Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 106

Thread: Senators Strike Deal On Background Checks

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    153

    Senators Strike Deal On Background Checks

    "SENATORS STRIKE A DEAL ON BACKGROUND CHECKS: A Senate aide tells ABC's GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS that Sens. Joe Mancin, D-W. Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., have reached deal to expand background checks to gun shows - all commercial sales. The deal will be announced at press conference later this morning. Gun show sales will be conditioned on same background checks and paper record keeping requirements currently applied to retail sales. There will be some exemptions for sales between family members, and short-term hunter to hunter loans If deal holds, likely to pass by fairly wide margin in the Senate."

    If this passes, I'll be pretty upset. I feel like our legislature is failing us.

  2. #2
    Regular Member optiksguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Town of Herndon, VA
    Posts
    69

    Question

    From the Politico piece on the deal:

    The Manchin-Toomey agreement would close the so-called “gun show loophole” by requiring that background checks are conducted on all commercial gun sales in the country, according to a fact sheet of the bill obtained by POLITICO from a representative of one of the gun control groups involved in the talks.
    ...

    However, person-to-person sales — the “friends and neighbors exceptions” would not be subject to a background check.
    Isn't thiis already the current state of affairs in some places (at least in Virigina it is, AFAIK), i.e. background checks when dealing with a commerical entity and none when dealing with private individuals? What am I missing?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Nampa, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    1,096
    The news is reporting like this is a new thing. Commercial sales are already subject to BG checks. Internet sales already go thru ffl for BG checks. There has to be something in there that we haven't seen or read.

  4. #4
    Regular Member sraacke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Saint Gabriel, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    1,222
    I'm waiting to see what this is supposed to change. FFLs already have to do background checks, at gun shows and anywhere else for that matter. What is this supposed to accomplish that isn't already being done?
    President/ Founding Member
    Louisiana Open Carry Awareness League
    www.laopencarry.org

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    484
    This is probably one of those "common sense" bills that will gain support since it's pretty much all in practice already, then they will try to sneak in amendments hoping the majority won't notice.

  6. #6
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    From what I have read, the Manchin-Toomey changes will be offered to the current bill as an amendment. The current bill is horrible. The Manchin-Toomey amendment is billed to be "better".

    Toomey put this blurb on his website:

    Bottom Line: The Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act would require states and the federal government to send all necessary records on criminals and the violently mentally ill to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The bill extends the existing background check system to gun shows and online sales.

    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.

    TITLE ONE: GETTING ALL THE NAMES OF PROHIBITED PURCHASERS INTO THE BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM

    Summary of Title I: This section improves background checks for firearms by strengthening the instant check system.

    - Encourage states to provide all their available records to NICS by restricting federal funds to states who do not comply.

    - Allow dealers to voluntarily use the NICS database to run background checks on their prospective employees.

    - Clarifies that submissions of mental health records into the NICS system are not prohibited by federal privacy laws (HIPAA).

    - Provides a legal process for a veteran to contest his/her placement in NICS when there is no basis for barring the right to own a firearm.

    TITLE TWO: REQUIRING BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR FIREARM SALES

    Summary of Title II: This section of the bill requires background checks for sales at gun shows and online while securing certain aspects of 2nd Amendment rights for law abiding citizens.

    - Closes the gun show and other loopholes while exempting temporary transfers and transfers between family members.

    - Fixes interstate travel laws for sportsmen who transport their firearms across state lines in a responsible manner. The term "transport" includes staying in temporary lodging overnight, stopping for food, buying fuel, vehicle maintenance, and medical treatment.

    - Protects sellers from lawsuits if the weapon cleared through the expanded background checks and is subsequently used in a crime. This is the same treatment gun dealers receive now.

    - Allows dealers to complete transactions at gun shows that take place in a state for which they are not a resident.

    - Requires that if a background check at a gun show does not result in a definitive response from NICS within 48 hours, the sale may proceed. After four years, when the NICS improvements are completed, the background check would clear in 24 hours. Current law is three business days.

    - Requires the FBI to give priority to finalizing background checks at gun shows over checks at store front dealerships.

    - Authorizes use of a state concealed carry permit instead of a background check when purchasing a firearm from a dealer.

    - Permits interstate handgun sales from dealers.

    - Allows active military to buy firearms in their home states.

    - Family transfers and some private sales (friends, neighbors, other individuals) are exempt from background checks

    TITLE THREE: NATIONAL COMMISSION ON MASS VIOLENCE

    Summary of Title III: : This section of the bill creates a commission to study the causes of mass violence in the United States, looking at all aspects of the problem, including guns, school safety, mental health, and violent media or video games.

    The Commission would consist of six experts appointed by the Senate Majority Leader and six experts appointed by the Speaker of the House. They would be required to submit an interim report in three months and a completed report in six months.

    WHAT THE BILL WILL NOT DO

    The bill will not take away anyone's guns.

    The bill will not ban any type of firearm.

    The bill will not ban or restrict the use of any kind of bullet or any size clip or magazine.

    The bill will not create a national registry; in fact, it specifically makes it illegal to establish any such registry.

    The bill will not, in any way at all, infringe upon the Constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens.

    That's a pretty long bill of goods... I want to see the actual text before I make a call.

    Some of these items will appeal to some gun-rights folks, and would appear to be thrown in to sweeten the deal.

    One of the biggest sticking points I would have with these features concerns the felony/prison term for someone who does keep illegal records. So what. Selling guns to Mexican drug cartels is just as illegal, and it's the same Justice Department who will decide who to prosecute for breaking this law as they DIDN'T for that one. Penalties are meaningless if they are "enforced" by dirty cops.

    Also, I'm tired of being taken for a sucker that there is no record keeping. If the government isn't keeping records, then prove it, by REMOVING the Serial Numbers from the Background Check form! Remove the temptation to sin, by not giving them the forbidden fruit that they are supposed to throw away...

    TFred

  7. #7
    Regular Member optiksguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Town of Herndon, VA
    Posts
    69
    while securing certain aspects of 2nd Amendment rights for law abiding citizens
    Gee, thanks for your benevolence Senator Toomey!

    Family transfers and some private sales (friends, neighbors, other individuals) are exempt from background checks
    "Some" private sales?

    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    Also, I'm tired of being taken for a sucker that there is no record keeping. If the government isn't keeping records, then prove it, by REMOVING the Serial Numbers from the Background Check form! Remove the temptation to sin, by not giving them the forbidden fruit that they are supposed to throw away...

    TFred
    Great point, hadn't thought of that angle before!

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Davis County, Utah
    Posts
    528

    Re: Senators Strike Deal On Background Checks

    About that "family, friends, and neighbors" exemption vs. gun show sales:

    There's an old saying, "Strangers are just friends you haven't met yet."

    Who's to say a person can't meet a vendor and quickly become friends? That's happened to a family member of mine a few times.

    I like to meet new people and learn things along the way, and if a friendship comes from that, cool.

    No sarcasm meant, but this sounds like an amendment built on the Honor System.

    Using Tapatalk. Please forgive any grammatical errors.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    484
    From that text the only thing I would not be ok with would be the mental health part. Mental health really needs to be strongly defined before I would be ok in allowing it to restrict a persons rights. Nearly all Americans suffer from some sort of chemical imbalance and many take anti-anxiety medication, but this is no way should be able to be used against someone, or else it effectively becomes nationwide gun confiscation.

  10. #10
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,279
    I am against all government meddling in people's rights! I am against background checks, they do not work, they cost tax money. The whole thing is a control scheme no matter how it is packaged.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  11. #11
    Regular Member Snake161's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    I am against all government meddling in people's rights! I am against background checks, they do not work, they cost tax money. The whole thing is a control scheme no matter how it is packaged.
    This.



    It is a control issue for this gov. Dangerous either way its packaged. We don't need more laws. We need less. This administration and even representatives we have voted for are dangerous and out of control. I think the NRA's interesting metaphor of plucking feathers sums it up. We will continue to allow this gov. to do the things it does until we just have nothing left, and then do nothing at all. Tyranny has many names. One is Obama. Another is Harry Reid.
    "We have the right to bear arms, for protection against the common criminal, but more so, for the protection from an abusive government"



    "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent" Thomas Jefferson



    "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away"

  12. #12
    Regular Member acmariner99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Renton, Wa
    Posts
    662
    The new restrictions they want to add are surprisingly a moot point. Internet sales already require a background check (at the point of delivery - but I wonder if that will add a check at the point of purchase, in which case it is redundant.) The only thing it restricts is private transfers between persons who don't meet certain criteria, but those purchases are a small percentage of firearms transactions. (Not saying it isn't an infringement, just saying it isn't a huge impact).

    While the portion about explicitly prohibiting a gun registry sounds nice, laws can be changed or repealed at the next crisis, so that doesn't make me feel any better about this.

    One part I did like - if I read it correctly - is to expand federal protections for persons traveling through stricter jurisdictions if they stop for gas or stay overnight while passing through in a general sense.

    It also seemed to void the need for background checks for any person who has a state CC license who buys a firearm from a dealer. Don't know if that applies to private transfers (which kinda voids the whole point of what the antis are trying to do - if so, great!)

    What I am gathering is that if this passes at all, there are enough additions to make it appear like a pro-gun bill. As I have stated already, the restrictions the bill seems to want to impose are almost a moot point. (I wonder if the definition of neighbor also applies to room mates and persons who aren't family members but are living under the same roof).

  13. #13
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Additional info from GOA

    Additional info from GOA. Copied below in full, at their request.

    TFred

    Senator Toomey Betrays Gun Owners
    Wednesday, 10 April 2013 15:42 Written by Gun Owners of America

    Urgent action required. It is urgent that every gun owner call their Senators today and demand that they oppose the “See a Shrink, Lose your Guns” sell-out bill that is being authored by Senators Pat Toomey (R) and Joe Manchin (D) - but which also has Chuck Schumer’s fingerprints all over it. Call immediately at 202-224-3121.

    See a Shrink, Lose your Guns. The anti-gun "ranters" have spent the last week telling us that Republican Senators can’t filibuster Harry Reid’s gun control bill; that they can’t cut off debate to a bill they haven’t seen yet. “Let the bill come up,” they say. “We need to see the bill” before Senators can vote against cloture to proceed to it.

    Well, we’ve seen the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer sell-out, and it’s worse than the Feinstein gun ban, which will reportedly be tied to it and offered simultaneously in a Senate procedure known as an “amendment tree.”

    Toomey and Manchin will claim that their bill only covers “gun show sales” and Internet sales. But if you’ve ever talked about your gun and /or let it be known you’d like to sell or buy a gun on the Internet, this language covers you. If you advertise your gun in the church bulletin and the bulletin is put on the Internet, you’re covered.

    The only exemption is for sales that are sold exclusively by word of mouth. The increased number of background checks would likely exacerbate the system breakdowns (inherent to NICS) which have shut down gun shows over and over again. It would mean that Americans who were illegally denied firearms because their names were similar to other people's would effectively be barred from owning a gun. (We would never tolerate such delays for voting rights or other freedoms that we are guaranteed.)

    And for those Republicans who think they’re going to be able to offer their useless amendments, guess what? Reid is reportedly going to use a procedure to block out all amendments (called an “amendment tree”). And there are plenty of Senators standing in line to make sure that the Senate doesn’t give “unanimous consent” to let those Republicans offer their amendments.

    So if you live in a rural area, you’re effectively barred from selling or buying a gun - or it at least becomes very, very difficult.

    Incidentally, the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer “national registry” language is full of holes. There will be a national gun registry as a result of this sell-out.

    But that’s not the worst part. Under an amendment in the bill to HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act), you could have your guns taken away because your private shrink thinks you’re “dangerous” and could send your name directly to the FBI Instant Check system.

    Did you think it was terrible that 150,000 military veterans had been added into the NICS system because they’d seen a VA shrink about their PTSD? Well guess what? Now it’s going to happen to the rest of the population ... by the millions!

    And the next step, of course, will be to begin to sue psychiatrists that don’t send every single patient’s name to the Instant Check system, and to make sure that their lives are ruined if they don’t send a patient to NICS and anything goes wrong.

    The bottom line: “See a shrink; lose your guns.”

    All of this will reportedly be on an amendment tree with the Feinstein gun ban and magazine bans.

    Repeal of gun owner protections. In addition, Toomey no doubt unintentionally agreed to repeal one of the most important protections for gun owners that was included in the 1986 McClure-Volkmer Act - the provision that would allow you to take an unloaded, locked-up gun through states like New York without being stopped. Under a new subsection (c), the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer bill would require you to “demonstrate” to the satisfaction of New York police where you were coming from and where you are going to. And, if you don’t do that to their satisfaction, they can arrest you.

    Please keep in mind, nothing in this bill would have stopped Newtown dirtbag from killing his mother and taking the firearms that she owned and perpetrating the horrible crimes that he committed.

    Nothing is this bill would actually make children safer at schools. There is nothing that will actually keep bad guys from stealing or illegally acquiring guns, but there’s plenty that will threaten our gun rights!

    ACTION: Contact your two senators immediately. Tell them the “see a shrink; lose your guns” sellout is even worse than the Feinstein gun ban which will reportedly be on the same amendment tree with it. Distribute this alert far and wide.

    Time is short, so if you call - at 202-224-3121 - you may click below to see the pre-written letter and use the contents to help direct your comments.
    Last edited by TFred; 04-10-2013 at 02:40 PM.

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by acmariner99 View Post
    Internet sales already require a background check (at the point of delivery - but I wonder if that will add a check at the point of purchase, in which case it is redundant.)
    I was wondering about that.

  15. #15
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    More coverage, from WaPo.

    TFred

    Interesting excerpts:

    The amendment to the guns legislation already proposed in the Senate would not cover private transactions between individuals, unless there was advertising or an online service involved.

    Under the terms of the Manchin-Toomey deal, all background checks would be conducted by federally licensed gun dealers, who would need to verify the validity of a purchaser’s gun license and record that a check was performed. Background checks would need to be completed within three days, except at gun shows, where they would have to be completed within two days for the next four years, and then within 24 hours. To avoid processing delays, the FBI would be required to complete background checks requested at gun shows before those requested elsewhere.

    A precise list of which transactions would be covered by the background-check deal was not immediately available. One person familiar with the discussions said the proposed legislation would likely require background checks on all advertised transactions, including those posted on Internet sale sites. It was unlikely, the person said, that sales conducted through an individual, private e-mail exchange would be governed by the new deal. But, he added, it is impossible to say with certainty until legislative language is announced.

    Under the Manchin-Toomey deal, records of the newly covered transactions would be kept by federally licensed arms dealers, according to a person familiar with the agreement. Currently, licensed arms dealers keep records of gun sales that take place in gun stores.

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member Skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Goochland, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    585
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    under the terms of the manchin-toomey deal, all background checks would be conducted by federally licensed gun dealers, who would need to verify the validity of a purchaser’s gun license and record that a check was performed.
    A WHAT? Is this going to introduce the requirement for a license to purchase a gun now? [ Yes I realize I should have posted that in this thread rather than the Other ]

    When do they start handing out First Amendment Licenses? How about 4th amendment licenses or 5th amendment licenses?
    Last edited by Skeptic; 04-10-2013 at 08:29 PM. Reason: grammar

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    ...Also, I'm tired of being taken for a sucker that there is no record keeping. If the government isn't keeping records, then prove it, by REMOVING the Serial Numbers from the Background Check form! Remove the temptation to sin, by not giving them the forbidden fruit that they are supposed to throw away...

    TFred
    Serial numbers are not included on any federal background check form. It is on the 4473 which is not a background check form. None of the information sent to the FBI for a background check includes any information about the gun except whether it is a handgun, a long gun, or something else.

    This is not to say that I don't advocate for the removal of the serial number from 4473's, or even advocate for the elimination of the 4473 altogether (I do). I just want to make sure there is precise information out there.

    The precisely correct information is that the serial number is on the 4473, which is retained by the FFL for 20 years, and is only turned over to the ATF if the FFL goes out of business before the 4473 is twenty years old. The serial number is not part of the background check, which is an FBI function, not an ATF function.

  18. #18
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,274
    No compromise. Call your elected officials and urge them to stop this bill.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  19. #19
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Serial numbers are not included on any federal background check form. It is on the 4473 which is not a background check form. None of the information sent to the FBI for a background check includes any information about the gun except whether it is a handgun, a long gun, or something else.

    This is not to say that I don't advocate for the removal of the serial number from 4473's, or even advocate for the elimination of the 4473 altogether (I do). I just want to make sure there is precise information out there.

    The precisely correct information is that the serial number is on the 4473, which is retained by the FFL for 20 years, and is only turned over to the ATF if the FFL goes out of business before the 4473 is twenty years old. The serial number is not part of the background check, which is an FBI function, not an ATF function.
    ATF has released an electronic Form 4473. I could not find the .pdf version on their website any more.

    If you think I or any other half-thinking person will believe that nobody else will see or store these serial numbers, well your assumption strains the bounds of credulity.

    We aren't all geniuses, but we aren't stupid either.

    TFred

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burke/Blacksburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    998
    So, has anyone actually seen the real wording of the bill? They throw around a lot of bits like "internet sales" and "gun show sales," but what the heck are they actually regulating and how the hell do they plan to implement it? It all looks like the typical, closed-door, bait-and-switch political games of unrepresentative politicians.

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Even between family members they'll likely require DNA tests, retina scans, anal probing to establish a familial relationship.

    Its all BS....

    And why are they meeting in private? They cannot do that. Commies...all of them.

  22. #22
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,279
    Quote Originally Posted by Ca Patriot View Post
    does anyone have the breakdown of the votes so far ? i cant find it online

    judging by the numbers there must have been quite a few republicans who voted for this
    I believe 16 so far, frigging traitors!

    Kelly Ayotte (N.H.)
    Richard Burr (N.C.)
    Saxby Chambliss (Ga.)
    Tom Coburn (Okla.)
    Susan Collins (Maine)
    Bob Corker (Tenn.)
    Jeff Flake (Ariz.)
    Lindsey Graham (S.C.)
    Dean Heller (Nev.)
    John Hoeven (N.D.)
    Johnny Isakson (Ga.)
    Mark Kirk (Ill.),
    John McCain (Ariz.)
    Pat Toomey (Pa.)
    Roger Wicker (Miss.)
    Lamar Alexander (Tenn.)
    Last edited by WalkingWolf; 04-11-2013 at 02:00 PM.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  23. #23
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,627
    Received information that this is the Text of the Bill, under Transfer.
    Transfer fees FFL's can charge are also capped, no amount set yet.

    `(t)(1) Beginning on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013, 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). Upon taking possession of the firearm, the licensee shall comply with all requirements of this chapter as if the licensee were transferring the firearm from the licensee's inventory to the unlicensed transferee.

    (2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--

    (A) bona fide gifts between spouses, between parents and their children, between siblings, or between grandparents and their grandchildren;

    (B) a transfer made from a decedent's estate, pursuant to a legal will or the operation of law;

    (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

    (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; or

    (iii) while hunting or trapping, if--
    (I) the activity is legal in all places where the unlicensed transferee possesses the firearm;
    (II) the temporary transfer of possession occurs during the designated hunting season; and
    (III) the unlicensed transferee holds any required license or permit.

    (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.

    (4)(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Attorney General may implement this subsection with regulations.

    (B) Regulations promulgated under this paragraph--
    (i) shall include a provision setting a maximum fee that may be charged by licensees for services provided in accordance with paragraph (1); and

    (ii) shall include a provision requiring a record of transaction of any transfer that occurred between an unlicensed transferor and unlicensed transferee accordance with paragraph (1).'.

    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendments-
    (1) SECTION 922- Section 922(y)(2) of title 18, United States Code, is amended, in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking `, (g)(5)(B), and (s)(3)(B)(v)(II)' and inserting `and (g)(5)(B)'.
    (2) SECTION 925A- Section 925A of title 18, United States Code, is amended, in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking `subsection (s) or (t) of section 922' and inserting `section 922(s)'.
    (3) NICS IMPROVEMENT AMENDMENTS ACT- Section 103(f) of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 is amended by striking `section 922(t)' and inserting `section 922(s)'.
    (4) CONSOLIDATED AND FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2012- Section 511 of title V of division B of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2012 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended by striking `subsection 922(t)' and inserting `section 922(s)' each place it appears.

    SEC. 123. LOST AND STOLEN REPORTING.

    (a) In General- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end--

    (aa) It shall be unlawful for any person who lawfully possesses or owns a firearm that has been shipped or transported in, or has been possessed in or affecting, interstate or foreign commerce, to fail to report the theft or loss of the firearm, within 24 hours after the person discovers the theft or loss, to the Attorney General and to the appropriate local authorities.

    (b) Penalty- Section 924(a)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the following:
    (B) knowingly violates subsection (a)(4), (f), (k), (q), or (aa) of section 922;'.

    SEC. 124. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this title shall take effect 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Milwaukee Wisconsin
    Posts
    542
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    ATF has released an electronic Form 4473. I could not find the .pdf version on their website any more.

    If you think I or any other half-thinking person will believe that nobody else will see or store these serial numbers, well your assumption strains the bounds of credulity.

    We aren't all geniuses, but we aren't stupid either.

    TFred
    I commend you for speaking out for yourself and the other half-thinking persons.

    The link in the page you referred to was faulty, Here is the ATF forms page: http://www.atf.gov/forms/firearms/index.html

    This is the link to download the .pdf version: http://www.atf.gov/files/forms/downl...f-f-4473-1.pdf

    Here is the web page with the instuctions and the ATF e-Form 4473 application/program which runs locally on the PC or Mac at the FFL dealer after download.
    http://www.atf.gov/applications/e447...oad/index.html This appllication prints out the form when completed.

    -------------------

    Grapeshot,

    Thanks for the text of the Transfer section of the proposed bill. Right now, FACTS about this are hard to come by.
    Last edited by E6chevron; 04-11-2013 at 02:46 PM.
    Wis. CCL #5x Springfield XDM 3.8 Compact .40 S&W, Utah CFP

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Nampa, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    1,096
    Currently, at least in Idaho, face to face sales between in state legal residents may be conducted without FFL an BG checks. If the bill passes and my neighbor posts and ad in a local internet classifieds for his 1911 we cannot do a face to face as it would be an internet sale. we would have to go thru an FFL and BG check. If you post an ad in the local newspaper for your 1911 it would not be an internet sale, unless they unknowingly to you, also post it on their online classifieds. You then sell to someone and it is an internet sale. You didn't know it was posted online so you are now a felon.

    This is a bad bill and needs to be stopped.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •