Warning: Not only I am not a lawyer or play one on TV or stayed at some hotel chain last night, but I had little sleep thanks to an argument between by stomach and overabundant use of Tabasco last night. You get what you pay for reading the following.
The first part is one of those that my eyes just end up glazing over after 5 minutes. If I am corrects, it mostly deals with issuing money to improve NCIS at state level & Indian Nations; if there is something else it should be pointed out, please let me know.
SEC 115, the protection for Veterans: Vets are being treated shoddily and actually are the group of Citizens that can get in the Mental Defective list by plain action of a paper pusher and not a certification by a doctor or panel and it is hell to get off that list. This has a double negative action: Obviously Veterans that are in the list but do not belong there are being denied their Second Amendment rights. But also that Veterans that may need help are avoiding it because they fear some secretary may decide their faith. From what I read, it gives veteran a fair chance to contest their adjudication. Again, too much legalese and I am not one, but I also feel there is room for improvement there.
SEC 122 Firearms Transfers: First coming out is the 48 hour time-frame. My fear here is that there are no provisions in case the FBI starts playing loosey and instead of allowing the transfer to go on, they just issue a denial and now is up to you to prove them wrong.
Then we jump to no private transfer without NCIS “at a gun show or event, on the curtilage thereof.” There goes the parking lot scheme unless you were to find an open lot next door. This would pass much easier down my throat if the word curtilage is removed.
Now here is a funny weird thing regarding internet sales:
“(B) pursuant to an advertisement, posting, display or other listing on the Internet or in a publication by the transferor of his intent to transfer, or the transferee of his
intent to acquire, the firearm.
“(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply if-
“(B) the transfer is made between an unlicensed transferor and an unlicensed transferee residing in the same State, which takes place in such State, if-
“(i) the Attorney General certifies that State in which the transfer takes place has in effect requirements under law that are generally equivalent to the requirements
of this section; and
“(ii) the transfer was conducted in compliance with the laws of the State;
So if there is no state law that acts like the Federal law then what? You cannot transfer privately? That is what appears to say and that is a poison pill right there for our side…..still we have this in subsection C
“(C) the transfer is made between spouses, between parents or spouses of parents and their children or spouses of their children, between siblings or spouses of
siblings, or between grandparents or spouses of grandparents and their grandchildren or spouses of their grandchildren, or between aunts or uncles or their spouses
and their nieces or nephews or their spouses, or between first cousins, if the transferor does not know or have reasonable cause to believe that the transferee is
prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm under Federal, State, or local law;
All of the sudden that looks like yes, you can have transfers between private individuals. I need a lawyer to make sure we are not blowing bubbles inside the microwave.
The next part is protection from liability to FFL holders. My amateur reading seems to indicate no traps and no protection if the FFL is indeed knowing and willfully breaking established law.
Now the definition of Gun Show:
“(7) For purposes of this subsection, the term ‘gun show or event‘-
“(A) means any event at which 75 or more firearms are offered or exhibited for sale, exchange, or transfer, if 1 or more of the firearms has been shipped or
transported in, or otherwise affects, interstate or foreign commerce; and
“(B) does not include an offer or exhibit of firearms for sale, exchange, or transfer by an individual from the personal collection of that individual, at the private
residence of that individual, if the individual is not required to be licensed under section 923.”. Ship & Transport: Is that from another state or from your home to the location? Why do I ask? Because it may mean you can actually create an “event” of only non-FFL people (regular gun owners) with a limit of 74 weapons and you’d be golden. If you belong to a shooting club, it is not unusual to see a gun belonging to a club member with a For Sale tag on some table. I am probably reading way too much into it, but I think you can have a “Gun Hoedown” or “Local Gun Enthusiast BBQ” where private individuals meet to exercise “the right to peaceably to assemble” and sale or trade personal firearms as long as the number of guns present is 74 or under. I know, it is a suckable alternative to having no restrictions as it should be but it is an alternative unless the definition of Gun Show or Event in this bill gets changed and includes the elimination of the curtilage proviso.
Next is the Prohibition of National Gun Registry.(923) “(m) The Attorney General may not consolidate or centralize the records of the-…”
“(1) acquisition or disposition of firearms, or any portion thereof, maintained by-“Any person who knowingly violates section 923(m) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years” This one is golden IMHO and should be fought to keep or be introduced somewhere else if this bill’s final version fails to get through. Nothing says “Keep your mitts off” that a stretch in a federal pen with Bubba Jamal Perez as roomie. That goes double when you consider the lack of loyalty in the chains of federal command and their knack for throwing underlings under the bus.
Gonna stop it here for now and see if I can gather better info on analysis from my betters. One thing, the bill sucks, but it is baby-suck compared to what’s waiting in the sidelines which is maelstrom-type suck. So far indicators are that something has to be passed so the congresscritters and other politicos have something to show to the electorate on the upcoming re-election. I rather be a bill that achieves almost nothing for both sides (I still think the 15 year Federal Correction Facility Spa Treatment should be saved) than playing hard to get and getting the original Feinstein/Schummer bills shoved down our collective gullets.
If the political flux changes more and there is no danger to go balls to the wall, then I can see this bill sent to the shredder filled with poison pills to make it unpalatable to the Dems. Speaking of poison pills, one item that was on the original talk of the bill that is no longer attached is National Reciprocity. If push comes to a shove, this is the one of the venomous items we must demand to be put in the bill before final voting as Scummer, Reid, Feinstein and the rest simply HATE the idea of the uncouth and unenlightened citizens of the United States traipsing their fiefdoms legally carrying a concealed weapon. They much rather see more kids die in Gun Free Zone schools.
All (somewhat smart & enlightening) comments welcome. Say your piece.And yes, I expect to be wrong in my assessments, just explain why.