We the People: firearm related bills
There are several firearms related bills awaiting executive action by the Senate Judiciary Committee. It is anticipated we will be doing that on Monday, March 21st. I will give a brief description of each bill. House Bill 271: “Exception to concealed weapon offense if eligible to apply”, says that if you are eligible to apply for a concealed carry permit you may carry without an official permit. If you are able to qualify for a permit by having completed a firearms training course or military training you may carry concealed, no permit required. A hunter’s safety course is not adequate. It also means that those who are ineligible may not carry concealed; felons, etc. Basically under current law, you do not need a concealed carry permit outside of cities and towns, but you do when you cross the border line of a city or town. The State of Vermont has a similar law. I am supporting this bill. Judging by the correspondence I am receiving on this one, the overwhelming majority of Montanans want this bill passed.
House Bill 384: “Revise carrying concealed in prohibited places,” has been creating more discussion. Currently, in the law as I understand it, you may carry “open” in some public places, but you can not carry concealed in those same places. This bill may be amended to state that if any public place (bars, hospitals, banks, etc) has an obvious sign prohibiting weapons; then those who violate that posting would be subject to criminal trespass law. I look forward to the debate on this one.
House Bill 496: “Allowing law enforcement agencies to destroy certain firearms they possess” was tabled very quickly. Essentially this bill would have allowed the destruction of a weapon used in a violent crime. If this were law, then one might assume that cars or trucks must be destroyed if used in a iolent crime. Remember, it is not the weapon that kills; it is the user behind it.
The one bill I have found most interesting is House Bill 174: “Repeal prohibition on firearm sound reduction devices in field”. This is the “suppressor bill”. Currently, it is legal to own a suppressor as long as the owner has met the requirements in federal law. Those requirements include, but not limited to, an FBI background check, filling out the required forms, finger printing, photo, and paying for the $200 BATFE tax stamp. There are very stringent federal laws regulating the possession and use of a suppressor. Under Montana law you can own one but the law is not real clear on where one can use the device. This bill clarifies that issue. In testimony on the bill it was stated there are about 1,000 legally owned suppressors in the state. I have always assumed that a suppressor (misnamed a “silencer”) muffled all or most of the sound made by a firearm; like we see in the movies. Two weeks ago I found out just how wrong I was. A few other legislators and I were invited to a gun range to use different firearms with legal serial numbered suppressors. This experience was sure an eye opener. The suppressor does not eliminate the sound. For the shooter the recoil is greatly reduced and so is the sound of the muzzle blast. If you are standing directly behind the shooter the sound is quieter but still loud enough that one must use hearing protection. The real surprise for me was the sound that I could hear when standing off to one side or a long distance away. It is still quite loud. The bullet creates a series of “sonic booms” as it travels through the air and you can actually determine the direction of travel. I could write pages concerning the testimony heard at the hearing. One thing we were told by FWP that there has never been a case of where a legally owned suppressor has been used for poaching. I doubt if anyone going through the long extensive registration and expensive purchasing (around $1,000 for a suppressor) process would be the kind of person who would use one for poaching. Another thing I learned is that they are required for hunting in the United Kingdom and used in other countries. A suppressor would help in protecting the hearing of the shooter.
I will continue to remain steadfast on our Second Amendment rights. You may contact me at 406-444-4800 or email me at ghinklesd7@gmail.com