The Latest on the Heller Gun Decision--Week Eight

Fourth, HR 6691 (the flawed attempt to rewrite DC’s gun laws), everyone is mocking the bill up and now agrees it is deficient. In terms of the interstate transactions provisions in HR 6691 and the ability of a Virginia FFL to process a DC resident’s transaction notwithstanding the assertion that Virginia did not change its laws post Virginia Tech it did.

Because of some drafting language there was a question about mental health reporting and a 10 day waiting period as to non residents, there does seem to be agreement that if Virginia State statutes do allow a Virginia FFL to actually and directly transfer permanent physical possession of a handgun via sale or otherwise to a DC resident, the transaction is not an instantaneous check. I do hear that DC is now earnestly trying to fix its laws before Congress does and is reviewing my Blog posting of last week.

Fifth, I alluded to the question as to whether an Arkansas Concealed Handgun carry license allowed someone to carry a handgun afoot outside a vehicle because of the language of Arkansas Code Ann. 5-73-120(a) and (c). I made inquiries of the Arkansas State Police and others on this issue and while they stated that the language was less than clear, they view an Arkansas Concealed carry license as an authorization to carry afoot so long as the gun is not carried into certain areas (Arkansas Code Ann. 5-73-306). The person I was in contact with agreed that Arkansas Code Ann. 5-73-120 (c)(8) should be amended to delete the reference to motor vehicles and have the carry permit act as a straight exemption.

Sixth, last week I pointed out the idiocy of using the “No Fly List” as a basis for prohibiting gun acquisition. Earlier this week, Judge Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit held in a 2-1 decision held that a passenger placed on the No-Fly list seeking injunctive relief held that the District Court had the authority to grant the relief. This opinion did not address the merits of the claim. It only addressed the ability of the District Court to grant relief though Judge Kozinski’s majority opinion did point out a number of problems with the “No Fly” list.

Last, but not least – and because I am also a subscriber to Governor Janet Napolitano’s weekly E-News Report, last week there were a series of article about how “lax US gun laws” arm Mexican drug cartels with a focus on straw transactions. I tended to view some of this as hype but this is probably a real issue. The question is how one deals with this given that all of the transactions that are the source of the problem are illegal now – at least in California. The three areas of concern were: (i) straw purchase; (ii) under-policed gun dealers; and (iii) unregulated gun shows. None of these are statutory issues in California.

As to narcotics, I have always wondered – and I have often asked police officers this question – as to why people would ingest a compound that is so obviously bad for them. The answer that I get is that people have so many problems and issues in their lives that they seek escape through the use of what is personally destructive to them. If there was not a demand for the product, there would not be narcotics trafficking and yet there is. It is that demand that fuels much of the fighting.

However, unlike alcohol prohibition where alcohol had many-many legitimate uses, and certain proscribed narcotics do have legitimate medicinal uses, “hard drugs” such as heroin, cocaine, etc. do not. While I am not for drug legalization, it is obvious that what is being done is not working.

Since the mid 1980's Irwin Nowick has worked for the California State Assembly and State Senate on a plethora of policy issues, m ost notably firearms legislation. He has been described as "The Assembly's resident genius" by a former Speaker of the Assembly and is seen frequently in the Capitol hallways and offices assisting legislators in drafting and amending pending legislation.