The bipartisan legislation would limit the authority of public bodies to regulate firearms, absent specific authorization from the General Assembly.
By Lee Williams
A bill that would stop the state’s public housing authorities from banning guns was introduced today, co-sponsored by a bipartisan group of more than two-dozen state lawmakers.
Millsboro Democrat Rep. John C. Atkins and Georgetown Republican Sen. Joseph Booth are the prime sponsors of HB 357.
Both have said their legislation comes in response to an ongoing investigative series by the Caesar Rodney Institute, which revealed that every housing authority in Delaware banned their residents from owning firearms for self-defense.
After CRI’s series was published, the Newark Housing Authority withdrew its firearms ban. However, the Delaware State Housing Authority, along with the Wilmington and Dover housing authorities, still prohibit their residents from owning firearms.
The National Rifle Association has announced it will sue the housing authorities if the bans are not withdrawn. Similar lawsuits by the NRA have forced housing authorities in California and Maine to drop their gun bans.
“I decided to file this bill after the issue was brought to my attention by the Caesar Rodney Institute and the NRA,” Atkins said. “In my opinion, and that of several courts, what these housing authorities are doing is a clear violation of the Constitution.”
Booth said the bill is needed because other than Newark, the three remaining housing authorities have not withdrawn their firearms prohibitions.
“If we put legislation out there, generally the controlling authority will yield or bend,” he said. “This is a legislative maneuver that has worked before.”
“We have to allow their boards, who often meet monthly, time to change,” Booth said. “But we haven’t heard anything from the Delaware State Housing Authority. That concerns me.”
Booth said the bill is garnering support from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.
“I will be interested in seeing how the administration will respond,” Booth said.
Dover attorney John Sigler, a CRI board member and former NRA President, said the bill will prevent housing authorities or other government agencies from unilaterally deciding to establish their own weapons bans in the future.
“The importance of this bill cannot be over-emphasized. Even if the remaining three Housing Authorities were to rescind their bans today, this is a much needed and very important measure that will ensure that such constitutional violations do not occur in the future,” Sigler said. “As Senator Booth said in an earlier interview: ‘This is a stand up and be counted thing.’”
Sigler hopes the bipartisan support continues.
“I congratulate each and every one of the current sponsors of HB 357, especially the prime sponsors, Rep. Atkins and Sen. Booth, for stepping to the plate to be counted on this measure,” he said. “Additionally, I encourage every member of both parties in both Houses of our General Assembly to step to the plate and do the right thing by becoming co-sponsors on HB 357, and by voting for its quick passage upon their return to Legislative Hall in March.”
John J. Thompson, president of the Delaware State Sportsmen’s Association, the state NRA affiliate, like Sigler, said the bill should prevent future gun bans from being established.
“It will also eliminate the concept of second-class citizenship for people who live in public housing,” Thompson said. “As a matter of policy and principal, that’s critically important.”
Senate Minority Leader Sen. F. Gary Simpson, R-Milford, said he decided to co-sponsor the legislation because “to deny those who are elderly, disabled or low-income their guaranteed gun rights is unfair and unconstitutional.”
Simpson said the bill is garnering good bipartisan support, and will likely pass both Houses.
“I don’t see how anyone could be against it,” he said. “We are all guaranteed Second Amendment rights. An arm of the state should not be denying those rights. Hopefully this won’t happen again.”
Laurel Democrat Sen. Robert L. Venables, Sr., said none of the housing authorities ever held public hearings before they enacted the gun bans.
“The bureaucrats made those decisions,” Venables said. “I’m not sure they should do that.”
“I am allowed to have a gun in my home to defend myself and my family,” he said. “It seems unfair that good, decent people in a poor economic situation can’t defend their property. I think our constitution should not only apply to people who own their own homes, but to people who live in public housing as well.”
HB 357 defined
According to its synopsis, HB 357 is intended to “address the banning of possession of firearms by certain governmental agencies and entities of the State. Currently, several housing agencies in this state have adopted policies of evicting or threatening to evict law-abiding tenants from their homes merely for the otherwise lawful possession of firearms for self-defense. This practice constitutes discrimination based on economic circumstances leaving these residents at the mercy of criminals.”
The legislation will amend Title 29 of the Delaware Code, which addresses the function of state government, by adding a new chapter that limits the authority of public bodies to regulate arms.
“No public body in this state shall have or exercise the authority to regulate, prohibit, restrict or license the ownership, transfer, possession or transportation of arms, firearms, components of firearms, ammunition or components of ammunition except as expressly and specifically authorized by act of the General Assembly,” the bill states. “Nothing contained herein shall be construed as negating or precluding standard security measures controlling physical access to governmental buildings, offices or institutions.”
It defines public bodies as “any regulatory, administrative, advisory, executive, appointive, or legislative agency or body of this State, or any political subdivision thereof, including, but not limited to, any, board, bureau, commission, department, authority, agency, committee, ad hoc committee, special committee, temporary committee, advisory board and committee, subcommittee, association, group, panel, council or governmental entity,” created by the General Assembly, or appointed by a public official, which receives government funds.
It specifically excludes the General Assembly from coverage, allowing lawmakers to retain the authority to regulate firearms.
PDF Version: for printing, slower to download
HTML Version: loads faster, no photos
CRI Blog Version: story, photos and access to reader comments
Read the entire series in CRI’s Special Reports section.
Subscribe: to CRI to receive email updates about this story and other issues
Contact investigative reporter Lee Williams at (302) 242-9272 or lee@caesarrodney.org
The Caesar Rodney Institute is a 501(c)(3) non-partisan research and educational organization and is committed to being a catalyst for improved performance, accountability, and efficiency in Delaware government.
© Copyright Feb.18, 2010 by the Caesar Rodney Institute
This is a very interesting piece of legislation, not for what it says, but for what it implies.
This bill seems to send a message to those bureaucrats with nanny-state mind sets that the General Assembly ( or at least these 26 brave legislators) are fed up with agencies taking it upon themselves to legislate a personal agenda by means of the regulatory process.
And just as importantly, it would appear that these 26 legislators seem to be sending the message that they truly do understand “transparency” in that it is much easier for the citizens of this state to watch and influence legislation than to do the same with “regulation”.
Kudos to those 26 legislators.
Perhaps Delaware’s General Assembly will display the will to take back the reins of power and actually begin governing this state rather than allowing unelected bureaucrats to do it for them.
Obviously, only time will tell. But at least this bill represents a good start.
Well said, Lawman.
Rest assured CRI shall be tracking the bill through the legislative process.
I’m reminded somehow of Madison’s reservations regarding the bill of rights. He felt it was unnecessary to enumerate rights, and that enumerating some would inherently obviate others. It turns out he was both right and wrong: the bill of rights does indeed often get read as an exhaustive list (plus whatever ’emanations of a penumbra’), but few people today would argue that it’s unnecessary.
Similarly, I’m concerned that a legislative solution might be a somewhat Pyrrhic victory: it will accomplish good ends, but may set a precedent saying that we bear arms at the sufferance of the state.
My two cents.
[…] Lee Williams Caesar Rodney Institute Blog February 18, 2010 https://criblog.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/house-bill-357-introduced-to-overturn-public-housing-gun-ban… […]