NRA Screws Arizona

R

RickD

Moderator
As some of you know, Tucson-based pro-gun
civil rights group, Brassroots Inc www.brassroots.org , had their preemption-strengthening bill HB2095 hijacked by out-of-state NRA lobbyist Darren LaSorte.

In order to get Governor Jane Hull to sign our once clean bill, LaSorte gave the anti-gun Democrats (lead by Senator Guenther) nearly everything they wanted. Arizona activists fought against the amendment but the Senate voted for it in a voice vote since they were too afraid of us to do a roll call.

NRA lobbyist LaSorte was able to convince the pro-gun legislators that it was a "good compromise." But as a result, we now have such a complex regulatory scheme (by Arizona terms) that it will create the very patchwork quilt of gun laws that we were trying to avoid. Cities will be able to ban guns in parks but there is no limit to what the city can call a park. A sidewalk park. A cul-de-sac park. An entire street. A complex of buildings.

Also, it allows certain exemptions only for CCW permittees. Arizona is a traditional open carry state with only 60,000 CCW permits (the rest either can't afford it or do not wish to convert a right into a privilege).

The bill also allows the cities to apply a "use tax" to firearms. How much? On what? It doesn't say. FFLs could be driven out of liberal Tucson and Tempe.

The list goes on, but I can't. Too much to do to get this bill stripped or stalled before it gets to the Governor's desk.

Why can't we have it pulled? The NRA is rumored to have told the bill's sponsor that if he did so it would be considered an anti-gun action in their rating system.

With friends like the NRA, who needs Sarah Brady?

Rick
NRA: The World's Largest Gun Control Organization.

------------------
"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American." Tench Coxe 2/20/1788
 
Isn't this what we have been seeing from the NRA for years? Every compromise is a victory for the anti's and a loss for us!! Jerry
 
My sympathies. And I was planning to move to Arizona one day.

You've hit the nail on the head. The NRA isn't even maintaining a pretense of not selling us out at this point. I can't figure what's going on in that organization, but if they keep it up we are really doomed. They are conceeding every principle and actually making things worse with their compromises.
 
NRA Screws Utah too! (Rant)

I am worried we have lost NRA, idealogically. They do not seen able to understand who we are up against and how to fight.
Between what they did to AZ, Lapierre's ridiculous statements about zero tolerance enforcement, (like we need more ATF and anti gun prosecutors harrassing regular gun owners over asinine technical laws like collapsible stocks barrel length,threaded muzzles, etc. Way to go Wayne, you play right into their hands) and their Utah shenanigans, I have had it.

I have been getting $ solicitations (and sending $) probably 2 or 3 times a month for the last year, a "neat" hat and an OK magazine. From GOA, I get solicited 2 or 3 times a year and tools I can use like updates and candidate rankings. I kept donating to NRA what I could here and there because I want to help. It seems like they spend more money on mailings than the money I can send in would cover.

Then, I read that NRA gave $10,000+ to our anti gun, tax the internet, liberal in conservative clothes governor Mike Leavitt. Who freedom loving and gunowning Utahns desperately want to unseat! I about hit the roof! To add insult to injury, I recently received an NRA letter advising me about what a great friend of the 2nd Orrin (Mr juvenille justice bill friend of Ted Kennedy) Hatch is and that they are giving him $$$!
I am livid over this. How we lost NRA with people the caliber of Jeff Cooper, Bob Brown, Steve Hornady, Neal Knox on the board is beyond me.

My money, time, and efforts will from now on be directed to no compromise groups like GOUtah, JPFO, SAF,and GOA. IMHO, these guys understand the nature of political warfare and are not afraid to stand up and fight in the politicaal arena.

GOUtah!- No Compromise! No Retreat! No Surrender! Not Now, Not Ever!

p.s. yes, I am frustrated and mad as H**L.
smile.gif


------------------
Armatissimi y Liberissimi!
most armed is most free

[This message has been edited by STRIDER (edited March 29, 2000).]
 
Oh! The anti NRA trolls are at it again.
Wish you guys would learn who the REAL enemy is, it sure isn't the NRA.

Incidentally, I get 3X the number of solicitations from the GOA than I get from NRA.

This is really tiring!


Geoff Ross
 
K80,
We know who the real enemy is, it's not the NRA (the enemy of my enemy is my friend- Machiavelli). We also know what is at stake here. Wake up man, do you live in the matrix or something?
rolleyes.gif
Have we gained or even held any gun (or other) rights ground on the national level? NO!

The CCW movement has happened at the ground level. Where is the NRA with national reciprocity? They are too busy pulling the stuff they did in AZ and elsewhere.

Notice who started this post, someone working for positive legislation.

Reread the comments in my post regarding time and energy.

Instead of going on TV and arguing statistics(even though they are on our side) and lack of enforcement, the debate needs to be framed in terms of principle and constitutionality. This is something the NRA seems unwilling or unable to do.

I get mad when my very hard earned money gets used by "my" organization for wholesale support of candidates (Mike Leavitt in particular) whose voting records are clearly antigun.

It's time to rethink the strategies and efforts which have given us the Gun control act of '68, machine gun bill of '86, the Brady Bill and assault weapons ban of '94.

As stated previously, my time, money, and energies will be priority directed to other firearms groups taking a more effective course of action than NRA.

[This message has been edited by STRIDER (edited March 30, 2000).]
 
RAE asks:

"Maybe I'm missing it but why is this such a bad bill?"

Good question. What is (was/is) up on ALIS is the orginal bill pushed by members of Brassroots. A nice, clean bill. The anti-rights Guenther amendemnt, encouraged by the NRA lobbyist to get the governor to sign it, is not up yet. It has been two days and these guys don't have the cajones to post the amended bill. Curious, eh? Just as courious is that fact that the amendment was passed on a _voice_ vote, so as not to record the names of those who dissed us.

What does the amendment say? I think that www.goa.org or www.keepandbeararms.org might have a synopis. But in short, it allows the cities to ban guns in parks which are, get this, SMALLER than 633 acres (one square mile). Only two parks (North Mountain and South Mountain Parks) would be exempted. But wait there is more. Even in those parks, picnic areas (and other areas), paths leading to such areas would be no weapon zones. Good luck as the honest man is forced to walk a crooked mile.

I don't know about your east-coasters but separating Arizona CCWers from the traditional open carriers is anethema to us.

One more thing. It permits a "use tax" on the sale of guns and ammo. Open-ended. $50 per transaction? $100? $500? It will pay for the children of course.

If any of you feel this is a good thing, you don't know Arizona, and you don't know freedom.

Rick

------------------
"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American." Tench Coxe 2/20/1788
 
I just received a synopsis of the Guenther amendment. I looks like the anti-NRA bombardment led by the GOAers helped to force the making of the amendment less onerous than reported two days ago. It might be on ALIS now, I'll have to check the actual language.

It still has the CCW exemption (which, of course, infringes on non-ccw open carriers who can't afford $150 for the process and don't want their names and fingerprints on file at FBI, with all the other criminals).

And there is a reference which _may_ serve to mute the use tax language.

As well, the language on use by juveniles _seems_ to exclude minors who are using guns safely as you and I would.

Amazing what a couple thousand e-mails can do. As soon as I find out which legiscritter softened this up for us, I'll have to buy him/her lunch.

By Arizona standards, this bill is still an infringement. But it will be much tougher to convince the critters to dump it. The main fault with it is that it will add another page to Arizona's once simple, and practical gun laws. This is usually bad for the good guys and good for the bad guys.

I'll have to read the actual amendment and re-assess.

Rick
 
Each time this type subject comes up and some of us criticize the NRA, others immediately jump to the defense of the NRA and seem to think we are hurting the RKBA cause. In most cases the defenders make the point that they don't like all the NRA does and many agree that it is compromising too much, but they defend the NRA on the basis that it is the best we have. While it is at this time the most influential RKBA organization we continue to lose our rights under the NRA leadership's actions. I would submit that if this is the best we have then we had better change it or get ready to turn in our guns in the not too distant future. My desire, and I believe others who criticize the NRA, is to either move them to stand firm for our rights or support another organization who will. It is my firm opinion that the blind support that is given by many will only result in further compromises. I doubt that the leadership will change this election and by staying in they will assume that they are doing a good job. Isn't it obvious that we continue to lose? Are you going to continue to praise the NRA while you stand in line to turn in your guns? I'm not. We need to support the ones who are standing tough, and that isn't the NRA. I continue to ask "Where are they in CA?" What is the plan to restore the rights we have lost partially as a result of their compromise? Until I see a major change I will continue to criticize them. If you want to blindly follow then do it, but don't expect me to. Unity is not always the best policy if it means unity in the mindset that we can't do better. Jerry
 
I would encourage all NRA members who are fed up with the organization's recent direction to show up in Charlotte in May and make your voice heard.

If enough of us do that, then we can make a change. I just got my card the other day, and am making my plans now to be in attendance. It's a lot easier for me to attend since I live in SE Virginia, but I know that it's important that we send a clear message to LaPierre that if the current trend continues, his 1/4 million dollar salary is all but over with.

Bottom line: We have to fight this "war" down every single avenue available to us. If that means that a bunch of us sign up for the NRA and elect our type of people to its board, then that's one way we ought to go about it.

Just my $0.02, FWIW.

Bob Locke,
Life-Member in the making
 
While there are parts of this bill I don't care for, it sounds as though it helps us regain some of the rights we have lost in the last year. It has been argued that we are regaining 95% of our rights, and it is not a matter of compromising away some rights.

That is, this bill retakes some of what we have lost. That seems to make good sense to me.

It is also notable that the GOA apparently went ballistic on the bill while not having all of their facts straight. For example, my understanding is that the 'use tax' language is actually in there to protect against such taxes being used in a discriminatory manner against firearms-related businesses. I get that from an attorney close to the action, although I can't confirm via the web or otherwise.

I will also point out that some folks in Arizona have been somewhat brutal in their attacks against other RKBA-supporters - those people that have been willing to discuss the pros and cons of this bill. RickD knows what I'm talking about. I find it counter-productive to abuse our allies in the same manner that anti-self defense gun bigots abuse us. I dislike the attitude that you're either with us or ag'in us, as well as the disparaging remarks sometimes used. It might pay to remember that next time we're wondering where all the RKBA support is hiding.

I voted for those who would 'reform' the NRA (ala Knox), and the NRA has taken positions in the past that I dislike. However, I don't care to deal with a******s who can't figure out which target is the enemy.
 
Sorry this is so long:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>OFFICIAL POSITION OF GOAZ ON HB2095 WITH NRA AMENDMENTS
March 22, 2000

OFFICIAL POSITION OF GOAZ ON HB2095 WITH NRA AMENDMENTS

The leadership of Gun Owners Of Arizona are indebted to Ken Rineer for challenging the Tucson city ordinance prohibiting weapons in Tucson City parks. It took guts to do what he did and we appreciate it, however the clarification of Arizona's Firearms Preemption bill (HB2095) is bigger than any one individual. We regret that Ken chose to leave GOAZ and is now working against firearms preemption.

GOAZ has been accused of being a status quo compromise organization, this is untrue and unfair. Your 2nd Amendment rights WOULD be compromised if we cowed to the demands of one individual. It is the position of the leadership of GOAZ that a bill that gives us 95% of what we demanded cannot be accurately characterized as a "compromise". Furthermore our position is that we MUST consider the overall impact of legislation on Arizona's gun owners. The overall impact of HB2095 on Arizona's gun owners is positive.

There has been a lot of noise made about "compromise" amendments to HB2095. This will make clear what is actually going on. A number of legislators have concerns that HB2095 would prevent a city from zoning firearms business' as they do any other commercial business. That problem has been addressed with an amendment that will prevent the cities from creating "special" zoning for gun business' and allow them to zone gun related business' like any other business. There is little objection to this amendment.

The second issue is related to sales tax. There is an amendment that will prevent the cities from taxing firearms differently from any other consumer product. The cities will be allowed to add the normal sales tax to firearm purchases. No more no less. HB2095 was never meant to affect these areas of law. There is little objection to this amendment.

The third issue is a contentious one.

WITHOUT IT THE GOVERNOR WILL VETO HB2095!!!

The "CCW in parks" amendment:

Because of a recent court case the current Arizona law allows cities to regulate guns in almost any way they choose. It is absolutely clear that it is 100% legal for cities to keep ALL GUNS out of the city parks. It doesn't stop there, this legal precedent allows cities to pass a myriad of gun control ordinances. HB2095 was written to correct this problem.

This amendment will allow "open carry" in parks unless a city chooses to pass an ordinance prohibiting it. You will be able to carry in any park statewide if you have a CCW permit. Many cities will choose not to regulate open carry, although some will. Regardless, you will be able to carry in a park if you have a CCW permit. Period. The cities will be forbidden from prohibiting CCW permit holders from carrying in parks.

Now, let's exercise a little logic here:

1) It is currently illegal to carry a gun openly or concealed in a park in some cities with or without a CCW permit.

2) The so called "CCW amendment" to HB2095 will prevent the cities from denying your right to carry in a park if you have a CCW permit.

Under scenario number 1 : NO GUNS IN PARKS! PERIOD!

Under scenario number 2 : GUNS ARE ALLOWED IN PARKS!

This is not perfect but it is a 95% WIN for gun owners. There is no way to consider this a loss for gun owners. Anyone who does that is twisting the truth. But...

A VETO BY THE GOVERNOR IS A 100% WIN FOR ANTI-GUN FORCES!

Furthermore HB2095 will prevent the cities & counties from the following: Gun "Buyback" Schemes, "Assault Weapon" Bans, Gun Show Bans, "Saturday Night Special" Bans, "Junk Gun" Bans, Other Carry Prohibitions, and a myriad of ordinances anti-gun politicians are certain to dream up.

We would much rather have a "clean" bill pass without this amendment. We would rather have any type of carry allowed in parks. As a matter of fact we would like it if you didn't need a permit to carry concealed or openly anywhere in the country.

But without the amendment the Governor WILL VETO THE BILL.

HB2095 in this form offers gun owners the ironclad protections that were intended by the original firearms preemption statute. This is an opportunity to use incrementalism against the anti's to take some of our rights back.[/quote]

It appears by this text that open carry is restricted by local laws, and CCW is also restricted. I have mixed feelings on putting CCW ahead of any type of carry, since it always boils down to a loss in the end of the right to bear, but not to keep arms.

FWIW, Arizona is one place I am considering a future move to, thus my interest.
 
Does that mean that if I have my CCW, I can carry openly in the park?
biggrin.gif


------------------
John/az

"The middle of the road between the extremes of good and evil, is evil. When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!
 
Strider, you and your buddies plesae, please quit the NRA and go off to fight the battle by yourselves. Go join Neal Knox, he really has influence.

If we loose our fight, it will be because of the infighting and comments like the title of this thread.

Damn right I will defend the NRA, they are all we have! If you can't see this, than you are not worth the time it takes to argue with you!

Geoff Ross
 
Ummm....what Jerry and Bob said.

Geoff, please reread my posts.
smile.gif

If we lose this fight, it will be because not enough of us acted smart enough, soon enough and diligently enough. Not because some of us pointed out tactical errors and/ or tried to fix them.
If NRA is all we've got (and it is not) we are in big trouble.
Compromise is killing the Second Amendment and the rest of the Constitution with it.

------------------
Armatissimi y Liberissimi!
 
Well, that was an interesting letter in defense of HB 2095. Written by GOAZ, huh? So just who might the "Gun Owners of Arizona" be? Are the subsidiaries of Gun Owners of America?

No. GOA has come out against this bill.

Nope, GOAZ has as its leader, Todd Rathner, from Tucson, an NRA board member. Would you like to know where its phone bank is located? In the offices of Sandy Frommen, NRA 2nd VP. What about the other members? They all resigned when GOAZ went down the compromiser path.

Why did they quit? Not for the "95%" of the good stuff but for the 5% of the bad which includes the key to the very patchwork quilt we were trying to avoid in the first place. The ban of non CCW carry in parks will be abused by the cities. Count on it. I know them. The original bill was just a couple of word changes in a law that was only a couple of sentences long. Just the amendment would take up a full page in Arizona Revised Code. How long will it take the lawyers and courts to fanagle all of that against the gun owners?

Not long.

Current status of the bill....a hold was put on the bill from both parties' caucus. The pressure is getting to them.

Now, if we can get them to delete some of the more offensive clauses...

"Offensive," you say? This is Arizona, not New Jersey.

Rick

------------------
"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American." Tench Coxe 2/20/1788
 
K80Geoff,
No, I am neither going anyplace nor am I going to follow the NRA over the cliff. I believe the real enemies of the NRA and RKBA are those who will blindly follow and not challenge a losing strategy. Emotionalism isn't going to win the battle for us. Only a well thought out strategy and the determination to see it through will win. I noted last night on the news the discussion about the Maryland bill passed by their Senate. The question was asked of the commentator about the NRA. His answer was that they were too little too late. That their strategy was wrong. I didn't get in on the beginning so I don't have all the details. However, his answer is what I observe all too often. I continue to believe that the NRA is on the wrong track. I will just ask "Are you better off now than you were when Clinton took office or are you worse off in RKBA?" If you are satisfied to continue to lose inch by inch then have at it, but I am not and neither are the others who are critical of the NRA and call attention to their deficiences. I have been in this battle for almost half a century and I don't intend to start compromising now regardless of any flame I might be subject to. Best regards, Jerry
 
"The question was asked of the commentator about the NRA. His answer was that they were too little too late."

That is why it is important to have strong local and state organizations and not rely on the distant NRA. You don't put much faith in the federal government with their elites so far away, why would you have any faith in the NRA to come in on time?

State organizations fight the big and especially, the little battles that are well under the NRA's radar screen.

And if NRA does show up, be careful what you wish for....

Rick
 
Rick,
You are correct. Here in NM the NRA doesn't appear to be the least interested in CCW. I realize it is probably not going to happen here regardless, but I never am aware of any action by the state of national organization regarding this issue. Jerry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top