Senate “Deal” GOA Alert

[22WRF]

Senate “Deal” Would Impose
Even More Gun Bans
Gifts, gun raffles and multiple sales of guns would be effectively banned

Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee will mark up four bills arising out of the Newtown tragedy:

* The Feinstein bill — which would ban millions of shotguns, rifles, handguns and magazines that Americans can legally own -- but which will probably die on the Senate floor.

* The universal gun registry — which may also die on the Senate floor — unless a last-minute deal with Sen. Tom Coburn brings it to life.

* Legislation by Barbara Boxer, which throws away $100,000,000 on school safety studies, but doesn’t immediately mention guns.

* And, currently the biggest danger, the Leahy-Gillibrand-Kirk bill, which has ominously been labeled a “gun trafficking” bill.

In regard to this latter piece of legislation (S. 443), the bill is being sold inside the Beltway as a bipartisan “compromise” because anti-gun Senator Mark Kirk (R-IL) is a cosponsor of it.

But S. 443 would dramatically threaten to put gun owners in jail with horrendously long sentences for the most minor of infractions.

Essentially, the bill would impose a 15-year prison sentence for “negligent multiple sales by a dealer,” “negligent gifting” or “negligent raffling.”

Increasingly, there are more and more individuals who are “prohibited persons” for non-violent reasons — for instance, they smoke marijuana or they are military veterans suffering from maladies such as PTSD.

But if S. 443 is passed, any person who sells to such prohibited persons two or more firearms ... or gives them a firearm as a gift ... or raffles a firearm (where they are the recipient) ... does so only at the considerable risk of spending 15 years in a federal penitentiary.

You don’t need to know the person is a prohibited person under either example. Nor does the recipient need to know they’re a prohibited person.

In fact, you don’t need to do anything more than plan (“conspire”) to transfer the gun. In addition, the recipient doesn’t need to be on the NICS list to be a prohibited person.

Not only that, under section 4 of the bill, if you even “intend” to sell a firearm to a person who turns out to be a marijuana smoker — or one of the prohibited military veterans suffering from PTSD — you become a prohibited person yourself.

When all is said and done, this bipartisan “compromise” is as bad as the Feinstein gun ban (S. 150).

[CCHolderinMaine]

Bi-partisan ought to be a dirty word. If it's a compromise, watch out. The ones being compromised will be you and me

[lonewolf204]

What is the deal with Coburn?

[GunnyGene]

S. 443 goes hand in glove with the philosophy of the proposed UN Arms Trade Treaty that will be in the news again in a week or so. http://www.un.org/disarmament/

And the official position of the US on the above Arms Trade Treaty: http://www.state.gov/t/isn/armstradetreaty/

A key component of the above ATT is a registry to track ownership of all small arms. Guess what?

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama's prospects for winning near-universal background checks for gun purchases seemed shaky as the Senate Judiciary Committee prepared for Congress' first votes on curbing firearms since December's horrific shootings at a Connecticut elementary school.

The Democratic-led panel had four bills on its agenda Thursday as lawmakers began shaping their response to the slaughter of 20 first-graders and six staffers in Newtown, Conn. The shootings elevated guns to a top-tier national issue, though many of Obama's proposals have encountered opposition from the National Rifle Association and many Republicans.

Besides expanding background checks, the other measures would ban assault weapons and ammunition magazines carrying more than 10 rounds, make gun trafficking and the purchase of firearms for people barred from owning them federal crimes, and provide more money for schools to buy video cameras and other safety equipment.

All four measures were expected to pass the committee, perhaps Thursday. But their fate when the full Senate considers them, probably in April, was less certain. The trafficking measure by panel Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., was thought to have the best prospects and the assault weapons ban by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., seemed to have the slimmest chance.

Democrats had hoped to reach a bipartisan deal on expanding federal background checks with conservative Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla. But on Wednesday, Democrats set aside their efforts to win over Coburn after weeks of talks failed to resolve a dispute over requiring that records of private sales be retained.

Their inability to craft a deal with Coburn was a blow to Democrats because of his solid conservative credentials and "A" rating with the NRA. His support could have meant backing from other Senate Republicans and even moderate Democrats, including several facing 2014 re-election campaigns in GOP-leaning states.

In addition, gun-curb supporters say the Senate will have to approve legislation with strong bipartisan support to boost their chances of success in the GOP-led House. Republican leaders there have said they won't act until the Senate produces legislation.

Democrats said they would negotiate with other Republicans and would not give up on eventually cutting a deal with Coburn.

"We're confident plenty of senators already understand that this is the sweet spot where good policy and politics meet," said Mark Glaze, director of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a gun-curb group led by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino whose membership includes more than 800 mayors.

Expanding the checks is the cornerstone and most popular part of Obama's effort to rein gun violence. They are now mandated only for sales by the nation's 55,000 federally licensed gun dealers, not for private sales between individuals, like those at gun shows or online.

An Associated-Press-GfK poll in January found 84 percent favored requiring background checks at gun shows. Other proposed gun curbs were supported by just over half the public.

Thursday's Judiciary session prompted widespread efforts, especially by gun control advocates, to pressure recalcitrant senators and show signs of public support.

Supporters of gun curbs planned rallies outside the home-state offices of Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Judiciary's top Republican, and Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz.

Former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., grievously wounded in a Tucson mass shooting two years ago, solicited contributions by email for the political action committee she and husband Mark Kelly, the retired astronaut, have formed to help elect lawmakers who back gun curbs.

"Your contribution will help us keep the pressure on Judiciary Committee senators while ensuring the rest of them see our message" during Congress' recess late this month, she wrote.

NRA officials said they have urged their members, said to number more than 4 million, to contact lawmakers.

Democrats say background check records, whether kept by the individuals, manufacturers or others, are the only way to ensure that the checks are conducted for private sales. Coburn said such information could help create a federal registry of gun owners - something that is now illegal and the White House says would not happen.

Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Mark Kirk, R-Ill., also have been involved in the background check negotiations and said in a joint statement that they would continue looking for a compromise with other senators.

"Dr. Coburn is still hopeful they can reach an agreement," Coburn spokesman John Hart said Wednesday.

Lacking an agreement with Coburn, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., planned to seek a vote by the Judiciary Committee on a bill resembling a measure he initially proposed two years ago. It would require background checks for nearly all gun sales, with narrow exemptions including transactions between close relatives. It would also cut federal aid for states that don't send enough mental health records to the federal background check network - a widespread problem that has fueled critics' complaints that the current system should be fixed before it is expanded.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20130307/DA4S4SA80.html

[carver]

Remember the health care bill that was passed by the senate? Same things going to happen with gun control. No Republican will be allowed to vote on this one either, be ready.

[rimmer1]

You better start loading those High capacity magazines and swab the oil out of those barrels.

[hobby_mesa]

I was just mentioning this to the wife...she strongly suggested if there's ANY other firearms I want, I better get them now. She was referring to a $3500 rifle. Lordy.

[soundguy]

so if a prohibited person is not on nics.. and the dealer doens't know they are prohibited.. and the buyer lies on the 4473 where it asks if they are an illegal user of drugs..e tc.

how's that the dealers fault?

[Blackhawk Dave]

Remember the primary reviewer of gun sales is the ATF. This is the same bunch that has gone after gun dealers for putting MS in the tiny state hole instead of Mississippi....which cannot fit.

[CCHolderinMaine]

Originally Posted by soundguy

so if a prohibited person is not on nics.. and the dealer doens't know they are prohibited.. and the buyer lies on the 4473 where it asks if they are an illegal user of drugs..e tc.

how's that the dealers fault?

The exact same way as if your own a store that sells booze, and you sell to an underage person, even if that person has a perfect looking fake id, you still get WHACKED. The guy with the fake id might get a $50 fine. You the store owner get your liquor license suspended and pay thousands in fines. I know this from personal experience.

[soundguy]

sounds like some public officials need to be out of a job...

[Zhurh]

So, I guess they marked up that kirk bill, I just got off the phone bitchin at Murkowski & Begich's office, they claim they ain't voting for it; ya right. Boy, I sure hope this doesn't get passed through the Senate, but my better judgment says just wait and see it does. Probably all die in the house hopefully.

[nmckenzie]

Originally Posted by soundguy

so if a prohibited person is not on nics.. and the dealer doens't know they are prohibited.. and the buyer lies on the 4473 where it asks if they are an illegal user of drugs..e tc.

how's that the dealers fault?

Knew a dealer back in the '70s who came within an ace of losing his license, maybe worse, because he'd sold an M1 carbine to a guy who'd presented all the proper ID, filled out the 4473, and after taking the carbine home had cut the barrel and stock to the point it resembled one of the old Universal Enforcer pistols. Eventually he was caught with this thing. The topping on the cake was he was also a convicted felon and had purchased the rifle illegally. ATF put the dealer through all sorts of hoops on that one, and eventually wrote it up as a "nonwillful violation" without any penalties being levied.

[soundguy]

presumably nics would catch that now.

as for the enforcer pistols. I see them now and again at gun shows, and love the 30 carbine and it's cartridge.. but have been too shy to buy one of the universal enforcer pistols for the very same reason.. how do i know some yeehaw didn't take and mi carb rifle and cut it/mock/mark it up and make an illegal SBR and sell it as a pistol.. etc...

[soundguy]

ps.. an updates on any of the gun legislation. i hear some stuff was suposed to be looked at today..

[RunningOnMT]

The people debating our fate, even the ones supposedly on our side, don't even know the law or proposed laws under discussion. Sen. Cornyn wanted an amendment to exclude military members and veterans from the proposed legislation. When Feinstein brought up the PTSD issue, Cornyn said vets with PTSD were already prohibited from owning firearms, which is not true. But by thinking that it was, he more or less accepted that prohibition. More importantly, why should veterans, retired military, and retired police officers be permitted to enjoy any more God given and constitutionally protected freedoms than any other citizens? A compromise with the devil is still evil. These republicans will throw us under the bus as they care only about keeping their jobs.

[jedwil]

Originally Posted by RunningOnMT

The people debating our fate, even the ones supposedly on our side, don't even know the law or proposed laws under discussion. Sen. Cornyn wanted an amendment to exclude military members and veterans from the proposed legislation. When Feinstein brought up the PTSD issue, Cornyn said vets with PTSD were already prohibited from owning firearms, which is not true. But by thinking that it was, he more or less accepted that prohibition. More importantly, why should veterans, retired military, and retired police officers be permitted to enjoy any more God given and constitutionally protected freedoms than any other citizens? A compromise with the devil is still evil. These republicans will throw us under the bus as they care only about keeping their jobs.

http://www.cornyn.senate.gov/public/...1-a3ebab8c836b

[RunningOnMT]

and?

[RifleHawk]

I don't care what "laws" they pass...I'm a free man.... I will NOT be a subject!