"Blair's Bill" - National registry/licensing

[illspirit]

Full text is online now. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.2666:

I'd paste the text, but it's like 20 pages long, so, here's some highlights:

License needed for "any handgun" or "any semiautomatic firearm that can accept any detachable ammunition feeding device." Licenses would cost $25/five years, and would be a "tamper-resistant card" with a photograph and stuff.

Private party sales would be banned for qualifying weapons mentioned above. All sales would have to go through an FFL or some such for registration. Registration which would become legal by:

Elimination of Prohibition on Establishment of System of Registration- Section 926(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking the second sentence.

Licensing and registration of new sales would start one year after the bill is signed. Registration of previously owned guns would have to be done in a year after that.

Looks like the bill would skirt the FFL inspection limits in FOPA to allow random harassment:

In order to ascertain compliance with this Act, the amendments made by this Act, and the regulations and orders issued under this Act, the Attorney General may, during regular business hours, enter any place in which firearms or firearm products are manufactured, stored, or held, for distribution in commerce, and inspect those areas where the products are so manufactured, stored, or held.

And more crazy stuff where that came from..

 

[Elza]

Prince Yamato: Employees hired to register the guns... couple that with people hired on low wages and who probably would enter things wrong.

Looks like a great place to employ all of the illegals they want to make instant citizens.

 

[Bezoar]

(6) a certification by the applicant that the applicant will keep any firearm owned by the applicant safely stored and out of the possession of persons who have not attained 18 years of age;

(7) a certificate attesting to the completion at the time of application of a written firearms examination, which shall test the knowledge and ability of the applicant regarding--

(A) the safe storage of firearms, particularly in the vicinity of persons who have not attained 18 years of age;

(B) the safe handling of firearms;

(C) the use of firearms in the home and the risks associated with such use;

(D) the legal responsibilities of firearms owners, including Federal, State, and local laws relating to requirements for the possession and storage of firearms, and relating to reporting requirements with respect to firearms; and

(E) any other subjects, as the Attorney General determines to be appropriate;


They dont give actual guidelines here, the information they want you to know before sounds like you must:
pass a handgun course at say, thunder ranch
have passed a ccw course for all state requirements

THey dont mention what guidelines to be used for safe securing the guns. I know brady bunch and "feel gooders" want the gun dissassembled and stored in multiple locations....

And are they going to make current owners of semi auto weaponry retroactively go through the "i can prove i can legally buy it now" as far as "safety training" is concerned?

 

[illspirit]

They dont give actual guidelines here, the information they want you to know before sounds like you must:
pass a handgun course at say, thunder ranch
have passed a ccw course for all state requirements

THey dont mention what guidelines to be used for safe securing the guns. I know brady bunch and "feel gooders" want the gun dissassembled and stored in multiple locations....

Section E says the AG can add any other subjects deemed appropriate, so it would seem they can make up the rules as they go along. If the AG watches a pirate movie and decides it would be a good idea for you to bury gun parts in various places around your property and draw a treasure map for them, then I guess that would be "safe storage."

And are they going to make current owners of semi auto weaponry retroactively go through the "i can prove i can legally buy it now" as far as "safety training" is concerned?

Yep.

`(2) APPLICABLE DATE- In this subsection, the term `applicable date' means--

`(A) with respect to a qualifying firearm that is acquired by the person before the date of the enactment of Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2007, 2 years after such date of enactment; and

`(B) with respect to a qualifying firearm that is acquired by the person on or after the date of the enactment of Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2007, 1 year after such date of enactment.'.

 

[Cellar Dweller]

Still think there's no chance of it going anywhere?

(b) Amendment to Title 18, United States Code- Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(36) The term `qualifying firearm'--

`(A) means--

`(i) any handgun; or

`(ii) any semiautomatic firearm that can accept any detachable ammunition feeding device; and

`(B) does not include any antique.'.

And there you go...won't affect the 'hunters and sportsmen.' Since it's an opt-in system, a lower court could easily rule that this bill does not conflict with RKBA - and the SCOTUS could easily sidestep as usual.

SEC. 801. INAPPLICABILITY TO GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITIES.

This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall not apply to any department or agency of the United States, of a State, or of a political subdivision of a State, or to any official conduct of any officer or employee of such a department or agency.

As usual, the 'elite' are exempted.

SEC. 305. CHILD ACCESS PREVENTION.

Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by sections 101, 201, 301, 302, 303, and 304 of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(gg) Child Access Prevention-

`(1) DEFINITION OF CHILD- In this subsection, the term `child' means an individual who has not attained the age of 18 years.

`(2) PROHIBITION AND PENALTIES- Except as provided in paragraph (3), it shall be unlawful for any person to keep a loaded firearm, or an unloaded firearm and ammunition for the firearm, any 1 of which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, within any premises that is under the custody or control of that person, if--

`(A) that person--

`(i) knows, or recklessly disregards the risk, that a child is capable of gaining access to the firearm; and

`(ii) either--

`(I) knows, or recklessly disregards the risk, that a child will use the firearm to cause the death of, or serious bodily injury (as defined in section 1365 of this title) to, the child or any other person; or

`(II) knows, or reasonably should know, that possession of the firearm by a child is unlawful under Federal or State law; and

`(B) a child uses the firearm and the use of that firearm causes the death of, or serious bodily injury to, the child or any other person.
`(3) EXCEPTIONS- Paragraph (2) shall not apply if--

`(A) at the time the child obtained access, the firearm was secured with a secure gun storage or safety device;

`(B) the person is a peace officer, a member of the Armed Forces, or a member of the National Guard, and the child obtains the firearm during, or incidental to, the performance of the official duties of the person in that capacity;

`(C) the child uses the firearm in a lawful act of self-defense or defense of 1 or more other persons; or

`(D) the person has no reasonable expectation, based on objective facts and circumstances, that a child is likely to be present on the premises on which the firearm is kept.'.

Gotta lock up that nightstand gun or the shotty under the bed.

 

[Ratzinger_p38]

Doesnt have a prayer. The guy who introduced this bill is a walking joke anyway. If HR1022 is toxic enough, this bill will be like nuclear fallout to any Democrat who wants to be reelected.

 

[ctdonath]

Licenses would cost $25/five years

No can do. Confiscating several thousand dollars worth of personally-owned stuff for want of renewal of a single piece of paper and periodic petty tax won't be tolerated.

Even NFA isn't that bad - once you get something, it's yours forever (only 'restriction' then is notification of relocation; no tax or expiring paperwork).

 

[Cellar Dweller]

Doesnt have a prayer. The guy who introduced this bill is a walking joke anyway. If HR1022 is toxic enough, this bill will be like nuclear fallout to any Democrat who wants to be reelected.

"Doesn't have a prayer" <-----Like McCain-Feingold? Like PATRIOT I and II? Like the Republicans NOT rolling back gun control, spending, illegal immigration, and socialism when they had the House, Senate and Presidency?

"Walking joke" <----Perhaps so, yet he keeps getting reelected, so he's no joke to the majority of his voting constituents.

"If HR1022 is toxic enough, this bill will be like nuclear fallout to any Democrat who wants to be reelected." <-----49 cosponsors on HR1022, all of whom appear to be Democrats. This is less toxic, because nothing is being banned.

Step 1: Register owners and "AWB 2-type" stuff first while allowing people to keep them.
Step 2: Wait for a Democrat/RINO victory in 2008; if Pres/Senate/House are swept,
Step 3: AWB 2, plus confiscation. If no sweep, AWB 2 without confiscation.

Guiliani and Romney would certainly sign AWB2, McCain - no one can say for sure what he would do. The anointed Demos couldn't whip out their pens fast enough...

 

[Ratzinger_p38]

Doesn't have a prayer" <-----Like McCain-Feingold? Like PATRIOT I and II? Like the Republicans NOT rolling back gun control, spending, illegal immigration, and socialism when they had the House, Senate and Presidency?

Without going into a debate about examples named, this bill goes has been introduced by someone with low credibility. And we all know how politically explosive registration is. Why do I think it doesnt have a prayer? Because even McCarthy hasnt tried this before....and because some Democrats want to get reelected in 08.

This is less toxic, because nothing is being banned.

I disagree, the old AWB didnt have registration - which is a gun owner's worst nightmare.

 

[BAT1]

Shall not be infringed

That's what Hitler did before he confiscated them all. We know what happened next. A ride on the train.

 

[Ratzinger_p38]

That's what Hitler did before he confiscated them all. We know what happened next. A ride on the train.

What? The only change to gun laws during the National Socialist era was in 1938, when guns were were allowed except to certain 'prohibited classes' IE known criminals, mentallly handicapped...and well, Jews. The previous 'democratic' government, Wiemar Republic, is actually the one that disarmed everyone (in 1919).

 

[ctdonath]

This is less toxic, because nothing is being banned.

It bans ownership. Don't pay the periodic renewal tax, you lose 'em - that's not ownership. Worse, if they don't accept the renewal tax, you lose 'em.

People keep losing sight of the fact that federally, there is no ban (save for post-'86 machineguns). Why would we want a federal system that is far more restrictive than what we have now?

 

[illspirit]

Why would we want a federal system that is far more restrictive than what we have now?

We don't. I think he means it will seem less toxic to the antis since anything short of a total ban seems "reasonable" to them.

 

[Deanimator]

Worse, if they don't accept the renewal tax, you lose 'em.

Bingo.

Every time some drooling product of incest and foetal alcohol syndrome tells me how I don't need to fear registration, I just ask him:

"What do I need to do in order to LAWFULLY move to Chicago with my handguns?"

I get two kinds of responses, crickets and outright lies.

 

[PILMAN]

What's the latest on this bill?

 

[Deanimator]

It won't pass, and I wouldn't obey it if it did.

 

[ozwyn]

at the risk of sounding less than high road - this kind of congressional activity makes reasonable people consider voting from somewhere other than a ballot box.

 

[Matt King]

Is this an Illinois bill, or a federal bill?

 

[wjustinen]

Great idea, if it didn't qualify as an

infringement of 2A rights.

That being said, once such a reasonable law is in effect there is absolutely nothing preventing a future change to the law adding all those bad things you listed that need to be left out.

Here in Canada we are just sitting and waiting for the next shoe to drop. Although, in recent years, there has been some acknowlegement among gun owners that self-defence is an appropriate use. Until that becomes a demand, we remain in a precarious position.

 

[jefnvk]

Anyone else get annoyed with how every bill has to be named after someone that got hurt by doing what it was trying to prevent? Appealing to a persons pathos, apparently is the way to get stuff done, when yuo can't just let the know the facts to decide for themselves.

I would just like to point out how well Canada's national firearm registry has worked. Not to pick on them, they have alot less people and a lot less guns, and its still horribly costly and ineffective.

 

[jefnvk]

You know, one thing I just thought of. Why not require all gov't agencies to follow this as well? That would be a poison pill. Imagine if every police officer, every soldier, ever Secret Service agent had to go through the same thing as us.

 

[kermit315]

i agree jefnvk, apply the rule equally and across the board, then see who really supports it in the end.

i bet when that happens alot of people that were originally for it all of a sudden find something wrong with it and back off.