Battle against the Schoenbeck gun ban continues
South Dakota Gun Owners E-mail
Alert
PO Box 3845, Rapid City, SD 57709
(605) 737-5583
LibertyTeeth@sdgo.org
http://www.SDGO.org
(February 17, 2005) – The battle against the Schoenbeck gun ban has moved to the House of Representatives.
Sponsored by Sen. Lee Schoenbeck, Senate Bill 43 contains a state-level version of the federal Lautenberg gun ban, among other things. The Senate passed SB 43 earlier this week, and it has since been referred to the House Judiciary committee.
If it becomes law, the Schoenbeck ban will create a new crime in South Dakota for firearms possession. Under the Schoenbeck ban, folks who have been trapped by the federal ban and who use a firearm for self-defense could be prosecuted under both state and federal law.
For more on the Schoenbeck ban, please visit our website: www.SDGO.org
Action:
Please contact the members of the committee listed below. SB 43 could be brought to a vote as early as Monday, February 21.
To leave a message at the Capitol for two committee members at a time, call (605) 773-3851. A legislative page should be there to take your call from 8am to 5pm, CST, and will deliver your messages to the legislators’ desks.
You can also email the committee members at the addresses below. You can use the sample message below to direct your comments.
House Judiciary Committee
Joni Cutler
Margaret Gillespie
Pat Haley
Thomas Hennies
Roger Hunt
Barry Jensen
Matthew Michels
Casey Murschel
Sean O'Brien
Elaine Roberts
Lou Sebert
R. Shawn Tornow
Thomas Van Norman
----- Sample message -----
Dear Representative:
There is a lot of misinformation being spread about the gun ban proposed in
section 269 of SB 43. The bottom line is that this gun control measure
duplicates the onerous federal Lautenberg ban, passed in 1996, which imposes a
lifetime gun ban on those who have committed minor infractions in the home --
"offenses" as slight as shoving a spouse or spanking a child.
Some think that federal officials would lift the federal Lautenberg ban if the
Schoenbeck ban were passed. But this is based on nothing more than a wish and a
prayer. There is no promise from BATF that its agents won't enforce the federal
gun ban if the state enacts the Schoenbeck ban. It is simply foolish for anyone
to buy this argument or to support a state ban that is similar to the federal
law.
BATF documents, such as the yellow form 4473, state that a
person “who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence is
not prohibited from purchasing, receiving or possessing a firearm if the person
has had civil rights (the right to vote, sit on a jury and hold public office)
restored.”
If the real objective of Schoenbeck’s legislation is to exempt South Dakota citizens from the federal lifetime ban, why not follow BATF guidelines? These guidelines clearly recognize the loss and restoration of the rights to vote, sit on a jury and hold public office as a qualification for exemption from the Lautenberg ban.
Not only is
the Schoenbeck gun ban a complete infringement of the right to bear arms, it is
absolutely unnecessary to the stated goal of helping victims of the federal
Lautenberg ban. South Dakotans don't need gun control. Please oppose
section 269 of SB 43.
Please defend the people who have been victimized by the Lautenberg gun ban by
voting against section 269 of SB 43. Don't entrench this bad federal law in
South Dakota.
Sincerely,
--------------------------------------------
Proponents of the Schoenbeck gun ban claim that the BATF generally waives the federal life-time ban and allows someone to have a gun again if that person has been subjected to a shorter state-level ban. But they have not produced one single specific case, either in this state or in any other, where anyone has had their gun rights restored because of a state gun ban.
BATF documents, such as the yellow form 4473, state that a person “who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence is not prohibited from purchasing, receiving or possessing a firearm if the person has had civil rights (the right to vote, sit on a jury and hold public office) restored.”
If the real objective of Schoenbeck’s legislation is to exempt South Dakota citizens from the federal lifetime ban, why not follow BATF guidelines? These guidelines clearly recognize the loss and restoration of the rights to vote, sit on a jury and hold public office as a qualification for exemption from the Lautenberg ban.
So why are Schoenbeck and other proponents so insistent about creating a new state-level gun ban? Not only is the Schoenbeck gun ban a complete infringement of the right to bear arms, it is absolutely unnecessary to their stated goal of helping victims of the federal Lautenberg ban.
The answer to bad federal law is NOT to duplicate it in state law.