President Biden, in a prime-time address last week, called on Congress to ban semiautomatic \u201cassault style\u201d rifles \u2013 or at least raise the age for legal purchase from 18 to 21.<\/p>\n
He was reacting to the spate of horrific and heartbreaking mass shootings that killed 22 people, most of them children, on May 24 at a Texas elementary school and 10 on May 14 at a Buffalo, New York, supermarket. The same night the president spoke on June 2, two women were shot and killed<\/a> in front of a church in Ames, Iowa \u2013 my hometown \u2013 by a gunman who then killed himself, police said.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, Iowa lawmakers have been confused about whether current law allows 16- and 17-year-olds to carry handguns without fear of prosecution.<\/p>\n During debate on the final night of the legislative session, lawmakers said they had been told a loophole created by a law approved last year had made it \u201cimpossible to prosecute\u201d a 16- or 17-year-old for possessing a firearm, lawmakers said.<\/p>\n As part of an omnibus budget bill, lawmakers passed a provision May 24 aimed at closing the \u201cloophole.\u201d It takes effect upon enactment, so that issue will presumably be fixed as soon as the governor signs the bill. But larger questions remain.<\/p>\n \u201cWe wouldn\u2019t have to close the loophole if last year this Legislature didn\u2019t make it easier to access firearms without background checks,\u201d Rep. Chris Hall, a Sioux City Democrat, said. \u201c\u2026 Those are the unintended consequences of when politics take priority over good public policy.\u201d<\/p>\n Last year, Republicans in the Legislature made Iowa a \u201cpermitless carry\u201d state<\/a> by doing away with the requirement that handgun buyers obtain a permit and submit to a federal background check. Federally licensed dealers would still have to carry out a background check on buyers. But for private sales from unlicensed sellers, buyers could escape any kind of background check.<\/p>\n Apparently, some law enforcement officials have been telling House Republicans this created a loophole for 16- and 17-year-olds caught with a gun.<\/p>\n \u201cThat was a big whoops with the original legislation and it\u2019s good to fix it,\u201d Rep. Mary Wolfe, D-Clinton, said during debate of House File 2589<\/a>, even though she told me later in an interview she wasn\u2019t convinced a loophole actually existed.<\/p>\n Rep. Steven Holt, R-Denison, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said in an interview Monday that prosecutors raised the issue after last year\u2019s bill was approved to eliminate the need for a weapons permit. He said while they weren\u2019t sure, it appeared it left the juvenile justice prohibition on carrying a firearm without a parallel crime for adults.<\/p>\n \u201cSo what public safety came back to us this session and said was that we\u2019re a little concerned, we\u2019re not sure, based on how the law is reading now, that we can that we could really take weapon away from a juvenile that was, let\u2019s say 16 or 17, because there is no commensurate crime for an adult,\u201d Holt said.<\/p>\n \u201cHonestly, I mean, I don\u2019t think it occurred to a number of us that you know, this was going to be an issue because we had discussions with with the minority party about the importance of making sure that there weren\u2019t any unintended consequences with constitutional carry,\u201d Holt said.<\/p>\n Once prosecutors identified a potential issue, Holt said lawmakers want back immediately to fix it, \u201cbecause obviously we don\u2019t believe somebody 17 years of age should be driving around with you know, a handgun in their car or whatever.\u201d<\/p>\n Frankly, I\u2019m surprised Holt persuaded his fellow Republicans in the Legislature it was necessary to fix the law. In 2017, they made it legal for children to fire guns<\/a>, with adult supervision. They\u2019ve allowed people walking around with loaded weapons to shoot and kill anyone they think is threatening them under a \u201cstand your ground\u201d<\/a> law, regardless of whether they were actually in danger and whether they could have avoided trouble by walking away. It\u2019s just fine to carry firearms in the State Capitol. This year, they passed a bill allowing the use of AR-15s and similar high-powered weapons of war for deer hunting<\/a>, for heaven\u2019s sake. Common sense has left the building.<\/p>\n The fix-it provision approved last month would specifically make it a delinquent act to possess a firearm as a minor, which is a serious misdemeanor. But I talked to three lawyers who said it was already illegal for a minor to possess a firearm. Wolfe speculated that this was aimed at prosecuting older teenagers in adult court, but other lawyers I talked to weren\u2019t aware of any barrier to that under current law.<\/p>\n So either Republican lawmakers created a potentially serious loophole with last year\u2019s bill \u2013 or they rammed through a \u201cfix\u201d that was at best unnecessary and at worst, carries its own unintended consequences.<\/p>\n One of those potential consequences came up during debate that night. Wolfe pointed out on the floor that it would be a violation of state law for lawmakers to debate the amendment without first obtaining a minority impact statement. Since 1993, state law has required a correctional impact statement for legislation that creates new crimes or higher criminal penalties. The analysis, to be done by nonpartisan legislative staff before the legislation is debated on the floor, would estimate the bill\u2019s potential for increasing Iowa\u2019s disproportionate share of racial minorities who are incarcerated.<\/p>\n House Speaker Pat Grassley, R-New Hartford, ruled Wolfe\u2019s point out of order, saying in effect that the Legislature wasn\u2019t bound by its own law, according to Wolfe.<\/p>\n Holt said he didn\u2019t think a correctional impact statement was needed because the law wasn\u2019t aimed at minorities.<\/p>\n \u201cAnd my response to that was simply be this is not a racial issue,\u201d Holt said. \u201cWe don\u2019t believe that someone under 18 years of age should possess a firearm, we don\u2019t care what color they are. And so that was the reason we did the legislation,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/iowacapitaldispatch.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/chris-hall-137x150.png\")
<\/a>![\"\"](\"https:\/\/iowacapitaldispatch.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/Mary-Wolfe-137x150.png\")
<\/a>Was there really a loophole?<\/h4>\n
Lawmakers ignore requirement for minority impact report<\/h4>\n