<TABLE class=contentpaneopen><TBODY><TR><TD class=contentheading width="100%">http://www.ohioccw.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3793&Itemid=83 What does the 110th Congress have in store for us? </TD><TD class=buttonheading align=right width="100%"> </TD><TD class=buttonheading align=right width="100%"> </TD><TD class=buttonheading align=right width="100%"> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=contentpaneopen><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top align=left width="70%" colSpan=2>Written by George Szwagulak </TD></TR><TR><TD class=createdate vAlign=top colSpan=2>Thursday, 11 January 2007 </TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top colSpan=2> According to an article by John Snyder, gun control and firearm rights are already an issue for the 110th Congress. Many legislators have already announced its intentions to add to our nation’s gun laws. However, all legislative news is not bad and there are a few proposed bills that are worthy of our support. Thoughts on the good and bad are given below: H.R. 73 would protect the right to obtain firearms for security and to use firearms in defense of self, family, or home, and to provide for the legal enforcement of such right. The philosophy behind it is solid. Without recognition of a right to legitimate self-defense, there really is no genuine recognition of a right to life itself. And without recognition of a right to the means necessary for self-defense, that is, firearms, there is no real acceptance of a right to self-defense. So, conceptually, the right to obtain and use firearms for self-defense really is part and parcel of a right to life itself. H.R. 226 is a national <ACRONYM title="Carrying a Concealed Weapon">CCW</ACRONYM> reciprocity bill which will allow you to carry in other states with our Ohio CHL. H.R. 96 is authored by Mike Castle (R), who was an original author of the 1994 Crime Bill that included the Assault Weapons Ban. This bill is a reintroduced gun show killer. In an article penned by Amy Hess entitled "Gun Rights and the 110th Congress", she says “This bill would set up so many requirements for background checking and report filing in connection with the numerous gun shows which occur annually in the United States as to undermine or eliminate most or all of them.” No matter if it is the Cook & Ludwig study "Brady Law Fails to Reduce Murders” or the CDC report ”Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws” or the National Academy of Science report “Gun control doesn't reduce crime, violence, say studies”... the conclusions are the same. The CDC report summarizes them nicely with “The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes.” Nevertheless, the anti-gun extremists still want to enact them to further infringe upon the law-abiding's protected right to keep and bear arms. In closing, I’d like to share the thoughts of Jeff Soyer over at Alphecca.com: To be honest, I don't expect any of these bills to gain much traction. The first two are certainly worthy of pursuit but will run into a stonewall of opposition from the newly Democratic majority in Congress or if they do make it to the floor, it will open the door for a host of gun control amendments being tacked on by anti-gunners. Mike Castle's anti-gun show bill will stall in committee if the Democratic strategists are serious about steering clear of gun control and will meet a firestorm of opposition from mid-western and western states if it does make it to the floor. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
