Lawmakers rally around expanded background checks for gun sales (crosspost)

[Duckhunter935]

Cross post from the other group for open discussion. The other group limits discussion and I would like to see what firearms owners feel about it.

Lawmakers rally around expanded background checks for gun sales

Universal background checks are back!

http://thehill.com/regulation/legislation/234457-lawmakers-rally-around-gun-control-legislation

“This bill is anti-criminal, and will help keep spouses, kids and communities safe by preventing dangerous people from getting guns,” said Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.), who will introduce the legislation.

But the gun safety legislation comes in stark contrast to recent Republican bills that would expand concealed carry laws across the country and allow hunters to use armor-piercing ammunition.

Gun rights groups are gearing up for a major concealed carry push.

The Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, introduced last month by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), the second-ranking Republican in the upper chamber, would allow gun owners who have a concealed carry permit in their home state to bring their firearms to any other state with concealed-carry laws."

===========

The problem with Cornyn's bill is two fold. One, it would require all states to accept the least restrictive CC protocols as opposed to those passed in their own legislatures and two it injects Federal regulation on states legislatures. It's one thing to pass a uniform CC act that sets universal minimum requirements and another thing entirely to force states to comply with the lowest common denominator devised by all the other states.

I like how the article frames some of these things

allow hunters to use armor-piercing ammunition.

Since the bullets the article is talking about do not meet the legal definition for "armor-piercing ammunition" as they have a lead core, this statement is just plain not accurate.

Most gun shops are already required to conduct background checks, but the rules don’t apply to firearm sales made online and at gun shows.

Here is another statement that is not accurate, any FFL holder has to conduct a background check even at gun shows and if the firearm was purchased online and shipped over state lines it has to be shipped to an FFL and background check has to be performed. I know this as I had to go through that process after purchasing some weapons online. Even had to do that for my 1926 bolt action Mosin.

The poster in the other group seems to have a problem with the bill on CCW Reciprocity.

The problem with Cornyn's bill is two fold. One, it would require all states to accept the least restrictive CC protocols as opposed to those passed in their own legislatures and two it injects Federal regulation on states legislatures. It's one
thing to pass a uniform CC act that sets universal minimum requirements and another thing entirely to force states to comply with the lowest common denominator devised by all the other states.

I am sure they feel the same way about drivers licenses, right?

Another article that can not even get the basic facts correct, journalism at it's best.

[tularetom]

1. As a collector who has purchased a dozen firearms online

I can state unequivocally that the background check (and shipment to a FFL) definitely DO apply at the present time.

The armor piercing bullet thing has been beaten to death here so I won't even get into that.

Yeah, it's just more scare tactics. I don't pay much attention to it anymore.

[Eleanors38]

2. The problem here is credibility of the promoters...

No matter how reasonable any measure may be (I support universal b.g. checks), if the backers of a measure derive from a group which has never seen a control/ban measure it hasn't liked, then the well is poisoned.

There are a lot of poisoned wells, courtesy of the controller/banners.

[petronius]

3. I'm in favor of UBCs, so long as they're not designed to create a significant

(i.e. non-trivial) impediment to purchases and sales.

I'm not in favor of CCW reciprocity: subject to the limits of 2A, I think the state is the appropriate level for licensing activities performed within the state, and individual states should retain the authority to set requirements and enter into reciprocity agreements as they choose...

[Duckhunter935]

5. do you feel the same way for

drivers license reciprocity. A vehicle can be just as dangerous.

[petronius]

6. Yes, actually. If a state wants to commit the economic suicide of not recognizing

other states' driver's licenses, I think that should be their prerogative...

[Duckhunter935]

10. Thanks

[Lurks Often]

4. Both sides in Congress will load it with amendments unacceptable to the other side

Those of you in favor of gun control, are you willing to trade UBC's for National CCW? WHat else might you be forced to give up to get UBC's?

We'll presume for the sake of discussion that Congress passes a clean UBC bill and the President signs it. As soon as that happens multiple states will almost certainly file suits in Federal Court arguing that the UBC bill, which will only apply to in-state transactions, is a violation of the 10th Amendment.

If SCOTUS upholds the UBC bill, you have just set precedence for the Federal government to regulate other things, like abortion, same sex marriage, pot and probably some other things that DU would be outraged by.

IF SCOTUS votes down the UBC bill on the grounds that it did violate the 10th amendment, you set precedence for the states to try and repeal other Federal laws they find intrusive, such as many of the existing gun laws.

[friendly_iconoclast]

7. You bring up good points-it *is* a thorny issue, and as you noted...

...UBCs will probably not get anywhere, more's the pity.

[ileus]

8. They always lie for mommy support....the gullible always fall for silly

horseshit like this.




Why is this the only subject we just can't seem to get a progressive stance on?

[Duckhunter935]

9. no surprise the EM or his buddies

from the other group have responded to this OP. I kind of wanted to hear the excuse they come up with on the outright lies in the story. I guess once again when facts are posted debunking those lies, they stay away.

[DonP]

11. Please! You're talking about people that still embrace Bellisles as a victim

Heck, we've seen it in the past week or two. Belllisles was just a victim of an NRA "Witch Hunt".

Besides, when you have the "Moral High Ground" on your side lies, fudged stats or ignoring the FBI UCR are all OK. After all it's "for the children" and anyone that doesn't agree with them on everything obviously wants more dead children.

Wait? Isn't that the same rationale the "Fundies" use about a woman's right to choose? Funny how they sound alike sometimes. Some days it's harder than others to tell one whack job from another.