View Single Post
Old April 14, 2013, 10:07 PM   #63
gc70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,487
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motorhead0922
I fail to see how "notwithstanding" can open the door to a registry, when the bill says twice that a registry is not permitted, and specifically restricts the AG from doing so:
Look at the various provisions and see how they relate to each other.

Proposed Act - Sec. 103 of the Public Safety And Second Amendment Rights Protection Act
SEC. 103. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this title, or any amendment made by this title, shall be construed to-
(2) allow the establishment, directly or indirectly, of a Federal firearms registry.
Sec. 103 is a statement of the intent of the Act, but not statutory language that would be included in the United States Code.

Proposed law - United States Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 44, Section 922(t)(4)(A)
Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, except for section 923(m), the Attorney General may implement this subsection with regulations.
In making regulations for 922(t), the AG could disregard any other provisions in Chapter 44, except for the provisions of 923(m).

Proposed law - United States Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 44, Section 923(m)
(m) The Attorney General may not consolidate or centralize the records of the-
(1) acquisition or disposition of firearms, or any portion thereof, maintained by-
(A) a person with a valid, current license under this chapter;
(B) an unlicensed transferor under section 922(t); or
(2) possession or ownership of a firearm, maintained by any medical or health insurance entity.
The AG many not "consolidate or centralize" records or parts of records.

Existing law - United States Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 44, Section 926(a)
... No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. ...
The AG many not require records or parts of records to be "recorded at or transferred to" government entities.

Putting the above together, the AG can make regulations for gun show and online sales under 922(t), disregarding the restrictions in 926(a) and subject only to the restrictions in 923(m). With respect to gun show and online sales (let's go ahead and call them private transactions), the current prohibition against records being "recorded at or transferred to" government entities could be ignored and there would only be a prohibition to "consolidate and centralize" records.

Why would the government need to "consolidate and centralize" records of private transactions in a massive government database when the information could be maintained in databases at each FFL and accessed on demand by the government since the "transferred to" restriction could be ignored? Would the courts view a distributed database query system as a registry?
gc70 is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04850 seconds with 7 queries