Meeting Public Comments

Jane R []

SJR 1 is not an attempt to add the Second Amendment right to the Iowa Constitution. The Republican majority voted down an amendment that exactly mirrors the US Constitutions Second Amendment.Under this proposed amendment to the Iowa Constitution, ALL state gun safety regulations would be subject to "strict scrutiny," the highest level of constitutional review available. Every commonsense gun safety laws and future laws would be challenged in court and would be at risk, including background checks, permit age limits and training, prohibition on felons to possess a gun, and more. SJR 1 goes well beyond the federal Second Amendment and is terribly unwise in light of the suicide rate, mass shootings, private 3Dprinting of firearms, Capitol insurrection, and more. Please vote NO on SJR 1.

Temple Hiatt [Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America]

Chair Zaun & Members of the SubcommitteeThank you for considering public comments as you hold a hearing on SJR 1. I hope you will reject this dangerous proposal.I am an Iowan and an Army Reserve veteran who served in the first Gulf War with the 320th Military Police. Prior to that, I served with the 339th Military Police in Davenport, Iowa. After the attempted coup at the United States Capitol Building, the FBI is warning of further armed demonstrations at the state Capitol in Des Moines. This moment calls for lawmakers to do more to prevent gun violence, rather than undermining Iowas gun safety laws. I fully support the 2nd Amendment. Unfortunately, this proposal is NOT the 2nd Amendment. With language that reads any and all restrictions, this is much more extreme. If strict scrutiny is applied to any and all restrictions this could remove public safety measures that the majority of Iowans support, such as background checks on handgun sales and permitting for concealed carry. I dont want convicted felons to have guns and I dont want guns on school grounds. This amendment will put all of that in jeopardy, with Iowa taxpayers funding all of the lawsuits filed by criminal defendants and extremists with criminal histories. Only three states have enacted strict scrutiny laws, and Iowa should not be the fourth. Respectfully submitted,Temple Hiatt

Julie Kearney []

I understand it took all of 15 minutes for the Iowa legislature to pass this bill to subcommittee. Is that careful consideration for a bill to make it easier to put guns in the hands of those who are a threat to themselves and/or to others? Is that the time it takes to ponder the wisdom of allowing more people to participate in armed insurrection against our democracy? Is that how long it takes to stop and consider that this bill IS NOT the will of the people of Iowa? Im asking the subcommittee to take their responsibility seriously to truly understand the impact of this bill and choose to end its consideration in the state of Iowa.

Francoise Gourronc []

Hello SenatorsMy name is Francoise Gourronc and I am writing to you because I am standing against SJR1.If you support this bill you will made it clear that you value the right to bear arm more than the right to vote.During the last assembly you decided to block HJR14 a proposition to restore voting rights to former felon. Here with this bill, I can understand that you will allow the same persons to have easier access to guns. Allow me to point to the irony of the situation.With gun ownership comes great responsibilities that are never addressed. This bill disrespect the victims of gun violence, ignore gun owner with mental illness, children who have crosspath with careless gun owners, police officers who will have to defend us from overzealous shooters, this is just a short list.You have already all the rights you need to own guns and it is covered by the US Constitution, nobody is going to take your guns away.Thank you for reading me

Tanya Keith []

I'm writing in opposition to the strict scrutiny bill for amendment. As a mother and community advocate, we want more safety and more oversight on gun ownership. We should have gun licensing and registration like we do for cars. Please do things to protect Iowans like sensible gun control. And wearing masks.

Carolyn Suggett []

The attack on the Capital Jan. 6 should show that our gun laws have not provided us with the protection all citizens should have. The Second Amendment is an amendment it is not a commandment to allow anybody to go out and buy guns without restrictions or limitations .

Lenore Holte []

I am an Iowa wife, mother and grandmother. I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed strict scrutiny amendment to the Iowa constitution. This dangerous step would lead courts to strike down the few public safety guarantees Iowa currently has against gun violence. It could put too many guns in the hands of dangerous people in our state. In addition, this is not even what Iowans want! Twothirds of Iowans oppose amending the constitution to undermine gun safety laws, according to polling data from 2020. Given the events of the last few weeks, we need our lawmakers to make us safer, not less safe. Do the right thing and stop this radical amendment.

Hope Johnson []

Iowa should not become only the the fourth state in the nation that takes such an action. It is a dangerous attempt to undermine Iowas reasonable, popular public safety laws, and it would be a truly extreme, farreaching change to our constitution. The truth is that the language in this amendment poses a direct threat to Iowa public safety laws that protect our communities by keeping guns out of the hands of people who we all agree shouldnt have them.

T Deal []

With nearly 70% of people in Iowa in favor of keeping background checks and other gun safety measures, this proposed amendment would surely make a lot of people unhappy and Iowa much less safe. Iowa has a very large per capita rate of gun ownership but because of Common sense gun laws on the books Iowa is a very safe place in terms of gun related incidentsPassing an amendment like this strict scrutiny law would undermine our states safety.

Janet Rosenbury [Iowans for Gun Safety]

Please oppose SJR 1 that adds a gun amendment to the Iowa Constitution that states any and all restrictions of this right shall be subject to STRICT SCRUTINY. Strict Scrutiny would require the highest standard for Iowas Gun safety laws and any gun legislation may be subject to costly court processes. Only three states (Alabama, Missouri and Louisiana) have included NRApushed strict scrutiny language in their gun rights amendments. Gun deaths in Missouri have increased since the bill was passed. 70% of voters in Iowa do not support amending the constitution to undermine Iowas gun laws. Please oppose SJR 1.

Kay Marcel []

Gun violence prevention is more important than ever in the as the pandemic continues to exacerbate gun violence, and after a year of increased gun sales, increased risk of suicide and domestic violence, violent extremists causing unrest across the country, and an increase in city gun violence. Lawmakers must do more to protect Iowans by rejecting dangerous legislation that would undermine public safety laws. Passing a strict scrutiny amendment to the Iowa constitution would force courts to use a type of judicial analysis that is likely to lead to them striking down Iowas bedrock public safety laws. Laws that prohibit convicted felons and domestic abusers from having guns, and the background check requirements that ensure those prohibited purchasers cant legally purchase guns.The proposed constitutional amendment comes as the FBI is warning of further armed demonstrations at the state Capitol in Des Moines after last weeks attempted coup at the United States Capitol Building. Lawmakers should be doing more to prevent gun violence, not undermining gun laws that keep guns out of the hands of extremists with criminal histories.

Brenda Schumann []

The US constitution gives the people in the US including Iowa the right to keep and bear arms so I think the current legislative session has more important things to address such as the pandemic. If the second amendment is added to the Iowa Constitution it should not include "strict scrutiny". Adding that may nullify the gun safety measures Iowa has such as keeping convicted felons from owning guns or requiring background checks.

Susan Jacobi []

I am writing to express my opposition to introduction of a strict scrutiny amendment to the Iowa constitutionSJR 1. This amendment will pose a threat to the reasonable public safety laws that protect our communities, including laws prohibiting gun possession by felons and domestic abusers, as well as background check requirements. As a child growing up in smalltown Iowa, I did not have concerns about gun violence. Much has changed since then, and sadly my own children have grown up learning about gun violence as a common occurrence. We should be striving to make our communities saferthis amendment does NOT work toward that goal.

Laura Hessburg [Iowa Coalition Against Domestic Violence]

Senators Zaun, Bisignano, Schultz:The Iowa Coalition Against Domestic Violence (ICADV) represents 22 crime victim service provider agencies across Iowa and the collective experience of agency staff who dedicate their lives to supporting victims of violent crime, specifically survivors of domestic violence and sexual abuse. Our direct service providers routinely witness the pain and suffering of crime victims, as well as their stunning resilience in surviving repeated violent acts (often over the course of months and years), inflicted on their minds and bodies by people they know and care about. ICADV urges you to oppose SJR 1, a constitutional amendment adding gun rights to the Iowa Constitution with a strict scrutiny judicial review standard. We believe this amendment undermines every existing or future sensible gun safety policy. Americas level of gun violence threatens public safety, and we urge legislators to halt further efforts to advance this constitutional amendment proposal.As we become normalized to the regular pace of mass shootings and gun homicides in our communities and come to grips with the reality that twothirds of all gun deaths are gun suicides, discussion to further expand access to guns present a false choice. Access to guns and gun rights for lawabiding citizens are not threatened in Iowa. You can be in favor of gun rights AND be in favor of reasonable policies to protect people from gun violence. Strict scrutiny is the most demanding judicial standard applied to constitutional cases. It requires judges to assume a challenged law is unconstitutional until the state proves otherwise. Only three states (Alabama, Louisiana, Missouri) include the extreme strict scrutiny language under consideration in Iowa. The experience in these states indicates a strict scrutiny standard undermines gun safety laws due to persistent legal challenges that burden the justice system and are paid for by taxpayers. Gun deaths by suicide, by intimate partners in homes, and in criminal acts occurring every day in communities across America are most common but mass shootings offer powerful illustration of the terror and toll of gun violence. The link between guns and domestic abuse homicide is so definitive that the history of domestic abuse among individuals who carry out mass shootings is unsurprising.More men than women are killed by gun violence, except when it comes to domestic violence incidents where women and children are significantly and disproportionately terrorized and killed when guns are present. Nearly half of female firearm homicide victims were killed by an intimate partner. Access to a gun makes it five times more likely that an abusive partner will kill his female victim and when that happens guns are the cause of death for 70% of bystanders killed in domestic abuse incidents. And women in communities of color face a disproportionate share of the burden nationally, Black women are twice as likely to be fatally shot by an intimate partner compared to white women and younger Black women between ages 1834 are nearly three times more likely to be shot and killed by an intimate partner than are white women in same age group. Importantly, for every case of domestic abuse homicide, there are many more cases where women and children are held hostage and terrorized with guns. For example, the abusive partner who never fires the gun, but threatens a partner with it by pointing it at the children, waving it around during an argument, or shooting a family pet. Experience and research offer numerous examples of policies that work to protect people from gun violence and overwhelming majorities of Americans support these policies. We are moving in the opposite direction in Iowa. As a modern society we balance individual rights with public safety and community interest all the time. In the face of overwhelming evidence confirming Americas uniquely shameful gun violence problem, gun rights should be no exception. The gun rights constitutional amendment proposal with strict scrutiny language advancing in Iowa would undermine all efforts to enact sensible restrictions on firearms access and could open the door for current gun safety laws to be challenged. Please oppose SJR 1.

Joseph Truszkowski []

I am a resident of Johnson County and have practiced medicine in Iowa for over twenty years. While I support the right to bear arms, I firmly believe that we must have responsible gun safety laws in place. By adding a strict scrutiny amendment to the Iowa constitution, lawmakers would be forcing courts to use a type of judicial analysis likely to lead to them striking down Iowas public safety laws. I therefore oppose SJR1. Thank you for your consideration.

Ingrid Madsen []

Regarding strict scrutiny... I am very concerned about violent felons being able to legally buy, own, and use guns. Will any Iowan, regardless of age, be able to buy, own, and use guns? Are there current laws restricting a class or group of people from owning a gun who should be able to own a gun? How does the safety of all Iowans factor into strict scrutiny and the lifting of all gun safety legislation? Doesn't the 2nd Amendment protect a citizens constitutional right to keep and bear arms? Would the subcommittee clarify the objective and discuss unintended consequences (all legislation has unintended consequences)? Thank You

Lori Durian []

I am strongly opposed to SJR1. This amendment goes beyond the Federal second amendment and will make it impossible for the legislature to pass any gun violence prevention legislation like requiring background checks on all gun sales or prohibiting convicted felons and those convicted of domestic violence from obtaining a gun. The absence of gun violence prevention legislation puts the lives of all of your constituents at risk.

Kathleen Cave []

I strongly oppose this change to the constitution of the state of Iowa. I can see no benefit to reducing the few controls on gun ownership. I have no desire to eliminate gun ownership; I own a gun.

Brenda Schumann []

I oppose adding strict scrutiny to the Iowa constitution. The US Second Amendment gives Iowa the right to bear arms so I think spending time on this when the pandemic is showing so many other problems that the legislature should be covering is not a wise use of time. However if you feel Iowa needs the Second Amendment in our constitution, add it without strict scrutiny. Strict scrutiny could undo a lot of common sense rules that keep Iowans safer. For my safety and my children and grandchildrens safety I want responsible gun ownership.