Serious Hidden Flaws in the Recent Senate Gun Control Bill

[SemperFiGuy]

OK.......I haven't had time to check this one out.   It was recently sent to me by an associate.   Here it is, as received:

--------------------------------
There's much more in the Senate Gun Bill than the "common sense" background check the progressives tried to convey.
 
No wonder the Senate REJECTED the bill........

And We All must of wonder why this information never makes the papers or TV news.....
 
The "most popular" part of the proposed Senate gun control bill (background checks) sounds like a good idea at first but is more restrictive than anyone anticipated and will have significant unintended consequences.

There is a huge push to get it through Congress before the public has a chance to consider its contents.

Common activities that we take for granted will become federal crimes. These are not irresponsible exaggerations.  Please take a moment to review the requirements of the bill.

Here are a few examples of the restrictions in the bill:

EXAMPLE #1
Loaning your buddy a shotgun for a duck hunting trip will be considered a transfer.  If the following requirements are not met, YOU HAVE BOTH COMMITTED A FEDERAL CRIME.

1. He must have already purchased his hunting license
2. Season is already open (and will not close before he returns it)
3. He cannot travel with the firearm through a county where season is not yet open or any area where hunting is prohibited and certainly not across a state line.

He CANNOT stop by your house on the day before season opens, pick up the shot gun, go to the sporting goods store to buy a license and shells then drive out to the hunting lease.  In this scenario, YOU BOTH WOULD HAVE COMMITTED MULTIPLE FEDERAL CRIMES, YOUR WEAPONS WILL BE FORFEITED AND YOU WILL LOSE YOUR RIGHT TO BUY OR OWN A FIREARM.

EXAMPLE #2
It appears that only you may relocate your weapons.  If your weapon leaves your home without you, the new legislation considers it a transfer of possession.  ALL transfers require going through a firearms dealer, paying the transfer fee and a background check for the transferee.

Putting the weapon, even temporarily in someone else's possession, requires a transfer through a dealer.  There is no exception for putting them in a friend's truck while moving to your new house or packing them unloaded, locked in a gun safe into a moving truck.
 
Any scenario in which your weapon leaves your home without you is considered a transfer.  Failure to properly transfer the weapon is a federal crime which can result in a prison term AND WILL RESULT IN THE FORFEITURE OF YOUR FIREARM.

In the scenario above, your buddy's truck was used to commit a federal crime and WILL BE CONFISCATED just like with current Fish and Game violations.

EXAMPLE #3
Infractions as above which involve 2 guns of any type are considered weapons trafficking.  You will be prosecuted under the same federal laws as a terrorist arms dealer.

EXAMPLE #4
Any of the infractions above (or hundreds of other routine scenarios) may result in federal charges, confiscation of ALL your weapons and being prohibited, like all felons, from ever owning a weapon again.

Please read the text of the bill yourself.  Most of it is boring legalese A link to the bill is included below on the official Senate website. See Section 122 "Firearms Transfers".

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c113:S.649:

Read it and call your congressman's office.  Talk to their staff.  Tell them how you feel about this.

Keep in mind, none of the above would have stopped the tragedy's in Columbine or Newtown.  The proposed law makes you a criminal and opens the door for confiscation of your weapons and property for otherwise routine activities.

Think and act. Congress is hoping that you will do neither.

If you found the patience to read the entire text, you also learned that exactly $100 million per year of your tax money is set aside to enforce these restrictions.

Finally, please forward this to your friends who may be affected.
-----------------------------------------

So there you are, Fellow NFOA Members.   It's a Super Hardball game that we are playing.


sfg
 
 

[GreyGeek]

Here's is the Pandora's Box of that bill:

`(4)(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Attorney General may implement this subsection with regulations.

"... with  regulations"?   And just what might they be that could make this draconian law even worse?

And a fight it is.  The "poll" used previously to claim that "more than 90%" of Americans wanted that bill is being replaced by other "polls" that claim those Senators who voted against the bill are under attack at home for that vote.   The LSM media is repeating that bogus claim over and over in an obvious attempt to intimidate at least some of the Senators into switching on a revote.   ABC had a piece this morning  about a "protest" outside the office of one Senator and claimed it was a massive response, but made the mistake of letting the camera sweep the area for a fraction of a second.  There were only 4 people there, counting the "reporter".

The greatest threat against the 2A is that one or more of the five Supreme Court Justices who voted FOR the 2A could meet with an unfortunate accident, or be extorted into retiring, and be replaced with an Obama appointee.  That would switch the vote immediately from 5-4 to 4-5, and the LSM would immediately file a court case to "test" the previous ruling.  It would receive rush treatment and the 2A would be reinterpreted to mean military, not individuals.  That would be immediately followed by an attempt to pass a law outlawing all private ownership of firearms in America.   If you think you're seeing bias in the media now, wait until that scenario happens.

[GreyGeek]

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107839599438746451936/posts/QGABXNCfems

[RedDot]

This has been the danger of these gun bills all along. The Bill of Rights was put in clear simple terms so that it could be understood by all, not because they were all simpletons lacking the legal sophistication today's "legislators" presume to hold.  All these new modifications have one goal in mind.  By introducing all these lengthy, complicated measures they create a muddled confusing situation wide open to constant re-interpretation, and within that morass our basic rights are lost.

While the current attacks are upon the 2nd Amendment which the Founding Fathers meant as a guarantee that we would have the means to resist tyranny, all along they have been attacking our will to resist tyranny through endless regulation, implied legal jeopardy, and vague notions of what the Founding Fathers really meant.

Filling out federal background check forms makes me as nervous as if Satan himself had dropped a lease option on my soul in front of me.  Will checking this box send me to Leavenworth?  I haven't done anything wrong or at least I think so, but  worry that an errant mark or misread will be my doom.
Everytime I catch myself wondering "Can I go here with a gun? Can I write this on a forum? Can I say this out loud?", I'm afraid they are winning the battle of Will...

[Gumby]

RedDot is right on... there is no limit to the mischief of bureaucrats when they use "good laws" as their "noble excuse" to abuse the law-abiding.  Consider this short story from September 2009, with emphasis mine (it will give you additional reasons to ALWAYS say no to registration efforts):

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2009/09/22/guns-toronto-seized-police523.html

Toronto police have seized almost 400 firearms with lapsed registrations in a six-month push aimed at reducing the number of guns on the city's streets...

Many of those who had to surrender their firearms had either let their registrations lapse, or had stashed their guns improperly under beds or in closets.  Most had simply inherited the firearms, police said.

The Firearms Act stipulates guns must be stored in a secure place or be locked so that they are inoperable...

Targeting people who had registered their guns is a preventative measure, said Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair... at a Tuesday news conference... "we know from experience that their firearms can become extremely dangerous when they get into the hands of criminals. And so we have undertaken a number of initiatives to reduce the availability of those handguns."

See how wonderful government is... it TARGETS the law-abiding... it CONFISCATES inherited property... IT shall judge - on the spot, without due process - what constitutes "safe" gun storage.  In the cause of "general welfare, general safety" it preys on the righteous and ignores the real evil-doers (they're too difficult to find and prosecute - so you and your family will do in the meantime). 

My #1 goal regarding our local gun rights is to secure the elimination of Omaha's handgun registration.