The response I received from Senator Coburn on his version of background checks. Since Manchin is determined to resubmit his bill and the talking heads are saying some Dems will reverse their votes and some Republicans are thinking of jumping ship, thought I would share what I got from Senator Coburn.
Thank you for contacting me regarding recent gun control proposals considered before the Senate. As the discussion unfolded over the past six months, I reiterated to my fellow Oklahomans that my commitment to our Second Amendment right to bear arms remained steadfast and I would not support any measure infringing upon this fundamental constitutional right. I appreciate this opportunity to answer your specific questions and to discuss my vote allowing for debate, my opposition to the “Manchin-Toomey†proposal considered by the Senate, and the alternative solution I offered to protect the rights of gun owners. I encourage you to watch my speech on the Senate floor discussing these issues, as well as the root cause of violenceâ€"criminal activity and mental health. You can view my speech here:
http://bit.ly/Y4U4rC.
First, I would like to address my vote in favor of the motion to proceed to the debate of gun legislation on the Senate floor. While some special interest groups tried to misconstrue this as a vote in favor of unconstitutional gun control laws, my vote was only supporting a debate and amendment process in the Senate. What our Founding Fathers expected of the Senate, and what the American people elect us to do, is openly and transparently debate the critical issues in our country. In my view, not participating in this debate would do more to jeopardize Americans’ Second Amendment rights than participating. Senators should be on record of where they stand on unconstitutional provisions such as “assault weapon bans†in order to hold them accountable to their constituents. I also believe that there are opportunities to improve our nation’s gun laws, including a national concealed carry reciprocity law that would allow an American’s right to self-defense to extend beyond the border of one’s home state.
As you likely know, the Senate voted down several gun control proposals, including the Manchin-Toomey proposal to require Federally Firearms Licensed dealers (FFLs) to conduct National Instant Criminal Background Checks (NICS) on all sales at gun shows or initiated by internet advertisements. I agree with the intent of their proposal to stem the transfer of firearms to those that are a danger to themselves or others. However, their approach to accomplish this goal prioritizes taxing, burdening, and criminalizing law-abiding gun owners at the expense of an effective proposal to keep firearms out of the hands of the dangerous. I therefore voted against the Manchin-Toomey proposal and offered my own alternative proposal, which I would like to describe in detail.
As a firm believer of the Second Amendment, I support longstanding federal law that prohibits illegal aliens, pedophiles, spousal abusers, drug dealers, felons, and mentally-dangerous individuals from purchasing and possessing firearms, as well as the current procedures at retail stores to prevent prohibited people from procuring firearms. Since 1968, federal law has prohibited convicted felons, those with dangerous mental illness and illegal aliens from purchasing or possessing a firearm. Since 1994, every firearm that has been bought at a gun store has required a NICS check be conducted prior to the final transaction to prevent these prohibited individuals from purchasing firearms. These laws were upheld as constitutional by the Supreme Court in the majority opinion delivered by Justice Scalia in the DC v. Heller decision that struck down the handgun ban in Washington, D.C. Justice Scalia clearly stated, “Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill.â€
Current laws intended to keep firearms out of the hands of the dangerous are rendered ineffective when a prohibited purchaser can just as easily procure a firearm from a gun show or an internet marketplace without a NICS check as they can at a gun store. I believe this is a legitimate flaw in our nation’s laws that necessitates the reasonable expansion of NICS checks into secondary and private markets for the sole purpose of keeping firearms out of the wrong hands. However, I believe Congress can find a better solution to this policy gap than a new regime of de facto transfer taxes and burdensome regulations on law abiding gun owners, as proposed by the Manchin-Toomey proposal. Unfortunately, their approach of rerouting all gun commerce through federally designated persons and charging a $30-$125 fee would incentivize evasion over compliance.
Unlike the Manchin-Toomey approach, I believe gun owners must be treated as part of the solution, rather than part of the problem. I submitted an alternative amendment that would give law abiding gun owners the tool to know the person they are selling their firearm to is not on the “do not buy list.†Under my proposal, a potential gun purchaser could log into a website and obtain a temporary permit, or use an open or concealed carry permit, to confirm to the seller that they are legally able to purchase the firearm. Under this plan, a concealed or open carry permit holder would not feel any impact. Those that do not possess a concealed carry permit would only require an extra two minutes to run a NICS check to obtain the temporary permit. My amendment would also allow states to create their own methods if they can improve upon this policy and take primacy of enforcement of the new policy. My proposal is a simple solution that focuses on empowering the individual gun-owner to keep firearms out of the hands of the dangerous, not a big government solution that penalizes gun-owners. Unfortunately, Senator Reid refused to allow a vote on this common-sense approach I offered. I encourage you to read the text, background, and summary of my proposal here:
http://1.usa.gov/14PYWE4.
Responsible gun owners should be leading the effort to make sure firearms are used for the purpose our founders’ intendedâ€"self-defense and freedom, not mayhem and murder. We cannot legislate away all acts of violence, and criminals will undoubtedly continue to break the law regardless of what Congress does. However, making it more difficult for people like violent felons to procure weapons will increase the chances of them getting caught trying to procure the weapon, rather than doing the harm post-acquisition. In order to accomplish this, Congress should provide gun owners a tool to make transfers of firearms in the secondary markets saferâ€"not more expensive, onerous, or invasive.
Undoubtedly, the urgency for Congress to reform gun laws was sparked by tragic, senseless acts of violence in communities like Newtown and Aurora, and a desire to prevent such despicable acts from occurring again. The national conversation about preventing violence should continue, and it is essential that we as a society address the root cause of the problemâ€"not just the symptoms. We must consider the impact of violent and graphic entertainment within our culture, the breakdown of the family unit and its long-term consequences, and the challenges of effective mental health care systems and treatments. Most importantly, addressing the root cause of the problem means restoring the value society places on the life and liberty of every human being, and upholding our commitment to protect it. As I have stated before, there is no greater protector of life and liberty than the U.S. Constitution, and it will continue to guide every action I take in the Senate.
Again, thank you for contacting me. God bless.
Sincerely,
Tom A. Coburn, M.D.
United States Senator
TC: GUN
