WEST VIRGINIA: Governor Signs Three NRA-Backed Bills Into Law

[GreenStormCloud]

http://www.nraila.org/hunting/issues-and-alerts/2012/4/west-virginia-governor-signs-nra-backed-bills-into-law.aspx

Today, West Virginia Governor Earl Ray Tomblin signed three NRA-backed bills into law: SB 149, SB 353 and SB 478. All three laws will take effect on June 8, 2012.

Senate Bill 149, introduced by state Senate Majority Leader John Unger (D-16), will mandate police authorities return all seized firearms, not currently being held as evidence in a criminal investigation, to the lawful owner if able. If that owner is not found or unable to take possession of the firearm, SB 149 will require the sale of these firearms at a public auction to a licensed firearms dealer. Current West Virginia law allows for seized guns to be immediately destroyed. SB 149 will prevent the wasteful and expensive practice of destroying firearms that could be re-circulated through licensed dealers to the retail market.

Senate Bill 353, introduced by state Senate President Jeff Kessler (D-2) and Senate Majority Leader Unger, will expedite the process of purchasing a firearm for valid concealed carry permit holders by making West Virginia eligible for an exemption from the FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). Such carry permit holders have already cleared a background check. This law will further conform state law to federal law and lead to greater reciprocity for permit holders throughout the United States.

Senate Bill 478, also sponsored by state Senator Unger, would create an apprentice hunting license that is available to West Virginia residents and non-residents alike. The licenses established pursuant to SB 478 are similar to current youth hunting licenses, but will be available to apprentice hunters of any age. Apprentice hunters will be encouraged to go afield while under the supervision of a person eighteen years of age or older who possesses a valid West Virginia hunting license. This will allow the “apprentice” to be introduced to hunting without having to take the otherwise required hunter education course.

This license will allow supervised, novice hunters to go afield for three hunting seasons within any five consecutive year window of time without having to take a required hunter education course. The NRA worked closely with the West Virginia Department of Natural Resources on this important legislation and its efforts to sustain and enhance the time-honored tradition of hunting are appreciated.
-----------
Didn't a certain regular here claim that the NRA was losing? Doesn't look like it to me.

BTW - Notice that these bills were introduced by Democrats.

[Turbineguy]

1. Dead people

don't buy guns. This is something similar to what the car manufacturers discovered after seatbelts and airbags.

[ileus]

2. Good news for my friends in WV...congrats on your hard work paying off.

[ladjf]

3. The NRA is running wild and hurting the overall quality of life in America. And,they are doing it

for very selfish base reasons, primarily profits in gun sales plus some other half-assed culture
issues.

[DonP]

21. Really? What models of guns do they sell for a profit?

I was not aware that the NRA sold guns for a profit. I thought that was the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) that represents the manufacturers of firearms, ammunition and other accessories.

Perhaps you could give us a link showing this under the counter sales program that doesn't requiire an FFL.

Or are you just talking out another orifice?

Let me guess, all you do is talk about how horrible guns are online. Or are you one of the 20 or so actual members of the Brady gun control campaign?

[ladjf]

27. I didn't say that the NRA directly sold guns and I think you knew that. But, that didn't stop you

from using up half of your post with sarcastic comments.

Further, I'm not going waste time explaining to you the exact meaning of what I said about the profits in gun sales. With over 19,500 posts by you, I'm confident that you would just belch out some more of of your "one trick pony" cliches.

No, I wasn't speaking "out of another orifice". I was saying what I believed to be the motives driving the NRA.

No, it is not true that "all I do is talk about how horrible guns are...". Fact is, I can't recall ever posting any remarks about the NRA in my life.

No, I'm not a member of the Brady gun control campaign. I actually have no opinion one way or the other about the gun control issue.

But, I am reading more and more about legislation that is directly driven by the NRA. That bothers me. It seems that they are branching off into issues that extend beyond the basic question of gun ownership and constitutional rights.

I feel the same way about religious fundamentalists and right wing conservatives who are also making political waves that threaten the quality of life on Earth.

[DonP]

28. You fooled us

The point where you said, "they are doing it for very base reasons, profits from gun sales..." kind of sounds like you thought they actually sell guns. We've had dumber things said down here.

If not, how do you think they "profit" from it, as you suggested? Building membership? They already have around 4.5 million dues paying members now at $35 a year. The Brady gun control group OTOH, the largest gun control organization, has less than 2,000 total claimed members.

Yes, the NRA gets a lot of pro gun legislation passed, mostly at the state level, making it easier for law abiding people to own, and in most states, carry and use guns for sport shooting and self defense. With all that said, and with gun sales at record levels for the last 4 years the violent crime rate, according to the FBI annual crime report, is also at a 40 year low and you've never been safer on the street or in your home.

The only issue they have anything to do with is the 2nd amendment, that's it. They don't have a position on foreign policy, a woman's right to choose, NAFTA or anything not directly related tot he 2nd amendment. Since the jerks at the ACLU chose to ignore some major SCOTUS decisions they didn't like (Heller and McDonald) they are the only ones watching out for that amendment.

[ladjf]

29. If there is one thing that I"m not an authority on it's gun issues.

As a teenager, I killed numerous cotton mouth moccasins from ponds that I was going to have to seine using my ancient 22 remington pump. I even bumped off a few squirrels and rabbits.

However, as an adult, I don't own a gun due to my fear that somehow, someone might gain access to it and kill somebody. But, I would be very insulted if I thought that I couldn't buy a gun if I wanted one and/or felt that I needed one.

Now, here is the biggest place we are going to disagree. I don't see the slightest evidence that down the time line, the Government is going to refuse my right to own a gun. You, of course, will disagree with my assumption.

I have no way of knowing what is in the minds of the movers and shakers in the NRA. But, my intuition suggests to me that there is something driving their fervor beyond a simple fear that that might be deprived their right to gun ownership. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe they are simply very paranoid or something else.

I do believe that the NRA is the main organization pushing the "Stand your ground" laws. That alone, makes me wonder what this has to do with gun ownership rights. Or, maybe I'm the
one that is paranoid about organizations. That could be possible as I can't think of one
Government agency I trust.

Thanks for the reasonable response to my post.

[GreenStormCloud]

30. About "down the time line"

Numerous leaders in the gun-control movement have stated that their goal is the eventual banning of all private gun ownership in the U.S. Short of a ban they will settle, as an intermediate step, for all the gun restrictions that they can get.

[ladjf]

32. "Many" gun control advocates may be stating the things you said. But, I don't believe that their

goals have any chance of being enacted as federal laws. The only way Americans could have
their guns taken away would be the result of some kind of repressive dictatorship that doesn't
want to deal with an armed opposition. That's not going to happen either, IMO.

[DonP]

33. Come to Chicago and see it in action

"I don't see the slightest evidence that down the time line, the Government is going to refuse my right to own a gun."

Efforts to ban specific types of guns at the Federal level have either been held off, or in the case of the bogus "Assault Weapons Ban" of 1994, had a sunset clause involved.

But at the state and local levels gun bans have been a fact of life and have created what the modern NRA has become. In Chicago, until last year with the McDonald decision, handguns were completely banned and rifles and shotguns had to be re-registered and a fee paid annually. The only problem was, the registration was closed the same year the ban was put in place.

In DC they didn't "Ban" all guns, just all handguns and required that any long guns be disassembled and rendered inoperative.

I'm not even including cases where the government (California, Cook County" etc.) approved a type of gun and later changed their mind and demanded that they all be turned in with no compensation.

So there have been more than a few cases of one government agency or another banning firearm ownership "for your own good" or "for the children".

That's part of the reason that many gun owners are more than a little suspicious of government promises not to ban guns. They've lied about it before.

[pipoman]

31. Just FYI

the combined sales of all US firearms makers wouldn't qualify for Fortune 500. It really isn't as big of business as one would imagine. All kinds of claims are thrown around here in the gungeon about the huge business that is the firearms manufacturers, when in truth the weight of many other companies could dwarf the entire industry.

edit..OTOH the weight of 4.5 million individual members, if unified, are a force to be reckoned with..

[aquart]

4. The NRA champions post-birth contraception.

And works hard to achieve it.

[digonswine]

5. I am concerned about the last bill. What does it mean that a hunter of any age can go afield?-

I can only assume that this does not mean that a hunter of any age can go and carry a firearm. Cuz- that would be stone cold nuts. Any help on this one? Thanks!

[gejohnston]

9. In some rural areas in the US and Canada, it is a nonissue

Canada allows 12 year olds to buy ammo and hunt on their own.

[digonswine]

12. That's great-

I was wondering what the age was-

There are some around here that want any kid to hunt w/heat at any young age. HEY--I had to wait until I was 12 and went through the safety course.

I think kids younger than that do not know the real ramifications of lead or steel moving quickly.

I do not want to hear of anyone's awesome kid that was a great hunter at age 3. I want to be sure that there is no small child hunting in the same area that I am. Christ-I barely trust the inevitably goatee-bearing redneck adults I need to deal with. I say this with confidence. A great many nitwits do not seem to think they need to keep track of where they are or where they point the barrel.
Many, though, I would trust easily. The ones that show themselves to know what the fuck they are doing-which is the majority of adult hunters I know.

[gejohnston]

13. on the bright side

This license will allow supervised, novice hunters to go afield for three hunting seasons within any five consecutive year window of time without having to take a required hunter education course. The NRA worked closely with the West Virginia Department of Natural Resources on this important legislation and its efforts to sustain and enhance the time-honored tradition of hunting are appreciated.

The key word is supervised. I have no idea what WV hunting regs are. When I was a kid in Wyoming, it was 16. But I don't think anyone is talking about letting three year olds loose in the woods with anything.
I don't think even Ted Nugent is that..........oh wait, we are talking about a draft dodging fourth rate musician and pedophile.

[digonswine]

14. Right-Supervised.

I don't like making anything more complicated than it needs to be-I just plain do not trust my fellow man with making consistently logical choices.
I think it was age 12 for us.(It's been awhile)--we went out for a few years beforehand-doing drives w/ no guns. FUN. Then we got through HS(Hunters safety) and we can hunt. A good course.

[gejohnston]

18. I can relate

long drives or walks in the wilderness, gun or not, is always fun and good for the soul.

Before Nugent sues me, the more accurate term I guess would be either hebephile or ephebophile. I prefer the generic "just fucking creepy."

[digonswine]

20. I wasn't really going there--

I guess I just want a person that is to use a gun in public to prove that they are able to do so in a responsible manner. I don't ask much.

[gejohnston]

23. I basically agree

I never really thought about it, growing up where most people learn gun stuff growing up. Then I took a CCW class with a bunch of former New Yorkers now Floridians. They were not really dangerous since they could not figure out how to open the cylinder to load it. It did ummmm surprise me.

My bad, I'm a wantabe music critic.

[Callisto32]

34. I prefer "pederast," generally.

Not always technically accurate, but easier to spit.

[Loudly]

6. Hang your head in shame to post such a story

on the day of the Oakland massacre.

[TheCowsCameHome]

7. +1

great timing. just great.

[Clames]

8. -10

Stop conflating this with another event. Especially on something you know next to nothing about....

[gejohnston]

10. the two are not even remotely related nt

[X_Digger]

11. Oh the poutrage! The hugh manatee! n/t

[ileus]

17. you rude toter you...

[CokeMachine]

19. When do you think it should be posted?

Tomorrow, the next day, never? Just curious.

[Johnny Rico]

24. -100. One has story has nothing to do with the other.

[jpak]

26. You must be new here - there is no shame in the Gungeon

yup

[Callisto32]

35. Otto Carius has something to say about thinking like that.

[seattleblah]

15. Putting guns back on the streets and not requiring background checks!

Ugh, what a backwards state.

[X_Digger]

16. The background checks were redundant,

The Brady Bill already has provisions for states to accept a valid concealed carry permit in lieu of yet another NICS check.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/brady-law/permit-chart.html

[petronius]

22. I'd say that returning legal property to the rightful owner is the much more

important part of that law. Allowing the state to efficiently dispose of the non-returnables is less critical, but it's just good sense...

[jpak]

25. "Didn't a certain regular here claim that the NRA was losing?"

nope - more fearful gasbaggery from the Gungeon

yup

[friendly_iconoclast]

37. Correct. The term you prefer is 'backlash', used most recently last month:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117223317

Attention GOP/NRA/ALEC - the Backlash is here

Would these laws be part of that backlash?

[Atypical Liberal]

36. All of these laws are simple common sense.

The first bill gets property returned to its rightful owner if possible, or makes some money for the state if not.

The second bill does what many other states already do - if you've already passed a background check to get your CCW permit there is no need to do another background check when you buy a firearm.

The final bill lets kids hunt under adult supervision without taking the hunter safety exam. Worked for me as a kid, and I later aced the exam with a 100% score.