At a press conference this afternoon, White House spokesperson Josh Earnest [sic] said the President does not want a federal gun registry. Just like that: “He’s not seeking a registry.” That said, Earnest also said “The president is a very strong believer in the Second Amendment. The president feels very strongly in the constitutional right to bear arms . . . What we want to make sure is that we’re keeping guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them, but without interfering with the ability of law-abiding citizens to get their guns that they would like to buy.” Except for the ones the President doesn’t want them to buy. Now. In fact, Earnest also said the Prez still likes him some assault weapons ban . . .

“I think you can anticipate that the president’s going to continue to ask Congress to consider a range of proposals, including the assault weapons ban, that would have a tangible impact on reducing violence in communities all across the country,” he said.

Furthermore, he added, the vote on the assault weapons ban amendment will serve as “another opportunity for members of the United States Senate to demonstrate some political courage.”

See? Now that’s funny. ‘Cause it would have taken political courage for the President to resist his fellow Democrats’ call for civilian disarmament in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook slaughter.

Recommended For You

66 Responses to White House: President is Not Seeking a Gun Registry

  1. That’s not the question. The question is would he sign a bill that contained a registry. That would mean the Feinstein bill, under which certain assault rifles must be registered.

    That’s very different than seeking one himself.

  2. Question: Why can’t you have background checks without a registry? Say, for example, just checking background but not including any info on the firearm sought to be purchased on the 4473? That way they could clear an applicant bunot know what, if anthing, the applicant ultimately purchased without searching the FFLs records.

    • why should there even be FFL records?
      If it’s currently OK for me to buy a rifle from a farmer in a private sale with no records whatsoever, isn’t it even more OK for me to pass a background check at the FFL, have the FFL give the thumbs-up, and buy the rifle from the farmer without writing anything down?

      Something tells me it isn’t about background checking the buyer so much as it is about recording firearm locations.

      • The issue is enforcement of a mandatory background check law. Records of approved NICS checks are maintained for only 24 hours and, thus, there is no way to show that any transaction went through a background check. And when people realize a UBC law is completely unenforceable, someone will say that we should keep a permanent record of NICS checks. Even with your proposal, it may not give you a registry of guns, but it would give you a registry of gun owners. Many people here would object to that.

        • NICS checks may not be maintained, but the 4473s are kept permanently by the FFL, as I understand it. Further, some states (Colorado and California to my knowledge) do their own background check and their records are not subject to the federal law. The ATF can and does audit FFL records for compliance witht he 4473 procedure.

        • Not completely unenforceable. They can still enforce them the way they enforce all other laws applying to private sales – by spot checks and stings. You know, the way they enforce most laws – they either catch you breaking it or they get a witness who saw you do it.

          In any case, if they made it fast, easy, and free, most private sellers would do it because it was the law and they’re law-abiding people. Most probably aren’t too keen on handing a functional firearm, in person, over to a nutjob or violent felon in any case. Those who weren’t inclined to follow the law wouldn’t bother with recordkeeping requirements anyway (“Did I sell it? Officer, I didn’t even realize it was missing!”).

      • The government would appear to have the power to regulate gun dealers–as Scalia suggested in Heller. Just like alcohol and cigarette dealers can be regulated tkeep them from selling to minors. It is not considered an infringement of the right to keep and bear to regulate the commercial sales aspect.

        • What you said in your reply to me is true, but FFL records are decentralized and difficult to turn into a registry. (Although I would oppose any effort to make all transactions, private and commercial, go through an FFL who is required to maintain a record.). If NICS checks are maintained permanently for all transactions, private and commercial, you have a centralized, government controlled registry of gun owners.

        • It is not considered an infringement of the right to keep and bear to regulate the commercial sales aspect.

          That’s correct. The feds have the power to regulate interstate commerce. But where’s the jurisdiction for regulating a purely intrastate transaction? If I sell a gun to my neighbor consistent with MA law, where’s the federal predicate?

    • THIS: IT IS ALREADY IN PRACTICE. What turnip planet did you recently arrive from? The current check is ten times more effective than any shiny turd they can deliver.

      You can put perfume on a pig..,

      • Yes!

        Now you’ve got it!

        Everything this administration puts out is designed to obfuscate the truth – no matter what the subject; but especially on 2A and firearm restrictions!

        • Obama put Biden on the gun issue. He figured if it wasn’t gonna fly it was Biden’s problem. He forgot that if he put Biden on the issue, that alone might tank the bills. But O’s a Hillary man, and Hillary ain’t talkin’.

  3. I think that Congress showing courage is doing what they are supposed to do: Represent their constituents and their desires, even under media and party pressure. This whole “Congress needs to show courage” thing drives me nuts. So, Congressman aren’t supposed to be representatives of their constituent base? They are supposed to represent the 1,000 person biased ABC/NBC/CBS/etc… phone polls that the anti establishment loves to quote? By doing so, THAT shows courage? I think that word does not mean what they think it means.

    • +1 for The Princess Bride reference.

      “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

      And how about:

      “My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my right to my Father’s AR-15. Prepare to die.”

  4. TO: All
    RE: Yeah….Right….

    What we want to make sure is that we’re keeping guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them…. — Article —

    Who decides just WHO are the PEOPLE that “shouldn’t have them”?

    ….without interfering with the ability of law-abiding citizens to get their guns that they would like to buy.” — Article

    And if you change the Law to make currently ‘law-abiding citizens’, “people who shouldn’t have them [weapons]”, you’re just setting up the ‘law-abiding’ to be ‘criminals’.

    I know this game. I’ve seen it played throughout history. And now you’re playing it with US.

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ!]

    • I note that Bill Ayers, admitted ex-bomber, would pass a background check today. Great caution should be exercised before tying a right of the people to a sloppy bureaucracy and a judiciary that is often forced to rule on technicalities rather than the harm they know a defendant committed.

  5. We are reaching a critical mass moment in the fight for preserving the Second Amendment- the media, Bloomberg, and the White House are converging on a final push to be the loudest voice in the Senate.

    It’s up to we pro-2A types to be louder- especially when they return from their break and if we can both now and after the break. Leave them voice messages or messages at their offices. Email them.

    This is the time to punch back. If we stand silent we have no one to blame but ourselves.

    • I just saw that VoteVets.com/or org has made a anti-gun video that MSNBC just showed. It’s message, is that soldiers have to pass a background check before being issued a weapon, why not anyone who wants to purchase a firearm!

      • Military law is not as strictly based on The Constitution as civil law is. Enlistment entails giving up some rights.

        • SS, I wasn’t justifying their rationale, I was trying to say another group that started with the premise of doing good for returning Vets, has been bought and paid for by either MSNBC or Bloomberg…that’s all!

  6. Just like if you like your insurance you can keep your insurance, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor, this plan won’t add one dime to the deficit.

    I can always tell when POTUS is lying, his lips move.

  7. Of course “He is not considering” He Already considered and wants a gun registry! Thisk was used by the corrupt president Johnson. Not a lie! He already considered it! listen carefully to statements by politicns!

  8. How does “including the assault weapons ban, that would have a tangible impact on reducing violence in communities all across the country,” work when there are only about 350 fatalities per year caused by ALL rifles?

  9. HE is not seeking one, but his cronies Feinstein, Cuomo, Bloomberg, and O’Malley, et al. are, and he is not exactly stopping them .

    • Yes Until it is changed or repealed.

      Every 4473 is a registry that BATF thugs can inspect./seize at any time. Once a record or list is created in can n be uncreated. You can’t unring a bell (or a vet remove his fingerprints from a Fed database).

    • until “they” pass a new law that cancels out or otherwise supersedes FOPA….not that that pesky Constitution and making laws is a big deal to this group of Chicago mafia *****ers

    • ALL the 4473s eventually end up scanned and entered by the ATF.

      As log as they don’t push the ‘tabulate’ button, they haven’t broken the law.

      • I’m actually reassured by the fact that the ATF is so anti-technology when it comes to “bound books” and FFL records. Most FFLs would love to have gone mostly or completely paperless years ago, but the ATF insists that the only legal records are on paper, arranged in a particular order.

        Yes, the records could eventually make it into a master database — but the ATF is doing everything they can to ensure that this will be as time-consuming, expensive, and error-prone as possible.

    • The Federal government is prevented from creating a registry. A federal military contractor, probably not so much. Keep in mind that we are talking about a federal government whose lawyers have said that it would be legal to assassinate American citizen without trial. Those lawyers have already given their blessing to a contractor putting such a list together. You can take that one to the bank.

  10. He may say he does not want a Federal Gun Registry, but Registries at the state level are ok – right? And with Federal Oversignt because now that is interstate commerce. Yep, sounds good to me Mr. President . . .Sir.

    End Sarcastic statement.

  11. That could be some kind of record for most lies in a single paragraph, or the biggest load of bullshit in a one horse wagon!

  12. I think you can anticipate that the president’s going to continue to ask Congress to consider a range of proposals, including the assault weapons ban, that would have a tangible impact on reducing violence in communities all across the country,”

    Really? A “tangible impact” on reducing violence when Obama stood in front of a camera and admitted that scary looking rifles are rarely used to commit crimes and that most murders are committed using handguns?

    This is the epitome of lying so much you can’t keep the lies straight.

  13. “White House spokesperson Josh Earnest [sic] said the President does not want a federal gun registry.”
    And so we’re just supposed to say to ourselves, “ok, let’s believe what he says one more time”? Like we were supposed to do when he said he’s not going to take our handguns, rifles, or shotguns? That little phrase, “shall not be infringed”, means you shouldn’t even be discussing the restrictions you’re contemplating. Surprise us for once and start discussing ways you’re going to work to protect the rights of the people.

  14. BULLSHIT!!! DID I SAY THAT LOUD ENOUGH FOR YOU MR. PRESIDENT?? My father taught me years ago, actions speak louder than words!! And your actions speak volumes!! He hates the 2nd admendment, he just relizes gun owners arent a bunch of dumb ass’s. Now that hes loosing bdly, hes simply trying to save face He’s done nothing but waste our money, and try to undermind our country from within!! With his CRAP FILLED stories, and offering to meet and sit down with anyone donating half a mllion to his gun grabbercampaign! He’s an embarrassment to the office, makes me sick. Says one thing and hides behind closed doors and does another.

  15. An Assault Weapons ban will make our communities safer? I’ve been doing a little research on gun deaths in Minnesota. From 2002 thru 2011 (latest figures available) there were 1124 total murders in Minnesota. BTW, these numbers are directly from the MN Bureau of Criminal Apprehension and available online for anyone who wants them. Of the 1124 murders, 37 were attributed to rifles…they do not break out the type of rifle (Bolt, Semi-automatic, etc.) so they cannot tell you if any were the president’s designated “assault weapons”. But, I digress. These 37 deaths amount to 3.29% of all murders in 10 years.

    Without getting deep into the figures, for those ten years, a person had about a 5X greater chance of being killed with a knife (178 deaths) than with a rifle. They also had about a 4X greater chance of being beaten or kicked to death (140 deaths) than being killed with a rifle. Biden “Shotguns” accounted for 3 more murders (40) than rifles during the same period.

    The numbers don’t lie Mr. President. Stop with the BS. Let’s get tough on crime and criminals.

  16. ATF agents have taken their cameras and photographed FFL records. They’ve already done it so a registry could be collected “some day”.

  17. Josh Earnest? Is this for real? A government mouth-piece, whose name translates to Fool Sincerely? A perfect name for a stand-up comic, but not a spokesperson. Goes double for a Fedgov spokesperson.

  18. Maybe the White House isn’t interested in a Firearms Registry, but ATF certainly has it underway – under the guise of “Tracing”:

    1. Multiple Sale Reports. Reported as 4.2 million records in 2010.

    2. Suspect Guns. All guns “suspected” of being used for criminal purposes but not recovered by law enforcement. This database includes (ATF’s own examples), individuals purchasing large quantities of firearms (including collectors of older firearms rarely used in crime), and dealers with “improper” record keeping. May include guns “observed” by law enforcement in an estate, or at a gun show, or elsewhere. Reported as 34,807 in 2010.

    3. Traced Guns. Over 1.2 million (2002) detail results from all traces. ATF reported 343,746 guns were traced in 2009, and a total of 4 million traces since inception This is a registration record which includes Names and Addresses of the first seller and purchaser, and possibly subsequent purchasers.

    4. Out of Business Records. Data is manually collected from paper Out-of-Business records (or input from computer records) and entered into the trace system by ATF. These are registration records which include name and address, make, model, serial and caliber of the firearm(s), as well as data from the 4473 form – in digital or image format. In March, 2010, ATF reported receiving several hundred million records since 1968

    5. Theft Guns. Firearms reported as stolen to ATF. Contained 330,000 records in 2010.[4] Contains only thefts from licensed dealers and interstate carriers (optional) Does not have an interface to the FBI’s National Crime Information Center (NCIC) theft data base, where the majority of thefts are reported.

    If ATF’s system is so antiquated, they why are they requiring (since 2008 – ATF Ruling 2008-2) that firearms dealers provide a digital ASCII file of their Out-of-Business records? Doesn’t sound like microfiche to me…. Sounds a lot more like a digital system of registration.

    “13. Upon termination of a license, the FFL must provide an American Standard Code for Information Interchange (ASCII) text file (in conformity with industry standards) and a file description, in addition to printouts of all records, to the ATF Out-of-Business Records Center. The printout and ASCII text file must contain the information as prescribed by regulation. All records must be forwarded to the ATF Out-of-Business Records Center in accordance with 27 CFR 478.127, including complete printouts, and ASCII text file (and file description) of the A&D records, and all ATF Forms 4473.”

    Think we don’t have a Firearms Registry? Think again!

  19. The info is there. This is just creating a paper trail for denial later. Caught in the lie on F&F. Caught in the lie on Benghazi. Caught in the preposterous joke of putting Crazy Old Joe out front and now this Admin PR staff and former campaign advisor rats cant jump ship fast enough…

  20. “What we want to make sure is that we’re keeping guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them…”

    …and we want to arbitrarily decide who should and shouldn’t have them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *