Archive for Gun Rights
Your Iowa Taxes Pay a Lobbyist to Remove Your Right to Bear Arms (Corrected)
Posted by: | CommentsArticle written by, Michael Ware, Vice-President – Operations Iowa Carry .org
That’s right. You read correctly. Let me make this clear for you. Your Iowa taxes pay a lobbyist to remove your right to bear arms. Your doctor would probably be unhappy with me for managing to raise your blood pressure 15 points in five seconds. However, your doctor’s unhappiness aside, you need to consider a few things.
As Iowa Carry has worked to change the Iowa Code we’ve run into about as many obstacles as you can imagine. Some that were evident from the start and some nobody could have seen. It seems as if making a change that honors Iowans is something nice to think about, but in actuality much harder to accomplish. I happen to subscribe whole heartedly to the Sun Tzu ethic and I reread “The Art of War” at least once a year. Many of you are thinking “know your enemy” at this point and you’d be right on the money. Through years of watching, reading, and participating on various forums I noticed a pretty high rate of questions and answers regarding the law in Iowa. While some of this takes interpretation from a lawyer, the vast majority of the questions I noticed were those of simple Iowa Code. I began combing the legislature and reading Iowa Code to familiarize myself with the layout, the content, the means to look up and search for various code, etc. I also began researching activity within the legislature. I started following lobbying while reading and digesting lobbying reports.
Header Image at Iowa Carry .org
The ISSDA (Iowa State Sheriffs and Deputies Association) came to forefront this past session as an opponent to our legislation. The ISSDA is comprised of many county sheriffs and deputies. Of the 99 Iowa counties, seven counties don’t belong. The 92 counties that are members all pay membership dues in some fashion. The board of the ISSDA speaks on behalf of their membership. They have various committees one of which is their Legislative Committee. They employ a lobbyist. Sounds pretty normal, right?
How is the ISSDA funded? There are several ways. The members which include the Sheriffs and Deputies pay membership dues much like most organizations. Some members pay out of their pocket, some counties organize pancake breakfasts and local fundraisers to fund their dues. Primarily, most forecast their dues into the county budget and your taxes pay for the membership to this organization. Did the hair raise on the back of your neck a little? If it hasn’t, it soon will.
Let’s delve into the numbers a bit with documentation via the state’s legislative website. According to the copy of client data 2008-2009 the ISSDA spent $51,063.29 in lobbying and expenses with their registered lobbyist. To most of us that sounds like quite a bit. To others, it may just be a number. I decided to compare for myself what the ISSDA spent on lobbying against others during the same time period. Some of the names I found and the amounts they spent are surprising, so I looked specifically at some local companies many of you may know as examples. Have you ever bought gasoline? Casey’s spent $23,350.00. Do you ever gamble? Diamond Jo Casinos spent $20,000.00. Do you buy groceries? Hy Vee spent $55,401.33. Do you use a computer? Microsoft spent $13,394.25. Do you have insurance? Principal spent $22,404.97. Have you ever crossed a set of train tracks? Union Pacific Rail Road spent $7,000.00. Do you use a bank? Wells Fargo spent $44,500.00. These are some of the largest and most well known companies in the Iowa area, and they lobby for their own self interests with huge sums of money – each spends cash to benefit their financial position. What is the ISSDA spending their money for? Is it their money to spend?
If you haven’t noticed a trend here, I’ll spell it out for you. The ISSDA is spending massive amounts of money to lobby against your right to bear arms – and you’re paying for it!
I have researched the monies spent that a certain lobbyist reported. Of the $7400.00 contributed, by this lobbyist, to campaigns in 43 separate disbursements, 28 were spent with Democrats at a total of $5350.00. The other 15 disbursements of $2050.00 were spent with Republicans.
This brings me to some reasonable conclusions. The ISSDA board obviously doesn’t speak for all Iowa’s sheriffs as many counties don’t belong as members. Of those counties that do belong to the ISSDA, the cross section of sheriffs is about 50/50 with Democrats and Republicans. Did the ISSDA board report to their members how much they spent with a certain lobbyist, as compared to other entities that lobby? I doubt it. Did the ISSDA board mention how heavily weighted it was toward Democratic Legislators? I doubt it. Why spend so much with Democrats that control the Governor’s office, the House, and the Senate? Is this payback in some fasion? Over one thousand entities were able to lobby last year and many did. Of the largest monies spent on lobbying the ISSDA managed to rank near the top. If I were an ISSDA member I’d be questioning their motives and their expenditures a bit. After all, it appears as the ISSDA lobbyist efforts have taken this on as a partisan issue, when it is simply an issue of freedom.
We hold Iowa Law Enforcement in the highest possible regard and the vast majority of these good men and women support us. However there are those that
Gun Carry Guessing
support taxpayer funded lobbying and discrimination of your right to bear arms. IowaCarry fights this fight throughout an entire year on one quarter what the ISSDA spent for a portion of the year. Unlike the ISSDA we speak for all our members, as they volunteer to be part of our group. Most of all we fight this fight with ethics and morality. While Iowa Code section 68A.505 prohibits use of public resources for political purposes, it does not apply to lobbying. Your taxes pay a lobbyist to remove your right to carry a weapon. Are you ready to join the fight yet? Join us at Iowa Carry .org.
Editor’s Note: Correction – Iowa Carry has asked that some content be corrected in this article.
How Could Owning a Gun Prevent You from Getting Healthcare? (Updated)
Posted by: | CommentsWe are all quite aware that the Baucus healthcare bill passed through the Senate Finance Committee with promises to increase your healthcare costs and your taxes. Fortunately, the President still does not have the 60 votes needed to make his nationalized healthcare reform pass through as law.
There are still a number of serious concerns lurking around this whole issue. One of the biggest would be the question of just how much health care would increase
under the recently passed Baucus bill? One estimate produced by, PriceWaterhouseCoopers, shows that the new legislation could cost the average household of four an estimated $26,000 more per year. That’s right! That is $26,000 that could have been used to purchase firearms and ammunition and instead will be going to support the mandated Obamacare.
What you aren’t seeing in the news is that the nationalized healthcare legislation could very easily be refused to you if you are one of the hundreds of thousands who are gun owners and Second Amendment supporters. No matter which bill you are looking at, there will be a national database which will contain your personal and medical details. It has been reported through a number of sources that medical questionnaires have already been including questions asking if you own guns, along with many other questions that do not pertain to your health. It is the belief of many that these questions have been posed in preparation of the national database.
Reports from GOA have already alerted members of discrimination against gun owners having already occurred by the homeowner insurance industry.
“Gary Atkinson, a South Carolina businessman and Del Bruno, a Connecticut cop, have had a common problem. When their insurance companies found out that they were involved with guns, they had their insurance coverage canceled.”
“After some research, Atkinson learned that State Farm has canceled other people in other parts of the country. It seems they have — for the agents — a permissive policy. If the agent wants to cancel a gun owner, they can do so at their own discretion.”
Now, Gun Owners of America comes out with,
“…proposed healthcare legislation would compile the information of Americans into a government database. The group says that by using this data, the government could deem a citizen “medically unfit” to carry a gun.
“All of the proposals that we’re aware of would handle people’s health data that way,” said Larry Pratt, executive director of the group.
“And then you end up having a gazillion people lose their gun rights because of some medical record that someone doesn’t like, where they say, ‘Oh, that might be a danger to their self or others.’ No trial, no due process, just gone.”
It seems to me that gun owners now have many more reasons to take a stand against the proposed healthcare legislation with the potential for their Second Amendment rights to come under even greater attack.
Judge Napolitano Voices in on New Jersey v Brian Aitken
Posted by: | CommentsI have just received this update from Brian Aitken regarding his arrest by New Jersey law enforcement for allegedly transporting firearms illegally. Judge Napolitano offers his opinions on his show, “Freedom Watch”. What adds weight to his opinions on this case is that the Judge use to be a Superior Court Judge in the state of New Jersey.
I owe all of you a huge thank you for voting for Brian to appear on Judge Napolitano’s show and for having a faith in this young man as he endures this potentially life changing attack on his Constitutional Rights.
Article helping to break Brian’s Story:
Brian Aitken Follows New Jersey Gun Laws and Now Faces 7 years in Prison
Find Details of Brian Aitken’s appearance in his press release:
Yesterday, Brian Aitken appeared on “Freedom Watch” on FOX News to discuss his unconstitutional arrest and indictment with Judge Napolitano, a former New Jersey Superior Court Judge.
Mr. Aitken, a 25 year old resident of New Jersey, was arrested for what the State of New Jersey has called “illegal possession of unregistered firearms” on January 2, 2009. According to all verifiable sources, it appears Mr. Aitken was abiding by the law and even went so far as to seek the advice of New Jersey State Police before being arrested for doing what he was told—even though State and Federal laws protect his right to possess and transport his legally owned firearms.
Surprisingly, Mr. Aitken has received no local or national media attention until recently; understandable when one considers the local media has had their hands full with the recent New Jersey Corruption Sting—which resulted in the arrest of mayors, state lawmakers, and other public officials.
Mr. Aitkens first national appearance began with Judge Napolitano saying, ““I am happy to meet you because you are a lover of freedom, and a defender of freedom, although your rights in the Garden State have not been upheld by the judicial system.”
The interview was most notable due to the Judges’ personal and professional connection to New Jersey. Judge Napolitano spent his career as a lawyer and Superior Court Judge in the same state that is trying to lock up Mr. Aitken for obeying the law. Add in the 11 years Judge Napolitano spent as a constitutional law professor at Seton Hall University and it’s difficult to imagine anyone could know the New Jersey State Law better than him. “Jersey is not a gun-friendly state,” said Judge Napolitano, “I can tell you as a former life tenured judge in that State, [New Jersey] is not a friend of the Second Amendment.”
Judge Napolitanos’ expert opinion? “They were legally possessed… I’m 100% on your [Brian Aitkens’] side.”
Part 6: 08/05/2009 Freedom Watch 26 w/ Brian Aitken
Brian Aitken Follows New Jersey Gun Laws and Now Faces 7 Years in Prison
Posted by: | Comments
Brian Aitken
On January 2, 2009 Brian Aitken was wrongfully arrested for illegal possession of firearms while moving from one residence to another within the state of New Jersey after law enforcement was called to a family residence during a verbal dispute between Brian and his parents over issues stemming from a recent divorce and an ongoing custody battle for rights to see his son. Law enforcement officials responded to a dropped 911 call at his Parent’s residence. These details were provided to me during a phone interview with Brian.
The guns Brian owned were purchased legally while living in the state of Colorado after going through the normal FBI and CBI background checks to be approved to purchase the firearms. During his move back to the state of New Jersey, Brian received clearance by TSA to transport his firearms via checked baggage. Brian has an Uncle who served in law enforcement who made sure he was fully aware of the need to contact the New Jersey State Police to see if there were any special requirements needed to register or license. Which he did and was informed that he did not have to register the guns.
Please take a few seconds from your day and vote for Brian’s story to be heard on Freedom Watch with the Judge by clicking the following link: http://freedomwatch.uservoice.com/pages/16626-freedom-watch-guest-suggestions/suggestions/267495-brian-aitken
Brian Aitken was also informed that if he would wish to purchase more guns or ammunition he would need a New Jersey Firearms Purchaser ID Card. He had no desire to purchase either item and chose not to apply for an Purchasing ID Card. During his conversation with the New Jersey State Police, Mr. Aitken was also informed that he could apply for a Conceal Carry Permit, of which he chose not to pursue since he planned to only keep the firearms for home defense.
At the time of Brian’s arrest his guns were locked in the trunk of his vehicle, unloaded, and in wrapped in cloth and stored in a duffle bag. New Jersey law only requires they be unloaded, stored in a locked trunk, and stored away from ammunition. Which all laws were followed, according to statement provided to me by Brian himself.
New Jersey Firearm Statutes and Laws:
NJS 2C:39-6e:
“Nothing in subsections b., c. and d. of N.J.S.2C:39-5 shall be construed to prevent a person… from carrying the same, in the manner specified in subsection g. of this section, from any place of purchase to his residence or place of business, between his dwelling and his place of business, between one place of business or residence and another when moving…”NJS 2C:39-6g:
“All weapons being transported under paragraph (2) of subsection b., subsection e., or paragraph (1) or (3) of subsection f. of this section shall be carried unloaded and contained in a closed and fastened case, gunbox, securely tied package, or locked in the trunk of the automobile in which it is being transported, and in the course of travel shall include only such deviations as are reasonably necessary under the circumstances.”
New Jersey State Police – New Jersey Firearm Laws
During my interview with Mr. Aitken, he also told me that he was charged with possession of illegal hollow point ammunition. According to New Jersey law, listed below, these bullets were not in violation of these laws.
N.J.S.A 2C:39-3f(1) limits the possession of hollow nose ammunition. However, there is a general exception that allows for the purchase of this ammunition but restricts the possession of it to specified locations. This exception provides that:
(2) Nothing is sub section f (1) shall be construed to prevent a person from keeping such ammunition at his dwelling, premises or other land owned or possessed by him, or from carrying such ammunition from the place of purchase to said dwelling or land . . . [N.J.S.A 26:39-3g (2)].
Thus a person may purchase this ammunition and keep it within the confines of his property. Sub section f (1) further exempts from the prohibited possession of hollow nose ammunition “persons engaged in activities pursuant to N.J.S.A 2C:39-6f. . . .”
N.J.S.A 26:39-3f. (1).
More details on the Hollow Point issue can be found at:
Transportation and Use of Hollow Point Ammunition by Sportsmen
According to Brian Aitken, he was threatened with incarceration if he did not answer questions and consent to the search of his vehicle. He also told me that his Miranda Rights were read to him approximately 1 1/2 hours after his search and seizure. There seems to be violations of his Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment Rights with his case. Taking into consideration, State and Federal laws which protect a citizens right to own and transport legally purchased firearms, I would assume it safe to say that this case appears to be politically motivated for reasons the law enforcement officials and Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, John Brennan can only answer. John Brennan is the Assistant Prosecuting Attorney who has chosen not to drop charges against Brian and to prosecute his case.
I was also informed that, due to Brian not being able to afford a lengthy court battle, his attorney informed him that the prosecutor was offering Mr. Aitken only a 5 year sentence if he pleaded guilty. Brian has no desire to plead to a crime that he didn’t commit and declined the offer. I wouldn’t plead guilty for a crime I didn’t commit either!
If all of this wasn’t enough, a Judge Sheldon Franklin of Ocean County Family Court in New Jersey also chose to remove all visitation rights from Brian Aitken except 1 hour per week in the presence of law enforcement officials inside the Ocean County Family Court. Judge Franklin, according to Mr. Aitken, chose to treat him as though he were a violent criminal, even though Mr. Aitken is no longer in possession of the firearms and the charges against him are non-violent and victimless.
Brian Aitken and Son
Brian stated:
“The charges against me are non-violent and victimless. I did everything I could to follow the letter of the law; I checked the State Statutes, I contacted the New Jersey State Police… I did everything by-the-book. The Courts don’t seem to care. My son has gone fatherless for over one-third of his life because of a charge without merit. It’s time for this to end.”
I would also like to add that while interviewing Brian, he talked about his generous nature with helping with non-profit organizations and even taking time away from work so he can take an elderly neighbor to his kidney dialysis 3 times a week. Does he really sound like a violent criminal to you? I believe the courts of New Jersey are busy enough that they don’t need to be looking to railroad good citizens for legal gun ownership.
I ask that you share this story with everyone you can to help Mr. Brian Aitken find justice in this case. If you know of someone with ties to the National Rifle Association or Gun Owners of America, please get these someone in one of these organizations to help him with his battle.
Also, if you are an attorney wishing to help Brian, please use my contact form (at the top of each page) and send me your information so I can pass it along to Brian. He needs your help immediately to fight these unlawful attacks on his Constitutional Rights and Freedoms!
Listen to his story at: http://www.peacefreedomprosperity.com/?page_id=36
Subscribe via RSS
Join us on Twitter
Suggest a Story
