Saturday, February 15, 2020

West Virginia Senate Passes Preemption Bill to Protect more than Guns




The West Virginia Senate passed Senate Bill 96, a reform of the state weapons preemption law, on 11 February, 2020. It passed with a vote of 30 in favor, 2 opposed.

It appears all 50 states have some form of weapons preemption law.  Such laws prohibit local governments from enacting rules, ordinances or limits on the exercise of Second Amendment rights. This ensures some weapons laws are uniform across the entire state.

The preemption laws vary in effectiveness and scope. In West Virginia, the current preemption law §8-12-5a, has this heading:
§8-12-5a. Limitations upon municipalities’ power to restrict the purchase, possession, transfer, ownership,carrying, transport, sale and storage of certain weapons and ammunition.
The current law prohibits local governments from regulating revolvers, pistols, rifles, shotguns, or any ammunition components, in a manner in conflict with state law.

SB96 expands the protection of the current preemption law to include most deadly weapons and pepper spray. From Senate Bill 96:
(b) For the purposes of this section:

Deadly weaponmeans an instrument which is designed to be used to produce serious bodily injury or death or is readily adaptable to that use. The term deadly weaponincludes, but is not limited to:   

(A) A blackjack, gravity knife, knife, switchblade knife, nunchuka, metallic or false knuckles,pistol, revolver and firearm, as defined in §61-7-2 of this code, or other deadly weapons of like kind or character which may be easily concealed on or about the person; and 

 (B) A rifle and a shotgun.

Deadly weapondoes not include explosive, chemical, biological and radiological materials,or any item or material owned by a school or county board of education intended for curricular use, and used by a student solely for curricular purposes.
Parsing the wording carefully, the bill brings all arms under the protection of the preemption law, with the exception of explosive, chemical, biological, or radiological materials.

As I  wrote almost three years ago, the Supreme Court, in Caetano v. Massachusetts, unanimously affirmed the Second Amendment applies to all bearable arms.  From Ammoland:
In a historic, but extremely short unanimous opinion, the United States Supreme Court has confirmed that the Second Amendment applies “to all instruments that constitute bearable arms,”.  
As this is an enormous class of nearly all weapons, the decision is properly applied to knives and clubs, and nearly all firearms that have been sold in the United States. 
Knives are protected.  Infringements on the right to keep and carry knives have been common in the United States. Knife Rights is lobbying on behalf of West Virginia Senate Bill 96. Knife Rights has a stellar record of restoring the right to keep and carry knifes. The organization has lobbied for and been instrumental in passing laws repealing knife bans in 22 states.

Knife Rights proudly claim that " The fight to protect our knives is the Second Front in Defense of the Second Amendment™"

It is an accurate description. 

Many who fight hard to infringe on the rights to keep and carry firearms have been allies in the right to keep and carry knives. This creates momentum and precedent to remove infringements on the right to arms generally. 

SB 96 in West Virginia has been referred to the House. If it passes a House vote,  it will need to be signed by the Governor Jim Justice to become law.


©2020 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch



5 comments:

  1. Imagine all the laws: federal, state, and local; that the US Supreme Court could wipe away by simply declaring all arms control laws un-Constitutional.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If you read numerous supreme court rulings and put them altogether the court has already ruled on the issue of state laws. over the years the court has managed to confuse the issue, but the rulings are there. A point in law if the specific th8nhg the court changes is not properly referenced the new ruling merely confounds the issue. The court has ruled All rights are equal, all rights cross state lines. If none of the other rights can require a license none of them can require a license. None of them can require special training and none of them can require an age limit. the court has also ruled that no law can be construed to say any thing not written in the law. If it is not written it does not exist. Therefore it can not be construed to exist. also federal law is always superior to state law. The tenth amendment clearly limits states authority to any thing not addressed in the federal constitution. The second amendment is clearly in the Federal constitution. Acts Are Not Amendments. therefore any federal law or act that is in conflict with Shall Not Be Infringed is void. There is no amendment ratified by the people to change Shall Not Be Infringed. all of the federal gun control acts are not amendments. Only an amendment can void Shall Not Be Infringed. all of the acts and second amendment laws are Infringements by definition.

    ReplyDelete
  3. We depend on the specific definition of words to understand the language. our constitution and bill of rights were written in the English of 1787 The definitions of those words must be understood with the language of that time. some words meanings have changed over time, but Shall not be infringed are not any that have changed. Shall or Shall Not are still legal absolute commands. The constitution forbids ex post facto laws changing the meaning of a word after it is written in a legal document is Ex Post Facto. Assuming to change or redefine a word is ex post facto And nothing can be added, changed or ignored Ex post facto in a ratified document. Infringed means the specific item or any thing related to that item. in the case if the second amendment it is any means of self defense and the accessories.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The framers of the constitution actually worked on the constitution for eleven years then the constitutional convention was formed to put all of the ideas together. after many months and lots of argu9ing over nearly every word put down in writing The constitution was complete and ratified in 1889 the Bill of rights was ratified in 1891. The framers intent was to prevent the federal government the constitution created from having too much power over the people it represented. then the bureaucrats took over. People that like to think their opinions are more important than what is physically written and is the law they must apply. to do any thing else is a violation of their oath of office. by law should they violate their oath of office they are required to resign or be impeached. They have no power or authority once they have violated their oath of office. Nothing they do officially after violating their oath of office is valid. so says the volumes of American Jurisprudence. the books that define American Law.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sorry, typing error the constitution was ratified in 1789 The bill of rights was ratified in 1791.

    ReplyDelete

Spammers: You are wasting your time. Irrelevant comments will not be published