While gun rights advocates are waking-up to some of the positives offered by the Manchin-Toomey compromise “universal background check” bill, so are the gun grabbers. “Times Square could become a new ‘OK Corral’ if the NRA and its enablers in Congress tack an amendment onto a gun control bill, Sen. Charles Schumer said Sunday,” repeated by the entirely credulous nydailynews.com “The ‘reciprocal concealed carry’ amendment would allow anyone with a permit to carry a concealed weapon in any state to use carry (sic) the gun legally any other state.” And that’s bad because states with de facto bans on concealed carry (e.g. New York) would get an earful from residents shouting WTF. Where’s our concealed carry permit? Oh wait. That’s not it . . .
“Times Square is different than rural Wyoming, and our police don’t need even law abiding citizens having the right to carry guns,” Schumer said.
Wait. What? New York police don’t need law-abiding citizens to exercise their Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms? Who asked them?
I’ve got a question: is this a deal breaker? Would Republicans turn against the Manchin-Toomey compromise if the Dems strip national reciprocity form the bill? Senator Marco “I’ll filibuster” Rubio ain’t saying.
But Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) defended a nationwide reciprocity.
“Someone who has a conceal-carry permit has been background-checked. That’s why they have one…I think that should be part of the bill,” he said on ABC’s This Week.
Huh. So let’s go back to why this is a bad idea, according to the News.
Cops oppose the amendment because it would be too hard to figure out whether a person carrying a gun on the street was a legal permit holder from another state or a criminal, said Pete Paterson of the Nassau County Police Benevolent Association.
“This will be very dangerous for police officers,” Peterson said.
Not so benevolent if you ask me. But completely, 100 percent asinine. A concealed carry permit holder from another state would have to show his permit. (Kinda like a driver’s license if you think about it.) Hang on. Why would a NY cop query a permit holder in the first place? Oh right. Stop ‘N Frisk. Electronic gun detectors. Well . . . deal with it.
Fingers crossed.
Don’t worry Chuck,i have no intrest in visiting your shameful disgusting city.
Chuckie is just worried about the reduction in his voting bloc when the formerly easy pickings turned out to be carrying.
It doesn’t matter, you need to be a NY resident to possess any handgun in NY.
I agree, I have absolutely no desire to visit that festering pile of humanity they call a city. I do feel bad for the oppressed in that state though.
I’d visit it if this passes just so I could say I legally carried a gun in Bloomberg’s city… hell if I saw him, I’d tell it to his face! We could start a tour called: “I legally carrying in places that the elected officials don’t want you to”… but that would probably be everywhere, so never mind.
No, no, no, no. National reciprocity is NOT worth banning private sales and ushering in national registration.
I agree, although it may be enough to derail the entire bill, which would be good.
If we end up getting gun control laws passed because of gun-rights groups selling out, I might just shoot myself.
Well now, that would show em!
Wasted ammo bro. Don’t give up the fight.
In jest yes, shrink might say you are no longer fit.
Ammo’s expensive nowadays, don’t waste it.
I can see kapo bloomberg and mikeyb#’s after Tote shoots hisself. In public they would be saying.” This proves our point. If this man had not had easy access to a gun he would still be alivew today.”
In private, it would be a wank fest of joy. Another gun owner down.
Hey has anyone thought that mikeyb2000 is Michael Bloomberg himself?
Okay, I think we’ve been through this at least 5 times this week: just to play devil’s advocate, where in the bill as currently written does it “ban private sales” or “establish universal registration”? I’m by no means ready to jump the fence and actually support Manchin-Toomey, but I’m getting sick of purely reactionary screwed denouncing it. I’m sure that the final amended version will be worse, but right now, we get criminalization of misuse of filed 4473s, which is the exact opposite of registration. We also get interstate handgun sales, and strengthening of FOPA traveller-protection rules. This is in exchange for requiring background checks in situations where, as has been pointed out numerous times here, they’re already required 90% of the time anyway.
Is that 10% worth the gains we get?
Where in the bill as currently written does it “ban private sales” or “establish universal registration”?
Where it bans any private sale that is not to an immediate family member. You can go to Toomey’s website and read the bill yourself and see. Also, what do you think they’re going to do with all of those extra 4473’s? Just throw them in a closet? No, they will use them to create a registry.
but right now, we get criminalization of misuse of filed 4473s, which is the exact opposite of registration.
It’s ALREADY a crime, yet they STILL do it! Why do you think THIS law would magically get the government to obey the law?
We also get interstate handgun sales, and strengthening of FOPA traveller-protection rules.
You can already buy handguns from other states, they just have to go to a FFL (like any online sale or sale from a non-bordering state for a long arm). As for FOPA, again, they already ignore that, why would they magically follow the law this time?
This is in exchange for requiring background checks in situations where, as has been pointed out numerous times here, they’re already required 90% of the time anyway.
No, basically all private sales will be banned and we already know that they WILL use those records for evil deeds. Even if you want to claim that it only affects gun shows and “internet” (meaning you said ANYTHING online about selling a gun) sales, that still eliminates the majority of private sales.
In exchange we get essentially nothing new.
As an FFL holder, I feel the need to correct something I’ve seen on here several times. The feds can not use 4473s to tell what firearms you own. The only way they could do that is to come to my shop and look through my bound book, which I will not let them do unless they can show me reasonable cause that a crime has been committed .
Keith, they can come do it any time they want because you’re not willing to lose your business and spend years in jail for telling the ATF “no”.
We all know what happens if you say “no” to them – they simply come back with a few dozen thugs with M4’s, arrest you, seize your property, and if you’re very lucky you’ll end up free but without an FFL anymore.
Keith, what happens to your 4473s when you retire/die/quit?
They go to ATF. Who, right now, will admit to having north of 300 million of them. They aren’t sitting in boxes deep in an underground storage facility…
They are scanned into a computer. Just because nobody has “officially” pushed the ‘collate and print’ button doesn’t mean there isn’t a database.
There is an ATF database of stolen guns as well as one with about 4MM 3310s – the form for multiple sales to an individual.
Lets not forget this also includes any private sales that use any form of advertising, newspaper, armslist, sign in the yard. In fact, the way I read this, unless a total stranger happens to walk up to you and ask to buy a firearm that you happen to be carrying, and that you are not advertising for sale, and are nowhere near another 75 guns for sale, then you can sell it without a background check. Ironically, the only legal scenario for a private sale appears on the surface to be a clandestine, black market sale! WTF!
So yes, it is a de facto ban on private sales.
Keith,
Dead wrong pal. I’d say that 99% of the time if BATF comes knockin, you’re showing them. You say that they show you “reasonable cause.” Well, do you think possibly, just maybe, they could lie?
I’ve heard countless stories of BATF showing up with a digital camera and photographing all the 4473s in a bound book. Some reports from FFLs point to this occurring weekly or monthly at all local area gun stores. So, what are you going to do when they start taking digital shots of yours?
Okay, I think we’ve been through this at least 5 times this week: just to play devil’s advocate, where in the bill as currently written does it “ban private sales” or “establish universal registration”? I’m by no means ready to jump the fence and actually support Manchin-Toomey, but I’m getting sick of purely reactionary screwed denouncing it. I’m sure that the final amended version will be worse, but right now, we get criminalization of misuse of filed 4473s, which is the exact opposite of registration. We also get interstate handgun sales, and strengthening of FOPA traveller-protection rules. This is in exchange for requiring background checks in situations where, as has been pointed out numerous times here, they’re already required 90% of the time anyway.
Is losing that 10% of transactions worth the gains we get? I don’t know, but THAT’S the conversation we should be having, not “WAGHARBL THEY’S TAKIN’ OUR GUNS!!!1” That accomplishes nothing, and contributes to the negative stereotypes of gun owners, when this is our opportunity to show that we’re the reasonable party willing to discuss the issues, and that the antis are the completely irrational ones.
ETA: Apparently, by “You comment could not be published,” they meant “Your comment was published,” so I get to double-post and look like a jackass (which I’m sure I’ll get called anyway for not freaking out to the demanded level). Awesome.
“… so I get to double-post and look like a jackass …”
Still laughing out loud.
Don’t sweat your double post … lots of people are victims of the “quirks” around here quite a bit. Thank you for your humility.
I’m from NY. One of the things that keeps me going is that when it’s time for us to move there will be free states to go to. If we weaken states rights in the gun debate all we have done is create an incentive for the gun grabbers to swing for the fences and try to get one crippling gun law passed at the federal level that ends the gun world as we know it. If we keep the patch work of state laws there will always be some place that is free, always a bastion left. At the federal level we only need gridlock to win.
If we enable registration… well then we just slow pitched the ball to grabbers the next time they have all three branches in their control.
Where does it say “private sales” are banned? Show me in the proposed bill?
The part where is says all sales must go through a FFL unless to a family member.
That, is not a ban. If you have to go to an FFL if you purchase out of state, if you have to go to an FFL if you purchase new via retail, what is the big deal if you have to go to an FFL to sell to someone else?
That, is not a ban, it just means you need to do paper work. For most people in a Red state, this is an everyday transaction not a ban.
Also, there is no registration, you simply have to go through a NICS check so what is the big deal?
You may not want to do the paper work or go through a NICS check but that is neither a ban nor a registration. Read the bill and what SAF has said.
A ban would require you to sell to an FFL and nobody else. The bill only requires that you meet at an FFL, each person show their permits, a NICS check is done, and the transfer goes from the seller to the buyer and the only thing the FFL does is makes the phone call.
Pascal,
It is a big deal because it is MY property and the government has no business knowing what I do with it.
Pascal, requiring you to beg government permission to sell something to another individual is a ban on private sales of that object, plain and simple.
As we’ve already seen, the 4473’s used for NICS checks can be used to generate a registry and the only way to enforce a ban on private sales is to keep track of every gun and who owns it.
That, is not a ban, it just means you need to do paper work. For most people in a Red state, this is an everyday transaction not a ban.
Clearly you do not live in a free state then. For us, one person hands you cash (or a check) and you hand them a gun – no begging government permission involved.
Seriously, like I said above, if pretend gun people like you get your way on this, I might just shoot myself – better to end the suffering early than to slowly be raped to death over the next couple of decades.
NICS IS REGISTRATION. Purchase info goes on a gov’t provided form. Feds can access at any time they want.
@neiowa – actually IIRC NICS is destroyed w/in 24-72 hours or something, the 4473 is the form that must be retained for 20 years by the FFL or is stored indefinitely by ATF (& likely digitized) if the FFL retires or goes out of business
@Pascal – Right now I can go pay cash for a gun from a private party w/o hassle or having to go through a FFL. If this bill passes that will be a felony – which bars you from owning guns. What part of that is not a ban on private sales as we currently know them?
You also neglect to mention being required to fill out a 4473, which is a distributed registry. Though surely if this bill passes the ATF will be upgrading their shredders so they can destroy the 4473s as soon as they receive the FFLs book.
I bet the FFLs will be making all these NICS calls free, right? You clearly are not familiar with the issues our California brothers are dealing with, where many dealers will outright refuse to process private party sales and the ones who will charge an arm and a leg. That $150 used 10/22 can’t really compete with new guns if the FFL charges $100 per transfer.
“Where does it say “private sales” are banned?”
If you have to go to a government regulated agent (FFL licensee) to do the transaction, which is then subject to government approval/denial and results in a permanent paper trail for the transaction then it isn’t a private sale.
Private sale in this context does NOT mean a sale from one private party to another. It means a sale is conducted solely between private parties with no government scrutiny or approval required. Capiche?
Also, it is a mistake to take these things in isolation and forget the long term goal of our opponents. If Obummer signs this into law, it’s just the beginning. Before the ink is even dry he will be crowing about the rest of his laundry list of gun grabs (semi-auto bans, magazine cap. limits etc. etc.). Our opponents will not settle for this and they cannot ever be placated by compromise, it just makes them bolder and more arrogant.
Disagree. When national reciprocity works, and we don’t have blood in the streets (except the bad guys), we get a compelling case against unnecessary gun laws in multiple states. Not only would that blow CC wide open, but should usher in a whole host of pro-gun truth as well.
If they threw in a national exemption for CC permit holders for all gun sales I’d be for it. They could also overturn the Hughes amendment while they’re at it, though I see gun dealers and collectors fighting that just as much as the anti’s.
Collectors may fight it due to what it would do to the value of their investments. Gun dealers, however, I think would fully support this because it opens up a new market. All those people with all the MSRs they ever wanted and can’t afford a $10K NFA item may look at newly legal automatics and say, “Hey, there is something new to branch into!”
Speaking soley for myself I would jump on a true assault rifle if the Hughes Amendment was repealed if for no other reason than to get while the getting was good.
I think you’d find that NFA dealers are making far, far more trading in collectables worth thousands of dollars than they would trading in automatics worth slightly more than their semi-auto counterparts. Also remember that the vast majority of major manufacturers would have no part in selling full autos to civilians… you’ll note that the most of the pre-86 MG’s on the market today are conversions, no original select fires.
There were no where near as many ar-15 makers back then. And yes Colt had an informal policy that you could have 2 select fire guns at any time. When you sold one to a gov/leo you sent them the paperwork on it and they sent you another gun. Sell to a regular guy and you get no more MG’s. Now you think that that places like Aero wouldn’t in a second start adding a third hole to their already shelf-ed ar-15 lowers to sell as MG’s, it’d add all of 1 pass in the milling machine to do and it would make post SH look like a walk in the park. People would be stacking full auto lowers as deep as their pockets would allow. Wait times would shoot to probably 2 years in a matter of weeks. SOT’s would be putting s/n on HK sears, lightning links, DIAS’s, and tubes by the hundreds of thousands.
They would NEVER allow that one. From what I understand, even in states where your CCW exempts you from background checks on purchases, you still have to fill out a 4473, correct? They don’t care about the background checks. They only care about the paper trail.
This. No one is going to repeal the Dealer Record of Sale law. DROS does not invade the 2A, it is argued, because it is a record keeping requirement imposed on the licensed seller.
I can’t imagine willingly wanting to go to NY, let alone the city. If shumer and Co. didn’t have any vote on the rest of the nation, I’d say fine good riddance. Let the people reap what they sow ( either they voted for these Jacka**es, or they didn’t vote ).
To have a police state enacted and the courts letting it happen……makes me wish I never enlisted
Oh, Chuck….
You just don’t get it, do you? Consider these words from Robert Heinlein:
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” ~ Beyond This Horizon
You see, Chuck, imagine if a certain Adam Lanza would have tried to bring his version of horror and death to a crowd of children with armed mothers present. Those mothers, committed to killing in order to protect their children, would not have screamed and run about like victims. No. They would have given Adam Lanza his 15 seconds of fame by reducing him to a pile of bleeding meat.
So keep beating that collective drum of sissiness and fomented victimhood, Chuck. “Guns are bad, guns are bad, too many guns, grrrr, argh, whine, whine!” Those of us who actually care, and those of us who are vigilant, and those of us who would protect the innocent from the schemes of madmen, we know what we need to do. Please cease and desist in trying to stop us.
Our guns are not your enemy, Chuck. Our guns are the enemy of any who would seek to be ill-mannered and criminal. Bang.
How many times have we heard this argument now? Every single time someone tries to pass a CCW law? And how many times has it come to pass? None?
You have to remember that there are New Yorkers who reject the new, shiny clean Times Square and pine openly for the days when it had “character.” That is when it was a filthy, drug-infested, crime-infested blot on American civilization. Can’t expect this kind of person to make much sense.
Adding national reciprocity is a great idea. If we get it, helps sooth the sting from whatever else we get saddled with. But most likely, it sinks the whole gun-control ship.
Hey now. As a former visitor to NYC, I too pine for the days when Times Square had character and all the debauchery one could want in one convenient location. All the stuff that’s just below the surface in Las Vegas, was right there in Times Square, front and center. At least it was interesting and fun.
Now? There’s nothing there but the same mediocre chain garbage you can get anywhere in the US. The only difference is you’ll be packed in like sardines with other lemming tourists, and you’ll pay $20 for a rail drink. Blecch.
Didn’t someone already try to detonate a car bomb in Times Square not too long ago?
Obviously, people like Schumer and Piers Morgan don’t know that the legendary fight at the O.K. Corral only lasted 30 seconds with a total of 30 shots fired. It was a gunfight between lawmen and outlaws. In total, the fight between left 3 people dead and another 3 wounded.
Personally, I’d take that scenario over a terrorist strike. But, hey, saying the “O.K. Corral” sounds scary to those who don’t know history. Not to mention the fact that nothing is stopping a criminal from carrying a gun through Times Square at any given moment.
Looks like SCOTUS won’t be wading into the right to bear debate right now, after all:
http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/15/17761368-supreme-court-passes-on-gun-rights-case
Does that mean Scalia doesn’t have enough votes? Or maybe they are waiting to see if Illinois decides to appeal. Or maybe they don’t want to deal with it while gun control is all the rage in Congress. Who knows. It’s not like they’d be guaranteed to rule for the right to bear.
It’s utterly pathetic that the SCOTUS gets to just refuse to do their job.
SCOTUS determines SCOTUS’ job. They decide which cases to hear. That’s part of their job. And since almost every case they hear alleges some violation of the Constitution, it would be impossible for the nine judges to hear every one of the thousands of cases from the courts below.
They’ll get back to gun laws in the next couple of years.
I thought that their clerks do most of the work when selecting cases for review. Given that most of the clerks are most likely from ivy schools, does not surprise me if they lean to the left on most cases (and the Constitution).
I could be wrong so feel free to correct me.
SCOTUS determines SCOTUS’ job. They decide which cases to hear. That’s part of their job.
Please cite that part of the Constitution for me.
This ends up with us NOT getting national carry and compulsory “background checks” (actually registration) at gun shows.
Just remember the gun fight O.K. Corral was about gun control and the gun grabbers won.
The Earps were pimps, horse thieves, and thugs who just happened to wear badges. Kinda like today’s cops.
So…it’d be a safer place?
The O.K. Corral only had that one gunfight…
Here’s what so many people seem to be missing:
If a person is truly carrying concealed, NO ONE WILL KNOW! It’s called CONCEALMENT. If your gun is visible, IT IS NOT CONCEALED!
If you have a CC permit, you have been background-checked, you are very likely a law-abiding citizen, and you tend to follow established gun laws–in fact, you are probably more knowledgeable of gun laws than most legislators. Will there be exceptions? Yes. you can NEVER completely eliminate criminals from the general population.
I think the article is correct in asserting that only on use of the gun or in cases where the person is legally asked if he has a gun does the fact that a person even has the gun is an issue. And this is obviously going way deeper than simple carry–we now have states that are imposing search laws that can impede the very concept of concealed carry.
You’re clearly not aware of NY’s Stop and Frisk policies….
http://www.nyclu.org/issues/racial-justice/stop-and-frisk-practices
4336 buses and 12053 taxis in NYC and not ONE can run over Chuckie?
Would Schumer please just stfu, have a heart attack or be found with a trunk full of dead hookers already? I’m tired of his rights-trampling BS!
Amen, brother
I’ve seen it several more times on here today. 4473 does not tell the feds anything except that you made a purchase. There are no serial numbers, makes or models listed on 4473. The only place that is listed is in the bound book. I’m not for this bill, but we’re always complaining about the grabbers not getting their facts right, so let’s be careful about doing the same.
^^This.
NICS tells the FBI you made a purchase. 4473 does include make/model/serial unless they changed it in the last month. The FFL fills that part out. A cursory google search confirms this with multiple sources.
Keith, If you somehow have an FFL, you won’t for very long. Calling in a NICS check doesn’t include the make, model and s/n. But the 4473 does.
http://www.atf.gov/files/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf
16V – my thoughts exactly. I just read Keith’s post where he states he has a FFL and had a little chuckle. If he is neglecting to fill out page 3 of the 4473 of the form I think he will have some issues with the ATF.
Nate you covered it, your post wasn’t up when I started replying.
(The days when I have computer stuff to do, I keep the TTAG tab open and pop in and out. So I may start to reply then go away for 20 minutes, and meanwhile I miss stuff like your post.)
*pointing to blocks 26 – 30 on the 4473* THIS
Have you bought a gun from a FFL dealer? Did you watch them fill out the bottom of the form with the gun’s serial/make/model? Pay attention next time you make a purchase.
Continuing the Western motif, Schumer is a lyin’ polecat, bushwacker and hoss thief who speaks with forked tongue. And if the NYC cops had been at the OK Corral, they would have shot nine innocent bystanders and at least one horse.
Wasn’t OK Corral a shootout between law enforcement and outlaws? Really wasn’t any private citizens put banging rounds everywhere, well Doc was, but he was deputized….
I guess there’s never been an officer involved shooting ever in Times Square….. Oh
Who would ever want the wild west?
http://www.politisite.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/us-historical-homicide-chart.gif
The 4473 tells the gov where to get the info and they seem to think they’re above the law in order to get what they want. If you don’t comply as an FFL they’ll just shut you down. How long before they would pass something like the patriot act to get all the information they want from dealers? It’s for the children…
“Times Square is different than rural Wyoming, and our police don’t need
even law abiding citizens having the right to carry guns,” Schumer said.
Yes, rural Wyoming doesn’t anywhere near the crime rate as times Square.
Wyoming has conceal carry as a right, not something you have to apply for.
A majority of criminals will stay away from places where they can get shot.
Again with the “the police will save you” lie that never has been proven true.
What we’re getting is the hyperbole shoot-out in the D.C. to N.Y. corridor.
Funny that Schumer mentions OK Corral which was a shootout between law enforcement and criminals. I believe that’s already happened in Times Square…
Actually, the OK Corral was a shootout between criminals and criminals pretending to be law enforcement. Not much different than today’s law enforcement.
Its a good amendment I think it will kill the gun control bill period.
Yeah…you’re right, Chuck. Far better that only New York criminals have guns.
Douche.
“Times Square is different than rural Wyoming, and our police don’t need even law abiding citizens having the right to carry guns,”
Oh, I see how this works… When this crazy “Second Amendment” idea spills over into his state, he cries that rural Wyoming and Times Square are two completely different places. But when we’re talking about a federal ban on certain types of guns, he’s all for it, because suddenly rural Wyoming (and every other place) IS Times Square.
Gotta love that anti-gunner “logic”.
We were fed the exact same lines of BS in 2004 when the AWB was about to sunset. We were promised the streets would run red if it wasn’t renewed.
Shut up, Chuck Schumer.
I dont support this bill.My question if they r so pro 2a why dont they pass the legitmatly good things in this bill as a standalone bill woithout all the anti 2a BS.
It shouldn’t matter one bit where you are or what your doing, your Second Amendment rights go with you everywhere. Those seeking to limit those rights are only seeking the power and control over you. Schumer wants to make sure government has control of the sheep and they aren’t armed. Cloth Sword Tees
Schumer’s just trying to protect the NYPD’s turf. After all, randomly spraying bullets in Times Square is their job. Also, if they suddenly had to live up to the standards of the average CCW permit holder, their training budget would explode.
OK Corral? What is it with all these gun-grabbing, secular humanist, big gov statist, libtard officials in power…….and why are they almost all jews?
OK corral is better than visitors getting mugged.