Deeds: SB 287 Firearm transfers; criminal history record information checks

So much for Deeds being "reasonable."

This law is horribly written. At first read it sounds like you must know that you are selling to a prohibited person, but I don't believe that is actually the case. The "willfully and intentionally" applies to the list of verbs, not the status of the buyer. It's so badly written, it's impossible to say for sure.

TFred

SB 287 Firearm transfers; criminal history record information checks, penalty.

Transfer of firearms; penalty. Provides that any person who sells or otherwise transfers a firearm to a person who is prohibited from possessing a firearm by state or federal law is guilty of a Class 6 felony if the transferor does not obtain a background check from a licensed firearms dealer.

§ 18.2-308.2:4. Criminal history record information check required to transfer firearm; penalties.

Any person who does not obtain verification from a licensed firearms dealer that the Department of State Police has determined that the prospective purchaser or transferee is not prohibited under state or federal law from possessing a firearm who willfully and intentionally sells, rents, trades, or transfers a firearm to a person who is prohibited under state or federal law from possessing a firearm is guilty of a Class 6 felony.

Such a law would effectively put an end to private transfers and create a registry of all transactions.

I wonder how much the anti-gun crowd is counting on sympathy for Deeds being the mourning father?

I doubt it's an accident that he submitted this bill.

TFred

TFred said:

I wonder how much the anti-gun crowd is counting on sympathy for Deeds being the mourning father?

I doubt it's an accident that he submitted this bill.

TFred

Click to expand...

Have no doubt that it is the victim card.

That such a law will not prevent family tragedies from happening is totally ignored.

I guess Deeds has gotten over son's suicide - to paraphrase the current Mayor of Chicago (also a democrat) - no tragedy is worth wasting.

HPmatt said:

I guess Deeds has gotten over son's suicide - to paraphrase the current Mayor of Chicago (also a democrat) - no tragedy is worth wasting.

Click to expand...

Politics aside, that is a highly offensive statement.

homestar said:

Politics aside, that is a highly offensive statement.

Click to expand...

I concur.

I will engage Deed's proposal on it's merits or lack thereof, but will not attack him in any way via the tragedy, pain and suffering he has had to endure. Will maintain the high road.

homestar said:

Politics aside, that is a highly offensive statement.

Click to expand...

It all depends on how Deeds and the GA act. If they bring it up, it shows the remark was not offensive.

Do you have any reason to believe they will not bring up the subject?

stay safe.

ETA: When, if ever, will Lori Haas stop dancing in her daughter's blood? (Just one example of several who continue to do so as a tactic.)

skidmark said:

It all depends on how Deeds and the GA act. If they bring it up, it shows the remark was not offensive.

Do you have any reason to believe they will not bring up the subject?

stay safe.

ETA: When, if ever, will Lori Haas stop dancing in her daughter's blood? (Just one example of several who continue to do so as a tactic.)

Click to expand...

Regardless of whether or not anyone brings it up, making a blanket statement that an individual must have gotten over a significant personal loss is offensive. That's not a point I feel the need to defend and this is the last I'll say on the subject.

Homestar I find my self at odds with members of this forum from time-to-time, but I got to say, TFred hit's the mark. The modem aperendi of liberals on most anything, especially when it comes to advancing the gun agenda is to parade people that they think should not be challenged. They'll drool all over themselves to find a veteran or a LEO that supports restricting our 2nd Amendment rights. Time and time again examples can be found that supports my statement. It is no accident that Deeds submitted this bill, I'd like to know who wrote it.

T Dubya said:

Homestar I find my self at odds with members of this forum from time-to-time, but I got to say, TFred hit's the mark. The modem aperendi of liberals on most anything, especially when it comes to advancing the gun agenda is to parade people that they think should not be challenged. They'll drool all over themselves to find a veteran or a LEO that supports restricting our 2nd Amendment rights. Time and time again examples can be found that supports my statement. It is no accident that Deeds submitted this bill, I'd like to know who wrote it.

Click to expand...

I didn't raise any issue with TFred's post and I agree, it would be interesting to know who wrote it.

TFred said:

I wonder how much the anti-gun crowd is counting on sympathy for Deeds being the mourning father?

I doubt it's an accident that he submitted this bill.

TFred

Click to expand...

If you look at the way the antis go about their business of civil rights suppression, we can be very sure of their intent.

Antis always work at the emotional level. Pro gun forces usually operates based upon logic. Never underestimate the power of emotion in politics. Just because logic is on the side of the pro gun forces does not mean that we win politically. Politicians can, and often do, choose emotion over logic.

homestar said:

I didn't raise any issue with TFred's post and I agree, it would be interesting to know who wrote it.

Click to expand...

Patron writes it unless it's on behalf of a constituent. I always have to write them then send to the Patron....then it goes to Legislative Services who re-write it, then back to the Patron who does the final re-write to be introduced.

homestar said:

Politics aside, that is a highly offensive statement.

Click to expand...

Grapeshot said:

I concur.

I will engage Deed's proposal on it's merits or lack thereof, but will not attack him in any way via the tragedy, pain and suffering he has had to endure. Will maintain the high road.

Click to expand...

Do you remember almost 10 years of campaigning by Jim & Sarah Brady on the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, and then how Sarah Brady avoided background checks to give her son a rifle? How about the drumbeat on raw emotions after Sandy Hook that got NY & CT its magazine capacity limitations and registration rules - things that do absolutely nothing to stop events from happening again?

Again I reiterate we underestimate the lowness that the facists in government will go to infringe upon the 2A - let no tragedy go to waste when it can be used to advance the agenda.

Current gun laws would go a long way to mitigate the threat if every state dutifully reported mental cases to NICS - the major weakness in gun laws is addressing the mental illness issue.