I hope it is ok to post this here. This enewsletter came from Gun Broker this AM.
Senators Oppose Ammo Bans in National Parks
NEWTOWN, Conn. – In a letter to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, 13 senators detailed their concerns about the impact a ban on traditional ammunition would have on hunters, the economy and wildlife populations.
"At this time, the motives behind NPS actions addressing lead issues are very unclear. Especially in these difficult economic times, this action will discourage people from hunting and fishing and decrease revenue into the Pittman-Robertson fund that funds state conservation efforts," read the letter.
The firearms industry, sportsmen's groups and multiple conservation organizations criticized the ban in a press release, calling it "arbitrary, over-reactive and not based on science."
In concluding their letter to Secretary Salazar, the senators were very clear as to what they wanted to see: "We request that NPS cease all actions to prohibit the use of lead products on NPS lands by private citizens and NPS personnel."
Signatories on the letter include:
Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)
Sen. James E. Risch(R-ID)
Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY)
Sen. Roger F. Wicker (R-MS)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC)
Sen. Michael B. Enzi (R-WY)
Sen. Robert F. Bennett(R-UT)
Sen. John Thune (R-SD)
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC)
Sen. Mike Johanns (R-NE)
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK)
Sen. David Vitter (R-LA)
Poll Shows Decline in Support for Gun Control
BELLEVUE, Wash. – A new Rasmussen poll shows waning support for stricter gun laws.
According to Rasmussen, only 39 percent of Americans believe the country needs stricter gun laws. That's down from 43 percent only six months ago. Democrats still emerge as the party of gun control, with 65 percent of respondents claiming Democrat affiliation supporting tighter gun laws while 69 percent of identified Republicans and 62 percent of independents do not support more gun laws.
SCOTUS to Hear Chicago Gun Ban Case
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Supreme Court announced recently that it will hear the case of McDonald v. City of Chicago
At issue is a 27-year-old Chicago law banning handguns, requiring the annual taxation of firearms, and otherwise interfering with the right of law-abiding individuals to keep guns at home for self-defense. The case was brought on behalf of four Chicago residents, the Second Amendment Foundation, and the Illinois State Rifle Association.
Last year, in the landmark case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms.
However, as that case concerned the actions of the District of Columbia government, a federal entity, the high court was not called upon to decide whether the right bound states and local governments. Over the years, almost the entire Bill of Rights has been held to apply to state and local governments by operation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
"The freedoms we enjoy as Americans are secured to us against violation by all levels of government," noted Alan Gura, of Gura & Possessky, PLLC, lead counsel for the McDonald plaintiffs. "State and local politicians should be on notice: the Second Amendment is a normal part of the Bill of Rights, and it is coming to your town."
Otis McDonald, a Chicago resident since 1952 who led the fight to integrate his union local in the 1960s and is a plaintiff in the case, welcomed the news.
"I am grateful the Supreme Court has agreed to hear this case," McDonald said. "I now pray that the Court secures me and all other law-abiding citizens the right to defend ourselves and our families."
Senators Oppose Ammo Bans in National Parks
NEWTOWN, Conn. – In a letter to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, 13 senators detailed their concerns about the impact a ban on traditional ammunition would have on hunters, the economy and wildlife populations.
"At this time, the motives behind NPS actions addressing lead issues are very unclear. Especially in these difficult economic times, this action will discourage people from hunting and fishing and decrease revenue into the Pittman-Robertson fund that funds state conservation efforts," read the letter.
The firearms industry, sportsmen's groups and multiple conservation organizations criticized the ban in a press release, calling it "arbitrary, over-reactive and not based on science."
In concluding their letter to Secretary Salazar, the senators were very clear as to what they wanted to see: "We request that NPS cease all actions to prohibit the use of lead products on NPS lands by private citizens and NPS personnel."
Signatories on the letter include:
Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY)
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)
Sen. James E. Risch(R-ID)
Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY)
Sen. Roger F. Wicker (R-MS)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC)
Sen. Michael B. Enzi (R-WY)
Sen. Robert F. Bennett(R-UT)
Sen. John Thune (R-SD)
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC)
Sen. Mike Johanns (R-NE)
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK)
Sen. David Vitter (R-LA)
Poll Shows Decline in Support for Gun Control
BELLEVUE, Wash. – A new Rasmussen poll shows waning support for stricter gun laws.
According to Rasmussen, only 39 percent of Americans believe the country needs stricter gun laws. That's down from 43 percent only six months ago. Democrats still emerge as the party of gun control, with 65 percent of respondents claiming Democrat affiliation supporting tighter gun laws while 69 percent of identified Republicans and 62 percent of independents do not support more gun laws.
SCOTUS to Hear Chicago Gun Ban Case
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Supreme Court announced recently that it will hear the case of McDonald v. City of Chicago
At issue is a 27-year-old Chicago law banning handguns, requiring the annual taxation of firearms, and otherwise interfering with the right of law-abiding individuals to keep guns at home for self-defense. The case was brought on behalf of four Chicago residents, the Second Amendment Foundation, and the Illinois State Rifle Association.
Last year, in the landmark case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms.
However, as that case concerned the actions of the District of Columbia government, a federal entity, the high court was not called upon to decide whether the right bound states and local governments. Over the years, almost the entire Bill of Rights has been held to apply to state and local governments by operation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
"The freedoms we enjoy as Americans are secured to us against violation by all levels of government," noted Alan Gura, of Gura & Possessky, PLLC, lead counsel for the McDonald plaintiffs. "State and local politicians should be on notice: the Second Amendment is a normal part of the Bill of Rights, and it is coming to your town."
Otis McDonald, a Chicago resident since 1952 who led the fight to integrate his union local in the 1960s and is a plaintiff in the case, welcomed the news.
"I am grateful the Supreme Court has agreed to hear this case," McDonald said. "I now pray that the Court secures me and all other law-abiding citizens the right to defend ourselves and our families."
