The Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act would require states and the federal government to send all necessary records on criminals and the violently mentally ill to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The bill extends the existing background check system to gun shows and online sales. The bill explicitly bans the federal government from creating a national firearms registry, and imposes serious criminal penalties (a felony with up to 15 years in prison) on any person who misuses or illegally retains firearms records
The Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act | Pat Toomey | Senator for Pennsylvania.
Again, this is just the summary and I won’t be satisfied till I read the actual bill. Some things jump at me besides Private Sales remaining private: Possible strengthening of FOPA, approval of National Reciprocity and bypass NCIS checks if you have a CWP.
I have not checked the feeds of the usual Anti Gun groups this morning, but I would not imagine they would be too happy about this. If the bill is as good as it looks from over here and becomes law, there will be a long line of people that will have to kiss Toomey’s butt as manner of apology.
CSGV is apposed and calling it less than nothing. Ladd also claims that the removal of the prohibition on interstate handgun sales will void licencing and registration. Personally, I think the good out weighs the bad, maybe. The amendment also prohibits intrastate shipping of long guns from seller to buyer.
forgot to give the link to Ladd’s childlike fit.
http://www.csgv.org/media-web/press-releases/248-csgv-concerned-about-manchin-toomey-amendment-on-background-checks
Based on what I’ve hear so far, I’m confused. (No great feat, I admit.)
What changes about gun shows? If I carry a gun to a gun show, can I only sell it after getting a background check done on the buyer? What if we agree to go out to the parking lot? Or the parking lot of Wal Mart? Or to my house? Same questions apply to internet gun sales. What actually constitutes an internet sale? What if I post a message on an internet forum, but meet the buyer in person? What if I send a friend an email?
I realize most of these questions can’t be answered until the actual text of the bill is released. I just don’t think we should declare victory just yet. I will admit we’ve made great strides from what was being proposed 3 months ago, but my trust in politicians, any politician, is very limited.
‘After victory, tighten your helmet cords.’
-Samurai battle cry
This actually does sound like a compromise. I’m especially happy about the possibility of bypassing a check if you have a CCW permit and (according to the CSGV site) the improved ease of buying a gun outside your home state.
I’m anticipating a marked increase in the number of concealed carry permit applications upcoming and a marked decrease in approval of “universal” background checks once it starts getting out that those would effectively kill the idea of taking your friends to the range for an afternoon.
No, this looks like a terrible bill. Yes there is some good, but overall terrible. Regulating gun shows and internet sales (with a five gun/year limits) is bad. Allowing doctors to put patients on the NICS banned list is bad. Will the CCW bypass is nice, a 4473 is still filled out, so there is still record keeping requirements. While the FOPA strengthening is nice, I doubt it will actually stop NY and NJ from violating it.
I highly doubt reading the actual text (which may not happen until the bill is passed) will make me feel any better. I will not be apologizing to Toomey. Gun control was dead, until he stepped in. We have a conservative Republican writing a gun control bill that closes the gun show loophole. I will be actively working to defeat him in 2016.
A lot of states already bypass the NICS check if you have a CHL.
Remember, what the congress critters SAY a bill does and what it actually does are usually completely different. I don’t trust any bill that has anything to do with firearms in any way. It’s too easy to add a midnight amendment or a quick rewrite in conference committee. That’s how the Hughes Amendment was added to the FOPA.
I don’t trust them one bit.
And that is why we will be watching and force our congresscritters to act accordingly. Now, we can all decide and say THIS BILL SUCKS AND NO for no other reason than striking a pose and risk the full Schummer Bill makes it to the floor and gets passed. A hole has been made and it will be filled; it can be filled with a ton of crap or not a quite hallelujah bill.
So what if Obama and the dems call it a win? Who gives a flying s***? If it leaves private sales safe, no record-keeping, national reciprocity, bypassing NCIS with CCW, gives veterans a way to regain their violated rights and reinforce FOPA, they can call the bill “Obama’s Holiday Camp and Free Ice Cream act of 2013.
Bloomberg seems overall satisfied with the “compromise”. This is as big a red flag for me as anything. MAIG has pulled their “bad” Toomey ads and are now running ads thanking Toomey.
I think what we’ll find buried in the bill is the new definition of “transfer” as defined by Mike Bloomberg and which was foisted on the people of Colorado. This is a bill killer for me.
As it is, I wonder WTF was Toomey thinking by getting involved. And what he’s been promised.
If the new definition of “transfer” gets in the bill, it means they shed about half the initial draft and the bipartisaship is dead. I don’t think this administration can deal with having to spend more political capital on this issue knowing it is becoming a corpse for them. There is a boatload of issues (economy, NK, Iran, etc) coming and they will need whatever they have left to make deals.
I think you are right. Toomey is getting something in return. He is not doing this out of the goodness of his heart.
I just read this one and it’s scary. We all know doctors don’t like guns so who’s to say your doctor may think you don’t need a gun? What then? I still say, screw them. It says ‘shall not infringe’ for a reason!
http://www.redstate.com/2013/04/10/the-toomey-manchin-proposal-will-allow-doctors-to-block-your-right-to-guns/
A medical professional has no place knowing anything about a given individual’s access or familiarity to firearms. If I get a bullet in me, I’ll pay you to take it out and fix the wound. Keeping bullets out of me is my job, not yours.
Trust a politician? Believe the sweet, soothing words (i.e. lies) that they say when the text of the final full bill has not been written?
That misplaced trust should be sufficient grounds to declare you mentally unfit (and by extension have your second amendment rights nullified).
Senator Toomey will not be getting an apology from me. I’m hoping for a recall or a primary challenge. Of course, he’s only one step below the spineless Republicans who will not filibuster.
“…we will be watching and force our congresscritters to act accordingly….”
Righhhtt- just the way it’s been working for every other anti-firearm bill passed the last 80 years.
Sorry, Miguel- I can’t swallow any of that. This bill has been a fiasco from Day One and is only going to get worse. For one, I’m tired of ‘giving an inch to get a foot’ only to take two feet backwards.
Again, two months ago we were facing not about two feet back but a marathon’s worth of retrograde movement. The text of the law is now available and amzingly so, I see a couple of very good things in it.