The bill calls for people who are the subject of a protective order or have been convicted of domestic abuse to relinquish firearms by selling them, transferring them to a qualified party, such as a family member, or turning them over to law enforcement to hold for the length of the protective order.

Nearly six hours after beginning debate, the House voted 73-25 to approve Senate File 2357.

Floor manager Rep. Deborah Berry, D-Waterloo, said it would prohibit people who are the subject of a protective order or have been convicted of domestic abuse from possessing firearms. It now goes back to the Senate, where it was approved 36-11.

The bill’s backers have been working for its passage for the past 11 years, said Rachel Scott, lobbyist for the Commission on the Status of Women. Most years, the bill never won committee approval.

What’s changed? Scott isn’t sure.  A high-profile case in Des Moines focused attention on the issue. Therese Ann Lynch allegedly was kidnapped by her husband, Randall Moore, from a shopping mall and shot at their apartment. Moore had a history of domestic abuse, including four different women filing protective orders against him in the last four years.

Since 1995, when the federal law that the state bill is based on was enacted, 205 Iowans have been killed in domestic abuse murders, Berry said. Of those, 114 involved guns.

Although Scott said the Attorney General’s Office worked with the National Rifle Association to find language the group would not oppose, Berry emphasized the bill was not about guns.

“The bill is about victims and not firearms,” she said.

However, for the purposes of House debate the bill was labeled “firearm forfeiture” not “domestic abuse,” House Minority Leader Kraig Paulsen, R-Hiawatha, pointed out.

And much of the debate was about firearms, including an amendment by Rep. Matt Windschitl, R-Missouri Valley, to provide — at the abuser’s expense — self-defense training to people who have been the victim of domestic abuse or have been threatened with domestic abuse. Victims also could get a sales tax exemption on weapons purchases.

“This will empower victims to stand up and say, ‘Not this time, not today,’” Windschitl said.

Current law has not stopped abuse, he said, so it would make sense to try a new approach. By empowering victims “to come to a point where they say, ‘No, I won’t take it,’” may help break the cycle of violence perpetuated by domestic abuse, Windschitl said.

After lengthy debate by majority Democrats, they voted down the amendment, 44-53.

Although a federal law already calls for removing weapons from abusers, Berry said there aren’t enough federal Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, Firearms and Explosives agents in Iowa to enforce it. Also, local law enforcement is hesitant to enforce federal law, she said.

Domestic Abusers Barred from Firearm Possession

Written by Lynn Campbell

Friday, March 12, 2010

After a week of action that included a day-long, emotionally charged debate in the Iowa House, both houses of the legislature have passed a bill prohibiting domestic abusers from having firearms.

The passage comes despite Republicans arguing that the bill takes away a person's Second Amendment right to bear arms.

"It's been about 10 years that we've been trying to get something on this front done," said Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal (D-Council Bluffs). "I think that's really a major accomplishment in terms of protecting people from domestic violence and protecting people from ending up getting murdered."

During the House debate, several Democrats criticized an amendment by Representative Matt Windschitl (R-Missouri Valley) that would have struck the bill, made domestic abusers pay a $500 domestic-abuse surcharge, and taught victims how to fight back with a self-defense training course.

"This is about empowering the victim," said Windschitl, who claimed his amendment offered a fresh way of approaching the problem.

But Representative Ray Zirkelbach (D-Monticello), a correctional counselor who teaches felons, said that's not a sound approach. "Sending somebody to a self-defense course, what are they going to teach them?" he asked. "Are we supposed to send these children to training? Are we supposed to give them a certificate that says, 'I can shoot Daddy if he hits me?'"

Representative Deborah Berry (D-Waterloo) explained that while it's been federal law to prevent domestic abusers from having firearms since 1995, there are not enough federal agents for enforcement. She said 205 Iowans were killed in domestic-abuse murders since 1995, and 114 of the murders involved guns.

"The bill is about victims, and not firearms," Berry said. "The bill is about preventing the violence, terror, and death that occur when domestic abuse is mixed with easy access to guns."

But Representative Jodi Tymeson (R-Winterset) disagreed: "You're going to be taking away constitutional Second Amendment rights. We should take that very seriously."

The bill taking firearms from domestic abusers has long been a priority for Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller, who on Wednesday evening applauded House passage of the bill.

"I am elated that the House passed this bill, and passed it by a wide, bipartisan margin," Miller said. "This law will help prevent women, men, and children from being terrorized, maimed, and killed by violent domestic abusers using guns. It will only remove guns from domestic abusers. This is a big victory for public safety, and it will save lives."

Domestic abuser gun rights bill heads to Culver

Blog post by Jason Clayworth • jclayworth@dmreg.com • March 11, 2010