The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 12, 2013, 04:14 PM   #1
BarryLee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2010
Location: The ATL (OTP)
Posts: 2,656
S.649: Reid's Base Gun Control Bill

The US Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill implementing universal background checks 10 to 8 along party lines. If you remember the legislative process from college or maybe School House Rock the bill still has a ways to go, but regrettably it is still progressing.

The sad thing is even though neither the evidence nor logic supports the implementation of universal background checks some groups are still campaigning for them. A group of religious leaders submitted 4000 signatures supporting the effort. They stated, "To refuse to take the steps we know would reduce harm is a violation of religious values so severe that we are compelled to speak out." So, how do they “know” these efforts would reduce harm?

It is time to contact your Senators and express you opinion on gun control. Be sure to remember that just because a Senator voted one way in committee does not mean they won’t swing the other way on the final vote.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...est=latestnews
__________________
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
BarryLee is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 04:42 PM   #2
2ndsojourn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 590
From Barry:
"So, how do they “know” these efforts would reduce harm?"

Because they heard it on Piers Morgan's gun control hour.

Seriously, it's not enforceable for guns made before enactment of the law.
2ndsojourn is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 04:45 PM   #3
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,346
How do you figure? It's still interstate commerce.
JimDandy is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 04:51 PM   #4
USAFNoDak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 21, 2000
Location: Minnesota, Twin Cities
Posts: 1,043
We know that there are an estimated 300 million guns in America. I wonder if that is "legally" owned plus "illegally owned" or just "legally" owned. How many guns are in the hands of criminals today, or people who have no compunction about delivering a gun to a known criminal for a profit? Those guns will never undergo a change of possession WITH an associated background check. Neither will the guns which are stolen from people who legally own guns. Once the guns are stolen, they exit the government registration scheme. This will not reduce crime. It's going to get expensive and it will deliver little, if any, benefits.
__________________
"If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." Samuel Adams.
USAFNoDak is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 04:52 PM   #5
NWPilgrim
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 29, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,141
I am rusty on my high school stuff. Now that it is out of committee is it not up to Reid as Senate Majority Leader to either permit it to come to a vote or let it die?
__________________
"The ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone. ... The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation ... forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition."
- James Madison
NWPilgrim is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 04:54 PM   #6
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,346
Its the Senate, it could be up to Biden.
JimDandy is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 05:02 PM   #7
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 4,957
Does anyone know the breakdown of votes? I'd like to see a list, . . . to be sure my folks are on the side of the angels and all that.

Edited to add: I just looked this up on popvox, govtrac, and Thomas. The full text of the bill IS NOT AVAILABLE YET! How on earth does a bill pass committee when the dadgum text isn't even available?!? Gotta pass it to see what's in it, I guess!
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman

Last edited by Spats McGee; March 12, 2013 at 05:20 PM.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 05:49 PM   #8
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,054
Quote:
The full text of the bill IS NOT AVAILABLE YET! How on earth does a bill pass committee when the dadgum text isn't even available?!?
That's because it's being written in committee. Yep. The actual number is S. 374.

So far, all we've got for text is a page of "findings."
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 06:00 PM   #9
rebs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2012
Posts: 2,195
Unfortunately I live in NYS and my senators are Schumer and Gillabrand and they are both supporters of more gun laws as proven the new laws they passed in NYS. Gillabrand was pro gun right up until she got in with Schumer then turned on us.
I have emailed and phoned them daily with no success what so ever in changing their minds.
rebs is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 06:43 PM   #10
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,054
I was wrong. The text of the bill has been published, and it's here [pdf].
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 06:46 PM   #11
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 4,957
Thank you, Tom.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 06:50 PM   #12
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
I am still amazed by how few people can connect the mental dots between "Universal Background Checks" and "National Registry," let alone the connection between "National Registry" and "Confiscation."

My hopes right now rest along three avenues:

1) Killing as many of these bills as possible, before they can be signed;

2) Voting as many of the proponents as possible out of office in 2014; and

3) A SCOTUS expansion and clarification on the RKBA outside the home.

But I am not sanguine about any of it.
MLeake is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 06:51 PM   #13
BarryLee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2010
Location: The ATL (OTP)
Posts: 2,656
Quote:
Does anyone know the breakdown of votes?
The ten Democrats voted yes and the eight Republicans voted no. Follow the link below for a list of members.

http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/about/members.cfm
__________________
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
BarryLee is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 07:05 PM   #14
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,054
Quote:
Beginning on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, it shall be unlawful for any person who is not licensed under this chapter to transfer a firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this chapter, unless a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken possession of the firearm for the purpose of complying with subsection (s).
Exemptions are made for the following:
  • gifts (but not loans) between spouses, between parents and their children, between siblings, or between grandparents and their grandchildren
  • a transfer made from a decedent’s estate, pursuant to a legal will or the operation of law
  • a temporary transfer of possession, as long as the actual transfer occurs within the home of the owner, is not removed from the owner's home, and lasts less than 7 days
  • if the transfer occurs at a shooting range, but the firearm remains at the range
  • if the transfer occurs at a shooting range, but the firearm remains at the range
  • if the gun is being lent for hunting purposes during hunting season and the transferee is duly licensed

A "transfer" is defined as "a sale, gift, loan, return from pawn or consignment, or other disposition."

Failure to report the theft or loss of a firearm within 24 hours would be a felony. And the cost? An estimated $100 million/year.

There's also an odd bit that the Attorney General "shall include a provision setting a maximum fee that may be charged by licensees for services."
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 07:15 PM   #15
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,346
Gifts but not loans between spouses, parents and children, siblings and grands? So I can give this to you permanently, but I can't give it to you for a weekend?!?!? But I can give it to you permanently, and you can then go out for the weekend, and come back and gift it back to me.

A temporary transfer to anyone, as long as it occurs at my house if it's my gun, and my gun doesn't leave my house, and lasts less than 7 days. The ONLY part of that that makes sense is the 7 days part.

Especially when the exemption for a shooting range transfer requires the firearm remain at the range. So you can't go to the range with two of your buddies and hand them your extra 1911 anymore? Unless you're willing to give the live-in range master an extra special present. Good news for the live in range master. He gets all sorts of gifts, AND it's his home, so he can hand them to his buddies for 7 days or less. He just can't carry any of them outside his home. Maybe even move. And apparently that's important enough to mention twice.
JimDandy is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 07:51 PM   #16
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,298
Tom, I especially liked the part where if you discover that your firearm is stolen/lost, you have to report that theft/loss to the Attorney General within 24 hours of discovery... and your local LE (as if that is a second thought).

Hmmm... Will the US AG provide the necessary form and a stamped, self-addressed envelope?

Since the bill directly cites to the Commerce Clause in addressing the "temporary transfer" of firearms but doesn't address any constitutional authority in making the mandate that all transfers must go through the NICS check... Oversight?
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 08:24 PM   #17
rebs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 10, 2012
Posts: 2,195
I don't believe the national back ground check would amount to anything other than a federal registry and the next thing will be confiscation.

I don't know about you guys but it is getting pretty sickening to have to fight everyday for our constitutional rights against our own government that we elect. When are these people going to learn they represent the people, they do not rule the people. We are not subjects, we are the citizens and this is our country.
rebs is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 08:59 PM   #18
KyJim
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 7,454
As I read it, it would also be unlawful for me to go onto public land and hand a firearm to a friend to shoot unless it happened to be at certain kinds of shooting ranges or shooting events or for hunting. It would ban taking a gun for repair or modification to anyone except a licensed firearms dealer.
__________________
Jim's Rules of Carry: 1. Any gun is better than no gun. 2. A gun that is reliable is better than a gun that is not. 3. A hole in the right place is better than a hole in the wrong place. 4. A bigger hole is a better hole.
KyJim is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 09:22 PM   #19
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 4,957
Ok. I have now read the bill, though not with as much depth as I want to. That said, let's take a look at the exemptions:
Quote:
gifts (but not loans) between spouses, between parents and their children, between siblings, or between grandparents and their grandchildren
This creates a fairly silly scenario in which:
  1. My father can give me, my brother, or my nephew (my father's grandson) a gun.
  2. My brother can give my father, me or my nephew a gun.
  3. I can give my brother or my father a gun, but if I want to give my nephew a gun, we have to go to an FFL.

Quote:
a transfer made from a decedent’s estate, pursuant to a legal will or the operation of law
I'll need to digest this one before commenting further.

Quote:
a temporary transfer of possession, as long as the actual transfer occurs within the home of the owner, is not removed from the owner's home, and lasts less than 7 days
When you look at the actual language, this one is fairly squirrelly. That's the Arkansaslawyer technical term. Let's start with the language in the bill:
Quote:
‘‘(3) For purposes of this subsection, the term ‘transfer’—

‘‘(A) shall include a sale, gift, loan, return from pawn or consignment, or other disposition; and

‘‘(B) shall not include temporary possession of the firearm for purposes of examination or evaluation by a prospective transferee while in the presence of the prospective transferee.
And every "transfer" has to go through an FFL. However, some transfers are excluded.
Quote:
Paragraph (1) shall not apply to— . . .
‘‘(C) a temporary transfer of possession that occurs between an unlicensed transferor and an unlicensed transferee, if —

‘‘(i) the temporary transfer of possession occurs in the home or curtilage of the unlicensed transferor;

‘‘(ii) the firearm is not removed from that home or curtilage during the temporary transfer; and

‘‘(iii) the transfer has a duration of less than 7 days; and . . . [stuff about shooting ranges]
So, beginning with (i), I can loan someone a gun, if the loan is of short (<7 days) duration, and the loan occurs within my home or curtilage, and the firearm remains in my home or curtilage. For some bizarre reason, I cannot loan my buddy a gun at his house, though. We can plink at my house, but not his. . .

And then there's that "curtilage" word:
Quote:
cur·ti·lage [kur-tl-ij]
noun Law.
the area of land occupied by a dwelling and its yard and outbuildings, actually enclosed or considered as enclosed.
(Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/curtilage?s=t)
So my buddy and I can go plink off my deck or in my back yard (but not his), but as soon as we step out into the pasture to plink, I can't hand him my plinker, 'cuz that's not curtilage.

I can give my brother a rifle, forever and for good, but I can only loan him one to plink for an afternoon if we're in my back yard. Not his, and not in the pasture.

Quote:
if the transfer occurs at a shooting range, but the firearm remains at the range
There's more to it:
Quote:
[The FFL-transfer requirement doesn't apply to]: (D) a temporary transfer of possession without transfer of title made in connection with lawful hunting or sporting purposes if the transfer occurs—

‘‘(i) at a shooting range located in or on premises owned or occupied by a duly incorporated organization organized for conservation purposes or to foster proficiency in firearms and the firearm is, at all times, kept within the premises of the shooting range;

‘‘(ii) at a target firearm shooting competition under the auspices of or approved by a State agency or nonprofit organization and the firearm is, at all times, kept within the premises of the shooting competition; and
"at a shooting range located in or on premises owned or occupied by a duly incorporated organization organized for conservation purposes or to foster proficiency in firearms" -- What about private shooting ranges? I don't think these qualify as organizations "duly incorporated . . . for conservation purposes or to foster proficiency in firearms." The Arkansas Game and Fish Comm'n range, sure, but what about Bob's Shootin' Lanes? I'd say it's organized for to turn a profit, not for conservation or to foster proficiency. That may be a nice side-benefit, but it's not the purpose. What if Bob's Shootin' Lanes is a sole proprietorship? It may not be a smart move on Bob's part, but this provision seems to expressly exclude him.

I'll get back to the hunting issues later.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 09:55 PM   #20
2ndsojourn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 590
It sounds like this new law is gonna get shot full of holes.
2ndsojourn is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 09:55 PM   #21
Tac-comm
Junior Member
 
Join Date: January 26, 2013
Posts: 2
Universal Background Checks Passed Committee

I'm amazed it has gotten this far.
Tac-comm is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 09:59 PM   #22
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,054
Quote:
So my buddy and I can go plink off my deck or in my back yard (but not his), but as soon as we step out into the pasture to plink, I can't hand him my plinker, 'cuz that's not curtilage.
Yeah, but you're allowed to do it on your own curtilage! See? They're meeting us halfway. I think that's the compromise they keep telling us about.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 10:28 PM   #23
silvrjeepr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2009
Posts: 213
Universal Background Checks Passed Committee

Just wait. They have to get rid of the second amendment before they can go after the first... Then the rest of them.
silvrjeepr is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 11:24 PM   #24
BarryLee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2010
Location: The ATL (OTP)
Posts: 2,656
NBC is reporting that the NRA will support universal background checks if private sellers are not required to keep records. They are reporting that Republican Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma is a key player in the negotiations and supposedly if he agrees to the background check bill the NRA will sign off on it. The NRA is denying that this is true.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2...rds-fight?lite

http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/ne...heck-bill.aspx
__________________
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
BarryLee is offline  
Old March 12, 2013, 11:29 PM   #25
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,298
Possessory Interest n. The right to control a property and to exclude others for the present, exercised by one who is not necessarily the owner. A current or future exclusive right to possession and use of a property. Webster's New World Law Dictionary

As I understand it, the term above, most often (but not always), applies to Real Property. Yet this bill, if passed and signed into law allows the Federal Government to take a possessory interest in my personal property that is no longer in or affecting interstate, intrastate or foreign commerce.
.
I have a question: Under what authority does the Federal Government have the power to enable a possessory interest in my property without first paying for that privilege?

This is nothing more than an unlawful taking. See the 5th Amendment.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.19304 seconds with 10 queries