Olympia Considering End to Department of Fish & Wildlife!

The NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) just issued this bulletin today regarding the proposed dissolution of the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife and an absorbtion of their responsibilities into the Washington Department of Natural Resources. This would be devastating to the interests of Hunters, Fishermen, Shooting Sports Enthusiasts and others who enjoy outdoor activities as the WA DNR has repeatedly shown apathy towards the interests of the outdoor oriented public in their policies. Please contact your State Representatives and let them know that you do not support the dissolution of the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife!

Olympia Considering End to Department of Fish & Wildlife!
Hunters and Sportsmen MUST Contact their Legislators Immediately!

The Senate budget released this week would zero out the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) budget and transfer all WDFW functions to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) in a merger of the two agencies. Further, it would reduce by $10.5 million the amount spent on the functions that have been handled by WDFW.

To those involved in the shooting sports, the net result of such a transfer of authority would likely be devastating. Gun owners and sportsmen have been fighting DNR for years with regard to shooting and hunting on DNR land. Leadership in DNR is, at best, indifferent to the interests of sportsmen and, more likely, hostile and antagonistic.

The majority of hunters and sportsmen in Washington State agreed last year to surcharges on their licenses to keep important WDFW functions in place. Every hunting (and fishing) program and every dedicated fund is at risk for reduction or termination. Sportsmen’s support of the department could be wiped out if the Senate Budget is allowed to advance with the merger language in it.

It is critical that hunters and sportsmen contact the members of the Senate Ways & Means Committee immediately! Tell them to OPPOSE THE MERGER OF WDFW INTO DNR! Please leave messages for your Senator and Representatives, as well.

Following are the email addresses for the 22 members of the Senate Ways & Means Committee, including Senator Rodney Tom who is the author of the merger effort:

State Senator Margarita Prentice (Chair) - prentice.margarita@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Karen Fraser (Vice-Chair, Capital Budget) - fraser.karen@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Rodney Tom (Vice Chair, Operating Budget) -tom.rodney@leg.wa.gov

State Senator Joseph Zarelli (Ranking Minority) - zarelli.joseph@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Dale Brandland - brandland.dale@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Mike Carrell - carrell.michael@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Darlene Fairley - fairley.darlene@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Mike Hewitt - hewitt.mike@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Steve Hobbs - hobbs.steve@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Jim Honeyford - honeyford.jim@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Karen Keiser - keiser.karen@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Adam Kline - kline.adam@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Jeanne Kohl-Welles - kohl-welles.jeanne@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Joe McDermott - mcdermott.joe@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Ed Murray - murray.edward@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Eric Oemig - oemig.eric@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Linda Evans Parlette - parlette.linda@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Cheryl Pflug - pflug.cheryl@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Craig Pridemore - pridemore.craig@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Debbie Regala - regala.debbie@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Phil Rockefeller - rockefeller.phil@leg.wa.gov
State Senator Mark Schoesler - schoesler.mark@leg.wa.gov

Your Senator and his or her email address can be found here:
https://dlr.leg.wa.gov/MemberEmail/Default.aspx?Chamber=S

The toll-free Legislative Hotline number for those wanting to leave a phone message for their legislators is (800)562-6000.

Please call and email these legislators immediately! A Ways & Means vote on the Senate Budget with the merger language could occur as early as tomorrow morning.

Source: NRA-ILA http://www.nraila.org

Yet Another Case Demonstrating Why You Need Training If You Are Going To Keep A Firearm For Personal Defense

This story from the Pensicola area of the Florida Panhandle illustrates an unlawful use of force by residents against newspaper deliverymen who the residents believed to be burglars.

Armed citizens must remember that the use of deadly force is only justified when the person using that force reasonably believes that his/her aggressor is presenting imminent force which could result in the death or serious bodily injury to the armed citizen or a third person.

Mistaken ID: Man, Neighbor Chase Down, Shoot At Newspaper Delivery Men

February 24, 2010

An Escambia man and his neighbor ended up chasing down and shooting at three newspaper delivery men this morning thinking they were actually burglars.

Sgt. Ted Roy, spokesperson for the Escambia County Sheriff’s Office, describes what happened:

“At approximately 3:45 a.m., Escambia Deputies responded to a shots fired disturbance in the 5500 block of Turkey Rd. While en route information was being received that a white vehicle was being chased by a pick up truck and an SUV. When deputies arrived they observed three vehicles running in an open field. Deputies secured the vehicles and then observed several people within the field.

“All parties were secured and the following information obtained from the resident at the Turkey Road address: Douglas Weinberg stated that his wife woke him and stated that she observed someone inside the back yard creeping along the fence. Weinberg stated he armed himself with his black semi-automatic handgun and
exited his residence to see a white colored vehicle exit a side street one house from his. Weinberg stated his neighbors began exiting their residences due to the commotion.

“Weinberg’s neighbor, Jerry Stefani exited his residence with a revolver firearm and observed Weinberg yelling at a white vehicle. Stefani entered his pick up truck, picked up Weinberg and began chasing the white car. Another neighbor had entered his vehicle and tried to follow Weinberg and Stefani.

“Weinberg and Stefani pursued the white car, occupied by three people into an open field on Turkey Rd. The three occupants, later identified Dylan Duffewn (19), David Crittenden (32), and Daniel Hayes (22) got the car stuck in the mud in the open field and fled on foot due to Weinberg and Stefani being armed. Weinberg and Stefani then fired several rounds at the three fleeing occupants and into the air in an attempt to stop them from running into the woods. Victim/Duffewn stopped and laid down out of fear of being shot and the other two continued into the woods. Investigation revealed that Weinberg and Stefani had exited their residences with the above described handguns.

“The three occupants of the white vehicle were actually delivering newspapers for the Pensacola News Journal and were not involved in the attempted burglary at the Weinberg residence and fled only because they observed the two homeowners armed with guns and believed they were about to become the victims of a robbery.

“The actual burglars were not apprehended and left the area in the confusion. The Sheriff’s Office is investigating that case and has developed suspect information.
“Warrant Affidavits have been sent off for judicial review charging both Weinberg and Stefani with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon without intent to kill.”

Source: North Escambia.com http://www.northescambia.com/?p=14917

Even the police are prevented from using deadly force against unarmed fleeing felons who do not pose an imminent serious threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or public. This principle is established by the U.S. Supreme Court Case of Tennessee v. Garner.

U.S. Supreme Court

Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)

Tennessee v. Garner

No. 83-1035

Argued October 30, 1984 Decided March 27, 1985*

471 U.S. 1

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
SIXTH CIRCUIT

Summary

A Tennessee statute provides that, if, after a police officer has given notice of an intent to arrest a criminal suspect, the suspect flees or forcibly resists, "the officer may use all the necessary means to effect the arrest." Acting under the authority of this statute, a Memphis police officer shot and killed appellee-respondent Garner's son as, after being told to halt, the son fled over a fence at night in the backyard of a house he was suspected of burglarizing. The officer used deadly force despite being "reasonably sure" the suspect was unarmed and thinking that he was 17 or 18 years old, and of slight build. The father subsequently brought an action in Federal District Court, seeking damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for asserted violations of his son's constitutional rights. The District Court held that the statute and the officer's actions were constitutional. The Court of Appeals reversed.

Held: The Tennessee statute is unconstitutional insofar as it authorizes the use of deadly force against, as in this case, an apparently unarmed, nondangerous fleeing suspect; such force may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others. Pp. 497 U. S. 7-22.

States Loosening Gun Laws

This is a step in the right direction. Bear in mind that the New York Times has a political slant, but if you can get past that, there is some encouraging information in the story.

Fearing Obama Agenda, States Push to Loosen Gun Laws

When President Obama took office, gun rights advocates sounded the alarm, warning that he intended to strip them of their arms and ammunition.

And yet the opposite is happening. Mr. Obama has been largely silent on the issue while states are engaged in a new and largely successful push for expanded gun rights, even passing measures that have been rejected in the past.

In Virginia, the General Assembly approved a bill last week that allows people to carry concealed weapons in bars and restaurants that serve alcohol, and the House of Delegates voted to repeal a 17-year-old ban on buying more than one handgun a month. The actions came less than three years after the shootings at Virginia Tech that claimed 33 lives and prompted a major national push for increased gun control.
Arizona and Wyoming lawmakers are considering nearly a half dozen pro-gun measures, including one that would allow residents to carry concealed weapons without a permit. And lawmakers in Montana and Tennessee passed measures last year — the first of their kind — to exempt their states from federal regulation of firearms and ammunition that are made, sold and used in state. Similar bills have been proposed in at least three other states.

In the meantime, gun control advocates say, Mr. Obama has failed to deliver on campaign promises to close a loophole that allows unlicensed dealers at gun shows to sell firearms without background checks; to revive the assault weapons ban; and to push states to release data about guns used in crimes.

He also signed bills last year allowing guns to be carried in national parks and in luggage on Amtrak trains.

“We expected a very different picture at this stage,” said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, a gun control group that last month issued a report card failing the administration in all seven of the group’s major indicators.

Gun control advocates have had some successes recently, Mr. Helmke said. Proposed bills to allow students to carry guns on college campuses have been blocked in the 20 or so states where they have been proposed since the Virginia Tech shootings. Last year, New Jersey limited gun purchases to one a month, a law similar to the one Virginia may revoke.

But recent setbacks to gun control have been many.

For the rest of the article please see the full New York Times story at the following link http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/24/us/24guns.html?th&emc=th

Washington State Supreme Court Incorporates 2nd Amendment into the 14th Amendment

I'd have never thought that the Washington State Supreme Court would have declared that the 2nd Amendment is applicable to the states and that it is an individual right that should not be interfered with by the government, but it just happened!

WA Supreme Court: ‘2nd Amendment applies to the states via 14th Amendment due process clause’

February 18, 11:28 AM Seattle Gun Rights Examiner Dave Workman

The Washington State Supreme Court delivered a haymaker to anti-gunners – and strong reinforcement to gun rights advocates – Thursday morning when it handed down an opinion in the case of State v. Sieyes that states bluntly, “We hold the Second Amendment applies to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause.”

The majority opinion, written by Justice Richard B. Sanders, was signed by five other justices including Chief Justice Barbara A. Madsen, with a (sort-of) concurring opinion from Justice Debra L. Stephens that takes issue with the incorporation premise, and a partly-concurring and partly-dissenting opinion from Justice James M. Johnson that argues the majority ruling isn’t strong enough.

Although the issue of incorporation is at the heart of McDonald v. Chicago, the Second Amendment Foundation's case now before the United States Supreme Court for which oral arguments are scheduled March 2, Sanders notes in his majority state-level opinion that even though the high court “did not expressly consider incorporation of the right to bear arms” in the June 2008 Heller ruling, “that need not stop the rest of us.” He maintains that lower courts “need not wait for the Supreme Court” on the question of incorporation. (Read more about the McDonald case here.)

UPDATE: Naturally, the Associated Press story that now appears in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer does not mention any of this. The story merely alludes to the court's rejection of the notion that Sieyes' arrest and conviction violated his constitutional rights.

To read the full article please visit Dave Workmans Column at http://www.examiner.com/x-4525-Seattle-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2010m2d18-WA-Supreme-Court-2nd-Amendment-applies-to-the-states-via-14th-Amendment-due-process-clause

Concealed Firearms Once Again Allowed in National Parks

This has been battled back and forth in the Courts over the last few years. Hopefully the issue is settled for a while.

New Rule on Guns in Parks Takes Effect February 22
Tuesday, February 09, 2010

On February 22, a new law on guns in national parks takes effect. The law repeals a National Park Service rule that has long prohibited Americans from lawfully possessing firearms in national parks for self-defense.

The new law, passed last spring by an overwhelming bipartisan vote in the U.S. Senate, will allow people to possess, carry and transport firearms in national parks, in accordance with state law.

However, many details remain to be worked out. Reports indicate that National Park Service officials are debating issues such as the definition of “federal facilities,” where firearms will remain prohibited under a different federal law.

NPS officials are expected to issue further information as February 22 approaches, and some parks have already published information on their new policies. Because state laws vary greatly, before you visit a national park, you should check the park’s website or call the park headquarters for more information. NRA will also provide updates as they become available.

Source: NRA-ILA http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=5370