Gun Trafficking Prevention Act

[C0untZer0]

http://online.wsj.com/article/AP5ab8...feab29b41.html

I believe it was first brought forth in 2009.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myhUVlTrkZg

So now it's back...

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/articl...-push-gun-bill

[Sarge]

If recent events are any indication, the agency involved with oversight of that activity is doing about as much of it as anybody.

[C0untZer0]

I am waiting to hear the same people who said 822 is all good and don't worry about "state's rights" say of the Gun Trafficking Prevention Act: "Hey - the feds can't do that! they're violating state's rights !"

[ttolhurst]

Not to defend the bill (Heaven forbid!), but how does the Gun Trafficking Prevention Act interfere with State's Rights?

[ltc444]

Has she introduced a bill?

what is the title and number?

If you provide that information, I will contact my Congressman and sentators expressing my displeasure.

[icedog88]

If I buy a gun, I do it legally. So how does this even affect me? The only thing I saw is if a dealer at a show sells an illegal gun, the gun show organizer can be held liable? Not sure what the reference to HR822 has to do with it though. Umm..just a thought..don't buy illegal guns and you don't have to worry about it.

[C0untZer0]

Right now, most of the laws regarding sales at gun shows are state laws. For example, in New York, private sales at gun shows are illegal. Through a sting, the NYAG demonstrated that NY law was sometimes being violated, so instead of toughening NY's already tough law, the NY crowd is just taking it national.

I don't think this law is going anywhere, but if it were to become law, it would impose FEDERAL law and regulations on all gun shows across the country.

[icedog88]

But, as it pertains to something illegal, who cares whether it is state or fed??

[C0untZer0]

This is the from the press release that accompanied the bill in 2009:

1) Empower federal law enforcement to investigate and prosecute gun traffickers and their entire criminal networks, (while protecting responsible, law-abiding gun owners).

2)Second, the legislation establishes stiff penalties that are a much-needed deterrent to gun trafficking. Under this bill, traffickers could face up to 20 years in prison and be fined a significant sum of money.

The bill also treats individuals engaged in a conspiracy to traffic guns the same as those who actually traffick a gun. Individuals who engage in the conspiracy are subject to the same punishment as those who physically sell and receive the illegal guns.


3) The U.S. Attorney General and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) are empowered to impose heightened restrictions, levy tough financial penalties, and suspend or revoke the license of any corrupt gun dealer. Corrupt gun dealers will be subject to a license suspension of up to six months and a fine of up to $2,500 per violation. This is the first time that the levying of civil penalties will be widely available as a deterrent for corrupt gun dealers.

The Attorney General is given the authority to identify and impose special restrictions on high-risk gun dealers, which could include dealers who have been unable to trace guns as required by federal law or who report significant or frequent inventory losses or thefts, among other criteria.

4) The bill provides ATF with the resources that it needs to inspect all federally licensed gun dealers and further investigate high-risk gun dealers. Federal law currently allows ATF to conduct annual inspections of all federally licensed dealers, but with the current lack of resources and funding it would take the bureau between seven and ten years to properly inspect every licensed dealer in the country. This allows corrupt dealers to go for many years without being suspected or caught.


.

[C0untZer0]

The re-introduced bill will have a new number since this is a new session of congress, but here is the full text of the previous bill:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill...bill=s111-2878

There are so many things to not like about this bill but one of the very first things is in Section 2 FINDINGS:

(9) ATF needs more resources to prevent guns from falling into the hands of those persons not legally allowed to possess them.


!!! !!! !!! !!! !!! !!!





.

[Crazy88Fingers]

So this bill would make illegal sales illegaler?

[Patriot86]

^^^^^ Basically......what kind of restrictions are they going to put on "high risk" dealers? Does this mean I as a customer might face greater screening, or a longer wait time if I buy guns from a "high risk" dealer, or is it simply restrictions that have no bearing on the customer.

This whole bill is just so convoluded I dont know what to make of it.

[C0untZer0]

Well for one thing it would make BATFE biggger, you can change 2011 to 2012 and extend the timeline out to 2015:

SEC. 9. AUTHORITY TO HIRE PERSONNEL TO ADDRESS TRAFFICKING IN FIREARMS.

(a) In General- The Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives may hire additional personnel sufficient for a firearms trafficking team of additional agents, Industry Operations Investigators, and analysts that would enable the average inspections rate of gun dealers to operate on a 3-year inspection cycle.

(b) Authority To Hire Personnel To Address Trafficking in Firearms-

(1) IN GENERAL- The Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives shall hire 500 additional Industry Operations Investigators and 1,000 additional Special Agents, subject to the availability of appropriations, for the purpose of addressing trafficking in firearms, as described in section 932 of title 18, United States Code, as added by this Act.

(2) AUTHORITY- There are authorized to be appropriated for the hiring and maintenance of 500 additional Industry Operations Investigators and 1,000 additional Special Agents--

(A) $65,593,500 for fiscal year 2011, to hire 125 Industry Operations Investigators and 250 Special Agents;

(B) $153,735,425 for fiscal year 2012, to hire 125 Industry Operations Investigators and 250 Special Agents;

(C) $268,199,200 for fiscal year 2013, to hire 125 Industry Operations Investigators and 250 Special Agents; and

(D) $387,741,186 for fiscal year 2014, to hire 125 Industry Operations Investigators and 250 Special Agents.

Doesn't this mean that we'd be hiring even more gun-running agents to deliver even more guns to the Mexican drug cartels?

Oh wait - congress made that illegal going forward.

Uh.. they can't bug the Hell's Angels anymore...

What will all those agents do?

I guess they will actually inspect gun dealers.

[C0untZer0]

Maybe they should just take all of those alcohol and tobacco inspectors and retrain them to audit gun dealers.

[Aguila Blanca]

Why don't they take a bunch of the agents who are illegally running guns to Mexico and otherwise harassing honest gun dealers and reassign them to chasing cigarette bootleggers?

[MTT TL]

"It is really remarkable that in December of 2011, we have to stand here to hear Senator Gillibrand say she's introducing a bill to make gun trafficking illegal," said Schneiderman, who championed several gun-control measures during his time as a liberal state senator representing the Upper West Side. "It's just astonishing."

I would say you don't have to...

"This is a bill that does not actually affect law-abiding citizens or the Second Amendment,"

[ttolhurst]

Originally Posted by C0untZer0

Right now, most of the laws regarding sales at gun shows are state laws.

I've got news for you: Every firearm sale in this country, whether at a dealer, face-to-face private sale, or a gun show, is subject to Federal law.

[MrGreen]

Just another example of the Government reducing a persons rights while hiding behind the word "saftey."

[Hardcase]

As I see it, the bill does three things:

1. Increases the size of the ATF (and correspondingly, the federal budget)
2. Imposes stiffer penalties for violations of certain federal gun laws
3. Makes illegal activity...illegal.

Cynical me sees this as a way to spend almost a billion dollars over four years to enact and enforce new laws that have already been enacted and should already be enforced.

As far as states' rights go, I'm not sure that I see anything in the bill that infringes on them. What I see, though, is plenty that duplicates existing law.

I mean, if it's already against the law to illegally traffic in one firearm, why does there need to be an additional law to make it against the law to traffic in two or more?

[C0untZer0]

Right now there is no federal law mandating BG checks on intrastate private sales (whether they are at gun shows or elsewhere). Dealers must do BG checks wherever they are. But there are some states that regulate private sales. I am not sure that this infringes on State's right's but it seems to to me:

‘(3) APPLICATION-

‘(A) AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE- It is an affirmative defense to any prosecution for a violation of subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) of this subsection or a violation of paragraph (1)(D) of this subsection that relates to conduct specified in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) that the firearm at issue was transferred only after a background check on the actual buyer pursuant to section 922(t) indicated that the actual buyer’s receipt of the firearm would not violate section 922 (g) or (n) or State law.

... to be very close to instituting back ground checks for all sales on all indivuduals at the federal level regardless of state law.

[Spats McGee]

Originally Posted by C0untZer0

Right now, most of the laws regarding sales at gun shows are state laws. For example, in New York, private sales at gun shows are illegal. Through a sting, the NYAG demonstrated that NY law was sometimes being violated, so instead of toughening NY's already tough law, the NY crowd is just taking it national.

I don't think this law is going anywhere, but if it were to become law, it would impose FEDERAL law and regulations on all gun shows across the country.

Every firearm transaction is subject to both federal and state law. This is true whether the transaction happens at a gun show, Guns-R-Us, or in somebody's back 40 acres.

Whether this bill would mandate (or come close to mandating) background checks, at a federal level, on every firearm transfer is a different question.

[secret_agent_man]

...for a violation of subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) of this subsection or a violation of paragraph (1)(D) of this subsection that relates to conduct specified in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) that the firearm at issue was transferred only after a background check on the actual buyer pursuant to section 922(t) indicated that the actual buyer’s receipt of the firearm would not violate section 922 (g) or (n) or State law.

Huh?

That is as bad or worse than any IRS regulation.

[carguychris]

More potentially bad law...

SEC. 7. CRACKING DOWN ON HIGH-RISK GUN DEALERS.

Section 923 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding the following:

‘(m)(1) At least once every year, the Attorney General shall identify licensed firearms dealers who have a heightened risk of firearms being diverted to criminal use based on criteria determined by the Attorney General which may include 2 or more of the following:

‘(A) Short time-to-crime for crime guns traced to a dealer.

‘(B) Incomplete crime gun trace results for firearms sold by a dealer.

‘(C) Significant or frequently reported firearm losses or thefts by a dealer.

‘(D) Violations of Federal firearms laws by a dealer.

‘(E) Any additional criteria determined by the Attorney General.

(emphasis mine)

The FFL has no conceivable way to control (A) other than perhaps relocating to a ritzy part of town and cherry-picking buyers. ("Sir, before we complete the sale, I will need a copy of your CHL, your college diploma, and a letter from your pastor attesting to your good character." )

(E) basically amounts to "I can use whatever criteria I want, just cause I say so, and if you don't like it, you can go thhhpt." <--- bronx cheer there

What's to prevent nearly every high-volume FFL from being labeled as "high risk"?

[kozak6]

The probe also revealed a loophole in the law that holds the individual gun seller legally accountable but not the gun show operator. The legislation would close the nation's "gun show loophole" and keep operators responsible

How many gun show loopholes are there?

[Don P]

Do we really need more gun laws on the federal and state level? Do we need to give the Feds another way to poke the camels nose under the tent. Please remember folks that we have a ANTI-GUN administration in DC. Just like the health care bill, once its passed and becomes law, then and only then will we find out what is in the bill. Does anyone think that there is nothing going on behind the doors of the White House with regards to guns? To believe so is being naive.