Its surprising how much you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit
Shortly after Americans for Responsible Solutions visited Arizona bragging about a war chest of $15 Million to spend on legislators supporting their anti-rights agenda, the progress of two significant pro-rights gun bills, HB 2287 and SB 1159 ground to a halt. Coincidence?...
After HB 2287 passed out of the House, followed by a "Do Pass" recommendation from the Senate Government committee, Senate President Steve Yarbrough suddenly declared that "The Senate is not going to consider this bill" in an interview with the Arizona Republic. And, as the Chairman of the Senate Rules committee, he will not let the bill be heard by his committee. When did the Senate become a dictatorship?
HB 2287 would amend "Shannon's Law" that was passed 17 years ago after the tragic death of a teenager killed by celebratory gunfire. The stated purpose of the law was to punish people who recklessly fired their guns in the air without considering the consequences of their actions. Unfortunately the requirement for a conviction under Shannon's Law is the low standard of "criminal negligence" which allows prosecutors to categorize virtually every accidental or negligent firearms discharge as a Class 6 felony. HB 2287 would change the requirement to "intentionally, knowingly or recklessly" discharging a firearm, in keeping with the original intent of the law.
SB 1159 cleared the Senate and was followed by a "Do Pass" recommendation from the House Judiciary and Public Safety committee. The bill is now sitting in the House Rules committee which, apparently at the behest of the House Leadership, will not schedule SB 1159 for a review. When did the House become an oligarchy where a few dictate to the many?
SB 1159 protects property owners from liability if they respect people's fundamental right of self-defense. Under current law, property owners who prevent people from lawfully exercising their right to keep and bear arms face possible lawsuits for their dangerous and potentially negligent attempt to deny a person's civil rights should they become a victim of an attack while on the property. That will remain true if this bill passes. However, if a property owner does not prevent people from exercising their right to keep and bear arms; this bill would protect the property owner from being held liable for other people misusing firearms on their property, unless the property owner was grossly negligent or intended to cause harm.
Contact your Legislators
We have prepared emails for you to send to your Senator and Representatives urging them to insist that their Leadership move these bills out of the Rules committees and schedule them for floor votes. Both emails are waiting for you to send at our Legislative Action Center. Click here to contact your Legislators.
[If you send an email, PLEASE make changes to the language. It is meaningless for them to get thousands or even dozens of emails with the exact same language. Use their talking points but put it in your own words. You can also call your lawmakers over the weekend and leave a message and these bills may be available for comment on Request to Speak]
Got this too. Thought that name sounded familiar so looked them up. Sure, I understand why Mark & Gabby Giffords would be totally gun-averse, but the fact is that no one in that crowd had a gun to fight off the bad guy. As always with liberals, they want to punish law abiders thinking the bad guys care about laws. It's been proven that guy had mental issues and this law would not stop that. It's clear to me that something is fishy about this sudden change of heart on these two bills.