HR5005 new analysis and HR5092 new hotness


PDA






beerslurpy
April 11, 2006, 07:31 PM
Ok, we have some new analysis of 5005 that makes it potentially somewhat cooler and we have a new bill that puts further restrictions on the ATF to curb abuses.

First, I draw your attention to the original analysis in PDF (http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=38084&d=1144351437) and specifically to the altered 922(o).

(2) This subsection does not apply with respect toŚ....
(C) a transfer to, or possession by, a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer
solely for testing, research, design, or development of ammunition or a firearm;....
(E) any lawful transfer or lawful possession of a machinegun that was lawfully
possessed before the date this subsection takes effect.

In which we see that 06 FFLs (10 bucks a year) that manufacture ammunition for sale to others can now transfer and possess post 86 MGs. My only concern is what happens if your FFL ever expires. I think they should change the proposed law to allow retention of lawfully transferred weapons and then it would actually be an awesome bill.

I also refer your attention to HR5092 (http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2006/04/11/hr_5092/) which reels in the ATF in a few small ways, but reels them in nonetheless. Dont have a permalink to Thomas yet, but feel free to post one.

H.R. 5092 revises the current enforcement system , including expanding the currently limited options for administrative penalties applied to licensed dealers, manufacturers and importers of firearms. Todatm for most violations, BATFE has only two options: issue FFL holders a warning, or revoke the license. 5092's "modernization" would allow a series of clearly-stated fines and/or license suspensions for less serious violations; limiting license revocation to serious criminal violations that could potentially block criminal investigations or put guns in the hands of criminals.

If you enjoyed reading about "HR5005 new analysis and HR5092 new hotness" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
mp510
April 11, 2006, 07:43 PM
How would an 06 be able to purchase a gun on the FFL? I thought they were only able to make ammo on those, not purchase guns?

ElTacoGrande
April 11, 2006, 07:43 PM
Sounds good Senor Cevesaslurpy!

A lot of people would get ammo manufacturer licenses. You're right, the big plus would be if they could keep their MGs, or if their MGs could become transferable.

A good first step in getting rid of 922(o) would be to carve out some exceptions for FFLs.

Whittle it down by adding one class at a time!

beerslurpy
April 11, 2006, 07:57 PM
I was already thinking of becoming an 06 FFL to start cranking out subsonic 7.62x39, so this would be a double win.

Yes mp510, 06 FFLs cant manufacture firearms for sale to others, but HR5005 would use 922(o)(C) to give them a new ability.

The way it is written, I originally thought that it was creating a new class of FFL for "licensed importing or manufacturing of machine guns for the purpose of ammo testing/development". I didnt think it was adding a new ability to the FFL that is already licensed to import or manufacture ammo.

Sometimes I really wish that congress would have a lawyer proofread the stuff they write, especially since the ATF is known to normally resort to the administrative interpretation most hostile to gun rights. Observe the recent actions of our "pro-gun" administration. They should give them absolutely no wiggle room in interpreting the statute.

LAR-15
April 12, 2006, 04:54 PM
Thanks

If you enjoyed reading about "HR5005 new analysis and HR5092 new hotness" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!