|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
April 10, 2013, 11:50 AM | #151 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Got to see the bill. My problem is that if you add a restriction, you should get something in return. I suggested previously (and to buddies at the NRA) that if this does happen - the bill should not be passed unless it adds to gun rights.
For example, let NICS be the law of the land and no state can have checks or waiting periods on top of NICS. Let no state ban guns, mags, clips, phasers, etc. - federal law will determine such. That would wipe out NY, CT and CO horrors. But just to give in on this - it will be seen as a good but small, first step. Having a NICS on private sales at shows but wiping out the state laws would be fun - now wouldn't it - Chuck, Mike and Diane?
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
April 10, 2013, 11:50 AM | #152 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
That summary still has some jaw droppers in it.
Fixing the vagueness of the interstate travel protections? From the summary, it sounds like you could go from Florida to Maine, and stop for the night IN NEW YORK, get a hotel room, and still be protected- when we weren't even sure you could stop for gas or food. |
April 10, 2013, 11:52 AM | #153 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 29, 2010
Location: The ATL (OTP)
Posts: 3,942
|
If the Camel gets his nose under the tent his body will soon follow.
I have feared from the beginning that this is something that has a good chance of passing simply because most people are so uninformed about the current process. They seem to understand banning certain types of guns and for the most part opposed those actions. However, they just do not understand how much regulation currently exist and how much of a burden this will be on law abiding citizens with little impact on crime.
__________________
A major source of objection to a free economy is precisely that it ... gives people what they want instead of what a particular group thinks they ought to want. Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman |
April 10, 2013, 11:59 AM | #154 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
Got to see which Bill Glenn? There's a new one I and Bartholomew Roberts have reported which got merged into this thread a little early, as it's not part of 649 yet. Just announced this morning.
|
April 10, 2013, 12:03 PM | #155 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Whatever is the version that will be proposed to be voted on.
If there is a link, it would be appreciated.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
April 10, 2013, 12:08 PM | #156 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,416
|
"The bill explicitly bans the federal government from creating a national firearms registry, and imposes serious criminal penalties (a felony with up to 15 years in prison) on any person who misuses or illegally retains firearms records."
So if a private sale is made, you can't keep a record of who you sold it to? |
April 10, 2013, 12:09 PM | #157 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,815
|
Only if you illegally retain those records. Once the gov't makes them mandatory, it won't be illegal any more.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
April 10, 2013, 12:21 PM | #159 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 29, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,337
|
S.649: Reid's Base Gun Control Bill
Quote:
And to think MCain was the R presidential candidate!! He has been obsessed with back door gun registration for years. That's all this UBC is and for any senator to pretend any compromise does not lead to it is disingenuous. |
|
April 10, 2013, 12:30 PM | #160 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,899
|
Although still second-hand information, the Washington Post reports:
Quote:
|
|
April 10, 2013, 12:31 PM | #161 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
Now, what we've got so far is just a series of suggestions. S. 649 is still just the draconian Fix Gun Checks Act, with some addendi on school safety and trafficking. The weird thing about Toomey's suggestions is that they seem to be over-reaching reactions to Schumer's. For example, telling NICS to place a higher priority on checks from gun shows than from licensed dealers. Furthermore, I'm not sure how the law would distinguish between family members and other buyers at the point of sale. This whole thing is still a mess, and I think Toomey's just casting about while trying to appease his base. It really looks like they're trying to throw us a few bones with national reciprocity and out-of-state sales. Of course, those things can easily be taken away later, leaving the most restrictive provisions in place. (How are guys like Schumer expected to vote for nationwide CCW, just to get a really watered-down version of what they originally wanted?)
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
April 10, 2013, 12:34 PM | #162 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
Oh he may be off the reservation, but in the other direction. And not in a way that the control advocates can point to as unreasonable in the same way as the ACLU did with the "criminal justice traps" in the Schumer version.
edit: Interested in the text of - Encourage states to provide all their available records to NICS by restricting federal funds to states who do not comply. Could be nice if it's mean enough to be effective. Also wonder about the strategy on this one. Offer it up as an amendment toget rid of Schumer's part of 649, or risk letting 649 pass, so that if it doesn't, the people jumping overboard when it fails have this as a life raft. Last edited by JimDandy; April 10, 2013 at 01:03 PM. |
April 10, 2013, 01:07 PM | #163 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 15, 2011
Posts: 1,405
|
BG Checks and Internet sales
Over the last two days I have seen something I guess I didn't spot before. Along with talking about requiring checks for sales at gun shows I see a reference to checks on internet sales.
I have bought two handguns through GunBroker, both were from FFLs, and both were received by the same local FFL for my pick up. In both cases I had to do a background check with this local FFL. My question is "under what conditions is it possible to purchase a firearm and not be required to go through a background check?" (With the exception of those who are exempted because the have a CCW or something like that).
__________________
Colt M1911, AR-15 | S&W Model 19, Model 27| SIG P238 | Berreta 85B Cheetah | Ruger Blackhawk .357MAG, Bearcat "Shopkeeper" .22LR| Remington Marine Magnum SP 12GA., Model 700 SPS .223 |
April 10, 2013, 01:10 PM | #164 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 24, 2013
Location: NC
Posts: 545
|
That's a great question.
|
April 10, 2013, 01:15 PM | #165 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 29, 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO area
Posts: 4,040
|
Until the bill text is actually released there's no way to know. You can't trust summaries reported by the news, they have no idea what checks are required now.
I almost wonder if there will be very little ultimate change to when background checks are required but with higher penalties in the unlikely event they are skipped, discovered, and charged. |
April 10, 2013, 01:27 PM | #166 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 15, 2011
Posts: 1,405
|
Quote:
I am wondering if a private sale in-state is the exception or has my FFL just been overly cautious requiring the background check when the law doesn't actually require it?
__________________
Colt M1911, AR-15 | S&W Model 19, Model 27| SIG P238 | Berreta 85B Cheetah | Ruger Blackhawk .357MAG, Bearcat "Shopkeeper" .22LR| Remington Marine Magnum SP 12GA., Model 700 SPS .223 |
|
April 10, 2013, 01:29 PM | #167 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,899
|
Quote:
|
|
April 10, 2013, 01:32 PM | #168 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 15, 2011
Posts: 1,405
|
Quote:
Negative, this is not an internet sale, this is a private sale face to face. The only thing that happened across the internet was advertising and arranging the meeting for the purpose of conducting a private sale.
__________________
Colt M1911, AR-15 | S&W Model 19, Model 27| SIG P238 | Berreta 85B Cheetah | Ruger Blackhawk .357MAG, Bearcat "Shopkeeper" .22LR| Remington Marine Magnum SP 12GA., Model 700 SPS .223 |
|
April 10, 2013, 01:33 PM | #169 | |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Politico has a report on details of the bill that are disconcerting:
Quote:
If you haven't called your Senators yet to discuss these concerns, now might be a good time. They could be voting on this bill we still haven't seen as early as tomorrow. |
|
April 10, 2013, 01:34 PM | #170 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 24, 2013
Location: NC
Posts: 545
|
Quote:
So why not call the bill the private sales control law.? |
|
April 10, 2013, 01:39 PM | #171 |
Junior Member
Join Date: January 1, 2009
Posts: 8
|
Bad guys will just break into homes and steal guns. Kill cops for theirs
|
April 10, 2013, 02:01 PM | #172 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
|
lcpiper, the reason for the checks was that you did business via the FFL, and he is required as a federal licensee to do checks for all his transactions.
If you had bought directly from a private seller in your state, Federal law would not come into play, and a check would only be necessary if your state required it. |
April 10, 2013, 02:02 PM | #173 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 15, 2011
Posts: 1,405
|
This is what was posted on NBC News;
http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2...e-passage?lite Quote:
Quote:
Besides allowing for sloppy reporting, I do not understand the disparity of these reports.
__________________
Colt M1911, AR-15 | S&W Model 19, Model 27| SIG P238 | Berreta 85B Cheetah | Ruger Blackhawk .357MAG, Bearcat "Shopkeeper" .22LR| Remington Marine Magnum SP 12GA., Model 700 SPS .223 |
||
April 10, 2013, 02:04 PM | #174 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 15, 2011
Posts: 1,405
|
Quote:
If this is the case, and this is what they want to regulate. Then this is a State Issue and the Federal Government needs to back off.
__________________
Colt M1911, AR-15 | S&W Model 19, Model 27| SIG P238 | Berreta 85B Cheetah | Ruger Blackhawk .357MAG, Bearcat "Shopkeeper" .22LR| Remington Marine Magnum SP 12GA., Model 700 SPS .223 |
|
April 10, 2013, 02:09 PM | #175 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|