New Mexico Castle Doctrine Bill
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: New Mexico Castle Doctrine Bill

  1. #1

    Thumbs up New Mexico Castle Doctrine Bill

    I just received info from my representative that a Castle Doctrine bill will be carried to the floor this session. Rep. Candy Spence Ezzell is the author. Please notify your representatives and senators and encourage them to support this legislation. I will post when I get the HB number.
    It is HB 228...a little watered down, but it's a start!!
    Last edited by brcombs; 01-28-2011 at 11:34 AM. Reason: new info

  2.   
  3. #2

    Castle Doctrine and BUGs

    It would be great if we can get the Castle Doctrine in place as well as changing the CCW rule that you can only carry one firearm in New Mexico. Let's hope the new Governor can push some of the common sense ideas.

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by davidlbeaty View Post
    It would be great if we can get the Castle Doctrine in place as well as changing the CCW rule that you can only carry one firearm in New Mexico. Let's hope the new Governor can push some of the common sense ideas.
    The one gun issue is addressed in HB 136, and getting rid of the 2 year refresher as well.

  5. Castle doctrine

    Ohio already has it

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    NW New Mexico
    Posts
    148
    So do other states - now New Mexico needs it, and may do it this time. Current list of gun/2-A bills:
    HB 136 - opens new legal carry areas, eliminates one concealed weapon law
    HB 140 - eliminate the two-year refresher course for CCW
    HB 148 - questionable- see if you can unscramble this one - I can't.
    HB 228 - House version Castle Doctrine
    SB 29 - no 2-year refresher, no renew fingerprints, more renew time
    SB 220 - Senate version Castle Doctrine
    HJR 10 is a Declaration of State Sovereignty under Constitutional Amendment 10 --- long overdue! Please push this one, as well as the others. Emails to committee members are welcome and read. Express yourself to all committee members as the bills progress to new committees. Always be polite!!! [U]New Mexico Legislature[U] will get you on the right page - click on bill finder and follow directions. If we don't push for, and support favorable bills, some committees will just let them die. Here's your chance to be part of the system, right from your home or business. Next chance is a year away, and that one is only 30 restricted days.

  7. Quote Originally Posted by sailor View Post
    So do other states - now New Mexico needs it, and may do it this time. Current list of gun/2-A bills:
    HB 136 - opens new legal carry areas, eliminates one concealed weapon law
    HB 140 - eliminate the two-year refresher course for CCW
    HB 148 - questionable- see if you can unscramble this one - I can't.
    HB 228 - House version Castle Doctrine
    SB 29 - no 2-year refresher, no renew fingerprints, more renew time
    SB 220 - Senate version Castle Doctrine
    HJR 10 is a Declaration of State Sovereignty under Constitutional Amendment 10 --- long overdue! Please push this one, as well as the others. Emails to committee members are welcome and read. Express yourself to all committee members as the bills progress to new committees. Always be polite!!! [U]New Mexico Legislature[U] will get you on the right page - click on bill finder and follow directions. If we don't push for, and support favorable bills, some committees will just let them die. Here's your chance to be part of the system, right from your home or business. Next chance is a year away, and that one is only 30 restricted days.
    HB148 seems as though its trying to make it illegal for contiguous neighbors of NM to purcahse firearms in NM, and is trying to make it illegal for NM residents to purcahse firearms from neighbors contiguous to NM.

    Would say IMO, this is something we need to oppose. My letter to the HCPA


    Dear Members of the House Consumer & Public Affairs Committee,

    I am writing to ask that you do not recommend HB148 "Firearm Purchase In Contiguous States". In New Mexico there is no state registration entity, and all states require a federal background check when purchasing from a licensed dealer. Repealing this will do nothing to deter those prohibited from purchasing firearms. Repealing will cost domestic dealers of firearms out of state business, and will cost New Mexico much needed tax dollars.

    Please consider that there is no benefit to enacting this legislation and do not recommend that it goes further in the legislative process.

    Thank you!

    Respectfully,

    Your Name
    Quick to the gun, Sure of your grip. Quick to the threat, sure of your shot. - Chris Costa

  8. #7

    Nm hb 148

    House Bill 148 is a good bill.

    Between 1968 and 1986, a person could only purchase a rifle or shotgun at a FFL outside his or her state of residence if (1) it was a bordering state and (2) both the person's state of residence and the biordering state had enacted statutes affirmatively authorizing interstate long gun sales.

    The Firearm Owner Protection Act of 1986 rewrote the law to allow dealer sales of rifles and shotguns as long as the sale was not prohibited by the laws of the purchaser's home state and the state in which the long gun is sold. Unfortunately, most of the state laws enacted between 1968 and 1986 were interpreted as restricting interstate long gun sales. Most states have since repealed those laws, as HB 148 proposes for New Mexico. If HB 148 is enacted, New Mexico residents could purchase rifles and shotguns at FFLs in any state that does not have a state law prohibiting the sale.
    James M. "Jim" Mullins, Jr., Esq.
    Attorney, The Law Offices of James M. Mullins, Jr., PLLC
    Founder and Past President, West Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.

  9. Quote Originally Posted by WVCDL View Post
    House Bill 148 is a good bill.

    Between 1968 and 1986, a person could only purchase a rifle or shotgun at a FFL outside his or her state of residence if (1) it was a bordering state and (2) both the person's state of residence and the biordering state had enacted statutes affirmatively authorizing interstate long gun sales.

    The Firearm Owner Protection Act of 1986 rewrote the law to allow dealer sales of rifles and shotguns as long as the sale was not prohibited by the laws of the purchaser's home state and the state in which the long gun is sold. Unfortunately, most of the state laws enacted between 1968 and 1986 were interpreted as restricting interstate long gun sales. Most states have since repealed those laws, as HB 148 proposes for New Mexico. If HB 148 is enacted, New Mexico residents could purchase rifles and shotguns at FFLs in any state that does not have a state law prohibiting the sale.
    Are you sure? The bill aims to repeal IE: revoke/cancel NMSA 30-7-9 which states:

    Firearms; sale and purchase Residents of states contiguous to New Mexico may purchase firearms in New Mexico. Residents of New Mexico may purchase firearms in states contiguous to New Mexico.

    Per your section above you stated that "between '68 -'86 a person could only purchase......if (1)...........................(2) both the person's state of residence and the bordering state had enacted statutes affirmatively authorizing long gun sales.

    HB148 does not change the statute, it removes it from the record. NM could not possibly be interpreted to prohibit long guns as the language says "Firearms" not "handguns".

    If NM law does not authorize the sale then how will other state FFL's be able to sell to New Mexican's?If this were the case wouldn't the language be amended (rather than repealed) to strike CONTIGUOUS from the statute?

    I do see that you're an attorney, I just don't get how this helps us? or why it was worded the way it is?
    Quick to the gun, Sure of your grip. Quick to the threat, sure of your shot. - Chris Costa

  10. #9
    I am absolutely certain.

    Under current federal law, there is absolutely no need for a state to affirmatively authorize interstate long gun purchases. Therefore, a pre-FOPA law (such as the one NM currently has) not only has no tangible benefit to anyone but often causes confusion about whether that state's residents can purchase long guns at FFLs in non-bordering states.

    Here is a recent NRA legislative update on a similar bill in South Dakota.

    Also, it is a general principle of law that that which is not prohibited is legal. So why would we even want a law that purports to affirmatively authorize something that's absolutely legal in the absence of that law?
    James M. "Jim" Mullins, Jr., Esq.
    Attorney, The Law Offices of James M. Mullins, Jr., PLLC
    Founder and Past President, West Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by WVCDL View Post
    I am absolutely certain.

    Under current federal law, there is absolutely no need for a state to affirmatively authorize interstate long gun purchases. Therefore, a pre-FOPA law (such as the one NM currently has) not only has no tangible benefit to anyone but often causes confusion about whether that state's residents can purchase long guns at FFLs in non-bordering states.

    Here is a recent NRA legislative update on a similar bill in South Dakota.

    Also, it is a general principle of law that that which is not prohibited is legal. So why would we even want a law that purports to affirmatively authorize something that's absolutely legal in the absence of that law?
    Thank you for clarification, now I feel like an idiot for sending a request to my rep to deny...will unwillingly correct myself :( lol
    Quick to the gun, Sure of your grip. Quick to the threat, sure of your shot. - Chris Costa

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast