Background Checks for Nearly All Gun Purchases Cleared for Senate Vote Next Month

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Senate panel Oks Demo gun background check bill

WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday narrowly approved a Democratic bill expanding required federal background checks for nearly all gun purchases, but put off immediate consideration of an assault weapons ban.

The panel approved the measure by 10-8, supported by all Democrats and opposed by every Republican. Expanded background checks is at the heart of President Barack Obama's proposals to curb firearms. The sponsor is Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.

Schumer said the measure will reduce gun crimes, and said he hopes he can strike a compromise on the measure with Republicans, which would enhance the measure's chances of passing in the full Senate.

Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley, the top Republican on the panel, said he believes the measure will ultimately lead to a federal registry of gun owners — which is illegal. Schumer said wouldn't happen.

The committee postponed until Thursday a vote on a proposal by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., to ban assault weapons.

Requiring background checks for private gun transactions between individuals — they're currently mandatory only for sales by licensed dealers — is designed to prevent criminals, people with severe mental problems and others from getting guns.

The Judiciary Committee was expected to approve all three bills at some point this week, with full Senate consideration next month.

"The American people need to speak up and be heard," Leahy said Monday of what it will take for gun measures to clear Congress.

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20130312/US-Gun-Control-Congress/

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Bravo! The NRA has always supported the NICS system and in fact it was NRA pressure that established it with the Brady Bill and the Brady Bill was not passed until the NICS amendment was added.

Fascists wanted to impose a 7 day waiting period on our rights...rights delayed are rights denied, but that was OK for people that want to deny rights anyway. The "brady bunch" did not want instant background checks, they wanted only the 7 day "wait" Why would anyone be against improving criminal record keeping and an instant way to determine if a person were disqualified to own firearms without burdening our law enforcement agencies with millions of checks every year?

The NICS system negated the waiting period and upgraded the entire nation's criminal record keeping as has become the state of the art background check system in the world! It is used by USCIS and NVC also.

Amendments will be added to this bill allowing any person to access the system so that even private sales can go through a background check. This is a good thing. I look forward to its passage in final form. Now that it will be passed to the full Senate and then to the full house (if it passes the Senate) it is taken out of a tainted committee and handed to people that can make this a good solution for our country. The NICS system itself has been refined over the years and now can be completely automated and can allow anyone to access it for any sale.

I favor any system which can be used to keep firearms out of the wrong hands and does not interfere with our rights. Expanding the great NICS system is long overdue. Let's let everyone in on it.

Thank You, Senator Leahy for getting this out in the open where we can assemble a good bill to protect Americans and preserve our rights!

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Since the "clip is the same as a magazine" bunch brought it up, I would like to keep everyone informed on this issue.

First, than you to Senator Leahy for what is NOT in this bill.

1. There is NO assault weapons ban

2. There are NO magazine capacity limits

I only hear crickets on those issues.

Now about the background checks. The National Instant Check System was added as an NRA backed amendment to the Brady Bill 20 years ago and eliminated the desired 7 day waiting period. Over the last 20 years the system and technology has been improved. Where does this go?

Well, first, there IS NO "gun show loophole" ALL sales through licensed dealers MUST have a background check, even at gunshows. Private sales do not need a background...even NOT at gun shows. Gun Shows are a "non issue" in this. But it sounds sexy to low-information voters (that think a clip and magazine are the same)

The INTENT of this legislation by the fascists is to shut down gun shows with some sort of ominous hurdle that no one can be bothered with for a 1 or 2 day gunshow.

Won't happen.

I LOVE this bill and what is going to happen to it.

It goes to the full Senate. The NRA will let it pass through to the house. That is the plan. Then let the fascist low information people and Obama shout out how they "WON". You will see it here and I will not spoil their fun.

In the house the refinements get added.

1. Concealed Carry reciprocity. It already passed the House once, they will add it as an amendment. You want expanded background checks...we get reciprocity. That means I can carry my concealed handgun in California! Or Illinois, or New York City and Bloomberg can kiss my @ss.

2. Refined NICS system. Here is how it will be done, the technology is in place,waiting for legislation to finance it. That's right, we will get YOU to pay for it.

The system will be updated to allow ANYONE to access it via website. The prospective gun buyer will do a background check on himselffor a small fee payable by credit or debit card. They will then print out the results and an approval will be valid to purchase ANY NUMBER of firearms for 5 days. The seller, FFL or private, keeps a copy of the buyers printout. Aside from the initial startup cost, the program is self funded.

VOILA!!!!!!!!!! Background checks for ALL firearms sales!!!! No delays for buyers, no need to shut down gun shows. Merely do a check, print your approval and take it with you. Carry your gun with you because you will be able to do so anywhere!

Of course the people singing the praises of "background checks" will start to howl in protest when they discover that the checks can be done without infringing on rights (Ain't technology grand?) THAT is American ingenuity!

BUT

They will have already cheered how they "WON" and will have little choice but to approve in reconciliation the amended bill in order to have SOMETHING.

Oh the bill also approves funding for armed security/police and enhanced security measures for schools. Hmmmmmmmmmm. Who was it that suggested that?

We can call this the "NRA Dream Act"

See you soon!

Edited March 16, 2013 by Gary and Alla

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Since the "clip is the same as a magazine" bunch brought it up, I would like to keep everyone informed on this issue.

First, than you to Senator Leahy for what is NOT in this bill.

1. There is NO assault weapons ban

2. There are NO magazine capacity limits

I only hear crickets on those issues.

WASHINGTON — The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved a measure to reinstate a ban on assault weapons in the first major Congressional test of the issue since the law expired in 2004.

...the committee’s passage of the bill, along with three other measures that previously cleared the panel, demonstrated momentum by lawmakers who have sought new gun regulations after the school shooting in Newtown, Conn.

Taken together, the votes show a willingness by lawmakers to confront the pro-gun lobby, which has stifled new gun limits for years. As recently as last year, it would have been unthinkable for these bills to have even been considered in a Senate committee.

But those measures — which include a ban on high-capacity magazines and enhanced background checks for gun buyers — will now be considered by the full Senate,...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/15/us/politics/panel-approves-reinstatement-of-assault-weapons-ban.html?_r=0

Edited March 16, 2013 by The Patriot

[himher 634]

####### good are more background checks going to do? The current administration doesn't prosecute anyone when they're caught at the point of sale. They "dont have time".

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/01/joe-biden-we-dont-have-time-to-prosecute-everybody-who-lies-on-background-checks/

Sez the NRA on the (44) prosecutions out of the 72,659 denials at point of purchase in 2010:

“We think it is problematic when the administration takes lightly the prosecutions under existing gun laws and yet does not seem to have a problem promoting a whole host of other gun laws,” Baker told The DC.

“If we are not going to enforce the laws that are on the books, it not only engenders disrespect for the law but it makes law-abiding gun owners wonder why we are going through this exercise we are going through now,” he added.

“They don’t have time to pursue people who are dangerous, who aren’t supposed to get guns, and the message they have sent is literally ‘Good luck, go get them elsewhere,’”

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/01/joe-biden-we-dont-have-time-to-prosecute-everybody-who-lies-on-background-checks/#ixzz2NfHeBSsT

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

####### good are more background checks going to do? The current administration doesn't prosecute anyone when they're caught at the point of sale. They "dont have time".

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/01/joe-biden-we-dont-have-time-to-prosecute-everybody-who-lies-on-background-checks/

Sez the NRA on the (44) prosecutions out of the 72,659 denials at point of purchase in 2010:

“We think it is problematic when the administration takes lightly the prosecutions under existing gun laws and yet does not seem to have a problem promoting a whole host of other gun laws,” Baker told The DC.

“If we are not going to enforce the laws that are on the books, it not only engenders disrespect for the law but it makes law-abiding gun owners wonder why we are going through this exercise we are going through now,” he added.

“They don’t have time to pursue people who are dangerous, who aren’t supposed to get guns, and the message they have sent is literally ‘Good luck, go get them elsewhere,’”

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/01/joe-biden-we-dont-have-time-to-prosecute-everybody-who-lies-on-background-checks/#ixzz2NfHeBSsT

There are also some proposed amendments that would do something to mandate prosecution or investigation of denied applicants. I do not know all the details of the amendments, they will show up in the house when the bill gets there. Since even attempting to purchase a firearm by a person barred from possession of firearms is a felony. The mere act of attempting to purchase a firearm is a crime in itself.

It raises some issues though. Background checks do not always indicate an attempt to buy a firearm since there does not need to be a purchase to be a background check, and especially if it is expanded to individual use, getting an advance approval would not indicate an attempt to buy a firearm at all.

There have been proposals to require FFL dealers to "delay" the denied customer and contact police to arrest them on the spot...OK, but now you are requiring a citizen to "hold" a felon until police arrive. And while the instant check system has worked well to approve sales, sales which will be eventually denied are often delayed by several hours or even days. No one waits around and the felon is long gone before the answer comes back. Of course he did not get the gun, which is good, but how do you prosecute him?

I agree it is ridiculous to require background checks and then do nothing about them and perhaps we can work something out in that regard, but it needs to be carefully crafted legislation.

The problem with most gun laws is it applies a mandate to others and nothing to government to enforce all the laws they pass. That needs to change and needs to be part of this IF we actually want to do anything. Simply saying "You must do background checks on all sales" means nothing if the law also does not tell government...YOU must prosecute felons that attempt to buy guns! It is ultimately easier to keep felons away from guns than to keep guns away from felons, at least in legal commerce.

[Danno 1,228]

We all know this is not so much about stopping gun crime as it is about incrementally starting to ban and then confiscate, one type of gun at a time.

We know thats what they want, they have told us thats what they want

and

Eventually they are going to get there (thanks to mass immigration)

What I am immediately concerned about is a system which de facto registers a specific gun to a owner, (at every transfer) and of course the concern is, the first step to "confiscation" is to know who has what.

Gary, does the background chek do that?