun-A-Rama in Jersey City, New Jersey, which has been open since 1967. (Photo by Aristide Economopoulos / NJ Monitor) The New Mexico Court of Appeals this week rejected a challenge to state law prohibiting people convicted of felonies in the past decade from possessing firearms. A jury convicted Jeremy Romero, of Las Vegas, of unlawfully possessing a firearm and evading Albuquerque police in August 2022, and a judge sentenced him to eight years in prison. A few days later, he challenged the felon-in-posession statute's constitutionality, arguing that it violates his Second Amendment right to possess a gun. In a unanimous opinion published on Wednesday, a three-judge panel at the New Mexico Court of Appeals ruled that the law stands because there's a long history of Congress and state legislatures disarming people who are a danger to others, so the law itself is constitutional. In court briefings and at oral arguments in February, Romero's attorney argued that his prior convictions were for nonviolent offenses, so it was unconstitutional to apply the felon-in-possession statute against him. Mary Barket, Romero's public defender, also argued that the country's historical prohibitions on gun possession weren't similar enough to New Mexico's law because they targeted groups during times of war and conflict 'that posed an existential threat to the ruling government.' 'I do not think that that is similar to why we're trying to justify disarming felons, both violent and nonviolent,' Barket told the judges. The judges weren't convinced, and ruled that Romero did not challenge the trial court's findings that he is dangerous based on his criminal history of possessing and selling drugs and escape from house arrest, so the law is also constitutional as it was applied to him. While the ruling does not create any new rule about what's needed to prove that someone is dangerous, it does require that for the government to constitutionally apply the felon-in-possession statute to someone, prosecutors 'must demonstrate that the defendant presents a threat to others,' the judges wrote. Romero based his challenge on the legal standard established by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 for analyzing the constitutionality of firearms regulations, in a case called Bruen. Nonprofit news organization The Trace reviewed more than 2,000 court cases that cited Bruen and found that people whose felony records bar them from possessing guns used the decision more often than any other group. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
