Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 1222

Should States Have More Time to Use Existing Federal Grants for Public Shooting Ranges?

Argument in favor

The relatively short time frame of two years to use Pittman-Robertson funds, along with the requirement that states provide 25% of the funding for public target ranges built with these funds, is preventing states from utilizing these funds. Lowering the state contribution requirement and increasing the amount of time states have to use this money will allow them to make use of these funds.

Colleen's Opinion
···
04/29/2019
Gun ranges provide a bigger service than shooting. People learn how to use their guns safely. I took my hunters training at a range. I learned how to shoot a pistol at a range. Gun ranges are not exclusively about target practice. Right away the comments come in about the nra. This gun club provides training and the safety of guns. For all you nra haters, you are aware that not one mass shooting was caused by an nra member. But you don’t want to hear that because it doesn’t fit the liberal anti gun narrative.
Like (20)
Follow
Share
04/29/2019
The gunophobes need to learn about guns and how to use them so they replace their fear with knowledge.
Like (12)
Follow
Share
Jim2423's Opinion
···
04/29/2019
I support this Bill, here in northern Nevada we have one public gun range which is tied up with shooting clubs and local law enforcement. It is open three days a week to the public but there is always some shooting event taking place. Going into the desert to shoot being on wild fires from bullets ricocheting off rocks. And trash and debris along with spent cartridges. We need more ranges and this would be a great incentive. There are places in town to pay to shoot but limited to handguns or their equipment.
Like (11)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

The current requirements of two years to provide 25% matching funding for public target ranges aren’t unduly burdensome to states. It’s reasonable to give Pittman-Robertson funds to the Secretary of the Interior after two years, so they can be redirected to other purposes if states aren’t using them in a timely manner. This bill gives states too much time and requires too little of their own investment in public shooting ranges.

burrkitty's Opinion
···
04/29/2019
Special interest funding for special interest groups. No way. Get out of the NRA pocket.
Like (47)
Follow
Share
Cynthia's Opinion
···
04/29/2019
Use NRA money not taxpayer money. This country needs less shooting, not more.
Like (26)
Follow
Share
Glowurm's Opinion
···
04/29/2019
Hell, no. We are financing public shooting ranges? GO TO HELL! If the Ignorants want a shooting range, pay for it by donations, NOT GRANTS. I DO NOT WANT MY TAX DOLLARS TRAINING YOU ON HOW TO KILL ME AND MY LOVED ONES. God, you People sure have our Congress in your pocket, don’t you? This must not be allowed to continue. End it NOW! Whatever fees are associated with these ranges should be given to victims of gun violence. Not to create more sites such as these!
Like (21)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • EnactedMay 10th, 2019
    The President signed this bill into law
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house has not voted
      house Committees
      Water, Oceans, and Wildlife
      Committee on Natural Resources
    IntroducedFebruary 14th, 2019

What is House Bill H.R. 1222?

This bill — the Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act — would allow states to use grants awarded under the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act to pay for up to 90% of the costs associated with building or expanding public target ranges. Eligible costs would include: land acquisition, construction, or expansion of an existing range. Under current law, states may use grants awarded under Pittman-Robertson to pay for up to 75% of these costs, and must provide 25% matching funds from other revenue sources.

This bill would also allow states to retain Pittman-Robertson funds for up to five years to acquire, construct, or expand target ranges. After five years, those funds would be available to the Secretary of the Interior for other uses. Under current law, unused Pittman-Robertson funds go to the Secretary of the Interior after two years.

Funds under the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act are generated through an 11% federal excise tax on pistols, revolvers, ammunition, bows, arrows, and archery accessories. These funds are made available to the states as grants for wildlife preservation, hunter education, and the construction, operation, and maintenance of public target changes.

Impact

Public shooting ranges; states; Pittman-Robertson funds; and the Secretary of the Interior.

Cost of House Bill H.R. 1222

The CBO estimates that enacting this bill wouldn’t have a significant effect on direct spending. It might, however, have a minor effect on the timing of when funds are spent.

More Information

In-DepthRep. Ron Kind (D-WI) reintroduced this bill from the 115th Congress to encourage states to develop additional shooting ranges by making more federal funds for this purpose available to state fish and wildlife agencies. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), the Senate sponsor of this legislation, says:

“West Virginians have a proud hunting heritage and a strong interest in shooting sports, both for recreational and economic purposes. This bipartisan legislation—which I’m glad to reintroduce today—provides a responsible way to improve cooperation at the federal, state, and local levels to create and maintain shooting ranges while also encouraging their continued use.”

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the firearms industry trade association, supports this bill. The NSSF’s Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Lawrence G. Keane, says:

“This is crucial legislation that would provide state fish and game agencies more flexibility to use Pittman-Robertson excise taxes dollars raised from the sale of firearms and ammunition to enhance existing public shooting ranges and to build new ones to meet the growing need for additional places for target shooters to participate in their sport. Public shooting ranges provide hunters a place to sight in rifles and shotguns before hunting seasons, for people to take firearm safety and hunter education courses and, for recreational target shooters to enjoy their sport. NSSF thanks Congressmen Kind and Bishop for recognizing the critical need and providing solutions to benefit recreational shooters and conservation.”

This bill has 17 bipartisan House cosponsors, including 16 Republicans and one Democrat. A Senate companion bill, sponsored by Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), has passed the Senate by voice vote with the support of 14 bipartisan cosponsors, including nine Republicans, four Democrats, and one Independent.

Last Congress, the House version of this bill, sponsored by Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA), passed the House Judiciary Committee but didn’t receive a House vote. The House bill had 61 bipartisan House cosponsors, including 54 Republicans and seven Democrats. A Senate bill, sponsored by Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, passed the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works but didn’t receive a Senate vote. The Senate bill had 17 bipartisan Senate cosponsors, including 10 Republicans, six Democrats, and one Independent.


Of NoteThe Pittman-Robertson excise tax, which has been paid by firearms and ammunition manufacturers since 1937, imposes an 11% “user pays” excise tax on firearms and ammunition. Since its establishment, this excise tax has raised nearly $12.1 billion for wildlife conservation. States are currently permitted to use some of these funds for hunter education courses and public shooting ranges, but the NSSF says the “restrictive formula” currently in place “has largely discouraged state agencies from building and enhancing public shooting ranges.”

The Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation (CSF), which lobbies Congress and state governments to protect and advance hunting, angling, recreational shooting, and trapping interests, notes that the current formula, whereby states are required to provide 25% of the funds needed to undertake a shooting range project with non-Pittman-Robertson funds, has caused some Pittman-Robertson funds to go unused because states don’t have the matching funds they need to provide.  The CSF argues that the added flexibility this bill provides would give states “additional opportunities to build and develop shooting range projects over multiple budget cycles while enhancing their ability to maintain existing ranges.”


Media:

Summary by Lorelei Yang

(Photo Credit: iStockphoto.com / Gogosvm)

AKA

Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act

Official Title

To amend the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act to facilitate the establishment of additional or expanded public target ranges in certain States.

    Gun ranges provide a bigger service than shooting. People learn how to use their guns safely. I took my hunters training at a range. I learned how to shoot a pistol at a range. Gun ranges are not exclusively about target practice. Right away the comments come in about the nra. This gun club provides training and the safety of guns. For all you nra haters, you are aware that not one mass shooting was caused by an nra member. But you don’t want to hear that because it doesn’t fit the liberal anti gun narrative.
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    Special interest funding for special interest groups. No way. Get out of the NRA pocket.
    Like (47)
    Follow
    Share
    Use NRA money not taxpayer money. This country needs less shooting, not more.
    Like (26)
    Follow
    Share
    Hell, no. We are financing public shooting ranges? GO TO HELL! If the Ignorants want a shooting range, pay for it by donations, NOT GRANTS. I DO NOT WANT MY TAX DOLLARS TRAINING YOU ON HOW TO KILL ME AND MY LOVED ONES. God, you People sure have our Congress in your pocket, don’t you? This must not be allowed to continue. End it NOW! Whatever fees are associated with these ranges should be given to victims of gun violence. Not to create more sites such as these!
    Like (21)
    Follow
    Share
    No. The majority of public does not own guns or use shooting ranges. This does not serve the public in anyway. This is stealing of public funds for special interests.
    Like (15)
    Follow
    Share
    The gunophobes need to learn about guns and how to use them so they replace their fear with knowledge.
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    I support this Bill, here in northern Nevada we have one public gun range which is tied up with shooting clubs and local law enforcement. It is open three days a week to the public but there is always some shooting event taking place. Going into the desert to shoot being on wild fires from bullets ricocheting off rocks. And trash and debris along with spent cartridges. We need more ranges and this would be a great incentive. There are places in town to pay to shoot but limited to handguns or their equipment.
    Like (11)
    Follow
    Share
    There aren't nearly enough ranges, if people become proficient in the use of their weapons then there is less likely a chance that an accident will occur.
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    This is not the role of the Federal government. States should be responsible for funding their own shooting ranges. This is a libertarian argument. AND NO, the money should not be transferred to “prevent gun violence” because it is a waste
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    No, why is the two-year time frame with 75% of the funds coming from the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act not enough. States need to use it or lose it! A better use of these funds would be for gun safety programs and gun violence prevention programs. We don’t need more gun ranges!
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    Where in the world did the NRA come into this bill. This Rep is trying to make safe places for places to use firearms. Some of us are lucky enough to have our own place but many don’t.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    Pass this bill! It’s the only bipartisan bill that is helping protect our right to bear arms and actually enjoy shooting sports.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    Why the Devil not........Democrats ? The relatively short time frame of two years to use Pittman-Robertson funds, along with the requirement that states provide 25% of the funding for public target ranges built with these funds, is preventing states from utilizing these funds. Lowering the state contribution requirement and increasing the amount of time states have to use this money will allow them to make use of these funds. SneakyPete.......... 4*29*19..........
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    It will increase public safety with the weapons. It is not being used for private ranges. If the NRA money was used, then they wouldn’t be public, now would they? Yes, this would be great to train and educate the public on firearms.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    Repeal the Dickey amendment and reallocate the funds to the CDC to prevent gun violence.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes! It is a good sport and what would be good is having classes on shooting, education on proper handling and cleaning of a gun!
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Too many guns. Too much shooting.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    No. I do not support this proposal.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    This the opposite direction we need to be moving in. We need to be restricting access to guns and preserving our natural resources. We certainly should not be using federal funds to facilitate improved marksmanship of individuals who may be mentally unstable gun owners. We’ve had enough school & public shootings, so please don’t make it any easier than it already is for mentally unstable individuals to commit mass murder.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Why was the current timeline inefficient?
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE