armaborealis
Well-Known Fanatic
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2011
- Messages
- 575
Obviously everyone is all worked up about Dianne Feinstein's modern weapons ban, and about impending magazine capacity bans.
There's another threat out there too: "reasonable, common sense gun control." Rep Jim Moran (D-VA) is putting forward legislation to attack many issues. From The Hill:
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/27438 ... a-members-
I think this one is going be toughest to stop, frankly.
This closes the "private sale loophole," that is, your ability to lawfully transfer a firearm in a private sale/trade to a resident of your state who you don't have reasonable cause to think is a prohibited person (felon, crazy, drug abuser, etc). There are many issues here. First is the inconvenience: why should I have to go to an FFL and pay money to transfer a firearm to a family member or friend? The other issue is generating a 4473 for every transaction. This paper trail could be used as a back door registry in the future. I would be ok with something that let me do a more robust background check in a private sale, like letting private parties call NICS to run a background check, but the paper trail from a 4473 for every transaction is unacceptable.
This has little to do with preventing mass shootings or crime. Connecticut closed the "gun show loophole" for all firearms and closed the "private sales loophole" for handguns and you can see how effective that was -- the perp exploited the "kill your own mother and steal her stuff" loophole. Additionally it would do nothing to stop straw purchases, where a perp has someone who can pass the background check buy the gun for them, which is one of the more common ways that bad guys get guns. This is all about making a paper trail for every firearm trade so that a backdoor registry is later possible. That way, the next time they want to go for an "assault weapons" ban they know who has all the assault weapons by checking 4473s.
Basically this looks like a way to make life yet more difficult for FFLs. It is already a felony for a prohibited person to touch guns or ammo, even if its their job, which is why you don't find felons working in many gun stores. Why do we need to make it triple plus illegal? The devil is in the details, and what do you think the odds of the new "background check" involving a time consuming, expensive, invasive process are going to be? What happens when ATF takes six month to process the "annual employee check" paperwork and a store lacks staff to keep the store open?
I bet if you asked NRA members the question differently they'd respond differently. Let's poll this: "Do you support allowing attorney general Eric Holder, who oversaw a program armingMexican Drug Cartels with thousands of weapons and who strongly opposes private firearms ownership, to place any American citizen on a secret list that would make them a prohibited person with no due process or appeal options?"
That is what this is. The terror watch list/no fly list is a secret document built by the attorney general. There are many "false positives," that is, people who should not be on the list but are anyways. For example, Sen Ted Kennedy (to be fair, he did kill someone...) and Sen Ted Stevens were both on the list. Children, active duty marines returning from deployments, and other non-nefarious people have been caught up on this secret list too. Obviously nobody wants terrorists to buy guns, but it seems troublesome to me to forbid people to purchase firearms based on a secret list with no oversight/appeal process.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List
The ban on possession with no due process is VERY troubling. What happens if the government puts you on the secret terrorist watchlist accidentally and you already own guns? How do you find out that you are now a prohibited person in possession (generally a felony)? Will your first warning be when a SWAT team shoots your dog and crashes through your door to execute a no-knock warrant? I don't know how they could notify you that you're now on a secret watchlist any other way unless AG Holder is going to mail postcards to terrorists letting them know that they're being monitored.
Again, this topic links to closing the private sales loophole. They can't have future registration/reliable paper trails on all firearms if people can claim to have sold or lost their firearms without a paper trail. The fact that this could well criminalize conduct of burglary victims who have their property stolen is just a bonus feature.
National CWP standards? Really? That's a shitty idea. What about the ~10% of states that have Constitutional Carry? Are they going to be forced to require some BS federal training standard now? That's a step backwards. Unless this idea is in the context of disciplining the militia with broad training standards that apply to all military aged males (and maybe women too, it is the 21st century and all), this idea is intended to create barriers to entry before exercising a specifically enumerated Constitutional right. Does Rep Moran intend to require me to get mandatory training before I can blog or pray as well?
It is necessary to educate even folks on our side of the issue why it is a bad idea to allow Eric Holder to declare you a felon overnight or why it is a bad idea to force everyone to record every firearms transaction on a 4473.
Sadly these sorts of things are pretty likely to pass, much more so than the outright bans. They are esoteric, technical, and sound eminently reasonable. Who can argue with background checks for everyone or keeping terrorists from buying guns?
There's another threat out there too: "reasonable, common sense gun control." Rep Jim Moran (D-VA) is putting forward legislation to attack many issues. From The Hill:
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/27438 ... a-members-
I think this one is going be toughest to stop, frankly.
This closes the "private sale loophole," that is, your ability to lawfully transfer a firearm in a private sale/trade to a resident of your state who you don't have reasonable cause to think is a prohibited person (felon, crazy, drug abuser, etc). There are many issues here. First is the inconvenience: why should I have to go to an FFL and pay money to transfer a firearm to a family member or friend? The other issue is generating a 4473 for every transaction. This paper trail could be used as a back door registry in the future. I would be ok with something that let me do a more robust background check in a private sale, like letting private parties call NICS to run a background check, but the paper trail from a 4473 for every transaction is unacceptable.
This has little to do with preventing mass shootings or crime. Connecticut closed the "gun show loophole" for all firearms and closed the "private sales loophole" for handguns and you can see how effective that was -- the perp exploited the "kill your own mother and steal her stuff" loophole. Additionally it would do nothing to stop straw purchases, where a perp has someone who can pass the background check buy the gun for them, which is one of the more common ways that bad guys get guns. This is all about making a paper trail for every firearm trade so that a backdoor registry is later possible. That way, the next time they want to go for an "assault weapons" ban they know who has all the assault weapons by checking 4473s.
Basically this looks like a way to make life yet more difficult for FFLs. It is already a felony for a prohibited person to touch guns or ammo, even if its their job, which is why you don't find felons working in many gun stores. Why do we need to make it triple plus illegal? The devil is in the details, and what do you think the odds of the new "background check" involving a time consuming, expensive, invasive process are going to be? What happens when ATF takes six month to process the "annual employee check" paperwork and a store lacks staff to keep the store open?
I bet if you asked NRA members the question differently they'd respond differently. Let's poll this: "Do you support allowing attorney general Eric Holder, who oversaw a program armingMexican Drug Cartels with thousands of weapons and who strongly opposes private firearms ownership, to place any American citizen on a secret list that would make them a prohibited person with no due process or appeal options?"
That is what this is. The terror watch list/no fly list is a secret document built by the attorney general. There are many "false positives," that is, people who should not be on the list but are anyways. For example, Sen Ted Kennedy (to be fair, he did kill someone...) and Sen Ted Stevens were both on the list. Children, active duty marines returning from deployments, and other non-nefarious people have been caught up on this secret list too. Obviously nobody wants terrorists to buy guns, but it seems troublesome to me to forbid people to purchase firearms based on a secret list with no oversight/appeal process.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List
The ban on possession with no due process is VERY troubling. What happens if the government puts you on the secret terrorist watchlist accidentally and you already own guns? How do you find out that you are now a prohibited person in possession (generally a felony)? Will your first warning be when a SWAT team shoots your dog and crashes through your door to execute a no-knock warrant? I don't know how they could notify you that you're now on a secret watchlist any other way unless AG Holder is going to mail postcards to terrorists letting them know that they're being monitored.
Again, this topic links to closing the private sales loophole. They can't have future registration/reliable paper trails on all firearms if people can claim to have sold or lost their firearms without a paper trail. The fact that this could well criminalize conduct of burglary victims who have their property stolen is just a bonus feature.
National CWP standards? Really? That's a shitty idea. What about the ~10% of states that have Constitutional Carry? Are they going to be forced to require some BS federal training standard now? That's a step backwards. Unless this idea is in the context of disciplining the militia with broad training standards that apply to all military aged males (and maybe women too, it is the 21st century and all), this idea is intended to create barriers to entry before exercising a specifically enumerated Constitutional right. Does Rep Moran intend to require me to get mandatory training before I can blog or pray as well?
It is necessary to educate even folks on our side of the issue why it is a bad idea to allow Eric Holder to declare you a felon overnight or why it is a bad idea to force everyone to record every firearms transaction on a 4473.
Sadly these sorts of things are pretty likely to pass, much more so than the outright bans. They are esoteric, technical, and sound eminently reasonable. Who can argue with background checks for everyone or keeping terrorists from buying guns?
