@NCCapitol

@NCCapitol

NC House hits brakes on controversial gun bill

Posted May 12, 2015

Handgun generic, firearm

UPDATED Tues. 8:00 P.M.: House leaders have canceled Wednesday morning's hearing on House Bill 562, saying "New provisions are anticipated in the coming days. As a result, the Speaker wants to give adequate time for consideration."

Just hours before, House leaders announced they would fast-track the controversial omnibus gun bill after a lengthy delay in committee.

House Speaker Tim Moore announced Tuesday afternoon that a new version of the bill would available to the public online by 9 p.m.

It was scheduled to "pass through" – that is, to be approved by – the House Rules Committee at a 9 a.m. meeting Wednesday and then to be added to the House's floor calendar for debate during Wednesday's 2 p.m. session.

The legislation passed two House committees last month but was re-referred to the House Appropriations Committee and then pulled from that panel's calendar last week by its sponsor, Rep. Jacqueline Schaffer, R-Mecklenburg. Schaffer has not responded to questions about why it was pulled.

Tuesday's announcement came a day after a national gun-control group began running television ads statewide urging viewers to ask their lawmakers to oppose the bill.

Rep. Grier Martin, D-Wake, questioned the need for speed on such a controversial topic. He asked Moore, R-Cleveland, to follow the regular calendaring process, which would put the bill before the House on Thursday, the day following its committee vote.

Minority Leader Larry Hall, D-Durham, seconded the request, saying the fast-track schedule doesn't give the public enough notice to read the new version and weigh in or to come to the committee meeting if they want to speak.

"Most of us have citizens we represent that are going to want to give us some feedback," Hall, D-Durham, said. "What we’re concerned is to make sure we have an opportunity to hear from them."

Moore said the swift movement of the bill doesn't violate any rules.

There's no word yet on when the bill will – again – be rescheduled.

23 Comments

Please with your WRAL.com account to comment on this story. You also will need a Facebook account to comment.

Oldest First
View all
  • Mark Cline May 13, 2015
    user avatar

    The right to vote is not in question, And, there are, and will be, background checks for firearms purchases. Bloomberg's groups want you to believe that this bill does away with background checks. It does not.

    The fact that most gun control laws were enacted during the Jim Crow period of history, and were designed to deny 2nd Amendment rights to people based on whatever criteria the sheriff wanted to use. In fact, those individuals then acquired their weapons via black market outlets. They still do that.

    Background checks would still be accomplished through the NICS at the retailer level.

    However, I don't see the repeal of the PTP in the current version of HB562. So the argument is moot.

  • Abrams Tanker May 13, 2015
    user avatar

    View quoted thread



    Who are you to tell someone they cannot voice their opinion when you are doing the very same thing? Good grief.

  • Scott Mace May 13, 2015
    user avatar

    View quoted thread


    2nd Amendment: "..the right of the people..."

    15th Amendment: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote ..."

    So, can you be "the people" in this country without being a citizen?

    Seems to me "citizen" is a higher bar than just "the people", but then again I'm not a lawyer or an English major.

  • Scott Mace May 13, 2015
    user avatar

    View quoted thread


    Well, it was, and telling someone to SHUT UP not only doesn't make it less true, but is also not how adults discuss things. Technically the law didn't state "to keep minorities from...", but that was the insidious bit of the Jim Crow laws, they appeared completely innocent at face value.

    Also, while gun control in some format may have existed in the 1800's, there are a couple of points: 1. Slavery ended before 1900, thus the opportunity existed for Jim Crow-esque laws to be enacted, and 2. the actual law that I was referring to that would have been appealed by this legislation was N.C.G.S. 14-402, which was enacted in 1919, which is squarely in the time frame that southern states were enacting such laws.

    And while it's true folks weren't repeating this until that SCOTUS ruling, it doesn't change the likely intended purpose of passing it in the first place.

    And no one is saying NO gun control, merely that we have enough already.

  • Matt Wood May 13, 2015
    user avatar

    View quoted thread


    Anyone who thinks voter ID is constitutional must also believe gun control laws are constitutional. All in or not at all, right?

  • Matt Wood May 13, 2015
    user avatar

    Every saying this is a Jim Crow law needs to SHUT UP! Gun control laws date back to the 1800's and people didn't even start repeating this bit of information until 2010 when a particular SCOTUS judge decided that's what they would call it. Good grief.

  • Scott Mace May 13, 2015
    user avatar

    View quoted thread


    Right... it's just Common Sense(tm) to not repeal a Jim Crow law...

  • Bob Owens May 13, 2015
    user avatar

    Here's hoping that Laura Leslie will be more honest in her future reporting on this important bit of legislation, as she has mischaracterized it on numerous occasions in terms of both bias and facts.

  • Chris Weaver May 13, 2015
    user avatar

    Why would so many people oppose this bill? because Republicans wrote it?
    To keep the Jim Crow prevision is... well... a sentimental hold over at minimum, or just ignorance. The only reason the Sheriffs Assc. wants to keep it is because it is a revenue stream.
    Permission to BUY anything that is legal is fascist.
    The only reason I still carry my boat anchor 686 is because of principle . Why would the left wish me bent over to my right?
    snort!.

  • Abrams Tanker May 13, 2015
    user avatar

    View quoted thread



    More $ to the Democrats from BIG Business?

    "Obama's request for "fast track" trade authority. Fast track would let the president present trade agreements that Congress can ratify or reject, but not amend"
    Read more at http://www.wral.com/senate-vote-on-trade-looms-big-but-won-t-settle-the-debate/14639269/#fpdsLltwgkcAkjWi.99

More...