Friday, April 02, 2010
This week's Outrage concerns a legal case that comes to us from New Jersey, where a well-meaning firearm owner, through a series of events that were no fault of his own, inadvertently ran afoul of the law (or, rather, an interpretation of the law).
Gun owner Gregg C. Revell was flying from Salt Lake City, UT, to Allentown, PA, by way of Minneapolis, MN, and Newark, NJ. Revell had an unloaded firearm that was legally checked in his luggage, which he was to pick up upon his arrival in Allentown.
That was the plan, but things soon went awry. Revell's flight into Newark was delayed, causing him to miss his connecting flight to Allentown. He was able to book a seat on the next flight, but that course of action was changed by the airline. He then tried to take a bus, but his luggage didn't make it to the bus on time. He retrieved his luggage, but missed the bus. With no more connections to Allentown until the following morning, Revell went (with his luggage, of course) directly to, and stayed the night at, the Airport Sheraton Hotel. By this time, Revell had been through a lot, but his real trouble was just beginning.
The next morning, Revell returned with his luggage directly to the airport. He checked his luggage and, as he was supposed to, told the agent that he had an unloaded firearm stored in a locked case in his luggage. It was at this point that Revell's destination changed from Allentown to a Newark jail cell. He was arrested on the spot because New Jersey law requires a permit to possess a handgun (and also bans the hollow-point ammunition that Revell also had in a separate locked container in his luggage), and as soon as Revell's luggage became "readily accessible" to him (in this case, when he took possession of his luggage to go to the hotel) he violated state law.
The Firearms Owners' Protection Act (FOPA) states that, "Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver's compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console."
After spending four days in a Newark jail cell, Revell was released on bail. Revell was eventually cleared of all charges, but he didn't get his firearm and other property back until almost three years later.
With help from the NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund, Revell sued for damages related to his unjust arrest and detention (as a violation of his civil rights), but lost, with the U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit's finding that Revell was not covered under FOPA's narrowly defined safe harbor provision.
So we have a case where a firearm owner does everything he can to obey the law and ensure that he safely transports his firearm. Through no fault of his own, he is accused of violating the law. He is arrested, then thrown in the Newark jail for four days, and loses possession of his personal property for almost three years. That is outrageous!
This case is not as unusual as you may think. NRA presently has two similar cases awaiting rulings by the U.S. Second Circuit.
NRA members would be well advised to use caution when traveling with a firearm—especially by plane, and especially in the states of New York and New Jersey—if a planned, or unplanned stop in "hostile territory" is necessary.
Copyright 2010, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action.
This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes.
11250 Waples Mill Road, Fairfax, VA 22030 800-392-8683
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
.jpg)
Why More Immigrants Are An Answer to the Coming Boomer Entitlement Mess
By: Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor
Friday, April 9, 2010
I was born in 1946, just when the boomer wave began. Bill Clinton was born that year, too. So was George W. So was Laura Bush. And Ken Starr (remember him?) And then, the next year, Hillary Clinton. And soon Newt Gingrich (known as “Newty” as a boy). And Cher. Why so many of us begin getting born in 1946? Simple. My father was in World War II. He came home. My mother was waiting. Ditto for the others.
Sixty years later, we boomers have a lot to be worried about because most of us plan to retire in a few years and Social Security and Medicare are on the way to going bust. I should know because I used to be a trustee of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. Those of you who are younger than we early boomers have even more to be worried about because if those funds go bust they won’t be there when you’re ready to retire.
It’s already starting to happen. This year Social Security will pay out more in benefits than it receives in payroll taxes. The tipping point came sooner than anyone expected because the recession has kicked so many people off payrolls. But it was coming anyway. And it adds new urgency to reforming Social Security — a task the president’s commission on the nation’s debt is focusing on.
So what’s the answer?
Fed Chair Ben Bernanke this week listed the choices. “To avoid large and unsustainable budget deficits,” he said in a speech on Wednesday, “the nation must choose among higher taxes, modifications to entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, less spending on everything else from education to defense, or some combination of the above.”
Bernanke is almost certainly right about “some combination,” but he leaves out one other possible remedy that should be included in that combination: Immigration.
You see, the biggest reason Social Security is in trouble, and Medicare as well, is because America is aging so fast. It’s not just that so many boomers are retiring. It’s also that seniors are living longer. And families are having fewer children.
Add it all up and the number of people who are working relative to the number who are retired keeps shrinking.
Forty years ago there were five workers for every retiree. Now there are three. Within a couple of decades, there will be only two workers per retiree. There’s no way just two workers will be able or willing to pay enough payroll taxes to keep benefits flowing to every retiree.
This is where immigration comes in. Most immigrants are young because the impoverished countries they come from are demographically the opposite of rich countries. Rather than aging populations, their populations are bursting with young people.
Yes, I know: There aren’t enough jobs right now even for Americans who want and need them. But once the American economy recovers, there will be. Take a long-term view and most new immigrants to the U.S. will be working for many decades.
Get it? One logical way to deal with the crisis of funding Social Security and Medicare is to have more workers per retiree, and the simplest way to do that is to allow more immigrants into the United States.
Immigration reform and entitlement reform have a lot to do with one another.
Friday, April 9, 2010
I was born in 1946, just when the boomer wave began. Bill Clinton was born that year, too. So was George W. So was Laura Bush. And Ken Starr (remember him?) And then, the next year, Hillary Clinton. And soon Newt Gingrich (known as “Newty” as a boy). And Cher. Why so many of us begin getting born in 1946? Simple. My father was in World War II. He came home. My mother was waiting. Ditto for the others.
Sixty years later, we boomers have a lot to be worried about because most of us plan to retire in a few years and Social Security and Medicare are on the way to going bust. I should know because I used to be a trustee of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. Those of you who are younger than we early boomers have even more to be worried about because if those funds go bust they won’t be there when you’re ready to retire.
It’s already starting to happen. This year Social Security will pay out more in benefits than it receives in payroll taxes. The tipping point came sooner than anyone expected because the recession has kicked so many people off payrolls. But it was coming anyway. And it adds new urgency to reforming Social Security — a task the president’s commission on the nation’s debt is focusing on.
So what’s the answer?
Fed Chair Ben Bernanke this week listed the choices. “To avoid large and unsustainable budget deficits,” he said in a speech on Wednesday, “the nation must choose among higher taxes, modifications to entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, less spending on everything else from education to defense, or some combination of the above.”
Bernanke is almost certainly right about “some combination,” but he leaves out one other possible remedy that should be included in that combination: Immigration.
You see, the biggest reason Social Security is in trouble, and Medicare as well, is because America is aging so fast. It’s not just that so many boomers are retiring. It’s also that seniors are living longer. And families are having fewer children.
Add it all up and the number of people who are working relative to the number who are retired keeps shrinking.
Forty years ago there were five workers for every retiree. Now there are three. Within a couple of decades, there will be only two workers per retiree. There’s no way just two workers will be able or willing to pay enough payroll taxes to keep benefits flowing to every retiree.
This is where immigration comes in. Most immigrants are young because the impoverished countries they come from are demographically the opposite of rich countries. Rather than aging populations, their populations are bursting with young people.
Yes, I know: There aren’t enough jobs right now even for Americans who want and need them. But once the American economy recovers, there will be. Take a long-term view and most new immigrants to the U.S. will be working for many decades.
Get it? One logical way to deal with the crisis of funding Social Security and Medicare is to have more workers per retiree, and the simplest way to do that is to allow more immigrants into the United States.
Immigration reform and entitlement reform have a lot to do with one another.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)