Mr. Rogert is a Democrat, that is why he is not endorsed by the Governor or AG. He has been pretty darn good on guns, but has had a bit of a problem with his boat and sales taxes(see the Nebraska Watchdog website for details) and it seems Ms. Brasch is poised to make it a close contest come November.
This is
NOT an endorsement, but here is the communication I had with Ms. Brasch a couple weeks ago:
Hello. I?d like to know your stance on 2nd Amendment issues, especially in regards to legal Concealed Carry, Castle Doctrine, and a Montana-style Firearms Freedom Act for Nebraska.
Thank you for your time,
FarmerRickHello FarmerRick,
Most of my time is door to door in the district. I hope to personally meet you.This morning I am catching up on many emails, thank you for your patience and understanding. This is a very important question and issue indeed.
I support our U.S. Constitution and our U.S. Bill of Rights and Amendment II; protecting an individual's right to possess a firearm and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, including self-defense within our homes.
I also support the Castle Doctrine legislation (LB 889, Senator Christensen) that switches the burden of proof from the homeowner to the prosecutor and protects our homeowner from being sued in civil court (even if found justified in defending their home). Unfortunately, currently our homeowners are presumed guilty and the burden of proof is on the homeowner to prove that they were justified in defending their home and loved ones.
I will work to represent our District, from people I have met with and listened to I understand and agree with others to support the Castle Doctrine in Montana as described, copied and pasted below:
HB 228, the ?Castle Doctrine? bill, has been signed into law by Gov. Schweitzer.
Section 1. No duty to summon help or flee. Except as provided in 45-3-105, a person who is lawfully in a place or location and who is threatened with bodily injury or loss of life has no duty to retreat from a threat or summon law enforcement assistance prior to using force. The provisions of this section apply to a person offering evidence of justifiable use of force under 45-3-102, 45-3-103, or 45-3-104.
Section 2. Openly carrying weapon?display?exemption. (1) Any person who is not otherwise prohibited from doing so by federal or state law may openly carry a weapon and may communicate to another person the fact that the person has a weapon. (2) If a person reasonably believes that the person or another person is threatened with bodily harm, the person may warn or threaten the use of force, including deadly force, against the aggressor, including drawing or presenting a weapon. (3) This section does not limit the authority of the board of regents or other postsecondary institutions to regulate the carrying of weapons, as defined in 45-8-361(5)(b), on their campuses.
Section 3. Investigation of alleged offense involving claim of justifiable use of force. When an investigation is conducted by a peace officer of an incident that appears to have or is alleged to have involved justifiable use of force, the investigation must be conducted so as to disclose all evidence, including testimony concerning the alleged offense and that might support the apparent or alleged justifiable use of force
Please let me know if you have other questions. I completed the NRA survey this week and they plan to post it next week.
Thank you again, kindest regards,
Lydia Brasch
http://www.lydiabrasch.com/
