HANDGUN COMMERCE BILL TO BE VOTED ON IN US HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

LAR-15

Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2004
Messages
3,385
Wednesday!

http://judiciary.house.gov/markup.aspx?ID=143

7/26/2006 Full Committee Markup of H.R. 1704, H.R. 2679, H.R. 5092, H.R. 5005, H.R. 1384, H.R. 1415, Establishing a Special Investigative Task Force of the House Committee on the Judiciary for the Consideration of H.Res. 916, “Impeaching Manuel L. Real, judge of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, for high crimes and misdemeanors,” and Motion to authorize the issuance of a subpoena to Secretary Elaine L. Chao, Department of Labor.
H.R. 1704, the “Second Chance Act of 2005”; H.R. 2679, the “Public Expression of Religion Act of 2005”; H.R. 5092, the “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) Modernization and Reform Act of 2006”; H.R. 5005, the “Firearms Corrections and Improvements Act”; H.R. 1384, the “Firearm Commerce Modernization Act”; H.R. 1415, the “NICS Improvement Act of 2005”; Establishing a Special Investigative Task Force of the House Committee on the Judiciary for the Consideration of H.Res. 916, “Impeaching Manuel L. Real, judge of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, for high crimes and misdemeanors”; and Motion to authorize the issuance of a subpoena to Secretary Elaine L. Chao, Department of Labor.


Introduced Bill # Title Report
3-17-2005 H.R. 1384
Firearm Commerce Modernization Act
3-17-2005 H.R. 1415
NICS Improvement Act of 2005
4-19-2005 H.R. 1704
Second Chance Act of 2005
5-26-2005 H.R. 2679
Public Expression of Religion Act of 2005
3-16-2006 H.R. 5005
Firearms Corrections and Improvements Act
4-5-2006 H.R. 5092
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) Modernization and Reform Act of 2006
 
Now THAT would be good.... that would truly open up a lot of options for a lot of people. :)


Any chance it'll actually pass, though?



EDIT: "Firearms Corrections and Improvements Act" is pretty dang good too!!

No NICS fees allowed, EVER, no reporting of "too many" purchases to state PD anymore, barrels, etc., of MGs allowed to be imported once again, etc. Why haven't I heard of these bills before?



ALL of those bills so far that I've read are fantastic. Are they all stuck together, pass them all or pass none? I don't quite understand how this kind of thing works, unfortunately.
 
H.R. 5005

I have a real problem with Section 3 of H.R. 5005 (POSSESSION AND TRANSFER OF MACHINEGUNS FOR INDUSTRY TESTING AND SECURITY CONTRACTING).

Although some provisions of this bill are good, it should be renamed the Domestic Mercenary Enabling Act.

Why should "security contractors" be allowed to own post-86 machineguns when normal citizens can't?
 
Baby steps - allow more and more people to have MGs, and I'm happy. ANYONE extra that can own them, and I'm happy.
 
How about an "eliminate the ATF and DEA, bar all former ATF and DEA employees from any future government employment, and put all of them on a permanent watch list Act"? Too much to ask for?
 
Okay, can someone please translate this out of legalese?

Does this mean that the $XX you pay for your check is no longer required?
 
No... it means they can never charge for it, for one. Other little improvements are amazing, as well; the BATFE, after quite a while allowing barrels to be imported, said "NO MORE!", and one of the bills would reverse that. :)
 
3-17-2005 H.R. 1415
NICS Improvement Act of 2005

Look who introduced this bill and who the co-sponsers are. Something must be fishy about it but what?




H.R.1415
Title: To improve the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep McCarthy, Carolyn [NY-4] (introduced 3/17/2005)

Co-sponsers:
Rep Baldwin, Tammy [WI-2] - 4/6/2006
Rep Berman, Howard L. [CA-28] - 6/8/2005
Rep Bishop, Timothy H. [NY-1] - 4/6/2006
Rep Capps, Lois [CA-23] - 3/28/2006
Rep Case, Ed [HI-2] - 5/19/2005
Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14] - 5/2/2006
Rep Cummings, Elijah E. [MD-7] - 6/23/2005
Rep DeGette, Diana [CO-1] - 4/25/2006
Rep Dingell, John D. [MI-15] - 3/17/2005
Rep Engel, Eliot L. [NY-17] - 5/12/2005
Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] - 4/28/2005
Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-7] - 11/10/2005
Rep Israel, Steve [NY-2] - 6/8/2005
Rep Kucinich, Dennis J. [OH-10] - 4/25/2006
Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA-16] - 4/28/2005
Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. [NY-14] - 5/19/2005
Rep McCollum, Betty [MN-4] - 7/14/2005
Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] - 4/28/2005
Rep McGovern, James P. [MA-3] - 4/6/2006
Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 5/10/2006
Rep Nadler, Jerrold [NY-8] - 7/14/2005
Rep Pascrell, Bill, Jr. [NJ-8] - 4/6/2006
Rep Rothman, Steven R. [NJ-9] - 6/20/2006
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] - 4/6/2006
Rep Schiff, Adam B. [CA-29] - 4/6/2006
Rep Serrano, Jose E. [NY-16] - 10/27/2005
Rep Shays, Christopher [CT-4] - 6/27/2006
Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-27] - 4/14/2005
Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] - 5/12/2005
Rep Tauscher, Ellen O. [CA-10] - 10/27/2005
Rep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8] - 11/4/2005
Rep Weiner, Anthony D. [NY-9] - 4/6/2006
 
Look who introduced this bill and who the co-sponsers are. Something must be fishy about it but what?
Click to expand...
Yeah, that scares the crap outta me. That bunch of gun grabbers footing a bill to help gun owners?
Is it possible they eliminate any fees then push to defund the program?
 
H.R. 5005

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

I have a real problem with Section 3 of H.R. 5005 (POSSESSION AND TRANSFER OF MACHINEGUNS FOR INDUSTRY TESTING AND SECURITY CONTRACTING).

Although some provisions of this bill are good, it should be renamed the Domestic Mercenary Enabling Act.

Why should "security contractors" be allowed to own post-86 machineguns when normal citizens can't?
Click to expand...

Heh, heh.

They already can. :)

A law was passed allowing them to possess post 86 machineguns but it had no specifics nor spelled it out under 922(o).

I believe the BATFE requested clarification and to have it spelled out under the law.
 
Could it be that they simply want to, you know, have more people go through NICS as opposed to private sales? Still counts as "anti-gun", but doesn't harm anyone, really.
 
why the hell are they only moving to impeach one friggin justice?

They need to charge, try, and execute almost half of the judges on the federal circuit, beginning with these in the ninth circuit

Stephen Reinhardt, Cynthia Holcomb Hall and John T. Noonan, Jr., Circuit Judges, and William B. Shubb, , District Judge.
 
just called my rep

wdlsguy has it right

call your rep,

delete 922(o) , DO NOT enable mercinary rearmmament,

call all of them

re 1415 *** do the feds need a list of misdomeniors(?).:fire:
 
None of these bills are any good. Some of them toss us a few crumbs, but for the most part, they are bad bills or do-nothing bills.

Re: 922(o). If we are going to do anythign with it, it should be repealed or lessened in a meaningful way. This doesnt mean allowing government contractors to own machine guns in service of the government. Why such a "reform" is bad should be patently obvious to anyone. It puts more weapons in the hand of government servants, not more weapons in the hands of civilians like you and me.

Re: prohibited persons. If we are going to do anything with it, it should be repealed or significantly trimmed back to violent felons and people who were adjudicated insane in place of being found guilty of a violent felony, both of which are matters of public record already. All laws to improve the record gathering parts of any prohibited persons enforcement are bad because the only things that are currently off limits are things that should not be used to prohibit firearms possession anyway. HR1415 is sponsored by every anti-gun dem in the house for a reason that should now be obvious to you.

Demand meaningful reform guys.
 
3-17-2005 H.R. 1415
NICS Improvement Act of 2005

Look who introduced this bill and who the co-sponsers are. Something must be fishy about it but what?
Click to expand...

John Dingell (and NRA Board of Director) is also a co-sponsor of the bill. Basically this bill sets up federal funding to help states automate their records since seven years after the fact many states still do not have disqualifying records automated. The major push is to automate disqualifying mental illness (adjudicated mentally ill by a court) records since right now only 10 states have made any input at all and of those ten only a few have even submitted any substantial number of records.

Whether or not this is a good bill will depend largely on whether you think it is a good idea for NICS to have more information on people who are disqualified from owning a firearm by federal law.

HR1415 said:
Congress finds the following:

(1) Approximately 790,000 individuals were prohibited from purchasing a firearm for failing a background check between November 30, 1998, (the date the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) began operating) and December 31, 2003.

(2) From November 30, 1998, through December 31, 2003, over 40,800,000 Brady background checks were processed through NICS.

(3) Although most Brady background checks are processed through NICS in seconds, many background checks are delayed if the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) does not have automated access to complete information from the States concerning persons prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm under Federal or State law.

(4) Approximately 24,000,000 criminal records are either not automated or not accessible by NICS and another 16,000,000 criminal records that are automated and accessible are missing critical data, such as arrest dispositions.

(5) The primary cause of delay in NICS background checks is the failure of the States to--

(A) update and make available criminal disposition records; and

(B) provide automated access to information concerning persons prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm because of mental illness, restraining orders, or misdemeanor convictions for domestic violence.

(6) The failure of the States to provide automated access to this information is principally caused by the States' failure to--

(A) computerize information relating to criminal history, criminal dispositions, mental illness, restraining orders, and misdemeanor convictions for domestic violence; or

(B) make such information available to NICS in a usable format.

(7) Helping States to automate these records will reduce delays for law-abiding gun purchasers.

(8) Twenty-three States have failed to automate all of their felony criminal conviction records.

(9) Only forty-five percent of the criminal history records in the Interstate Identification Index, maintained by the FBI and used by the NICS, have disposition information included.

(10) Many States do not submit fingerprint-based records of misdemeanor convictions that may disqualify a person from possessing or receiving a firearm under section 922(g)(9) of title 18, United States Code.

(11) Forty States do not automate or make accessible disqualifying mental health records.

(12) Only ten States have provided disqualifying mental health records to NICS. Of this group, 8 States have provided less than 40 such records, 1 State has provided approximately 1,600 such records, and only 1 State has provided close to complete records by having submitted more than 50,000 such records.

(13) Five States and 4 territories do not automate or make accessible domestic violence restraining order records to NICS.

(14) Of the States that provide domestic violence restraining orders to NICS, records from 18 States are not complete and accurate.

(15) Fourteen States do not automate or make accessible domestic violence misdemeanor conviction records.

(16) Of the States that provide domestic violence misdemeanor conviction records to NICS, records from 29 States are not complete or accurate.

(17) On March 12, 2002, the senseless shooting, which took the lives of a priest and a parishioner at the Our Lady of Peace Church in Lynbrook, New York, brought attention to the lack of information sharing enabling Federal and State law enforcement agencies to conduct a complete background check on a potential firearm purchaser. The man who committed this double murder had a prior disqualifying mental health commitment and a restraining order against him, but passed a Brady background check because NICS did not have the necessary information to determine that he was ineligible to purchase a firearm under Federal or State law.
Click to expand...

H.R. 1384 basically removes some of the restrictions on FFLs selling only to residents of the state where their business is located. Under the new version, as long as the buyer and seller meet face-to-face and the sale is legal in both states, then the FFL is free to sell.
 
H.R.1415 - NICS Improvement Act of 2005

(3) MISDEMEANOR CRIME OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE- The term `misdemeanor crime of domestic violence'--

(A) has the meaning given the term in section 921(a)(33) of title 18, United States Code;

(B) includes any Federal, State, or local offense that--

(i) is a misdemeanor under Federal, State, local, or tribal law or, in a State that does not classify offenses as misdemeanors, is an offense punishable by imprisonment for a term of 1 year or less or punishable only by a fine regardless of whether or not the State statute specifically defines the offense as a crime of domestic violence;

(ii) has, as an element of the offense, the use or attempted use of physical force, such as assault and battery, or the threatened use of a deadly weapon; and

(iii) was committed by a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited with the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian, or a person similarly situated to a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim; and...
Click to expand...

I don't speak legaleaze, could someone please explain to me what this means?

Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

W
  • Locked
injustice subcom activity
Replies
3
Views
368
makarova
M
B
  • Locked
List of current US Firearms Legislation
Replies
0
Views
344
Barbara
B
L
  • Locked
Pass this law to allow handgun purchases
Replies
3
Views
391
Malum Prohibitum
M
R
  • Locked
Pro-Gun Groups Disagree on Bill Improving Background Checks
2
Replies
45
Views
1K
nico
N
A
  • Locked
the following from NRA might interest readers (excerpts)
Replies
8
Views
666
Sheldon J
S
Back
Top