coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Cool-ICE/default.asp?category=billinfo&service=billbook&GA=81&hbill=HSB721

As of 4-01-06 it is now HF2753

A study bill to look at changes to the current carry permits issuance system. It looks to me like they want to change alot of the training and make it a little more standardized. Also, it seems that they are adding in the ability to appeal a refusal. Good news to Iowa residents. The current system allows 99 different training standards.

This is great, especially for those in counties where sheriffs are against issuing permits.  It is nice to know that the process may become standardized for everyone in the state.

Standardization is nice, but it's only the tip of the iceburg.  

I will not be happy until we are a shall issue state

Dreemweever, click the link and go to line 29.  This makes nonprofessional shall issue.

This is great news.

Thanks for the update!

PFS!!!

i like it.  this sounds like it may actually protect the public and peoples rights at the same time.  i hope that this is the kind of thing that gets adopted and we can run with it.



septic tank

I'll bet you are all about this one Septic.  This would make it so that you would be able to get a permit simply because you are a law abiding citizen and are willing to go through the required training.

The other nice thing about this is that it takes away liability from the issuing authority in case someone who has acquired one does something bad.  The argument of a sheriff not issuing permits in order to cover their ass in liability situations goes out the window.

Let the relevant people know you care about this:

Find your Iowa Legislators

It's nice to see the legislation drafted, but note that it is just a study bill and nothing has been done with it yet. There are dozens of study bills that get filed in a committee every session, and few ever have any action taken on them. If you want to help this along you need to contact your legislator, and you also need to contact the Chair of the House Committee on Public Safety and the members of that committee. Tha committee must approve the bill and send it to the full House before anything else can happen. See the link above on how to find your legislator. You can also find the committee members on the same site. I would also encourage you to contact your State Senator and other legislators that you either know personally or that are in your area of the state, whether they are your specific representative or not. Most importantly, the funnel calendar deadline for bills to be reported out of committee is March 3, so unless the committee approves it by that date it's dead for the year. I'll be contacting my legislators - please do the same.

www3.legis.state.ia.us/ga/scmtgnotice.do?noticeID=1505

According to this link, it is scheduled for it's first sub-committee meeting. Hopefully this garners enough support to make it's way to the floor to be debated.

Yammerschooner, thanks for mentioning the fact of liability being wrote into the law, or the lack of for the issuing authority.

I just finished a letter to our representative asking his support. I hope others will do the same. Unless we urge our legislators, this is just another bill that will fall by the wayside. Maybe someone could post this outside the hometown forum for all the users who never stop by here.

I am bumping this to round up some more support.  It made it out of committee with a few changes and needs some more support.  Make sure you let your house representative know that you support as it left committee.  Make sure that you also articulate that you DO NOT support ammendments being added to it.

Once again, a friendly link to help you contact your local elected officials.

www.legis.state.ia.us/FindLeg/Default.aspx

It is now called House File 2688 (HF2688).

HF2688 has been refereed to the Ways and Means Committee, which has assigned a subcommittee to look at it. The members of this subcommittee are:
Jim Kurtenbach, R Nevada
George Eichhorn, R, Stratford
Brian Quirk, D, New Hampton.

These guys need to hear from us in a positive way to encourage them to report it out to the full committee. It also wouldn't hurt to start working on the other Ways and Means Committee members. Follow the link above to the General Assembly web site. If you click on Committees, then Ways and Means you'll find a list of Committee members. In order for this bill to move forward it needs to be voted out of the subcommittee, then voted out of the full committee to get back to the full House.

i talked to Paul Bell (D) today and he said he supports it and has supported it.  he expressed concern about section 6.  he said this:

"we have no problem with the proposal, but concerning reciprocity...  we can vouch for Iowans and their qualifying and training.  we can't be sure about other states."

i'm not sure what this means.  

FYI.

septic tank

I just checked my email.  This is what I got from my representative, Bruce Hunter:

Dear Lance:

Thank you for writing me concerning your support for HF2688.
Unfortunately, I am unable to support this bill as it is currently
written.  There is a section of this bill concerning reciprocity that I
feel is very poorly written and will cause this state numerous problems
if passed.  If this section were to be removed from the bill, I would
support it.

Thank you again for writing me and if you should have any other concern
about this or any other matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Representative Bruce Hunter

maybe i'm not considering all the ramifications here, but i don't see the reciprocity as an issue.  i welcome it.  do criminals cross the state line?  will i?  is my life worth any less in Nebraska than it is here in Iowa?  well, technically if i were a Nebraska native, it would in point of fact, be worth considerably less, but i'll try to stay on point here.  

Nebraska...

i'm trying not to be negative, but this response certainly sounds like a way to support something while not voting in favor of it...

is this a built-in excuse to do nothing?  

I can smell it too.  I was just posting the response I received.  I hope there are more people out there contacting their legislators.  A handful of emails/phone calls/letters is easy to write off, but when 30 or 40 looks like the tip of an iceberg is a different story...

Then responses like the one I got may actually at least come with an explanation of how they would word it so that they could support it, whether I agree or not.

Many people claim to feel strongly about issues like this.  Many people post that they wont be happy until they see a certain result.

How many of you actually spend the 5-10 minutes it takes to write an elected official?

I am guessing 99.9% of people on this board feel that owning an assault rifle is a right that should not be infringed.  I am also guessing 95% or more of the people here feel that shall issue, or something very close to it, should be the law of the land.  However, if I was a betting man and had a way to prove it, I would bet that a much smaller percent of the people who visit this hometown forum (probably less than 25%) actually take the time to make a stink when issues like this surface.  I say this knowing full well that I am posting it on a gun-related website, where the support is probably at its greatest.

I may be cynical, but it is my perception that Americans in general are lazy bastards who will take the path of least resistance.  I also feel that if we let shit like this pass without a fight then we deserve exactly what we get.

We have a sense of entitlement that makes us so damn lazy that it effects everything from our education to our welfare programs.  Although we feel entitled to bitch, there are very few people who actually try to do something about it.  For example, what was the turnout at your last local election?  I am not talking about Kerry -vs- Bush, I am talking about that bond issue or school board election that happened last November.

Do you deserve to have what you consider to be a right?

C'mon guys, was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

i'm finding myself stirred.  i agree with the notion we all expect these things but are rarely willing to put out some effort for them.  

i'm not willing to allow it to continue, however.

if you guys agree or disagree with this.  say so.  calling your rep up isn't hard and isn't embarrassing.  hell, you don't even have to know what you're wanting to say...  all you need to do is ask them where they stand and why.  then, let them know your stance.

simple.  the whole call takes less than two minutes.  i urge you to make a move on this one.  

-septic tank

[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

these folks are the ones looking into HF2688

copy these three guys into your email line and send them a note.  let them know what you're wanting and that you are watching and waiting for the appropriate outcome.

i just sent them my brief and polite opinion.  i sincerely hope it makes a difference.

-septic tank

I agree with you both. I spent the few min. to email my elected officals.

It is funny when I talk to my friends, that only own .22s or hunting shotguns. They always say, "They are only after the assualt weapons you own, not my little 22." Then I will quote to them certain proposed legislation and ask them if their rifle fits into any catogory listed. Suprisingly they always say yes. Then my friends get upset, think about it for awhile, and then go on with their hecktic lives and forget. I truly believe it is the lifestyle the politicians would like us to live. Be so busy, that you have no time to ensure that elected officals are truly representing us.

Anyway, I would like to say that House members have started amending HF2688 to the point that it is very close to losing my support. I don't care if the ISSDA wants to keep control at the county level, but if they want to be rid of the appeals section, I will defiantly be calling and hand writing letters to have this bill removed.

I agree.  No appeal, no bill.  Encourage them not to amend this one into oblivion.

Thank you for writing. I am a co-sponsor of the legislation and I hope to move
the bill through the Ways and Means committee next week.

Take care,
Jim

Jim Kurtenbach
State Representative
Nevada, Iowa

***

response to my letter i sent him - FYI

septic tank

A little caution here. This proposed legislation is undergoing so many changes it is beginning to look a little scary to me. It is a far cry from where it started. Take a few minutes and read the latest bill. What do you all think? Would it be better to scrap it and start over?

Quoted: A little caution here. This proposed legislation is undergoing so many changes it is beginning to look a little scary to me. It is a far cry from where it started. Take a few minutes and read the latest bill. What do you all think? Would it be better to scrap it and start over?

what part dont you like


Brett

Quoted: Quoted: A little caution here. This proposed legislation is undergoing so many changes it is beginning to look a little scary to me. It is a far cry from where it started. Take a few minutes and read the latest bill. What do you all think? Would it be better to scrap it and start over? what part dont you like Brett

If I am reading correctly, in the House version the sheriff still has the discretion to issue or not. The verbage also says "may" issue. I would like to see "shall" issue. I think the discretionary part needs to be removed. There are a lot of sheriffs who will still have an unreasonable litmus test to determine the "need" to go armed. I simply don't trust sheriffs with a political agenda. Let me ask, in each of the 99 counties, what will the sheriffs determine to be a "reasonable" need? How is this any different than what we have today? Still comes down to this, a law abiding citizen should have the right to lawfully carry as they see fit. I don't have a problem with proper firearm training requirements ( I have already done plenty of this) but I do need to ask: Is a requirement of 18 out of 20 shots a fully reasonable expectation? I know most of us probably think "no problem". But, in actualality, is this still reasonable? I am not a law officer but do police need to score 90% to pass their firearms qualification? How about military training? I just think the general populace is being asked to perform at a higher level.

I do hope we will see some real improvements over what we currently have though.

Just a few of my thoughts.

if i remember correctly, and it has been a few years.  but when i qualified a non professional had to score 70 out of a possible 100 on the shooting part of the test.  professionals had to go 80.  


i do agree after rereading about the sherriffs.




Brett

Just a note to everyone, the HSB721 has now been changed to HF2753. It appears that it maybe up for debate this week. I urge you to contact your Rep.'s and let them know that this bill will make IA's CCW more in line with the Constitution. Currently in 49 counties in IA any applicant is considered more likely to commit a crime if given a permit to carry. So, the answer by some Sheriff's is to not issue permits. That means that if you live in one of the 49 counties you are presumed guilty without due process. This bill has the ability to change that. If passed into law, the Sheriff would have to issue written reasons for denial. If the applicant is not satisfied with the reason, the applicant would have the right to an appeal. Currently you have no right to an appeal.

I hope everyone here realizes this is as much of gun control as making your AR illeagal. If you are not allowed to bear arms, as stated in 2nd Amend. you are not being allowed your unalienable rights. Now contact your Representatives!

I don't live in Iowa but would like to do something.  Whom should I contact?