"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
-- Alexander Hamilton
The deadline for Governor Gary Herbert to make a decision as to whether to sign or veto SB 11, the Utah Firearms Freedom Act, is, according to our (possibly inaccurate) calculations, this coming Friday, February 26th.
Governor Herbert hasn’t yet indicated whether he intends to sign or veto this bill. In our last alert, we told you that the Governor had expressed three specific concerns about SB 11. GOUtah! has looked into these concerns (see analysis below) and we continue to consider them ill-founded and we continue to encourage people to contact Governor Herbert and ask him so sign SB 11. We need to melt his phones with calls from gun owners. If you haven’t already done so, please contact the Governor to express your opinion on this matter.
Phone for Governor’s Office: (801)538-1000
Toll-free Phone: (800)705-2464
Fax: (801)538-1528
Webmail for Governor Herbert:
http://governor.utah.gov/goca/form_comment.html
This article isn’t essential reading. We just thought that some of you might be interested in our analysis.
In our last alert, we published Gov. Herbert’s explanation of why he’s considering a veto of SB 11, the Utah Firearms Freedom Act, which exempts firearms from federal regulation if they’re made, sold, and kept in Utah. GOUtah! decided to look into each of the Governor’s stated concerns. After having done this, we’re just as convinced as ever that the Governor’s concerns are ill founded.
The Governor cited three concerns he has about this bill when he spoke recently with GOUtah!. First, he indicated to us that he has concerns about whether the bill might somehow violate the U.S. Constitution.
So we sat down and read the U.S. Constitution (including amendments). We couldn’t find anything in the Constitution that remotely supports the Governor’s concerns. Article I Section 10 lists the specific things that state governments are prohibited from doing. These include such things as entering into treaties with other nations, imposing tariffs on goods imported from other countries, granting titles of nobility, issuing letters of marque and reprisal, passing bills of attainder, and various other stuff, none of which remotely resembles SB 11. Furthermore, nothing in the Constitution empowers the federal government to regulate intrastate commerce (i.e., commerce that occurs within the borders of a given state). Therefore, under the 10th Amendment and Article I section 10, a state bill such as SB 11 is fully constitutional in our opinion. SB 11 is merely reaffirming what the U.S. Constitution already says.
Second, the Governor says he’s worried that SB 11 will cause the state to incur significant legal costs. With regard to costs, the Deseret News reports: "Utah's top law enforcement officer [Attorney General Mark Shurtleff] said Gov. Gary Herbert can sign a controversial new bill without worrying about dragging the state into a potentially expensive legal battle with the federal government." Enough said.
Third, the Governor expressed concerns about SB 11’s potential impact on interstate commerce. This doesn’t make sense to us. SB 11 does not prohibit or in any way restrict interstate commerce in firearms. It merely ensures greater freedom of intrastate gun commerce, i.e., commerce within Utah. Interstate commerce and intrastate commerce aren’t mutually exclusive.
Every year, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence (formerly known as "Handgun Control, Inc.") releases grades for all 50 states. Each state’s grade is based on the Brady Campaign’s assessment of the strength of that state’s gun-control laws. The Brady folks grade on a scale of 0 to 100, with 0 being the lowest possible score (the weakest state gun-control laws) and 100 being the highest possible score (the strongest state gun-control laws). The Brady Campaign recently released its scorecard for 2009. This year, Brady used a "star" rating system in addition to a numerical score. States with a numerical score from 0 to 10 get zero stars. 11-24 is one star. 25-49 is two stars. 50-74 is three stars. 75-100 is four stars.
You can read Brady’s scorecard for Utah here.
It should be noted that the Brady scores don’t take into account federal gun-control laws. Furthermore, many types of state gun laws apparently don’t count in Brady’s formula. Utah, for example, has pages and pages of state gun-control laws, but the Brady folks apparently don’t count these laws in their scoring formula.
This year, 28 states received a score of zero stars (meaning that they had numerical scores below 11 out of a possible 100), but only one state received an actual numerical score of 0 from the "Brady Bunch". That state was Utah.
The state with the highest score (four stars and a numerical score of 79) is (drum roll, please)….. California. California was the only state to receive a four-star rating from the Brady folks.
A curious person might want to compare the violent crime rates for the state with the highest Brady score and the state with the lowest Brady score, to see whether there’s a correlation between the crime rates and gun laws of those two states. Unfortunately, we couldn’t find this sort of information on the Brady Campaign’s website, so we looked on the FBI’s website instead.
The FBI hasn’t yet released its state-by-state crime report for 2009, but you can find the 2008 report here.
Here’s a comparison of the violent crime and murder rates in Utah and California for 2008, derived from the FBI report:
California Violent Crime Rate: 504 per 100,000 population per year
Utah Violent Crime Rate: 222 per 100,000 population per year
Thus, in 2008, the average Californian was more than twice as likely to be the victim of a violent crime as was the average Utahn.
California Murder Rate: 5.8 per 100,000 population per year
Utah Murder Rate: 1.4 per 100,000 population per year
Thus, in 2008, the average Californian was more than four times as likely to be murdered as was the average Utahn.
Ergo, there is indeed a correlation between state gun laws and violent crime rates. But it probably isn’t the kind of correlation the Brady gang was hoping for. California has much stricter gun laws than Utah, and it also has much higher rates of violent crime in general and murder in particular.
As long as we’re comparing things, let’s compare Utah with Canada, where private gun ownership is tightly restricted. Anti-gun people often hold up Canada’s stringent gun laws as a model for the United States to follow. So it might be interesting to compare Canada with Utah, which the Brady people seem to view as one big gun bazaar.
Canadian Murder Rate: 1.8 per 100,000 population per year
Canadian Violent Crime Rate: 1.326 per 100,000 population per year
(Source: Statistics Canada)
In other words, in 2008 the average Canadian was 28% more likely to be murdered and six times as likely to be the victim of a violent crime as was the average Utahn. Yikes!
"I've always wanted to hike the precarious Angel's Landing in Zion National Park, but I've been fearful that my cautious ascent might anger some outdoorsman with a Swiss Army knife who is in a hurry. So I was pleased when Congress gave me the right to carry a firearm in our national parks to protect me from these ubiquitous knife-wielders.
Then I realized that I might have to deal with several guys also carrying firearms. So now I am leaning toward a semi-automatic rifle. It's like the Cold War when those Russkies weren't going to mess with us after seeing our nukes blast those Pacific islands. Similarly, a semi-automatic on my back would be evidence to everyone to not mess with me, and I would have both hands free for the chain handrail.
Then I realized that with the rifle on my back I'd have no chance of out-drawing some guy with a pistol, but if I carried the rifle in my hand, ready to fire, I'd have only one hand for the chain. As usual, Congress hasn't thought this through. Obviously, we need an escalator to the top of Angel's Landing to leave people's hands free for their weapons."
-- Robert Miner, in a letter printed in The Salt Lake Tribune, 19 February 2010.
"Is Sen. Mark Madsen, R-Eagle Mountain, serious? He proposes that the Utah-born inventor of the automatic weapon, John Moses Browning, share a holiday with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. ('Senators favor Browning Holiday,' Tribune , Feb. 18). Among King's many accomplishments, he saw success in asking angry people to put away their weapons and instead speak to each other.
And to Senate Majority Leader Scott Jenkins, R-Plain City, who sees 'no conflict' in honoring Browning on the same day with King because 'guns keep peace': Are you aware of the manner in which the civil rights champion died? Guns surely were not keeping peace that day.
How very wrong are both senators. Guns do not keep peace, sillies, people do."
-- Kara Sines, in a letter printed in The Salt Lake Tribune, 20 February 2010.
"The editorial, 'Gun fight: Governor should veto this one' (Our View, Feb. 13) is based on a false premise, leading to a wrong conclusion. In Montana, the federal government is not suing the State of Montana over the Montana Firearms Freedom Act. Rather, the private Montana Shooting Sports Association and the Second Amendment Foundation are suing the United States in federal court to validate the principles of the MFFA. This is being done without a dime of cost to Montana taxpayers.
The purpose of the firearms freedom acts that are spawning nationwide, including Utah's Senate Bill 11, is to challenge and change the status quo. Yes, existing precedent is against the concept. That's the exact reason to enact the bill -- to challenge and overturn bad precedent. If precedent were with us, the exercise would be unnecessary. The Supreme Court overturns bad precedent regularly. That may be its most important function. It's high time for the court to reverse a half-century of bad Commerce Clause law.
Gov. Gary Herbert should sign SB11, thereby unleashing Utah citizens to launch this important challenge to the status quo at no cost to Utah taxpayers."
-- Gary Marbut, President, Montana Shooting Sports Association, in a letter printed in The Salt Lake Tribune, 21 February 2010.
"There's a fuss these days about as simple a thing as wanting to tote around a handgun and show it when necessary to defuse a dangerous situation ('Showing a gun,' Forum, Feb. 12). Constitutionally, all of us have the right to defend ourselves, even against foul language, I guess.
If Jesus were here today, he would spread his word with a 9 mm semi-automatic (and hopefully some even bigger hardware) instead of being passive, accepting and, worst of all, having compassion for all people. That got him crucified!
So I say, let them have their guns, but there will be a price to pay; it will be a chaotic but necessary thinning of the herd. Oh, no, that sounds Darwinian. In the meantime, I'll price the cost of a bullet-proof vest, just in case I get caught in the line of fire between arguing parties."
-- Karl Walker, in a letter printed in The Salt Lake Tribune, 22 February 2010.
"Gun rights advocates are offering Gov. Gary Herbert some very bad advice about the bill that would exempt Utah-made guns from federal firearms laws ('Gun groups mobilize efforts to avoid possible veto,' Tribune , Feb. 18). Should the governor sign the bill, Utah's defense of SB11 will cost Utah taxpayers thousands of dollars. And when plaintiffs prevail in challenging the state's violation of federal law, Utah must also pay their attorney fees.
At least one domestic violence victims group is willing to challenge SB11 in federal court.
The group understands that SB11 unconstitutionally eases federal prohibitions upon gun possession by persons subject to domestic violence protective orders and persons convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence. Wife beaters should not have guns.
SB11 also weakens federal restrictions upon sawed-off shotguns and armor-piercing bullets. It dilutes requirements that gun manufacturers and dealers be licensed, keep detailed records about gun sales and report purchases of large numbers of handguns.
SB11 is unconstitutional. It's bad public policy. Its defense will cost taxpayers thousands of dollars. It should be vetoed by Gov. Herbert."
-- John Pace, in a letter printed in The Salt Lake Tribune, 22 February 2010.
Please create a copy for your Utah State Senator.
Date:
From:
To: Governor Gary Herbert
Subject: Please Sign SB 11
Dear Governor Herbert:
I encourage you to sign SB 11, the bill that exempts Utah-made firearms from federal regulation as long as they remain in Utah.
SB 11 is constitutional and will probably cost the state nothing, so there’s no reason not to sign it. Article I Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution lists the specific things that states are prohibited from doing. SB 11 clearly doesn’t do anything prohibited by this section. Furthermore, the Constitution doesn’t grant Congress the power to regulate intrastate commerce. Therefore, under the 10th Amendment, the Utah Legislature has sole authority to regulate commerce that occurs wholly within Utah.
All six states adjoining Utah allow law-abiding citizens to have loaded firearms in their cars without a permit (which Utah does not), and three of these neighboring states allow such loaded firearms to be concealed in the car, while at least one allows unloaded firearms to be concealed (which Utah does not). None of these states seem to have had problems resulting from these laws.
If you decide to veto SB 11, please write back to me and explain your reasoning. Thanks for taking time to consider my views on this matter.
Sincerely,
That concludes the GOUtah! Political and Legislative Alert #330 for 23 February, 2010. 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