Printed in the USA.
The Gottlieb-Tartaro Report
Issue 037
January, 1998
The Gottlieb-Tartaro Report is brought to you electronically about one month after publication. To help support the Report, and to receive it when it is current, subscribe by calling 425-454-7012 (and make sure you mention that you heard about it on the Internet!). More information on how to subscribe is available at the end of this page.
Subscribe Electronically to the printed edition of the report, and receive the news when its most current! Our online subscription for the Glottlieb-Tartaro report is available 24-Hours a day.
Also in this issue: -- HCI’s Concealed Carry Report Card -- BATF is after muzzleloaders -- How the new National Instant Check System is coming along -- Gun accidents declining -- Albania to send police for guns -- Violence Policy Center unmasked in our Page Eight “Parting Shot”Dear Subscriber,
This is how last year’s Gun Rights Battle shaped up: 1997 brought many victories for gun owners around the country. The Brady Law was declared unconstitutional in the U.S. Supreme Court and many other lawsuits are currently pending against the gun grabbers for bans on ‘assault weapons,’ ‘junk guns,’ and ‘high capacity’ magazines. In addition, voters in Washington State trounced (71%-29%) a gun owner licensing proposal.
Much more action is expected in 1998 with the phasing out of the Brady Law in favor of an instant background check and tough, off-year elections in the U.S. House and Senate. The pro-gun majorities are under attack. In addition, many court decisions are expected next year.
It was a great year for gun owners and we hope for more of the same in 1998. Our court victories are adding up - first the ‘Gun-Free School Zones,’ now the Brady Law, and soon we will eliminate Clinton’s Gun Ban.
BRADY LAW OVERTURNED: One of the biggest victories in 1997 was the demise of the Brady Law. The United States Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the Brady Law was unconstitutional for violating the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Brady Law had required a background check for retail handgun purchases. The records check results were underwhelming, with less than 2% of buyers initially rejected in the first year.
LAWSUIT AGAINST CLINTON’S GUN BAN MOVING FORWARD: Gun owners recently won standing in a lawsuit against Clinton’s so-called ‘assault weapon’ ban. The thrust of this challenge to the Clinton crime bill is threefold: first, Congress exceeded its delegated powers; second, the gun ban is a Bill of Attainder and therefore specifically prohibited under article 1, section 9 of the U.S. Constitution; and finally, the law is unconstitutionally vague.
CLINTON’S OTHER LAWSUIT: Gun owners launched another lawsuit against President Clinton and his cronies. This second federal lawsuit was filed to hold Bill Clinton and his 1992 Presidential Campaign Committee accountable for illegally applying for, receiving and spending millions of dollars in taxpayers’ money during the 1992 presidential race. Since the lawsuit was first filed in 1995, Clinton has repaid some of the money owed to the American taxpayers, but has failed to return all of the money left outstanding. Therefore, this case continues to seek restitution.
MORE GUN & MAGAZINE BANS UNDER ATTACK: Gun owners are utilizing the courts for an all-out assault on the ill-advised gun-banning schemes in states such as California. ‘Assault weapons,’ ‘junk gun’ bans, and ‘high-capacity’ magazine bans are all facing legal challenges.
GUN GRABBERS LOSE BIG IN WASHINGTON STATE: Anti-gunners drafted a comprehensive gun control package and claimed to only be concerned about safety, not control.
The so-called ‘Handgun Safety Act’ would have required trigger-locks for all handgun transfers and licensing of every adult member of a handgun owning household. There were even provisions for handgun confiscation. Early polls showed strong public support for both I-676 and the concept of “safety” but gun owners joined with police and prosecutors to defeat the measure.
Gun owners have made gains every year since 1994. But there is still much more to be accomplished, including a repeal of the harmful Lautenberg Amendment which prohibits gun and ammunition possession for people convicted of some misdemeanor offenses, passage of more concealed carry laws, and protection of our Congressional pro-gun majorities.
SENATE '98: EARLY READ
We see a net pro-gun gain of only one U.S. Senate seat, and that comes from Illinois. But there are five more highly vulnerable anti-gun seats — in Arkansas, California, South Carolina, Washington and Wisconsin.
Arkansas — Leaning anti-gun retention: The best Democratic bet to replace retiring anti-gun Senator Dale Bumpers (D) in Washington is ex-Rep. Blanche Lambert-Lincoln (D). She first must defeat attorney Nate Coulter (D) and State Rep. Scott Ferguson (D) in a March primary, but the only serious threat to her assumption of the nomination is the possibility of former Attorney General Winston Bryant (D) getting into the race. Higher Education Commissioner and ex-Democrat Lu Hardin (R) is expected to throw his hat into the ring and would be favored to defeat a Democrat statewide, if he can get past Christian conservative State Sen. Fay Boozman (R) in a primary.
California – Leaning anti-gun retention: Rabid anti-gunner Senator Barbara Boxer (D) leads all her potential of GOP challengers in a recent Field Poll, but is unable to break 50 percent. This is a sure sign of an anti-gun incumbent in serious trouble. But the Republican field is lacking, with no clear front-runner emerging from the trio of San Diego Mayor Susan Golding (R), State Treasurer Matt Fong (R), and businessman Darryl Issa (R).
Illinois — Leaning pro-gun takeover: Extreme anti-gunner Senator Carol Moseley-Braun (D) has a chance to keep her seat despite her rocky first term, thanks to GOP infighting over the nominee. Conservative State Senator Peter Fitzgerald (R) continues to oppose party-favored Loleta Didrickson (R), who recently signed up Bob Dole as her campaign chair. Despite GOP internal problems, Moseley-Braun is the weakest Democratic incumbent in the Senate and would be an underdog against Republican primary favorite Didrickson.
South Carolina — Leaning anti-gun retention: Anti-gun Senator Ernest Hollings (D) looks to be in good shape for reelection unless former Gov. Carroll Campbell (R) gets into the race. But with Senator Strom Thurmond (R) relinquishing some of his congressional duties, Campbell may be encouraged to wait for the senior Senator’s seat to open rather than challenge Hollings. Such a decision by Campbell would leave Rep. Bob Inglis (R) and Greenville County GOP Chairman Steve Brown (R) the remaining contenders, and while Inglis has better odds than Brown in the general election, Brown’s conservative base could nominate him in the primary.
Washington — Leaning anti-gun retention: Anti-gun Clinton clone Senator Patti urray (D) is vulnerable to a challenge from pro-gun Rep. Linda Smith (R), even though Smith is launching her challenge without the assistance of PAC money. Smith first must defeat liberal Republican Pierce County executive Doug Southerland (R) in the primary.
Wisconsin — Leaning anti-gun retention: Gun-grabber Senator Russ Feingold (D) will have a respectable challenge from Rep. Mark Neumann (R). His recent anti-administration stands would indicate that he is taking Neumann’s challenge — fueled additionally by Feingold’s anti-gun votes — very seriously.
A LEGISLATIVE LOOK AT THE STATES
California: the Sacramento City Council has passed a measure banning the sale of affordable self-defense handguns. The new law will likely take effect in the middle of this month after Sacramento Police Chief Arturo Venegas, Jr. decides which firearms will be banned. West Hollywood, the first city in California to enact such a ban, has been entangled in a legal battle for almost two years over the ordinance’s violation of the state’s firearm preemption statute.
Ohio: Attorney General Betty Montgomery and the U.S. Justice Department struck the deal to settle their dispute over conducting background checks on handgun buyers. In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision invalidating the background check portion of the federal Brady Law, Attorney General Montgomery declared the checks would be voluntary for prospective purchasers. Under the new arrangement, background checks on purchasers who decline to consent to the investigation will be conducted by the Franklin County Sheriff’s of Department which will be paid $5 for each check. As an incentive, buyers who agree to have their background checked will be allowed to pick up their handguns in 48 hours, while all others will have to wait five business day. According to the Associated Press, the Justice Department is now trying to reach a similar agreement with officials in Arkansas, the only state which does not mandate background checks.
Virginia: a Fairfax County judge threw out the county’s restrictions on carrying firearms in county-owned buildings as a violation of the state’s preemption law. The county had sought to bar concealed handgun permit holders from county government buildings and recreation centers.
Florida: South Florida’s gun-control crowd a led by Dade County Mayor Alex Penelas and state Rep. Kendrick Meek (D-Miami) — have teamed with anti-gun state Rep. Les Miller (D-Tampa) to mount a back-door assault on Second Amendment rights.
Unsuccessful in their efforts to ram restrictive gun-control through the state legislature, they have taken their case to Florida’s Constitutional Revision Commission resulting in the proposed constitutional amendment, CRC-167.
Sponsored by commission member and Miami-Dade State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle, CRC-167 would abolish Florida’s Uniform Firearms Act (also known as the state preemption law) and allow each county to regulate firearms and ammunition in any manner they choose — except for outright bans.
In other words, CRC-167 leaves the door open for a wide range of local-level attacks on gun rights: County licensing and registration schemes, waiting periods, gun rationing plans and taxes on the exercise of a constitutional right. Under the Uniform Firearms Act the state is the sole authority on firearms regulation. Under CRC-167, a patchwork of restrictive local gun-control would become the law of the land in Florida, creating chaos for gun owners, concealed carry license holders, sportsmen, and law-enforcement officers.
A committee of the Constitutional Revision Commission voted 5-0 to send CRC-167 to the full commission for consideration. If 22 of the 37 commission members approve the proposed constitutional amendment, it could appear before voters on the November 1998 ballot. The full commission could begin debate on CRC-167 this month.
CONCEALED CARRY, CONCEALED RISK, CONCEALED AGENDA
Handgun Control, Inc., (HCI) has released a year-end report on U.S. concealed carry laws. It contains a report card for each of the 50 states as part of their strategy to eliminate all gun ownership. HCI’s rationale for giving out grades is revealing. Gun-owners may examine the grades HCI gave to each state on an A to F scale and simply reverse them to see how each state should be properly graded for defending Second Amendment rights. Here are excerpts from HCI’s report:
“Since the early 1990s, state legislatures have been a battleground between those who would lift restrictions on the carrying of concealed handguns and those who believe that more concealed weapons on the streets escalate the already catastrophic rate of American gun violence.... Although 31 states now have denied their law-enforcement officers discretion in the issuance of concealed weapons licenses, the gun lobby lost every attempt to further liberalize the system last year. But the gun lobby is not giving up. At least 10 states have been targeted by the gun lobby for new action on carrying concealed weapons (CCW) legislation in the upcoming 1998 state legislature sessions.
“This report is a state-by-state snapshot of current laws regulating concealed-carry in all 50 states.... State CCW laws were graded for ability to keep citizens safe based on the following broadly defined categories:
Law-enforcement discretion in issuing licenses. On the grounds that local input into the very dangerous business of carrying a firearm is desirable, “may issue” states score better than “shall issue” states.
Required safety training. Grades reflect the wide differential in safety training requirements.
Thoroughness of background check. The efficacy and thoroughness of the check, including fingerprint checks, are a component of each state’s grade.
Persons prohibited from carrying. [States that prohibited those with misdeanor domestic violence convictions received higher grades.]
Prohibited places to carry. Each state’s attention to the appropriateness of concealed weapons in particular places is reflected in the grade.
Licensing requirements. This category includes how frequently licensees are required to renew their licenses, residency requirements and minimum age eligibility.
Reciprocity. [No reciprocity states received high grades.]
Data collection. Small bonuses are awarded to states that collect and make available data on shootings by CCW licensees, as well as demographic information.
Overall: Major emphasis was placed on law-enforcement discretion. Additional weight was also given to safety training, including actual use of the weapon.
1997 HCI 50-STATE REPORT CARD ON CONCEALED CARRY PERMITS
As an antidote to HCI’s efforts to poison public opinion on gun ownership, we quote from a recent USA today article datelined Raleigh, North Carolina: “A two-year-old state law that makes it easier for people to carry a concealed weapon has not resulted in more violence, as critics had warned, state and local authorities said. As of last month, the number of permits issued stood at 28,198, which is five of every 1,000 adults, yet crime rates have not gone up, officials say.” Okay, HCI, explain that.
THE DOMINOES START TO FALL
BATF director John Magaw has sent a letter and survey to select groups and individuals seeking their input on whether certain modified semi-automatic rifles are “properly importable” based upon whether they “are particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to hunting or organized competitive target shooting.”
Many of you may have already seen these items, as they’ve created quite a buzz on the Internet. This language is another link in the “sporting purposes” chain that was established by the Gun Control Act of 1968 — a criterion which is arbitrary and unacceptable. The Second Amendment makes no mention of “sporting purposes” in its guarantee of our right to keep and bear arms, and this test totally ignores other important legitimate reasons for owning firearms, e.g., self-defense and collecting.
Moreover, under this factoring criterion, firearms are not considered useful for sporting purposes unless they are actively being used in an organized target shooting event or for hunting. Translation: the BATF considers practicing for a shooting event or “plinking” — two activities that dominate the shooting community — as illegitimate for the purposes of whether a firearm should be legal for importation.
Does any of this sound familiar? It should. This philosophy is in line with Senator Barbara Boxer’s (D-California) bill, S. 70 — the “American Handgun Standards Act,” that would ban any handgun deemed not appropriate for importation — a bill that by her own concession would ban upwards of 50% of handguns in America. BATF’s latest actions, coupled with bills such as S. 70, demonstrate clearly that the anti-gunners are fighting their anti-freedom battle on many fronts.
As to the Boxer bill, Senator Dianne Feinstein’s (D-CA) recent outrage over BATF technical staff informing gun manufacturers of what modifications they would need to make to their firearms to bring them in accordance with federal law — including the 1994 Clinton gun ban which Feinstein herself authored in the U.S. Senate. Don’t forget, it was Senator Feinstein who, when confronted with FBI data showing rifles of all types are used in only three percent of homicides, noted, “I don’t doubt that at all. It is probably less than 3 percent.” We’ve heard it said on the Hill many times that “the facts don’t matter,” but they do matter outside the Beltway.
BATF CLASSIFIES SOME "INLINE" MUZZLELOADERS AS "FIREARMS"
The BATF strikes again: According to an Industry Circular sent out to all FFL holders by the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, muzzleloaders “with in-line firing mechanisms designed or redesigned to use modern conventional firearm timers do not meet the definition of antique firearms, and are therefore now subject to regulation as a “the firearm.” The issue revolves around the definition of “modern ammunition,” in which BATF classifies a primer, by itself, as ammunition. BATF thinks that if a “modern primer” is used anywhere in the firing mechanism, then the firearm is “modern,” and thus not subject to the 1898 exemption for antiques or replicas. “Primers are not an antique ignition system and are ammunition subject to regulation,” BATF says, seemingly forgetting that “modern primers” were invented in 1858. BATF is about to regulate all muzzleloaders as “firearms.”
ACCIDENTS WITH GUNS STEADILY DECLINING
“If you think gun safety is vital, join the club. The club is the National Rifle Association of America, world leader in firearms safety education.” With those words, Mrs. Tanya K. Metaksa recently praised NRA’s 50,000 instructors for their role in achieving safety and driving down fatal gun accidents.
“Check our numbers,” Mrs. Metaksa said. “Our 50,000 NRA-certified instructors are the world leaders in firearms safety. Our nationally-acclaimed child accident avoidance program — the Eddie Eagle Gun Safety Program — has been adopted by the FBI and endorsed by state legislatures and Governors nationwide. NRA-certified law-enforcement instructors work with some 450,000 peace officers annually. It’s part of NRA’s staggering investment of some $100 million in the last eight years in gun safety training alone.
“While gun ban advocates hold press conferences, NRA conducts tens of thousands of gun safety courses each year.” Good work, all you instructors.
PREVIEW OF NEW NATIONAL INSTANT CHECK SYSTEM
Most GT-Report readers are keenly aware that the FBI is scheduled to begin the congressionally mandated online instant background check system for prospective gun buyers in November of this year. Many have wondered how it is coming along.
Wallace Beinfeld, president of the National Association of Arms Shows, Inc, and Virgil Holden, an NAAS director, recently met in Washington D.C., with Wally Nelson and Theresa Ficaretta (attorney, Office of Chief Counsel) of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and with Charles Emerson, FBI Senior Policy Analyst overseeing the work of CPA, Inc., the company that is creating the system, for an update.
The NICS system (National Instant Check System) is virtually complete and will undergo field testing in a few months. When a gun dealer needs a background check on a customer, access will normally be by telephone or computer modem (you can still ask in writing, but customers are not likely to accept the long response times by mail). For customers who check out clean, the FBI intends to respond in 30 seconds to one minute, 24 hours today.
Customers who are prohibited will get a similarly swift answer. A third reponse is also possible: “delay.” It could mean that some additional research is necessary because of confusion in name, address, Social Security number, or other reasons. The FBI does not yet have a response time for delayed answers; the law allows up to three days to respond. The answer to that question is in the works.
The system can be accessed only by FFL holders. It is the FBI’s intention to issue a PIN number to be used by FFL holders and to cover only transactions between FFL holders and non-licensed, eligible persons. Non-licensed individuals cannot access the system nor can holders of Curio and Relic licenses.
BEINFELD and HOLDEN’s main concern was how to deal with the instant check system at gun shows. They discussed the need for some kind of central system at a show so one or two computer/modem setups can handle Form 4473s brought to the front desk where the show management can run the check using the dealer’s FFL and PIN number. Obviously, the dealer is either going to have to reveal his PIN number in order to process the 4473 or get his own telephone modem at a gun show. BEINFELD said, “Cell phones will work but they are not secure and putting your FFL and PIN number out on the air is risky.”
Once a NICS number is issued to a purchaser, it is good for 30 days. Subsequent purchases made at the same show do not need additional checks, but subsequent purchases from different dealers will require different NICS numbers.
The officials told NAAS that the information in the NICS computer is completely confidential. The computer will not know what guns are sold, only the names of those making purchases. We suspect the data would be used to keep track of people who are making multiple purchases in short periods from many dealers, a particular concern for the FBI.
HCI SUIT COULD PUT GUN OWNERS IN JAIL
Handgun Control Inc. (HCI) filed a suit against California Attorney General Dan Lungren challenging his enforcement of the state’s law requiring the registration of certain semi-automatic firearms. At issue is whether Californians who failed to register their guns by March 30, 1992 are in violation of the Roberti-Roos semi-automatic ban. HCI claims the March 30 date was a deadline for registration, while Attorney General Lungren contends that it was only a target, and was never meant to be a hard cut-off for registration. If HCI gets their way, California gun owners who tried to comply in every way with the law but did not submit their paperwork by March 30, 1992 could face jail time.
ALBANIAN POLICE TO RAID HOMES TO COLLECT GUNS
Reuters news service recently reported a horror story from Albania that is all too familiar in that dictatorship-stained nation. After a national disarmament conference in which it was learned that fewer than 30,000 of the estimated 600,000 illegal arms in the country have thus far been collected, the government’s Interior Minister warned Albanians that the police could be forced to raid homes to collect illegal weapons unless citizens began to comply with the law. Australia recently gave up on collecting firearms after years of citizen resistance. Albania evidently has bloodier thoughts.
PARTING SHOT
WE ALWAYS KNEW IT
A paid staff member of the Violence Policy Center recently appeared as a guest of a radio talk-show broadcast on WVLK, 590 on the AM dial, in Lexington, Kentucky.
A show called “Front Page,” hosted by Sue Wiley of WVLK, featured a debate between Susan Glick of the Violence Policy Center in Washington D.C. and Craig Palmer, a volunteer life-member of the National Rifle Association, from Louisville, Kentucky.
The debate’s topic was the Violence Policy Center’s accusation that the NRA’s “Eddie Eagle” is nothing but the American firearms industry’s “Joe Camel,” designed not as a valuable element of a children’s gun-safety course, but as a lovable, cuddly lure to entice children to become gun owners and future NRA members.
A call-in guest expressed outrage at GLICK’s accusation, and triggered a revelation that should come as no surprise to gun owners. Here’s how it went. The caller is “Mark”.
WILEY: “Mark, good morning on your car phone. Mark, are you there?”
MARK: “Yeah.”
WILEY: “All right.”
MARK: “ Ah, Sue, I believe this lady is a hypocrite.”
WILEY: “Why?”
MARK: “Well, you got her on here, she’s trying to say that Eddie Eagle is subliminally trying to promote children to use guns, and all she’s trying to do is to protect the children. I don’t believe that for a moment. I believe her entire agenda is nothing but completely outlaw the use of guns by private citizens. And I will not sit back and rest and allow people to take away my constitutional right to own and possess a gun.... There’s so many people trying to throw the children out there in the front lines to say, “this is all were trying to do,” and I believe it’s a hypocritical, shameful way of hiding behind children....”
GLICK: “Sir, we’re not hiding behind anything. We endorse a handgun ban. I will tell you that right now. We absolutely endorse that ban.”
MARK: “Now you’re saying that’s what your ultimate goal is.”
GLICK: “That’s right, and we are absolutely vocal about it.”
MARK: “You are exactly right.”
(An unintelligible exchange between WILEY and GLICK)
MARK: “So you’re going to pull on people’s heartstrings and act like you are out there trying to protect the children, when all you’re trying to do is outlaw guns and just admit it.”
WILEY: “And she did.”
MARK: “Let’s face that.”
Did you ever doubt it? Now we have it on the record.
The Gottlieb-Tartaro Report: An Insiders Guide for Gun Owners
$30 for a full year of 12 great issues
This publication is available to be ordered online! Find out how, and start your subscription today!
Printed in the USA.
The Gottlieb-Tartaro Report (ISSN 1079-6169) is published monthly by the:
Second Amendment Foundation
James Madison Building
12500 N.E. 10th Place
Bellevue, WA 98005
Phone (425) 454-7012. FAX (425) 451-3959Please call or write if you have a question regarding your subscription.
Subscriptions $30 per year anywhere in the USA, $35 elsewhere. Single issues $5.00.Send address changes to:
The Gottlieb-Tartaro Report
12500 N.E. 10th Place
Bellevue, WA 98005Publishers: Alan M. Gottlieb and Joseph P. Tartaro
Editor: Ron Arnold
Design: Northwoods Studio
Production: Janet Arnold
Subscriptions: Susan Elings
Published by: Second Amendment FoundationCopyright 1999-2002 by Alan M. Gottlieb and Joseph P. Tartaro.
Photocopying, reproduction or quotation strictly prohibited without written permission of the publishers.
Bulk rates on request. Postage paid at Bellevue, WA.