Email blast from the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL):
As a shocker, the Toome/Manchin/Schumer amendment to a gun-control bill in Congress was written by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA)! Alan Gottlieb, with CCRKBA, told a group of gun owners at a meeting that his organization wrote the bill and it has a lot of improvements to current law that are good for gun owners. In fact, CCRKBA actually ENDORSES the bill. HOWEVER, VCDL continues to OPPOSE that bill . . .
The bill does indeed offer some improvements to current law:
* Provides a felony penalty for anybody who attempts to make a gun registration database (currently such a thing is illegal, but there is no penalty)
* Allows handgun to be purchased in all 50 states, and not in just the state where the purchaser resides
* Clarifies the federal peaceful journey law to allow a person to stop at a hotel, eat a meal, get gasoline, etc. while traveling across a gun-unfriendly state
* Provides criminal and civil protections for private sellers whose sale was run through a background check
* Provides a method for protecting veterans from having their gun rights removed without proper adjudication
While those items are indeed good, the serious problems with the bill comes in the area of requiring background checks for all guns sold at gun shows or for guns that are advertised either in a “publication” or on the internet. While selling a gun or giving a gun to a family member would be allowed without a background check, selling a gun to anybody else would become almost impossible:
1. If you sell a gun at a gun show, then a background check MUST be done. There is no requirement in the bill, however, that a dealer would be available to run the background check! So it would be quite possible that private sales at gun shows would not be possible at all if no dealer agreed to run the background check. In fact, based on the definition of a gun show as having 75 or more guns for sale, a large flea market might qualify as a “gun show” because of a lot of small private sellers, with NO FFL present at the show to run background checks. In that case NO guns could be legally sold at the flea market at all, wasting everyone’s time. And how would a person know if there were 75 or more guns at the flea market or not? Talk about a trap to turn good people into felons!
2. If you say you have a gun for sale and either list it on the internet or post something about it in a “publication,” then the gun MUST be sold through a dealer at that point. If the buyer posts in either place that he is looking for a gun, the gun he purchases will also require a background check. The only way to sell a gun to a non-family member is if you are NOT at a gun show and never make mention of wanting to sell the gun on the internet or in any kind of publication. Basically, you would have to do it by word of mouth only. Good luck with that! What are you going to do – walk down a street and ask everyone you pass if they want to buy a gun from you?
3. While Alan claims that this bill would in no way lead to a registry, the data would be there for the taking, since the sale would be on a form 4473 kept by the dealer. If you didn’t sell through a dealer, the feds would know they only have to look to your family members to find the gun, since they would be the only people really exempt from the background check.
There is no doubt that this bill would do serious harm to gun shows and to private sales. You could find yourself at a gun show unable to sell your gun because no dealer will run the background check. You might not be able to sell your gun at a large flee market because there are no dealers in attendance to run the check. Make a mistake in how you sell that gun, for example mentioning it in an email but not selling it with a background check, and you can become a felon.
This is simply not the time for ANY gun bills to be considered in Congress, because they can be hijacked and made into anti-gun bills. Or, in this bill’s case, it already has some serious problems that can be made even worse. Surely, no one is really stupid enough to trust Senator Chuck Schumer when it comes to guns?
VCDL continues to OPPOSE ALL gun control bills in Congress. Sadly, this bill only makes our job harder at a time when Bloomberg and his illegal mayors are about to go on another offensive against our gun rights.
Click here for the text of the bill:.
Click here for a video of Alan explaining the bill.
Alan’s faith in background checks, and in Chuck Schumer, is misplaced and this bill must be defeated. Criminals will continue to have no problems getting guns with or without background checks. It’s the rest of us who will have lost our right to sell or buy guns from a private sale without Big Brother’s approval. That Big Brother, BTW, is the same Big Brother who provided guns to the Mexican cartels in Fast and Furious and tried to blame innocent gun dealers.
Dear SCOTUS,
FOAD. No, really – die. You are the lowest of the low and deserve to be punished for your crimes against Americans.
Sincerely,
All Americans that believe in upholding the Constitution
Wait. No really, wait at least 4 years, then die.
And yet, many people still believe in “checks and balances.” It’s laughable. They’re all on the same team, folks!
Henry,
I have fought against believing what you said for a long time. I think it’s time to believe you now.
We’re on our own, folks. No one will save us. No one will fight for us. We have no friends in high places of secular government. The cards are on the table.
Now what?
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.
what further proof do we need that SCOTUS is there simply to expand the powers of the Federal government beyond the Constitution?
VCDL is one of the best state-level pro-gun organizations out there. I would carefully consider any opposition they have to a bill
But, since it’s a Remington, I urge people to stick with a Ruger 10/22.
They made their decision – let them pay for it.
Someone, please inform me what Remington has done that brings this response.I haven’t heard a thing but you all seem to know.Thanks.
They were offered a government contract and “coincidentaly” decided to stay in New York. Im not against capitalism by any means but the timing of both more than stinks of bribery.
Question for those that understand the current background check proposal better than I:
Anything mentioned or advertised in a “real” or web-based publication requires a background check, correct?
Wouldn’t people selling just advertise that they have XX type of weapon for sale @ this price, call or email for details? Specific weapons wouldn’t be identified, so no background check, correct? Without any kind of specific identification used in the advert, the onus of proving that a background was required falls on the Feds, correct?
It’s my understanding that a *lot* of weapons get sold through word-of-mouth to friends, friends-of-friends, heard-from-the-guy-behind-the-counter, etc.
So, other than forcing people to adjust to this stupid law [hello, CA bullet button!], are the real-world down-sides all that bad? Do they really offset the real-world upsides?
Given that respectable 2A groups are falling on both sides of the debate, I’d really like to know.
The thing about intentionally vague wording on a bill, is that it’s intentional.
Given the language in that bill, a prosecutor could easily make the case that if you so much as sent a friend an email about “selling a gun”, then the FFL and BC requirements kick in.
Yes, the States traditionally have leeway to regulate the possession and carrying of firearms, but that is different from a State using those regulations to deny a civil right.
“May Issue” States with “proper cause” requirements are just covering the denial of a civil right with red tape. This is exactly the kind of case the Supreme Court should be hearing.
Remember, one of the classic moves of the propagandist is to frame an issue as being a struggle between two and only two propositions, both of which chosen so as to hide an underlying (and usually unacceptable) assumption.
In this case, it is the idea that children are owned. Children are people are not owned by other people.
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
One reason for buying a traditional styled .22 like my 10-22 or my Winchester Toz is price. You can save 2-300 bucks off one of the AR styled rifles and at the end of the day you still have a .22.
Funny that Schumer mentions OK Corral which was a shootout between law enforcement and criminals. I believe that’s already happened in Times Square…
“So, I’d be thrilled if all gun owners moved to Texas, Idaho and Florida.”
Gosh, I feel all warm and fuzzy and humble and proud that the “New-ish not-a-Republic” has put Idaho into the same “full of crazed eeevil gun owners” category as the Lone Star State. I am a bit peeved that they mentioned Texas first, however.
Not good.
Today is April 15, 2013. I ordered Remington UMC ammunition from Cabelas at the end of December. As far as I know, my order is still on backorder. Someone from Cabelas had told me that they were not receiving the ammo from Remington. I ordered the ammo almost 4 months ago! Why hit or miss can you buy ammo at Walmart but Cabelas can’t ship out orders in 4 months? In a time where Mayors like Rahm Emanuel are trying to influence things outside the law like pushing banks not to do business with gun companies. Is NY’s mayor Bloomberg influencing NY based Remington company to not ship out orders? In a time that gun companies are leaving states that have passed anti 2nd amendment laws. Remington has chosen to stay in NY and has received a 80 million dollar contract for $16,000. rifles. What rifle costs $16,000.?
Mom!?!
That video. It’s a double edge sword. The person holding the rifle could be a crazed mad man, but you know who else is holding that rifle? A cop, a Marine, a man, a woman, a young child protecting his home, protecting her family, fighting for God and country. It is not the weapon that makes the human. It is the human being that takes simple things made of metal, wood, stone, etc into weapons and it also takes a human being to decide what the weapon is used for. When you wake up in the middle of the night and something goes bump think about how long it’ll take for you to get up, grab a phone and dial 911. Then think about how long it’ll take to get your gun…think about that. So….how many rounds are we going to let it go? As many as it takes until you are safe.