"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers."
-- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story (1833)
In our previous Alert we outlined HB 357, a bill that we strongly support. This bill is sponsored by Rep. Stephen Sandstrom (District 58).
In brief, HB 357 would make it legal for you to carry a legally-possessed firearm, concealed and/or loaded, at your place of residence and on any real property that you own without the need for a concealed-weapon permit. The bill would also make it legal for you to keep an unloaded firearm in the glove compartment of your motor vehicle without a permit.
HB 357 will be heard by the House Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Committee on Thursday, Feb. 26, at 8:30 a.m. in room 25 of the House Building (the building on the west side of the Capitol campus, just north of the Capitol Building). We apologize for the short notice, but at this stage of the game developments can happen at the Capitol without much advance warning.
Please flip a coin right now. If it comes up heads, please contact Rep. John Dougall. If it comes up tails, please contact Rep. Richard Greenwood. We don’t know enough about these two representatives to know where they stand on HB 357, but we believe that, if they don’t already support it, they may be on the fence and may be amenable to friendly persuasion. We know enough about most of the other committee members to be confident that they’ll either support it or firmly oppose it, so we don’t want you to waste your time contacting them. We recognize that your time is valuable.
Contact info is provided below. You may e-mail or Fax the pre-written letter below if you wish, or use your own letter. Alternatively, you may phone the House switchboard before 5:00 p.m. to leave a brief voice message for either of these representatives. If you use e-mail, please put the main point of your message in the "subject" line, such as "Please vote for HB 357". Many legislators get flooded with e-mail during the session and often read only the subject line.
Rep. John Dougall (District 27)
e-mail: jdougall@utah.gov
Home phone: (801)492-1365
Rep. Richard Greenwood (District 12)
e-mail: rgreenwood@utah.gov
Cell phone: (801)452-3113
Utah State House of Representatives
House Switchboard: (801)538-1029
House Fax: (801)326-1544
On 23 February 2009 our friends at Gun Owners of America (GOA) released the following email alert about US House bill S. 22.
An alert last week asked you to urge your representative to oppose a massive land bill that was scheduled to come before the full House at any time.
The good news is that opposition to the bill grew so loud that the leadership pulled it from the calendar so they would have more time to muster enough votes to pass it.
Well, that also gives you another chance to contact your own representative to tell him to OPPOSE the anti-Second Amendment Omnibus Land Act. The bill, S. 22, is now scheduled to be voted on this week.
S.22 is a mammoth bill comprised of over 190 separate pieces of legislation and will come to the floor with a rule that will not allow pro-gun representatives to offer amendments.
There are serious Second Amendment concerns with this legislation. S. 22 will greatly expand the amount of land controlled by the National Park Service (NPS). Because the rights of lawful gun owners are restricted on NPS land, the bill will create even more "anti-Second Amendment" zones.
In contrast to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U.S. Forest Service, which allow State and local laws to govern firearms possession, NPS land was until recently subject to a complete gun ban.
In the waning days of his administration, President Bush partially reversed the ban, but that half-way measure still leaves a significant portion of the gun prohibition in place. Gun Owners of America has fought for several years to fully repeal the NPS regulations, but those efforts have been hampered by the anti-gun leadership of both the House and Senate.
GOA opposes many parts of the bill that are controversial and have not been debated on their individual merits.
Consider just a few provisions of the 1,294-page bill:
In all, the bill designates over 2 million acres of wilderness, establishes three new national parks, a new national monument, three new national conservation areas, and four new national trails.
If there are parts of the bill that could stand on their own, they should be brought up separately and dealt with in an open and fair process -- and not used as bargaining chips in exchange for compromises of your Second Amendment rights.
Some people on Capitol Hill contend that all of these bills already passed the House anyway. In fact, no they haven't. More than 70 of these bills now before the House were only passed by the Senate. The House of Representatives never even held hearings or open debate on these measures.
Representative Rob Bishop (R-UT) has indicated that he wants to at least have the opportunity to offer an amendment to ensure that the Second Amendment rights of all Americans are protected.
However, right now it looks as though the anti-gun House leadership will refuse to allow any amendments to the bill, in order to ensure that it goes straight to President Obama's desk.
There is a possibility that an amendment to protect only hunting and recreational shooting on federal land would be allowed. Such an amendment by itself is not sufficient and is clearly designed as a "cover" vote for gun rights compromisers.
Please contact your representative and urge him or her to insist that an amendment be allowed to protect ALL of your Second Amendment rights -- not just hunting and recreational shooting.

On 24 February 2009 our friends at Gun Owners of America (GOA) released the following email alert about the gun ban in Washington D. C.
An amendment to repeal the onerous gun ban in the District of Columbia may come to the floor of the Senate as early as tomorrow, Wednesday, February 25.
Senator John Ensign (R-NV) plans to file the amendment to the so-called D.C. Voting Rights Act.
After the landmark Supreme Court ruling in Heller striking down Washington's gun ban as unconstitutional, the city council passed a gun control law that was almost as restrictive as the old one.
To simply possess a firearm in the nation's Capitol City, a resident must:
In addition to protecting Second Amendment rights in the District of Columbia, a vote on the Ensign amendment is an important test for your two Senators. Many of the provisions in the existing D.C. gun law are also on the wish list of the anti-gunners.
A vote on repealing the D.C. gun ban will be a good indication of how the Senate will vote on other gun-related issues.
Ensign's measure will be offered as an amendment to S. 160, the D.C. Voting Rights Act. The bill is designed to give Washington, D.C., full voting privileges in the House of Representatives, as well as increasing the total number of representatives from 435 to 437.
While there are many constitutional concerns with the underlying measure, the gun ban repeal simply comes down to a vote for or against the Second Amendment.
It is vital that you contact your Senators in support of the Ensign amendment because GOA is the only group that has announced it will score this vote.
"Once again, a story about the terrible suffering of the victims of Sulejman Talovic's rampage at Trolley Square misused the victims to push the reporters' own agenda for greater gun control ("Pain persists, two years after Trolley Square," Tribune , Feb. 2).
Survivor Colleen Hanson tells how a woman in her 60s couldn't buy alcohol
because she didn't have her driver license with her and then compares that situation to Sulejman's: 'Why don't we have the same things in place for gun shops that we have for distributors of alcohol?'
Printing that statement either shows the reporter's basic ignorance of gun
laws or the reporter's willingness to cynically use these victims of violence to push an anti-gun agenda. For all pawn shop owners who sell guns must have a federal firearms license, and to sell a firearm they must require both a driver license and another form of identification from a buyer. Additionally, all potential buyers must undergo a background check for any felonies or domestic-violence convictions.
Shame on The Tribune !"
-- John Wangsgaard, in a letter printed in The Salt Lake Tribune, 24 February 2009.
Date:
From:
To:
Dear Representative :
I encourage you to support HB 357, Rep. Sandstrom’s firearms reform bill. This bill would make it legal to carry a legally-possessed loaded and/or concealed firearm at one’s place of residence and on any real estate that one owns, without the need for a concealed-weapon permit.
I support HB 357 and I hope that you will too.
Thanks for taking time to consider my opinion on this matter.
Sincerely,
That concludes the GOUtah! Political and Legislative Alert #315 for 25 February 2009. We hope this information will be of assistance to you in defending your firearms rights.
Remember that getting this information is meaningless unless You Act On It Today. If you just read it and dump it in the trash, your gun rights, and the gun rights of future generations go in the trash with it. Get involved, get active and get vocal!
Return to GOUtah! Archive Index
Return to GOUtah! Home Page