* Forwarded (from: PA-RKBA) by Roy J. Tellason using timEd 1.10.y2k.
* Originally from FHA (1:270/615.77) to All.
* Original dated: Tue Dec 24, 12:09

From: FHA 
Subject: PA-RKBA! Thank you NRA

   The NRA objects because the law is being enforced differently from what
they envisioned.  My what a shock! The fact that the NRA has so much gun
owner support is a testament to our stupidity.  They, and we, never seem to
catch on to the game.  I'll start supporting the NRA when they successfully
get a dozen or so gun laws repealed.  I'll not be holding my breath in the
meantime.
-- 
Keep Smilin'
Fred

Cogito, ergo armo.

"Never forget, even for an instant, that the one and only reason
anyone has for taking your gun away is to make you weaker than he is, so
that he can do something to you that you wouldn’t let him do if you were
equipped to prevent it. This goes for burglars, muggers, rapists, and even
more so for policemen, bureaucrats, and politicians." From the novel
"Hope" by L. Neil Smith and Aaron Zelman 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Raids aim to curtail illegal gun ownership

But an NRA attorney says California authorities are applying the NRA-backed
law too broadly.

By Gary Delsohn -- Bee Capitol Bureau Published 2:15 a.m.  PST Tuesday,
December 24,

http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/5697710p-6670909c.html

SAN FRANCISCO -- Dressed in riot gear, six special agents from the
California Department of Justice met in a Fisherman's Wharf office here the
other day -- it's three floors above tourists and Christmas shoppers -- to
plot their latest gun raid.

Ignatius Chinn, supervisor for the Sunday-before-Christmas mission, told
his men to go easy.  They were after firearms they believed a 42-year-old
man with a history of violence was keeping illegally.

But they wanted to do it without a fuss.

Keep your guns down, he told the agents.  Try not to excite anyone.  He's
got five daughters living inside there. Knock on his door and let's hope he
cooperates.

"If not," Chinn added, "we'll knock it down and we're going
in anyway."

It was all part of a new California program -- the nation's first --
wherein state agents try to identify some of the estimated 170,000 firearms
registered to owners who later run afoul of the law and are no longer
allowed to possess weapons.

Even the National Rifle Association supported the bill when it was debated
in the Legislature last year, but a lawyer for the organization now
questions whether the law is being enforced too broadly.  Among his
concerns: Gun owners can lose their weapons if they have temporary
restraining orders imposed on them by the courts in domestic violence cases
-- even if they're not convicted.

"The biggest problem with these raids," said Chuck Michel, a
lawyer for the NRA and spokesman for the California Rifle and Pistol
Association, "is that they net as many dogs as they do wolves.  You
have to make a distinction between the felon and someone involved in a
domestic violence dispute who may not even be convicted."

Agents and other Justice Department officials say the program targets only
those with bona fide violent pasts and that no law-abiding citizens are
losing their guns if they are legal and registered properly.

When gun owners who show up on the so-called "armed and
prohibited" list don't hand over their firearms voluntarily, agents
get search warrants, seize the weapons anyway and often get local
prosecutors to file charges.
 
On more than one occasion, they've knocked down doors, stormed through
houses, confiscated dozens of guns and rifles and made multiple arrests.

The target of this San Francisco raid, a 42-year-old car dealer who'd been
accused of beating his wife but found not guilty when she recanted her
complaint, wasn't in his tidy green bungalow near Balboa Park when agents
showed up with their own shotguns and battering ram.

After talks with his wife and a subsequent call to the man at his job,
where the agents showed up unannounced, he agreed to give up at least three
assault-style weapons.

Ten days earlier, during a similar encounter in Sacramento, agents
confronted a 32-year-old man on probation for a past felony weapons
conviction and struck gold.

A spokeswoman for Attorney General Bill Lockyer said agents confiscated two
sawed-off shotguns, three unregistered assault pistols, three unregistered
assault rifles, 18 other firearms, more than 460 electric matches, large
amounts of ammunition, a 37 mm grenade launcher and shells, 20 mm shells
and two multiburst trigger devices designed to fire multiple rounds with
every trigger pull.

The Sacramento Police Department's bomb squad was called in when agents
also found an explosive device among the suspect's weapons cache.  Hallye
Jordan,
a Justice Department spokeswoman, said the man is facing at least 29
weapons-related charges.

"The individuals we're going after have a violent past or they been
held for mental problems that make them a threat to themselves or
others," said Randy Rossi, head of the Justice Department's firearms
division.

"The vast majority of people we're going after have multiple
violations that make it illegal for them to possess firearms.  We've had
some who've been committed against their will for mental health problems as
many as eight times."

So far, since starting the new program in July, agents have arrested 24
so-called "armed and prohibited" persons and seized 259 firearms.

Those numbers would likely skyrocket once the Justice Department can find
$4 million to fund its new firearms database called for in legislation
sponsored last year by Senate Republican Leader Jim Brulte of Rancho
Cucamonga and signed into law in October 2001 by Gov.  Gray Davis.  The
bill passed both houses of the Legislature without a single dissenting
vote.
 
Once the law is made fully operational, the program would work like this:

A new database would include names of all registered handgun owners who
subsequently were convicted of a felony or misdemeanor spousal abuse.  If a
restraining order is filed and not removed, a gun owner could also land on
the prohibited list.  The list also would include people who sought to
purchase new guns from registered dealers and were turned down because of
something in their criminal background.

Those people would be contacted and told they now were banned from
possessing weapons.  If the guns were otherwise legal and they cooperated,
no charges would be filed and the weapons would be turned over to Justice
Department agents and, in most cases, eventually destroyed.

Those who didn't cooperate or had illegal guns, such as assault weapons,
would be searched and charged if firearms were found.

Police and other law enforcement officers could also tap into the database
and know within seconds if someone were both a registered owner and legally
prohibited from having a firearm.

Because the Legislature didn't add funding when the bill was passed,
Justice Department has yet to set up the database.  It has been relying
primarily on calls from gun shops that deny a sale due to something
criminal in a customer's background against a check of permanent state
records of all registered owners of handguns.

"Right now we're identifying the worst of the worst," said
Jordan, the Justice Department spokeswoman.  "We have limited
resources.  Until we get some money, we're going at this at the best pace
we can."

In July 2001, when the Legislature was considering the issue, the NRA
included its signature on letters of support that were also signed by
California prosecutors, police and sheriff's groups and handgun control
advocates.

"Without this critical information," the letters said,
"public and officer safety will be jeopardized by allowing these armed
and prohibited individuals to possess these handguns."

But in an interview Monday, Michel, the NRA and gun-rights activist, took
strong exception to the program.

"What Lockyer's doing is painting it and spinning it as if these are
all bad guys they're going after but that's not always the case," said
Michel.

For instance, someone who has a temporary restraining order filed against
him in a spousal dispute may not be someone who should lose his otherwise
legally registered weapon, Michel said.

In the San Francisco case, the target's wife obtained a temporary
restraining order after she alleged that he physically abused her, and it
was never canceled, agents said, despite the fact the man and woman have
reconciled and are living together.

"The first move of every woman in a divorce is to get a TRO,"
Michel said. "It's a strategic advantage in a divorce
proceeding."

Michel said convicted felons should be made to give up their weapons, as
state law requires, but non-felons need to be considered on a case-by-case
basis.

Rossi, the Justice Department firearms chief, called Michel's statement
"one of ignorance."

For one thing, according to the agents involved in the San Francisco raid,
their target had "a violent past but no convictions." Plus, he
allegedly possessed illegal assault weapons.

"This is a program the NRA supported," Rossi said.  "It's
their mantra that we should enforce existing gun laws and that's what this
program does.  How they can say that without having an idea of who we're
going after is really too much for me."

"Our Rights are not what's wrong in Pennsylvania"

The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania guarantees your right
to bear arms in Article 1 Section 21: "The right of Citizens to bear
arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned."

To unsubscribe to this list, send a message to pa-rkba-unsubscribe{at}yahoogroups.com

H Howard Lewis Bloom takes no responsibility for the content of the message
as this is an unmoderated list.  ***All Rights Reserved*** 

___
 - Origin: TANSTAAFL BBS  Internet Gateway (1:270/615.77) 
---