You might want to check out HB 290

[XD-GEM]

Let's hope this one can survive the inevitable media hype that will go with fighting against it. This same thing passed in Florida, and the local politicians there are steamed about it. Expect anti-gun hysteria to crank up to full volume.

 

[Gus McCrae]

Awesome. When do I need to start writing?

 

[762NATO]

If it is to prohibit local ordinances from being any stricter than state law, let's have it! Now, let's take care of the GCA of 1968 and NFA of 1934.

 

[owen502]

Looks like Florida passed similar additions to their preemption laws adding the penalties.

*************************************************
21. You can now carry your gun at Florida State Fair
*************************************************

Ken Martin emailed me this:

--

Too bad the State Fair of Virginia is private. Of course that is why they are in bankruptcy. [PVC: I stopped going years ago when they posted "no guns."]


From tbo.com: http://tinyurl.com/72n9g36


You can now carry your gun at Florida State Fair
By WILLIAM MARCH
February 15, 2012

TAMPA -- Following complaints by a gun rights group, and a law passed by the Florida Legislature last year, you can now carry your gun at the Florida State Fair.

"We have changed the policy to comply with the state law - it allows a person with a concealed weapon permit to come in with a firearm," said Charles Pesano, executive director of the State Fair Authority. "We've changed some signs to reflect that."

Instead of "No Weapons," the signs now say, "No Unlawful Weapons."

The policy changed Sunday, after Florida Carry Inc. and Marion Hammer of the Florida NRA complained to state Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam, said Sean Caranna of Florida Carry, a gun rights group.

At the same time, local members of the group complained to the State Fair Authority after a member of Florida Carry was denied admittance Saturday.

Pesano said the authority decided after meetings Sunday to change its policy.

"It was brought to our attention, and we quickly determined we wanted to be in compliance with the state law - we acted within minutes."

It's the first time in his experience, which covers eight state fairs, that fairgoers have been allowed to carry weapons.

"Since I've been here, the policy has been not to allow weapons on the fairgrounds just through good common sense," Pesano said.

The change was required by a 25-year-old law in which the state Legislature took control of all firearms regulations, declaring local government ordinances void -- an act known as "pre-emption."

But the law wasn't generally enforced, said Arthur Hayhoe of the Florida Coalition to Stop Gun Violence.

"That law had no penalties so a lot of local governments ignored it," he said. "Some local governments dropped some laws, and a lot of them kept their laws."

In 2011 however, the Legislature passed a new law imposing tough penalties -- fines of $5,000 against officials of any local government that enforces a gun control law, along with removal from office by the governor and provisions for individuals and organizations to sue the local government for damages and legal fees.

Caranna said the gun rights groups contacted Putnam before the fair and were told the policy would be changed.

"They've been violating this law for nearly 25 years, and we wanted to make sure it didn't happen again this year," he said. "Unfortunately, it did happen."

A Putnam spokesman couldn't provide any comment from the agriculture commissioner Tuesday afternoon.

Scott Barrish of Plant City, a member of Florida Carry, sent complaints to Putnam and Pesano after another member, Charles D. Bingham, said on the group's Facebook page that he was searched and denied entry to the fair while carrying a gun Saturday.

Barrish, a Republican candidate for Hillsborough County clerk of court, said he went to the fair Monday, carrying his Springfield Armory 1911 Range Officer semi-automatic pistol.

Barrish said he carries a firearm "everywhere that it's legal for me to do so," because, "I take responsibility for my own safety and that of my family and friends - law enforcement can't be everywhere every single second."

But Hayhoe said the law "has created a lot of problems, and there are a lot of people angry about it - people can't post their land for no firearms.

"Local governments can't do anything - they can't pass or enforce any law that even has the word gun in it."

Last month, the Hernando County commissioners cited the law in reluctantly allowing a Spring Hill homeowner Paul Hargis of Hague Court to sell guns from his home, despite objections from the neighborhood.

Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office Major Al Greco, in charge of security for the fair, said in past years, officers made anywhere from two or three to 15 or 20 arrests during the fair, mostly for fighting, drug or weapon possession.

He said he didn't know how many had been made this year.

 

[TheMaddMan]

The 1985 law stated that a city or parish could not enact a stricter law then the state already has if I'm reading this correctly. The current bill would give the state full and total control of firearms laws? To me, this could be both good and bad. For instance, say a BHO wannabe is elected governor and dems control everything else, what is to provent them from passing laws more restrictive then currently exist? Under the 1985 law, locale goverments could pass less restrictive laws and get away with it. Not so with this current bill. Or am I missing something?

 

[Ritten]

Under the 1985 law, locale goverments could pass less restrictive laws and get away with it. Not so with this current bill. Or am I missing something?

If a law is LESS restrictive, then why would a local government need to pass it in the first place??? That's like saying Terrebonne parish will pass a law saying it's only illegal to drink a drive in a school zone. This law will hold local governments and law enforcement individuals responsible and attach a penalty to the act of knowingly enforcing a gun control law that is MORE restrictive than what the state already deems illegal. If Louisiana were to go to a liberal state government and pass state wide gun control, there is nothing that the local governments can pass that will "UNDO" statewide legislation anyway. The only way to get less restriction is from the top down. This will make sure the locals pay attention.

 

[Gus McCrae]

Awesome. When do I need to start writing?

Bump for this question. Paging Dan.

 

[Emperor]

Bump for this question. Paging Dan.

I won't speak for Dan, but in my expereince with that dirty bunch and since most of them can't see past the free meal of the day; it is usually when they are in session.

 

[XD-GEM]

The 1985 law stated that a city or parish could not enact a stricter law then the state already has if I'm reading this correctly. The current bill would give the state full and total control of firearms laws? To me, this could be both good and bad. For instance, say a BHO wannabe is elected governor and dems control everything else, what is to provent them from passing laws more restrictive then currently exist? Under the 1985 law, locale goverments could pass less restrictive laws and get away with it. Not so with this current bill. Or am I missing something?

First they'd have to change the State Constitution. The current constitution only gives the Legislature the power to regulate concealed carry.

 

[Tulse Luper]

So Helena Moreno is a big wig in the Judiciary Committee now? Was she there last year as Vice Chair? As usual I can't wait for Barbara "Don't Cha Know" Norton's stammerings on this bill.

Will this go to Judiciary first?

 

[dzelenka]

So Helena Moreno is a big wig in the Judiciary Committee now? Was she there last year as Vice Chair? As usual I can't wait for Barbara "Don't Cha Know" Norton's stammerings on this bill.

Will this go to Judiciary first?

Administration of Criminal Justice

 

[Tulse Luper]

Administration of Criminal Justice

I was looking at the three Judiciary Committees first and miss-typed. Criminal Justice is what I was referring to. Thanks. Keep us informed please.

 

[XD-GEM]

This committee make-up seems like it might be a little less friendly than in the past.

Name Position District Party
Lopinto, Joseph P. Chairman 80 R
Moreno, Helena Vice Chair 93 D
Adams, Bryan Member 85 R
Badon, Austin Member 100 D
Brown, Terry R. Member 22 I
Burrell, Roy Member 2 D
Guillory, Mickey J. Member 41 D
Hazel, Lowell C. Member 27 R
Hodges, Valarie Member 64 R
Honoré, Dalton Member 63 D
Howard, Frank A. Member 24 R
Landry, Terry Member 96 D
Mack, Sherman Q. Member 95 R
Norton, Barbara M. Member 3 D
Pylant, Steve E. Member 20 R
Kleckley, Chuck Ex Officio 36 R
Leger, Walt III Ex Officio 91 D

 

[Jack]

Someone clarify one part of this for me, would local ordnances concerning where shooting is legal fall under this or no?

 

[Tulse Luper]

Any idea when this one will go to committee.

 

[Pale Horse]

Under current law the State has perempted the field of firearms law and has proclaimed that local governments cannot have laws more restrictive than state law. The local governments enact them anyway.

Examples please?

 

[geauxshootin]

Bravo!!
+1

 

[Ritten]

Examples please?

A perfect one is the St. Tammany trace where the parish government has rules that no guns are allowed on the trace but state law allows it. This law would provide some pretty harsh consequences for the parish government and any law enforcement officer who enforces it. It's ALREADY illegal for the parish government to make and enforce the law, but now it will carry some weight in the form of fines and lawsuits from organizations like the LSA and NRA (or anyone else for that matter).

 

[Pale Horse]

A perfect one is the St. Tammany trace where the parish government has rules that no guns are allowed on the trace but state law allows it. This law would provide some pretty harsh consequences for the parish government and any law enforcement officer who enforces it. It's ALREADY illegal for the parish government to make and enforce the law, but now it will carry some weight in the form of fines and lawsuits from organizations like the LSA and NRA (or anyone else for that matter).

I'm eager to hear any more examples. I'm planning on moving in not too many more years and if there are particular places that are bad about this I'd like to know so I can cross them off my list of potential new homes.

 

[XD-GEM]

How about this one from New Orleans:

Sec. 54-349. - Sale or transfer of ammunition; execution of forms.

(a)
It shall be unlawful for any person or dealer to sell, transfer, or deliver any ammunition to any person except in accordance with the provisions of this section. It shall be unlawful for any person or dealer to sell, transfer, or deliver any ammunition to any individual under 18 years of age and, if the ammunition is other than ammunition for a shotgun or rifle, to any individual under 21 years of age. Presentation of the documents enumerated in this section shall constitute proof of age. Prior to the sale, delivery, or transfer of ammunition to any person, the purchaser or other person seeking to acquire the ammunition shall complete a city ammunition transfer record and present valid photographic identification. The city ammunition transfer record shall be a form provided by the superintendent of police or his authorized agent. Within 24 hours of the sale, delivery, or transfer of any ammunition, the person or dealer making the sale, transfer, or delivery shall maintain each original ammunition transfer record and the superintendent of police or his designee may inspect such records upon demand.

(b)
The city ammunition transfer record shall contain the following information:

(1)
Applicant's name, address, occupation, place and date of birth, height, weight, race, any visible marks and the signature of the applicant;

(2)
Acknowledgement by the applicant that he:

a.
Has never been convicted of a crime of violence in the state, or any other state, territory, or the District of Columbia or in the United States;

b.
Is not under indictment for or charged by information with any crime of violence;

c.
Is not a fugitive from justice;

d.
Is not an unlawful user of or addicted to narcotics, or dangerous drugs;

e.
Is at least 18 years of age;

(3)
The date the completed form was delivered to the prospective seller by the prospective purchaser;

(4)
A description of the ammunition including the type of ammunition, manufacturer, and caliber or gauge.

(c)
For the purposes of this section, ammunition shall mean any bullet, shot, or other projectile with fuses, propelling charges, or primers manufactured or intended for firing from firearms. Ammunition shall not include BB's or pellets manufactured or intended for firing from BB guns, pellet rifles, or other spring or pneumatic guns.

(d)
For the purposes of this section, only the following documents shall constitute valid proof of a person's age:

(1)
A valid, current, state driver's license which contains a photograph of the person presenting the driver's license.

(2)
A valid, current driver's license of another state which contains a photograph of the person and the birthdate of the person submitting the driver's license; provided that, for any state that does not include a photograph on its driver's license, a driver's license of that state may be accepted as proof of age if a supplementary identification card containing a photograph of the holder, such as a student identification card, is also presented.

(3)
A valid, current, special identification card issued by the state pursuant to R.S. 40:1321 containing a photograph of the person submitting the identification card.

(4)
A valid, current passport or visa issued by the United States of America, or another country or nation, that contains a permanent attached photograph of the person and date of birth of the person submitting the passport or visa.

(5)
A valid, current military or federal identification card issued by the United States of America containing a photograph of the person and date of birth of the person submitting the identification card.

(e)
No driver's license or special identification card (I.D. card) as described in subsection (d) of this section shall be accepted as proof of age unless the I.D. card appears to be valid, authentic, and correct on its face and no I.D. card shall be accepted if the I.D. card is expired, defaced, mutilated, altered, or does not depict a photograph of the person who presents the I.D. card as proof of age; provided that, a drivers' license of another state which does not contain a photograph may be accepted as proof of age in accordance with subsection (d)(2) of this section.

(f)
Except as otherwise provided in this section, no other document including but not limited to a birth certificate, student identification card, or selective service card shall be accepted as or constitute proof of age for the purposes of this section.

(Code 1956, § 42-64.2)