Almost restores my faith in the state legislature

Not quite.

Legislative output won’t be high this session

“When you can reduce the number of bills, that’s probably a good thing,” said Rep. Ralph Watts, R-Adel. “If you put all the code books side by side and you look at the growth of them over the years, you can really relate that — as those books grow, your personal freedom goes down.
“People complain about, ‘well, it’s a do-nothing Legislature.’ My experience in the time I’ve been here is the shorter time we’re here, the better off the people out there are; the less we get involved, the less we meddle in their lives,” Watts added.

Well said.

[Sen. Rob] Hogg, vice chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee — an area that traditionally sees a lot of legislative action — said the panel took a limited approach this session to House-passed measures dealing with gun laws and other bills that seemed politically motivated or designed to take advantage of an election-year session.

 Because enjoying protections from prosecution\persecution while protecting yourself is "politically motivated" and has nothing to do with protecting one's life.

Looks like the legislature will adjourn on Friday, barring a recall from the governor.

No "castle doctrine", no addition to the state constitution, and traffic cameras will be allowed to expand across the state instead of banned.

Giving them a D- for not being freedom-minded legislators.

Traffic camera bill passes house

HF2450 prohibiting the use of traffic cameras, passed the house on a 58 to 42 vote.

It now goes on to die in the senate.

Iowa legislative update 2/22/12

Nothing... Absolutely nothing.

Every gun bill in the House is mired in committee and according to Iowa Gun Owners claim, it's all political.

HJR2005 - Adding a Gun Rights Amendment to the State Constitution.

HF2114 - Reinforcing the prohibition of local, county and city gun regulations.

HF2113 - The "Constitutional Carry" bill.

HF2116 - Removing the need to obtain a purchase permit for handguns.

HF573 - Iowa's "Castle Doctrine" bill.

Good advice from IGO to contact the leadership to get things moving. Here's contact information for Speaker Kraig Paulsen

If we could pass only one bill in the statehouse this year, I would pick the Castle Doctrine bill. An anti-self-defense county attorney or an over-litigious lawyer could ruin a persons' life after they successfully defend themselves from a criminal.

A sheriff on both sides of the fence

Allamakee County Sheriff Tim Heiderscheit comes down on both sides of the gun debate in statements attributed to him at Allamakee County Sheriff expresses concerns with Iowa's new concealed weapon permit law. After the recent passage of the concealed carry bill, he concluded there wasn't enough gun control laws in his county:

...at the suggestion of and with the support of the mayors and police chiefs of all Allamakee County municipalities, to propose a county ordinance banning concealed weapons in establishments that serve alcohol, a control that was in place in Allamakee County prior to the recent legislation, when each county sheriff established his own county’s guidelines for issuing permits.

Aparently he placed this restriction on permit carriers from his county. Interestingly enough, other permit holders without restrictions could have carried into bars but not those from his county.

“Due to public safety concerns, the mayors from all towns in Allamakee County, along with their police chiefs, requested the Allamakee County Board of Supervisors explore a county-wide ordinance prohibiting concealed weapons in establishments that serve alcohol within Allamakee County,” Sheriff Heiderscheit explained. “Due to the fact that mayors and police chiefs are charged with providing public safety for their communities, I believe their request should be examined. Unlike a Federal or State law, a local ordinance must be read three times and all objections or supporters heard.”

Didn't C. S. Lewis say something about "tyranny of good intentions"?

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity (desire) may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

But I digress.

Notwithstanding that the new laws forbids carrying concealed while legally under the influence, Allamakee county wishes it to go further. In other words, if you're in a bar, you don't need to be protected. You're on your own.

And then they have the whole preemption law to deal with. This would end up in the courts for years.

The good sheriff does make a couple of valuable observations:

It is ironic that the majority of the no votes pertaining to this bill came from counties like Johnson [County].

No mention that Johnson County is the lefty-liberal mecca of Iowa and there's no way in hell they would support individual freedoms like carrying a gun for self defense. Which is why they got away with years of rejecting permits for ordinary serfs that resided in the county.

“When I asked our representatives why they do not recognize concealed weapon permits at the State Capitol and if they would push to change the policy with implementation of the new law, they both replied ‘no’, citing the fact that they are elected officials and it could create a dangerous work environment,” the sheriff remarked. “I believe this to be a great example of hypocrisy."

An excellent point making mention of this.

But this whole thing fell apart on this:

And one final argument echoing throughout the passage of this new legislation relied heavily on referencing the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution - the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, but Sheriff Heiderscheit has a different view on that reasoning. “You do not need a permit if it is a constitutional right,” he viewed. “We do not issue permits for free speech nor do we issue our local newspaper a permit for freedom of the press. A permit is permission, and you don’t need that for a true Constitutional Amendment.”

The only conclusion I can come up with is that the good sheriff doesn't agree that bearing arms is a right. Unless the reporter butchered the sheriff's interview.

Chalk this up to "I believe in the Second Amendment, but..."

Iowa Senator Steve Kettering calls law a "compromise"

Iowa Senator Steve Kettering agrees with me that the new Iowa carry law is a compromise. Listen here Iowa Senator Steve Kettering says new gun law may change in future

The senator also agrees with commenter SeanM that he believes that the law will be tweaked in the future.

Carroll, Iowa -- Governor Chet Culver signed a new gun bill into law last week that changed Iowa to a “shall issue state”. Senator Steve Kettering says he’s been lobbied by people on both sides of the issue so they must of gotten it close to being right.

Kettering says he thinks it will be tweaked in the years ahead.

Kettering reveals the reality of politics in Iowa, damned when you do and damned when you don't.

Let's hope those tweaks are for the better.

2nd Amendment quotes

From sheriffs in SE Iowa Sheriffs: Weapons law threatens safety:

(Referring to the new law) "I still think it's one of the dumbest things they've ever done," said Lee County Sheriff Buck Jones, noting no one knows their jurisdiction better than the local sheriff.

Jones said unless an applicant fails the standard requirements under the new law, then "I think we're going to end up having to give (permits) to anybody who wants one."

I guess Jones has other rights he would rather you not exercise in his county, just because you want to.

Des Moines County Sheriff Mike Johnstone, a vocal opponent of the bill, has said the matter should have remained under local control.

"I'm all for Second Amendment rights, I have no problem with that," Johnstone said. "But when you literally take all discretion away, there will be people who will be carrying who should not be. We won't have the adequate ability to prevent someone who is mentally ill from getting a permit."

From a sheriff who hasn't read the law. All they have to do is give a documented reason and no permit. The "because I say so" won't be a valid reason. Oh and then there's that "but" again.

And ending with this gem:

"What this does, it allows someone to carry a .44 magnum into a Walmart at two o'clock in the afternoon, and there's nothing I can say about it," Johnstone said. "There's no way I can screen these people, unless I can prove they have a record or something else."

What this idiot doesn't realize after using his "Dirty Harry" reference (ha ha) is that he has no "say about it" now. If someone wants to walk around with a firearm concealed, they can do that now. Not much he can say about that. Happens all the time.

Some people carry without a permit and no crime, no negligent discharge, no one hurt or dead. Some people carry and bad things happen.

This is what a free society is all about. Not allowing our "betters" in political positions rule over us. Losing a little power apparently is a bad thing to some of them.

Looking at the lobbyist declarations for SF2739 there is nothing from the ACLU.

Sheriff's don't like the new carry law

Story County Sheriff Paul Fitzgerald said Iowa sheriffs know people in their counties who have histories of bad behavior, even if they've never been convicted of crimes that would disqualify them.

"We know individuals who may have an assaultive [sic] or abusive relationship in their family," Fitzgerald said. "Just because an individual has never been convicted in court doesn't mean this abusive relationship doesn't exist."

Culver signs law to unify gun permits, but sheriffs dubious

Either this guy is being disingenuous or he hasn't read the law (which should disqualify him for the office of sheriff). The law states that a applicant can be denied if the sheriff thinks they might commit a crime in the future or are a danger to themselves or others. (Section 724.8 paragraph 3 - SF2379)

And this is where I think a lot of denials will be placed and possibly upheld on appeal. "The sheriff thinks you might be a danger."

"Now if we deny somebody, for whatever reason, we have to give a detailed explanation," he said. "If someone doesn't know they're under investigation, I'm going to have to grant the permit."

He has a valid point here, I believe. But then he throws out this:

If sheriffs write an invalid reason just to stall the gun permit, "we'll lose in the appeal and the person will get the firearm anyway," Fitzgerald said.

So this sheriff implies that he would act in a dubious manner to deny someone a permit. In one amendment to this bill, penalties would have been enacted against this guy if he tried that, but it failed.

Iowans no longer need to justify why they feel the need to carry a weapon that could be used with deadly force, Emmet County Sheriff Mike Martens said.

"Instead of 'Why do you need it?' It's 'Why can't I have it?' " Martens said.

Currently in some counties stating a "personal protection" need would be a disqualifier, while in others, would get you right in. Uniformity in the law is a good thing.

But it all falls back to asking permission and then qualifying for a right.

Gov. Chester signs carry bill

In what would be classified an improvement, as in being poked in one eye instead of two is an improvement, Governor Chester signed SF2379 on Thursday. The great gun compromise is now law. NRA-backed gun permits bill is now law in Iowa. A few quotes:

“Even though Chet’s a Democrat and I’m a Republican, I’m as proud to decide to stand next to him for this as I was the day I hung the sheriff’s badge on my uniform,” said Cedar County Sheriff Warren Wethington. “This is a huge victory for Iowans’ rights.”

Sorry, but a huge victory for Iowan's rights would have been eliminating the whole permit process.

“That was the last of the Jim Crow laws in Iowa,” said Glen McCannon, an Aurelia resident who belongs to the grassroots gun group Iowa Carry.

Sen. Keith Kreiman, D-Bloomfield, said “people put a lot on the line” to get the bill passed.

“I think it’s a great day for the second amendment and it’s a great day for public safety,” Kreiman said.

Raises the permit age, there's still a sheriff's discretion and you have to get re-trained when renewing. Yep, it's a great day for the Second Amendment.

The only thing improved is that there is now a better appeals process for denials. A sheriff can still deny the permit but has to state a purpose instead of arbitrarily refusing and keeping mum on it.

The Great Gun Compromise of 2010.

Governor Chester to sign SF2379

It's being reported that Governor Chester with sign SF2379 on Thursday.

Culver plans to sign several policy bills

As a side note, Obama is coming to Iowa and Chester plans on running around the state with him and to sign a bill in Sioux City instead of Des Moines. Thank you Governor Debt Culver for wasting taxpayers' money this week. I really appreciate this as I sign my check for taxes I owe to state (due date is 4/30).

SF2379 still sits on Gov. Debt Culver's desk

Central Iowa Politics Examiner gives an update on SF2379 which still sits on Gov Chester's desk.

Sean McClanahan of Iowa Carry sent out an update today on SF-2379. SF-2379 is "an ACT relating to permits to carry weapons and permits to acquire pistols and revolvers including the dissemination of information relating to persons suffering from mental and substance abuse health-related disorders and the possession of firearms and providing penalties and an effective date" in Iowa.

Central Iowans - and all Iowans - have concerns over the bill. Sean McClanahan of Iowa Carry gives update on SF-2379 regarding rights to carry weapons

"Concerns" is an understatement. My criticisms have been many, but I'm sure they dwarf in relation to the hoplophobes in Iowa.

I'm still not sure he'll sign it.

Will governor Chester sign SF2379?

Will Governor Chester Culver (shown here doing his best Sinatra imitation) sign SF2379? Why should he? This NRA A rated governor might sign the bill, but politically he owes no favor to anyone on this.

I tend to look at things differently than most and this is one vision:

Chester is toast and won't be re-elected, almost everyone in the state predicts this. The NRA gave cover to some traditionally anti-gun democrats, thus putting them in a better position to keep their offices.

Chester can veto the bill, the briefly-pro-gun democrats get re-elected, and a republican gains the governorship. A near democrat like Branstad and nothing has changed. An incompetent idiot gets replaced with a competent idiot. Nothing changes.

The anti-gun pols can claim to the heavens that they were giving back liberty to the masses, current sheriffs can keep their powerful status-quo, and nothing changes.

Could this be Sen. Gronstal's plan all along?

Four years from now after the dems and repubs put the state deeper into a hole, Branstad gets trounced by Gronstal for governor in 2014?

Am I over thinking or is this from a lack of sleep?

Some clarity from a sheriff

From a sheriff who understands:

A recent poll by the Iowa State Sheriffs and Deputies Association found 77 sheriffs or deputies did not approve of this legislation. The Jones County Sheriff is one of only five people who agreed with it.

"Some people think there's going to be blood in the streets and everybody's going to be carrying their guns into the bars. It's not the people with the permits to carry that we have to worry about. It's the ones that don't,” Jones County Sheriff Mark Denniston said.

In a headline that doesn't make sense New Bill Could Change Gun Rules in Iowa ("Could" - hey factchecker, they are changing) some discussion of the new bill in Cedar Rapids and surrounding counties.

Sheriff Denniston may not understand that there are many people in Iowa who carry concealed without a permit and do so with no ill-intent. But I will give him some credit especially compared to the 77 who wanted the status quo.

Reading on we find another example of IowaCarry and Iowa Gun Owners inability to work on changing Iowa's laws:

"I think it's unfortunate the NRA was able to come in, push the legislature around and get them to go along with this,” Johnson County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek said.

The evil and powerful NRA came in and pushed the weak-kneed pussy legislature around and forced them (at gun point) to bend to their will. Maybe they threw money around because both Iowa groups run on a shoestring budget.

It's okay for Pulkrabek to push citizens around to get a permit, but oh no, not a lobbyist. (Granted, he is more lenient compared to his predecessor in issuing permits) but I don't think he truly gets the point.

And now, a few words from the Register

At the Des Moines Register, Lawmakers approve bills for concealed guns, I-JOBS

From the sky is falling crowd, Rep. Mary Mascher, D-Iowa City:

"...this kind of reciprocity, I think, is a formula for disaster."

From the bonehead status quo section:

Rep. Bruce Hunter, D-Des Moines, argued for retaining the discretion of sheriffs to deny permits for any number of reasons.

Hunter contended that it's rare for sheriffs to be overprotective and wrongly deny gun permits. And if that's a problem, voters can oust the sheriff, he said.

I guess he hasn't lived in Des Moines, Louisa or Johnson counties. Or maybe Benton county, where you can only carry while hunting.

But another view:

"This bill is a first step forward toward restoring true constitutional rights to carry a weapon," said Rep. Dwayne Alons, R-Hull.

We will have to keep him at his word and take the next step. Too bad he didn't persuade a few of his cohorts in the legislature to pass the amendment to eliminate the whole permit process.

And the obligatory NRA reference:

The bill's passage is noteworthy in part because it marked the re-emergence of the powerful National Rifle Association on the Iowa political scene. Quiet in Iowa for years, the gun advocacy group made a major push for the bill. (Not to mention their work on the disarmament bill they helped write - ed)

As if Iowa Carry or Iowa Gun Owners sat on their hands and needed the professionals to swoop in to save us.

What could have been for Iowa

For a true reflection of what the politicians think your right to carry a firearm without a permit, this is the tally for the amendment that would have eliminated need to obtain a permit. Although there was wording that would allow the permit process for reciprocity similar to Alaska law.

On the question “Shall amendment H–8652 be adopted?” (S.F. 2379)

The ayes were, 45:
Alons, Anderson, Arnold, Chambers, Cownie, Deyoe, Dolecheck, Drake, Forristall, Grassley, Hagenow, Heaton, Helland, Horbach, Huseman, Huser, Kaufmann, Koester, Lukan, May, Miller, L. Olson, S. Paulsen, Pettengill, Quirk, Raecker, Rants, Rayhons, Roberts, Sands, Schult,e Schultz, Soderberg, Sorenson, Steckman, Struyk, Sweeney, Thomas, Tymeson, Upmeyer, Van Engelenhoven, Wagner, Watts, Windschitl, Worthan

The nays were, 52:
Abdul-Samad, Bailey, Baudler, Beard, Bell, Berry, Bukta, Burt, Cohoon, Ficken, Ford, Frevert, Gaskill, Gayman, Hanson, Heddens, Hunter, Isenhart, Jacoby, Kearns, Kelley, Kressig, Kuhn, Lensing, Lykam, Marek, Mascher, McCarthy, Mertz, Miller, H. Oldson, Olson, D. Olson, T. Palmer, Petersen, Reasoner, Reichert, Running-Marquardt, Schueller, Shomshor, Smith, Swaim, Taylor, Thede, Tjepkes, Wenthe, Wessel-Kroeschell, Whitead, Willems, Winckler, Zirkelbach, Mr. Speaker Murphy

Absent or not voting, 3:
De Boef, Olson, R. Wendt

My rep is counted among the ayes and I must give her credit and thank her.

New and "improved" concealed carry bill passes

SF2379 passed the house 80-15 after they gave up on their own bill.

Updated for final vote in the house:

On the question “Shall the bill pass?” (S.F. 2379)

The ayes were, 81:
Alons, Anderson, Arnold, Bailey, Baudler, Beard, Bell, Berry, Burt, Chambers, Cohoon, Cownie, Deyoe, Dolecheck, Drake, Ficken, Ford, Forristall, Gaskill, Gayman, Grassley, Hagenow, Hanson, Heaton, Helland, Horbach, Huseman, Huser, Kaufmann, Kearns, Kelley, Koester, Kressig, Kuhn, Lukan, Lykam, Marek, May, McCarthy, Mertz, Miller, H. Miller, L. Olson, R. Olson, S. Olson, T. Palmer Paulsen Pettengill Quirk Raecker, Rants, Rayhons, Reasoner, Reichert, Roberts, Running-Marquardt, Sands, Schultz, Shomshor, Smith, Soderberg, Sorenson, Steckman, Struyk, Swaim, Sweeney, Taylor, Thede, Thomas, Tjepkes, Tymeson, Upmeyer, Van Engelenhoven, Wagner, Watts, Wenthe, Whitead, Windschitl, Worthan, Zirkelbach, Mr. Speaker Murphy

The nays were, 16:
Abdul-Samad, Bukta, Frevert, Heddens, Hunter, Isenhart, Jacoby, Lensing, Mascher, Oldson, Olson, D. Petersen, Schueller, Wessel-Kroeschell, Willems, Winckler

Absent or not voting, 3:
De Boef, Schulte, Wendt

SF2379 Concealed carry bill update 3/27/10

Yesterday, the state senate introduced an amendment S5371 that failed along party lines. This would have given the state the Alaska type of carry we wanted and Sen. Hartsuch should be commended for the attempt. My senator, Sen. Kapucian, did vote for this amendment.

On the question “Shall amendment S–5371 be adopted?” (S.F. 2379), the vote was:
Yeas, 20:
Bartz, Hahn, Kapucian, Reynolds, Behn, Hamerlinck, Kettering, Rielly, Boettger, Hartsuch, McCoy, Seymour, Dandekar, Houser, McKinley, Wieck, Feenstra, Johnson, Noble, Zaun
Nays, 28:
Appel, Dotzler, Horn, Schmitz, Beall, Dvorsky, Jochum, Schoenjahn, Black, Gronstal, Kibbie, Seng, Bolkcom, Hancock, Kreiman, Sodders, Courtney, Hatch, Olive, Stewart, Danielson, Heckroth, Quirmbach, Ward, Dearden, Hogg, Ragan, Wilhelm
Absent, 2:
Fraise, Warnstadt

SF2379

The final senate vote for the bill:

On the question “Shall the bill pass?” (S.F. 2379), the vote was:
Yeas, 44:
Appel, Feenstra, Kapucian, Rielly, Bartz, Gronstal, Kettering, Schmitz, Beall, Hahn, Kibbie, Schoenjahn, Behn, Hamerlinck, Kreiman, Seng, Black, Hancock, McCoy, Seymour, Boettger, Hartsuch, McKinley, Sodders, Courtney, Heckroth, Noble, Stewart, Dandekar, Hogg, Olive, Ward, Danielson, Horn, Quirmbach, Wieck, Dearden, Houser, Ragan, Wilhelm, Dotzler, Johnson, Reynolds, Zaun,
Nays, 4:
Bolkcom, Dvorsky, Hatch, Jochum
Absent, 2:
Fraise, Warnstadt

Many traditionally anti-gun politicians were among those voting in favor of this bill. It was sent to the house where it looks like they will consider it on Monday.

I thought amendments are supposed to make bills better

Where do I start regarding Amendment H8619 for the house bill HF2528? The bill that the Iowa ACLU is against.

Section 724.4, Subsection 4

Paragraph a. It rewords how a person carries on their own property as only "for any lawful purpose". How is that defined?

Paragraph f. strikes the ability to transport a handgun

Paragraph g. no longer able to carry at a range

Section 724.9 strikes the "only one" requirement to get a certificate of training completion.

Section 724.11 strikes the training renewal waiver, making it possible to have to re-train in order to renew your permit.

But there is reciprocity and a permit is for 5 years.

Remember, NRA lobbyist Rager said this is how your "right" to carry is defined.

(Update and clarification) Further reading of this amendment would strike the concealed carry provisions, but still allow the permit process for reciprocity with other states. If taking out the carrying portion of the bill, then maybe my criticism/concerns with paragraph f. above needs to be re-thought. Could it be similar to other states where having a loaded weapon in your vehicle is legal?

This is a mess when states define what a person can do legally and defining what your rights are.

How legislation and sausage is made

The Iowa Senate passed SF2379 concealed carry bill 44-4 and sent to the House. They have not published the details of the vote.

Looking through the amendments, it would require re-qualifying and testing before a renewal. That's new.

Gives clairvoyant powers to sheriffs:

Probable cause exists to believe, based upon documented specific actions of the person, where at least one of the actions occurred within two years immediately preceding the date of the permit application, that the person is likely to use a weapon unlawfully or in such other manner as would endanger the person's self or others.

Something's amiss?

Besides me?

I haven't been able to get into the Iowa legislature's website this evening to check in on them and find out how much damage they've done today.

I'm usually the joy-kill at any party, but I can't seem to get into the party.

Let the amendments begin, statehouse news

The state house bill for the democrats' concealed carry "reform" bill HF2528 was introduced on Tuesday and today, amendments were filed.

One amendment, H8466, requires sheriffs to destroy any gun information they may have of a citizen's weapon. Many sheriffs require a make, model and serial number of the handgun a permit holder will carry and then limit the permit to only that gun. A defacto gun registry.

Also, this amendment prevents sheriffs from collecting fingerprints of permit seekers.

No news regarding the senate version, SF2379