It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gun Control Legislation

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2004 @ 10:08 PM
link   
I was reading my latest mail from the NRA (actually it was their sweepstakes entry but they always lobby you for money). This letter mentioned a pending bill sponsored by Senators Lautenberg, Kennedy, Corzine and Reed. The tenets of the bill include:



  1. suspension of 2nd amendment rights anytime the
  2. threat level is yellow or higher
  3. national gun registration
  4. federal firearms rationing
  5. indefinite delays on background checks


I don't know how to search for pending legislation, other than what's been submitted to the floor for consideration. Does anyone else know about this? It looks like it's time to horde and protect our right to bear arms. I'm not one of those "well-trained militia" people, I believe in my right to defend my family and hunt. My wife is well-versed in how to handle my guns so I don't need to hear about how more gun owners are injured by their own gun. I heard about that in my last thread on gun control.

Does anyone else belong to the NRA? What do you all think the chances are of such a bill passing? If the momentum in Congress shifts in November I'd say the chances are definitely better.

Thoughts?




posted on May, 12 2004 @ 10:23 PM
link   
I don't quite get how suspending the 2nd ammendment during times of a yellow alert would be of any real benefit. Quite frankly the concept of suspending ANY of the ammendments seems like a bad idea. They have been the same set for so long I would think they work pretty darn well. As for the registration thats not anything new, its always on the tables it seems. The rationing I think is a load of crud, prices on guns doesnt exactly let people buy them up, plus the whole waiting periods and 1 a month limits kind of make it already a ration like situation. The indefinite delays on bg checks sounds like typical government thinking, I would think they already drag their feet on doing the checks, hence why the current batch of laws seems to be realatively ineffective at their goal of keeping the guns out fo the hands of those who don't need them.



posted on May, 12 2004 @ 10:42 PM
link   
Here is a good site listing current legislation: www.gunowners.org... .

If you want more details on specific bills goto www.senate.gov... and lookup the bill using the H.R. 3449 or S.980 nomenclature.



posted on May, 12 2004 @ 10:45 PM
link   
Here is the bill I believe the NRA letter references. It is S.969. The full text is pasted here because the source site does not allow a link based on how it presents its data.

Caveat: I will try to scan the proposed changes to the US Code tomorrow for a determination of what is prescribed here.

URL: thomas.loc.gov...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT GO TO
Next Hit Forward New Bills Search
Prev Hit Back HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Help
Contents Display

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GPO's PDF Display Congressional Record References Bill Summary & Status Printer Friendly Display - 11,444 bytes.[Help]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homeland Security Gun Safety Act of 2003 (Introduced in Senate)

S 969 IS


108th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 969
To enhance the security and safety of the Nation by increasing the time allowed to track terrorists during periods of elevated alert, closing loopholes that have allowed terrorists to acquire firearms, maintaining records of certain handgun transfers during periods of heightened terrorist risk, and for other purposes.


IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

May 1, 2003
Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. CORZINE, and Mr. REED) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A BILL
To enhance the security and safety of the Nation by increasing the time allowed to track terrorists during periods of elevated alert, closing loopholes that have allowed terrorists to acquire firearms, maintaining records of certain handgun transfers during periods of heightened terrorist risk, and for other purposes.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Homeland Security Gun Safety Act of 2003'.

SEC. 2. SUSPENSION OF CERTAIN ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS DURING PERIODS OF HEIGHTENED THREAT CONDITION.

Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in subsection (s)(6), by adding at the end the following:

`(D)(i) Subparagraph (B)(i) shall not apply during any period in which the threat condition under the Homeland Security Advisory System is elevated, high, or severe.

`(ii) The provision under clause (i) shall remain in effect until the threat condition has been at the lowest level for 180 consecutive days.'; and

(2) in subsection (t)--

(A) in paragraph (1)(B)(ii), by inserting `subject to paragraph (7),' before `3 business days'; and

(B) by adding at the end the following:

`(7)(A) Paragraphs (1)(B)(ii) and (2)(C) shall not apply during any period in which the threat condition under the Homeland Security Advisory System is elevated, high, or severe.

`(B) The provision under subparagraph (A) shall remain in effect until the threat condition has been at the lowest level for 180 consecutive days.'.

SEC. 3. FIREARM STORAGE AND TRANSFER REQUIREMENTS.

(a) LIMITATIONS ON HANDGUN SALES- Section 922(b) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in paragraph (4), by striking `and' at the end;

(2) in paragraph (5), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and

(3) by inserting after paragraph (5), the following:

`(6) any firearm to a qualified purchaser if the licensee knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, that--

`(A) the purchaser intends to transfer the firearm to an individual who would otherwise be ineligible to purchase a firearm under this chapter; or

`(B) the gun will be used in the commission of a crime.'.

(b) REPORTING REQUIREMENT- Section 922(s)(6)(C) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`(C) If a chief law enforcement officer determines that a person is ineligible to receive a handgun, the officer shall--

`(i) notify the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives of the person's attempt to purchase a firearm; and

`(ii) not later than 20 business days after a request from such person, provide the person with a written explanation of the reasons for such determination.'.

(c) MULTIPLE HANDGUN SALES- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after subsection (y) the following:

`(z) PROHIBITION AGAINST MULTIPLE HANDGUN SALES OR PURCHASES-

`(1) SALES- It shall be unlawful for any licensed dealer--

`(A) during any 30-day period, to sell 2 or more handguns to an individual who is not licensed under section 923; or

`(B) to sell a handgun to an individual who--

`(i) is not licensed under section 923; and

`(ii) purchased a handgun during the 30-day period ending on the date of the sale.

`(2) PURCHASES- It shall be unlawful for any individual who is not licensed under section 923 to purchase 2 or more handguns during any 30-day period.

`(3) EXCHANGES- Paragraph (1) does not apply to an exchange of 1 handgun for 1 handgun.'.

(d) SECURITY STANDARDS FOR STORAGE AND DISPLAY OF FIREARMS-

(1) RULEMAKING AUTHORITY- Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall, by regulation, prescribe security standards, to prevent theft or other loss of firearms, for the storage and display of firearms by firearms dealers that are licensed under chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code.

(2) PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION OF STANDARDS- If a licensed firearms dealer fails to comply with the standards prescribed pursuant to paragraph (1), the Attorney General--

(A) shall suspend the license of such dealer until the dealer is found to be in compliance with such standards; and

(B) may assess a fine in accordance with section 3571 of title 18, United States Code.

SEC. 4. LICENSING REQUIREMENTS.

(a) REQUIREMENT OF LICENSEES TO COMPLY WITH MINIMUM STANDARDS- Section 923(e) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking `or fails' and adding the following: `, fails to comply with the requirements under subsection (d)(1), or fails'.

(b) UNLIMITED INSPECTIONS- Section 923(g)(1)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking `without such reasonable cause or war-rant--' and all that follows and inserting `at any time without such reasonable cause or warrant.'.

(c) SECONDHAND FIREARM PURCHASES; CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS- Section 923 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(m)(1) A licensed importer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector shall, before purchasing a firearm from a person who is not licensed under this chapter, check the make, model, and serial number of the firearm against the Stolen Gun File of the National Crime Information Center.

`(2) If a record of the firearm under paragraph (1) is contained in the Stolen Gun File, the licensee who acquired such information shall immediately report the make, model, and serial number of the firearm of an unlicensed person and the name of the person who offered to sell the firearm to--

`(A) the National Crime Information Center;

`(B) the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; and

`(C) local law enforcement.

`(n)(1) Each licensee shall submit to the Attorney General the name and other identifying information of each responsible person or employee who will be authorized by the licensee to handle or possess firearms in the course of employment with the licensee. Upon the receipt of such information from the licensee, the Attorney General shall determine whether the responsible person or employee is described under section 922(d).

`(2) If the Attorney General determines that the responsible person or employee is not described under section 922(d), the Attorney General shall notify the licensee in writing or electronically of the determination and issue, to the responsible person or employee, a letter of clearance, which confirms the determination.

`(3) If the Attorney General determines that the responsible person or employee is described under section 922(d), the Attorney General shall notify the licensee in writing or electronically of the determination and issue to the responsible person or employee, as the case may be, a document that--

`(A) confirms the determination;

`(B) explains the grounds for the determination;

`(C) provides information on how the disability may be relieved; and

`(D) explains how the determination may be appealed.'.

SEC. 5. PENALTIES.

(a) ENHANCED PENALTIES- Section 924(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in paragraph (2), by striking `or (o)' and inserting `(o), or (z)';

(2) in paragraph (3), by striking `one year' and inserting `5 years'; and

(3) in paragraph (6)(B)(i), by striking `1 year' and inserting `5 years'.

(b) MANDATORY SUSPENSION OF LICENSE WHEN LICENSEE CHARGED WITH CRIME- Section 924 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(p) A license issued to a person under this chapter shall be suspended when the licensee is charged with a violation of this chapter. Such suspension shall continue until--

`(1) the licensee is convicted of the violation, at which time the license shall be revoked; or

`(2) the licensee is acquitted, at which time the license shall be restored.'.

(c) PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO REPORT MISSING FIREARMS- Section 924 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by subsection (b), is further amended by adding at the end the following:

`(q)(1) A person who violates section 923(g)(6), or makes a false statement relating to firearms, shall, immediately upon discovery by the Attorney General of such conduct, have any license issued under this chapter immediately suspended for not less than 48 hours. A suspension under this subsection shall not terminate until the Attorney General completes an investigation of the conduct that necessitated such suspension.

`(2) A dealer, importer, manufacturer, or collector licensed under this chapter who violates section 923(g), or knowingly makes a false statement in connection with the firearms of such licensee, may be fined under this title and imprisoned not more than 5 years.'.

SEC. 6. EXPLOSIVE MATERIALS.

Section 845(a)(5) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking `fifty pounds' and inserting `5 pounds'.

SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2004--

(1) $50,000,000 to hire not less than 500 new inspectors within the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Department of Justice; and

(2) $100,000,000 to hire not less than 1000 new agents within the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Department of Justice.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT GO TO
Next Hit Forward New Bills Search
Prev Hit Back HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Help
Contents Display

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



posted on May, 12 2004 @ 10:57 PM
link   


1. suspension of 2nd amendment rights anytime the
2. threat level is yellow or higher
3. national gun registration
4. federal firearms rationing
5. indefinite delays on background checks



I am a lifetime member of the N.R.A.
To suspend the second amendment right they first need to have a successful gun registration. That won't happen, too many people who will refuse to register.
People already know that Canadas gun registration was a failure, Britains was a failure and Australias was a failure.
It always leads to confiscation or lock-ups, eventually confiscation.
No gun owner would ever register.
New gun purchases would be harder.
No cop or ? is going to go to someones house and try to take their gun.



posted on May, 12 2004 @ 11:17 PM
link   
Unlike other so-called rights - like those the Mass. supreme court justices amazingly find in their states constitution after hundreds of years the 2nd amendment is a right, its guaranteed, theres no debating our right to own a gun. I just dont know why so many Americans are willing to give up a right. Nor do I know why we're letting elected officials take it away.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 08:21 AM
link   
Bringing this up to the top since I started this late last night. I have meetings this morning but hope to post the proposed changes and their affects to the current US code later today. Has anyone looked at the first link I posted www.gunowners.org... ? I am not really amazed by the number of bills to be honest. It is normal for bills to act as riders to other bills for "sneaky" passage. That's what concerns me if we have an overwhelmingly Democratic congress next year.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bob88
I just dont know why so many Americans are willing to give up a right. Nor do I know why we're letting elected officials take it away.


I think we don't like to think for ourselves anymore. If something doesn't directly impact us we instantly don't care, whether a principle's involved or not. Americans are so disgusted with our political system that most don't try to do anything about it. That would involve effort, and in our ultra-modern, gotta have every convenience possible society that just doesn't fit in.

It's disappointing. I listen to stories from my father-in-law and his father about life as a kid in central NY and wish I could be in those days.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 06:36 PM
link   
Yeah, told ya. The war on terror is just an excuse to take away rights. Clinton, amazingly, tried to do the same thing after the OKC bombing. Remeber that whole speech he gave on gun control, as if guns had something to do with Timmy McVeigh? last time i checked, it was a bombing, not a shooting, and guns were not involved.

Same thing with 9/11. last time I heard, airliners were hijacked with BOXCUTTERS AND KNIVES. I dont recall anythiong mentioned about a gun. Madrid, no guns were used. In fact, the only place terrorists use guns are in the warzones, come to think of it. At home, they plant bombs, or threaten people with bombs and knives.

So i say again, what do guns have to do with terrorists? Nothing.

It goes to prove my earlier points: liberals are just as dangerous to this country's security as the NEO Cons. (Note ted kennedys name in there...ahem, he killed more people with his car than I killed with my guns, so the bumper sticker says). They are using the war on terror to enforce thier own agendas. Pure and simple.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by titian
Bringing this up to the top since I started this late last night. I have meetings this morning but hope to post the proposed changes and their affects to the current US code later today. Has anyone looked at the first link I posted www.gunowners.org... ? I am not really amazed by the number of bills to be honest. It is normal for bills to act as riders to other bills for "sneaky" passage. That's what concerns me if we have an overwhelmingly Democratic congress next year.


im against gun control and have voted democrat in the past and will no longer ever vote republican or democrat as both sides are being run and controlled by the same force whos ultimate goal is to erode civil rights and destroy the liberties of all americans.....
THEY ARE CONTROLLING BOTH SIDES OF THE COIN PEOPLE DONT FOOL YOUR SELF .....MAKE YOUR SELF AWARE....ALL POLITICIANS ARE SERVING THE SAME FORCE.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT THE ELITE SEEK TO LEAD THE ORGANISATIONS OF BOTH FOR AND AGAINST WHAT THEY DESIRE, TO ENSURE COMPLETE CONTROL OF THE "DEBATE" AND ITS OUTCOME.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf


It goes to prove my earlier points: liberals are just as dangerous to this country's security as the NEO Cons. (


Skadi .....god bless your little heart .....! That is hitting the nail right on the head ......both sides are controlled so the outcome will always be the same ....it just seems as if we have freedom ....while all the time its just a show to convince us that we are electing officials who represent the people and the best interests of the country.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 07:08 PM
link   
"Neo Cons"?
Help a brother out, what does the "neo" part mean, I only know it as meaning new.

Conservatism, by the definition of the word in this context, would prohibit a conservative from being for the removal of a constitutionally protected right. Being a right wing member without conservatism, however, such as Nazi Germany, is not good for persoanl rights. The Jews, disarmed and then slaughtered, could tell you that.

There's a reason I call myself a conservative or a constitutionalist rather than one of the two controlling parties. Both parties are owned by the same master, and when you own both horses, you don't have to care who wins.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 07:09 PM
link   
Yep, watcher, thats how Ive always thought. The only difference between liberals and conservatives is that they go about robbing us of rights differently.

What rights one party doesnt destroy, the other one will wipe out, so they have all bases covered.

Thats one reason I liked having a republican congress and a democrat president, they spent more time battling each other than passing legislation that would ultimately choke us further. The less they get done in washington DC, the better for the rest of us.

Thats why Im not overly thrilled on the upcoming elections, and may just resort voting third party as I normally do. While Bush sickens and frightens me, Kerry will simply wipe out the rights Bush hasnt.

I can somewhat understand peoples disgust with the political system, but thats no excuse for inaction. if people started looking into third parties and voting for them and supporting them, instead of relying on TV and campaign adds to decide for them, wed be alot better off. More support would strengthen the third parties and give us what Americans love: variety.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 07:43 PM
link   
yes Skadi ...we must vote third party !!!!!Austin powers would say YAAAHHH BABBYYYYY......ITS TIME TO DO AWAY WITH THIS TWO PARTY SYSTEM WHICH IS ACTUALLY A ONE PARTY ILLUSION,,,,



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 07:47 PM
link   
And, what third party would that be? What one will have the money to fight the two giants? How would the public learn of it in sufficient quantity with the media against it?



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 09:05 PM
link   
To answer your questions, TC,

A Neo con is just that, a "new conservative. Not of the old variety of which you speak. Not the old common sense conservative.

new conservatives believe in having a big military so they can send it all over the planet and trash countries that blockade the efforts of thier funders to impose Mc Donalds and Star Bucks on everyone. Americas security is of no concern to them, just the security of assets.

The new conservatives believe in favoring the rich and cutting them fat deals, and believe in capitalism allowed to run amok without any sort of regulation on what companies can or cant do, like trashing the environment.

NEO cons favor outsourcing, instead of working to keep production here at home. they keep signing trade deals to ruin us.

This as opposed to the older brand of conservative, who favored outsourcing only as a last resort, who supported independant enterprise and capital diversity to encourage new business. old conservatives were known for being fiscally sound and not raising taxes to fund failed social engineering. old conservatives favored a society of common sense, not toal unbridled ruin or a police state.

That said, as far as third parties go, it is true they are not funded enough, nor strong enough, because the big two have basically out spent them. The idea is to get mroe interest in the third parties. the problem is too many people rely on mainsteam media, an outlet THEY own. They key is to start a counter offensive that even the media cannot ignore. It takes the activism and information dispersal of a legion of dedicated Americans, no matter what thier political affiliation, to take to the streets, the internet, even the mail. Its not a problem curable magically. It takes alot of effort and a desire of people to see change.

if a person with no college degree can favor third party and vote for them, anyone can. I did.



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 12:22 AM
link   
as an alien i don't get a vote, in about 7 years time ,i will .
however i can get a firearms licence and own a firearm .
the arguement about guns and the constitution doesn't seem to apply to me !!!!!
i'm politically an anarchist [and an unreconstructed marxist ], i'm anti gun control and if i had to choose would vote republican .
i really don't see how taking the guns from the poor is going to better thier lives in fact i'd suggest the opposite.
so far this year ,i've yet to hear a politican on either side come up with a suggestion to assist the poor of this country , first one that does gets my unflinching loyalty .[when i get my vote ]
in the mean time i am reminded of my great granny [god rest her ] 'it's better the devil you know '



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by titian

  1. suspension of 2nd amendment rights anytime the
  2. threat level is yellow or higher
  3. national gun registration
  4. federal firearms rationing
  5. indefinite delays on background checks



Titian-I've gone through this legislation three times now and I'm not finding anything that relates to suspending the 2nd amendment during yellow or higher Or a national gun registration.

From what I've been able to gather 90% of the bill involves more paperwork and higher penalties for gun dealers.

The only thing directly relating to individual rights is the 2-gun a month limitation and would be in effect regardless of the threat level. Is this what the NRA was referencing? Because they ought to be all over this section.



posted on May, 14 2004 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 24, Section 922 Changes

Changes are boldfaced


(s)(6)
(A)
Any transferor who sells, delivers, or otherwise transfers a handgun to a transferee shall retain the copy of the statement of the transferee with respect to the handgun transaction, and shall retain evidence that the transferor has complied with subclauses (III) and (IV) of paragraph (1)(A)(i) with respect to the statement.

(B)
Unless the chief law enforcement officer to whom a statement is transmitted under paragraph (1)(A)(i)(IV) determines that a transaction would violate Federal, State, or local law -

(i)
the officer shall, within 20 business days after the date the transferee made the statement on the basis of which the notice was provided, destroy the statement, any record containing information derived from the statement, and any record created as a result of the notice required by paragraph (1)(A)(i)(III);

(ii)
the information contained in the statement shall not be conveyed to any person except a person who has a need to know in order to carry out this subsection; and

(iii)
the information contained in the statement shall not be used for any purpose other than to carry out this subsection.

(C)
If a chief law enforcement officer determines that an individual is ineligible to receive a handgun and the individual requests the officer to provide the reason for such determination, the officer shall provide such reasons to the individual in writing within 20 business days after receipt of the request.


D)(i) Subparagraph (B)(i) shall not apply during any period in which the threat condition under the Homeland Security Advisory System is elevated, high, or severe.

(ii) The provision under clause (i) shall remain in effect until the threat condition has been at the lowest level for 180 consecutive days.';



(t)(1)
Beginning on the date that is 30 days after the Attorney General notifies licensees under section 103(d) of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act that the national instant criminal background check system is established, a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer shall not transfer a firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this chapter, unless -

(A)
before the completion of the transfer, the licensee contacts the national instant criminal background check system established under section 103 of that Act;

(B)
(i)
the system provides the licensee with a unique identification number; or

(ii)
subject to paragraph (7), 3 business days (meaning a day on which State offices are open) have elapsed since the licensee contacted the system, and the system has not notified the licensee that the receipt of a firearm by such other person would violate subsection (g) or (n) of this section; and


(t)(7)(A) Paragraphs (1)(B)(ii) and (2)(C) shall not apply during any period in which the threat condition under the Homeland Security Advisory System is elevated, high, or severe.

(B) The provision under subparagraph (A) shall remain in effect until the threat condition has been at the lowest level for 180 consecutive days.'



(z) PROHIBITION AGAINST MULTIPLE HANDGUN SALES OR PURCHASES-

(1) SALES- It shall be unlawful for any licensed dealer--

(A) during any 30-day period, to sell 2 or more handguns to an individual who is not licensed under section 923; or

(B) to sell a handgun to an individual who--

(i) is not licensed under section 923; and

(ii) purchased a handgun during the 30-day period ending on the date of the sale.

(2) PURCHASES- It shall be unlawful for any individual who is not licensed under section 923 to purchase 2 or more handguns during any 30-day period.

(3) EXCHANGES- Paragraph (1) does not apply to an exchange of 1 handgun for 1 handgun.'.




top topics



 
0

log in

join