Constitutional Carry Passes Vote In NC House But.....

House Bill 746, the Omnibus Gun Bill which contains a provision for permitless concealed carry, passed its first two votes on the floor of the North Carolina House yesterday. The bill will have its third and final vote on Thursday. It passed on a vote of 65 yea, 54 nay, and 1 not voting. All weakening amendments were either defeated or tabled.

This should be a moment of joy and celebration for gun rights supporters in North Carolina and the nation. It should be except it isn't. The bill if it passes the North Carolina State Senate will almost certainly be vetoed by Gov. Roy Cooper (D-NC). For the bill to have been veto-proof it required 72 yea votes. In other words, the bill needed either a few Democrat supporters which was unlikely or fewer Republican defections.

Now the question that remains is whether those eight Republicans are anti-rights, have been bought off by Michael Bloomberg and his hired guns, or both. It is too soon to see if campaign contributions will be made by Bloomberg to any of these eight. Nonetheless, it appears that Bloomberg's hiring of lobbyist Chris McClure was a smart tactical move given McClure's Republican connections. As for their stand on gun rights, most of them were considered wobbly given their ratings by GRNC with only two having 3 stars or better ratings.

So the question remains as to whether any of the "Elite Eight" or "Elitest Eight" (as they are called by Grass Roots North Carolina) will change their vote Thursday.

In the meantime, here are the eight Republicans that voted against constitutional carry and against their own party's platform. Links to their legislative webpage are in the captions below each picture.

Rep. Ted Davis (R-New Hanover)

Rep. John Faircloth (R-Guilford))

Rep. John Fraley (R-Iredell)

Rep. D. Craig Horn (R-Union)

Rep. Frank Iler (R-Brunswick)

Rep. Chuck McGrady (R-Henderson)

Rep. Samuel Watford (R-Davidson)

Rep. Linda Hunt Williams (R-Wake)

You can read GRNC's alert on the defection of these eight Republicans here. It contains a pre-written email to send to them.

If these eight had voted against funding abortions or against free lunches for school kids you know the Democrats would be sending their minions to demonstrate in front of their homes and offices. The news media would run the story as the lead item on the local broadcast. I rarely see gun rights supporters adopting their Alinskyite tactics. The only exception I can think of is the demonstrations by activists from the New Jersey Second Amendment Society (NJ2AS) outside the home of Senate President Steve Sweeney after the death of Carol Bowne who was murdered while waiting for a carry permit. I can't say whether or not these type of demonstrations would be effective in North Carolina but they certainly would get the media's attention.

UPDATE: A reader who is active in North Carolina gun rights politics sent me this by email and he is 100% correct.

With respect to your article, I would add only that what matters is not how the eight voted today, but rather how they would vote on an override. Many who oppose the bill will vote for an override out of loyalty to their party.

HB 746 passed its Third Reading yesterday on a vote of 64-51. Rep. Craig Horn and Rep. Sam Watford who are mentioned above did not vote as they had excused absences. Speaker Tim Moore (R-Cleveland) did vote and he voted for passage.

The Omnibus Gun Bill has been ordered engrossed and will now be sent to the North Carolina State Senate for their consideration.

Earl Ray Says No To Constitutional Carry In The Mountaineer State

West Virginia Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin (D-WV) vetoed SB 347 this morning it was in the interest of public safety. SB 347 which passed both houses of the West Virginia legislature by overwhelming majorities. The bill would have made the state the fifth to adopt constitutional carry. While open carry is legal without a permit, concealed carry permits require mandated training and cost $105.

From Tomblin's press release:

“Throughout my career, I have strongly supported the Second Amendment, as demonstrated by my repeated endorsements and high grades from the National Rifle Association. However, I must also be responsive to the apprehension of law enforcement officers from across the state, who have concerns about the bill as it relates to the safety of their fellow officers. It also would eliminate the required gun safety training courses for those applying for a concealed carry permit. In light of these concerns and in the interest of public safety for all West Virginians, I have vetoed Senate Bill 347.”

Another politician who had received high grades from the NRA at one time, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), was already under fire for his opposition to SB 347 in which he said West Virginians believed in "gunsense". That is one of the code words popular with Shannon Watts and the Everytown Moms for Illegal Mayors. The Firearms Policy Coalition said that Manchin who claims to be a Life member of the NRA needs to be booted from the organization. As Sebastian noted today, he's not sure West Virginians much care for Manchin and we'll find out for sure in 2018.

The West Virginia Citizen's Defense League hasn't not commented publicly on the veto yet and are still considering their options. However, their Facebook page has a very active comment thread on it. It appears that a veto override will require a special session of the legislature.

Legislators on both sides of the aisle are indicating that they will vote in favor of the bill when it comes up again.

Del. Rupie Phillips (D-Logan, 24) supported the legislation in the House of Delegates and promised to do so again.

“We spent a lot of time on this issue and I hate that we’re going to have to spend time again on it at the beginning of next year’s session,” Phillips said.

Meanwhile, Del. Mike Folk (R-Berkeley, 63) has said the bill will come up again in the next session. He also dismissed the supposed concern that it would put law enforcement at risk.

He dismissed claims that it would have put law enforcement officers at risk. “They assume (already) that every person is armed, so the safety issue is not a good argument,” Folk said.

He is promising to bring the proposal up again during next year’s Regular Legislative Session.

“We’ll do it again next year and we’ll make sure we do it early enough that he can veto it next year and the same thing that happened with the pain capable bill will happen with this bill,” Folk said, referencing this year’s legislative override of Gov. Tomblin’s veto of the bill that would have banned abortions in West Virginia after 20 weeks.

Given the overwhelming majorities in favor of the bill, 71-29 in the House and 30-4 in the Senate, I think it is a safe bet that when it comes up again, it will pass.

Background Check Veto Upheld In Maine

The Maine State Legislature passed a universal background checks bill on June 19th in what was considered a surprise vote. The bill had been defeated twice before in the State Senate.

In a surprise vote Wednesday, the Maine Senate passed a bill that creates civil penalties for those who sell guns in private sales to people who are prohibited from having them.

The legislation imposes a civil fine of $500 if a gun seller does not perform a background check and the buyer is later discovered to be a prohibited person.

The bill, LD 1240, was first watered down by the Senate, but on Tuesday, the House of Representatives sent the original measure back to the Senate. The Senate approved the bill on a 18-17 vote, with two rural Democrats joining Republicans in the minority on the measure.

Fortunately for Maine gun owners, Gov. Paul LePage (R-ME) was true to his word and vetoed the bill. He said the bill only impacted honest gun owners and for that reason he vetoed the bill.

Yesterday, the Maine State House voted to uphold the governor's veto in a 77-71 vote. The gun prohibitionists in the State House are now threatening to go to a referendum to pass the measure and cite the misleading poll number from an anti-gun push poll.

The background-check bill, L.D. 1240, sponsored by Rep. Mark Dion, D-Portland, would have created a civil violation for selling a gun to a person prohibited from owning a gun, such as a convicted felon.

It originally was a sweeping bill that would have mandated background checks before all gun purchases. His bill passed narrowly in the Legislature earlier this month, and the House upheld the veto in a 77-71 vote on Wednesday.

In his veto message, LePage said the bill was focused "on those who would choose to obey the law, and for that reason I believe it misses the target."

"This is an issue that may need to go straight to our citizens," Dion said in a statement after the vote. "The governor described my bill as 'well-meaning,' but public policy requires more than intentions, it requires action."

Dion was referring to a potential referendum on the matter: J. Thomas Franklin, president of Maine Citizens Against Handgun Violence, a pro-gun control group, said last week that it is considering bringing a citizens' initiative to ask Maine voters to decide on mandatory background checks in 2014.

Searching the Maine register of lobbyists, I cannot find any that represent Mayor Bloomberg's Illegal Mayors nor any that represent other gun prohibitionist group. I am going to assume that Bloomberg didn't employ his full court press like he did in Colorado and Nevada.

Still that a state like Maine with a long tradition of protecting gun rights would have even considered such a bill - much less passed one - is disappointing. Maine, like the rest of northern New England, is changing and, in my opinion, not for the better.

Obama Urged By Advisors To Veto Appropriations Bill

The Executive Office of the President released a statement yesterday regarding the House passage of the FY2013 appropriations bill for the Departments of Commerce and Justice as well as for science and related agencies. They are accusing the House of Representatives of violating the "bipartisan agreement to put the Nation on a sustainable fiscal course in enacting the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA)." They go on to say that the President's senior advisors would be urging him to veto this bill.

From a taxpayer's perspective this is rich given that the appropriations bill is below the level that Obama requested. The administration is accusing Republicans of making spending cuts that would mean cuts in services elsewhere in the budget.

However, what is much more interesting is their strong opposition to the budget rider proposed by Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-MT) which would cut the ATF's funding for the multiple semi-auto firearm reporting requirement in the Southwest.

Prohibition on Multiple Sales of Rifles Reporting Requirement. Preventing the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives from requiring licensed firearms dealers in four border States to report information on the sale of multiple rifles or shotguns to the same person would hamper efforts to address the problem of illegal gun trafficking along the Southwest Border and in Mexico.

This reporting requirement is of dubious legality and even more dubious utility in stopping firearms trafficking to the narco-terrorists in Mexico. That the Obama Administration would single it out for special mention speaks to their true intentions regarding firearms.

UPDATE: Bob Owen is reporting that even with the cut to the multiple rifle reporting requirement, ATF will be getting a $1 million increase in its budget over the previous fiscal year. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) has offered an amendment to the appropriations bill that would remove that same $1 million from the DOJ's General Administration budget. This is the part of the budget that supports the AG's office. Gowdy said he proposed doing this due to their stonewalling over Project Gunwalker. (corrected)

UPDATE II: The NRA-ILA released a statement urging members to contact their member of Congress regarding the Rehberg Amendment and the need to keep it in the appropriations bill.

It comes as no surprise that the Obama Administration put out a Statement of Administration Policy saying that President Obama’s senior advisors would recommend that he veto H.R. 5326 (FY2013 Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations bill)...

Apparently, one of the reasons the President would veto H.R. 5326 is because of a NRA-backed general provision preventing funding for the new and unauthorized multiple sales reporting and registration plan proposed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE). On Thursday, April 26, the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations approved this general provision offered by Congressman Rehberg (R-Mont.), by a vote of 30-19.

Without this funding restriction, the BATFE could continue to circumvent the will of Congress by collecting information on multiple-sales of long guns by Executive Branch mandate and then, centralizing records of thousands of Americans’ gun purchases, without any legal authority.