« They live. They're here. And they vote. | Main | New York grand jury does the right thing »
Senate Judiciary passes universal background checks
By a vote of 10-8. I suspect this means in reality "passes a ban on private sales," but I haven't seen the exact language.
11 Comments | Leave a comment
http://www.pagunblog.com/2013/03/12/we-have-language-for-s-374-the-transfer-ban/
Based on my reading, it looks like a great way to turn gun owners into felons.
The definition of transfer is incredibly strict and pretty much means 5 years in prison if you lend a gun to anyone for any purpose without going through an FFL first.
Oh and all FFL fees would be set by the attorney general. Want to bet Holder would set them at NFA transfer fee levels rather than cheap levels?
If existing law is any indicator, it won't be used to go after actual straw purchasers, but instead used to target political enemies who happened to gift a gun to their fiancee/best friend/gay lover/etc.
http://www.pagunblog.com/2013/03/12/we-have-language-for-s-374-the-transfer-ban/
Based on my reading, it looks like a great way to turn gun owners into felons.
The definition of transfer is incredibly strict and pretty much means 5 years in prison if you lend a gun to anyone for any purpose without going through an FFL first.
Oh and all FFL fees would be set by the attorney general. Want to bet Holder would set them at NFA transfer fee levels rather than cheap levels?
If existing law is any indicator, it won't be used to go after actual straw purchasers, but instead used to target political enemies who happened to gift a gun to their fiancee/best friend/gay lover/etc.
To paraphrase, "Help, help, I'm being infringed."
That said, I wonder what Mr. Reid will do with it and if there will be enough votes for cloture.
David:
Of course this is a ban on private transfers. The bill requires sellers to access a government list of prohibited persons, whether or not it also mandates record-keeping of such transfers. Given the transfer involves government, it is no longer "private."
The bill is really poorly written. Someone above linked to my post which includes a link to the text. I'd be curious as to what you're take is on the bill, Dave.
I think the real implications come in the exceptions they make, which seems to imply that the bill intends the concept of "transfer" to be quite broad, and only with exceptions being legal, which they define very narrowly.
The way I see it, they make an exception for transfers within a home, implying that, outside the exceptions, transfers within a household are generally illegal. OK, so if I'm living with someone I'm not married to, they can handle my firearm, or use it for self-defense, since that falls under an exception, unless that possession goes beyond 7 days, in which case I have to formally transfer through an FFL or be guilty of a felony. So if I leave my roommate/life partner/etc alone in the home with the guns for more than a week, it's an illegal transfer, since they explicitly define that as a limit of the exception to the general rule.
Same deal with the boundaries. They limit it to the home and curtilage. So presumably the land is not excepted. So a friend comes over, we go out on the property to shoot pigs, rats etc, and I hand the friend the gun: illegal transfer.
The whole bill is a steaming pile of crap. It's meant to get gun owners in prison where they apparently think we belong.
Dave, as mentioned above, the language is worse than you can imagine.
Did the NRA sell us out again and compromise?
Follow up- From NRA
An article appearing today on NBCNews.com is falsely reporting that NRA will not oppose legislation being negotiated in the U.S. Senate that would mandate background checks for all gun purchasers.
The story posted on NBCNews.com alleges that NRA will not oppose expanding the background check system to include all private firearm sales, "provided the legislation does not require private gun sellers to maintain records of the checks". This statement is completely untrue. The NRA opposes criminalizing private firearms transfers between law-abiding individuals, and therefore opposes an expansion of the background check system.
The NRA supports meaningful efforts to address the problems of violent crime and mass violence in America, through swift and certain prosecution of violent criminals; securing our schools; and fixing our broken mental health system.
This is effectively a national registration requirement. Here's why:
FFL transfers are only meaningful because FFL-owned guns are documented by records available to ATF. Basically, guns on FFL books are registered; the owner is documented to be associated with the serial number of the weapon.
Without a record of where the guns are currently owned, the gov't cannot prove a gun was ever transferred. If next year my guns are owned other people, it's meaningless unless somebody had a record that I owned them in the first place. Without registration, there's no way to know that a transfer ever occurred.
I do not see how this proposal can work without registration. It would be practically voluntary. It contains a glaring "loophole" that would be the justification for immediate calls for registration to close.
We have background checks for private handgun sales here in North Carolina. To purchase a handgun from anyone, FFL or private party, you have to go to the Sheriff and get a pistol purchase permit. You don't have to say what kind it is, what the serial number is, who you buy it from -- it is not registration. It just certifies to the seller that you are legally qualified to purchase it -- not a felon, not crazy, etc. They cost $5 each. You can get three at a time. They are good for five years. Most sheriffs set up a booth at gun shows and process hundreds on the spot -- submit your application, come back in 15 minutes, they run the NICS check, here's your permits sir, that'll be $15 (because no one ever buys one. Are you kidding?)
Now, I hear -- just scuttlebutt you know -- that sometimes the seller in a private transaction doesn't actually take the permit like he is supposed to. Sometimes, if he knows the guy well enough, he doesn't even ask to see it. Imagine that.
Oh, and if you have your CCW, it's like an automatic purchase permit. Which is one of the best reasons there is, besides the obvious one, for having a CCW in NC.
Ten senators have declared themselves illegitimate and unfit for office.
Nothing they do henceforth has any validity.
They should be ejected from the chamber by their colleagues, with sticks and whips if necessary.