Will combining National Carry Reciprocity with Fix NICS help it pass?

If the Democrats want to fix NICS they need to vote for Concealed Carry Reciprocity.

It’s an obvious attempt at helping pass the National Carry Reciprocity....

I think it's more political then that. They (House) really didn't want 50 state recipe, so tack Fix NICS to it. Knowing good and well it goes to Senate whereas more ingredients are added to the fudge and ultimately becomes a no-go. Bill dies, (D)s are happy (no recipe) , (R)'s are happy ''gee we tried'' closely followed by, all together now (both Ds & Rs a-singin') ''vote for me again and again''

Aim1 said:

Do you think combining the two will work?

Click to expand...

No. It's actually a double "poison pill." The concealed-carry reciprocity part will sink Fix NICS, and Fix NICS will sink reciprocity. Politically, it's a subtractive process, not an additive one. This is brilliant if you want nothing to get done.

The dem's didn't vote for the bill and likely the senate won't even hear it. They should have just tried to pass it without that crap that can possibly be abused by the government.

Doubt it.
You'll only have 50 more contributors to an already broken system. Making more delays and ending worse off then now.
Feds already ca t do the job there suppose to. Why would adding more "fix it?

Senate FixNICS is clearly a poison pill. Entire thing was penned by Schumer/DiFi--clearly a red flag.
Looking into the guts of FixNICS, the things intended to "fix" are not those in our favor. Nifty things like beinag able to enter new names into NICS by fiat rather than through adjudication. Another way to read that is that, they want to be able to "blanket" deprive rights without recourse. Also, they want a "Delay" to default to a "No," rather than a "Procede." The length of the delay is also allowed to be increased "at Director's (of BATFE) discretion.

In no place of the FixNICS bill (now Amendment( is there anything to actually fix the existing problems. There are no provisions for ensuring that administrators actually oversee the process of entering names into NICS, or that there would be repercussions for failing to properly enter (or completely enter) appropriate records. There's no money to integrate all of the State Bureaus of Investigation NICS records into the national NICS database, or vice versa. Nothing to organize or coordinate the 50-60 different agencies responsible for mental health records reporting. Nor any way of organizing the 2000-2500 agencies dealing with "temporary" Prohibitions due to TRO from divorce and pre-trial DV issues.

All of those things are known, immediate, real problems with NICS. Schumer and DiFi just want to make it harder for we plebeans to own guns.

As political shenanigans go, this one is a doozy. The antis in both Houses can vote for this and claim they were for National Reciprocity., while all the while working to prevent ownership. The Pro types will be stuck hard, unable to vote for a good, National Reciprocity, because of the Bad, FixNICS, as they will be excoriated, rightly, for decreasing rights.
So, the thing fails, and it will be because those supporting our side, have to kill it. And all the low-information voters will know is that their guy failed them on a "gun" issue. Win/win for the antis.

Not only that, but, since this is in the anti-gun Senate (which remains about 52-54 to 48-46 against us) they get to take some of the stink about clobbering HPA and SHAPE off of them and put it on the House, who have to defeat their "sensible gun legislation" in a massive partyline vote.

I am aware that a TN gun dealer had been in hot water with ATF, a local gun club member denied by NICS, and the guy in GA who had to hire a lawyer to suss out why he was suddenly denied. They all boiled down to bad data dumped into the NICS sysem.

The gun dealer had been a teenage clerk at a hotel that was robbed; it was routine in the 1960s for the state bureau of investigation to assume an inside job and list employees as suspects in robberies; he was cleared by investigation; he joined the Army; served in VietNam; came back; ran a farm; opened a gun shop with blessing of ATF; then was blindsided by accusation by ATF that he had lied about his criminal record on his application for an FFL. He had to find out why. Old state records listing him as a suspect had been dumped into the national system. He had to locate the state investigator who handled his case (luckily then the chief of police for his home town) and get a deposition that he had been investigated and cleared.

The gun club member had been arrested on a traffic stop for having the same first and last name as a federal fugitive; FBI told the local police He is not the man we are looking for. He had the presence of mind to get a paper copy of court disposition of his mistaken identity arrest. For a number of 4473s he had to file an appeal of denial showing, yes, he was detained as a federal fugitive, but it was a case of mistaken identity.

Then the guy in Georgia had almost the same SSN as a guy arrested in the Northwest for felony urinating at the side of the road (public exposure sex offense). When the Blue State Coastie's SSN was entered in the system, the clerk miskeyed his SSN. Years later when the bad data was dumped into the system, the Georgia guy started getting denials at the gun store.

Will the "fix NICS" act fix the problem of false positives (people denied without just cause) and false negatives (people who should be denied on actual case history)? Or will it enable more bad unadjudicated data to be dumped into the system? In the past Temporary Restraining Orders were notoriously issued knee-jerk without a showing of actual threat. Before no-fault divorce laws were common, often one party in a bad marriage (usually the man) would play the the heavy to get a divorce that both parties wanted without any actual DV involved when the problem was just that they both fell out of love. The NICS was supposed to be actual adjudicated threats, not decades old partial records.

On commenting at the Washington Post, one of the common anti-gun talking points is to dismiss the phrase "lawabiding gun owner" as just a gun criminal who hasn't been caught yet. I think the goal of the true believer anti-gunner is to deny as many people as possible. To them there are no good guys with guns: guns are bad and need to be denied to all but the State and its agents.

Fix NICS was supposed to be honey to get anti-gunners in Congress to accept it, but it is more and more looking like a poison pill all around.

This (coupling of Fix NICS with national reciprocity) smells a lot like the FOPA '86 coupled with the Hughes Amendment. Back then, the McClure-Volkmer reforms were a high priority for the NRA, so it went along with the "poison pill" Hughes Amendment. It would have been better if Reagan had vetoed FOPA. We would have eventually gotten the reforms, but would not now be saddled with the Hughes MG prohibition. Now, the high priority for the NRA is national reciprocity. Wrongly, in my view.

Kill this bill now, or regret it later. The practical effect of national reciprocity is that you could use a carry permit from a state like Virginia to carry in NYC. The mystery is why you would want to spend time in NYC anyway.

This (coupling of Fix NICS with national reciprocity) smells a lot like the FOPA '86 coupled with the Hughes Amendment. Back then, the McClure-Volkmer reforms were a high priority for the NRA, so it went along with the "poison pill" Hughes Amendment. It would have been better if Reagan had vetoed FOPA. We would have eventually gotten the reforms, but would not now be saddled with the Hughes MG prohibition.

Click to expand...

Maybe. It's all fuzzy history at this point, and speculation. In the 1980s, without any external pressure making the market go nuts, very few shooters seemed to be all that interested in full-auto stuff. It was easy to get (relatively speaking), was reasonably cheap (just a slight upcharge over semi-auto) and pretty much "nobody" cared. The issues that McClure-Volkmer set out to fix affected a lot of people, not just a few niche militaria collectors and FA enthusiasts. Today we look back on it and can't really picture what the gun scene would be like without the M.V. reforms. Maybe they would have happened eventually. Maybe not. In hindsight -- since the gun world has shifted radically around to concealed carry and military style weapons -- now that trade-off looks horrible to a lot of people. Was it, really? It's darned hard to say. The answer depends a lot of what aspects of shooting tickle your fancy, and what assumptions you make about how gun legislation would have progressed over the intervening years.

Now, the high priority for the NRA is national reciprocity. Wrongly, in my view.

Click to expand...

Let's be very clear. In 1986 there were EIGHT "shall issue" carry states. In 2017, there are FORTY-TWO states which are either shall-issue or "Constitutional carry." AND, while there are some holdout places which are still difficult, there is not one jurisdiction in the nation that doesn't have SOME kind of carry permit process in place -- including the flippin' District of Columbia, and if you'd said THAT would ever happen, even ten years ago, you'd have been laughed right out of the building.

While it is not an easy, uncomplicated issue and there are good arguments from our side both for and against, the absolute incontrovertible final goal of the march to carry rights IS national carry of some sort. We can quibble over the details, and they might actually be important, but to say that it isn't appropriate for this to be very high priority for the NRA is like the guys racing in the 24 hours of Le Mans pulling over at about 23 hours and 55 minutes because "Well, this has been fun, but the point is to have participated. I don't care about the finish line." Just ain't gonna happen.

Kill this bill now, or regret it later.

Click to expand...

Yeah. Maybe. I don't like the FixNICS stuff, and I don't think this effort will go through, but something probably will and there might be bones thrown to the antis.

The practical effect of national reciprocity is that you could use a carry permit from a state like Virginia to carry in NYC. The mystery is why you would want to spend time in NYC anyway.

Click to expand...

This kind of thing doesn't help anybody. There are VERY cool things to see and do in places like NYC and our other big cities, and plenty of compelling reasons to live and work there. We're working for the rights of everybody to carry wherever they are, or want to be -- RIGHT? Being snide and divisive and militantly country-bumpkinish doesn't help.

Most of the proposed NICS "fixes" move from an (almost) presumption of innocence to a stronger presumption of guilt. It also increases the power of government bureaucrats at every step and decreases the rights of citizens.

True fixes of NICS would preserve the presumption of innocence for civilians and raise the burden and consequences for bureaucrats who abuse their power or fail in their duties. How about seven figure fines for federal agents who fail in their duties to make the required notifications? How about jail time for bureaucratic neglect which leads to citizens being deprived of their rights? How about the feds pick up the tab and the citizen get the firearm for free if approval takes more than 24 hours?

When the bar is raised only for honest citizens and not for government bureaucrats, there is a problem.

National carry reciprocity was good for gun owners. The fix NICS is very bad for gun owners. Combine the two & 2nd amendment rights get compromised again and some people will lose their constitutional right to bear arms. The only reason Feinstein, Pelosi, and Shumer would give an inch is to gain a mile.

Steve51 said:

The only reason Feinstein, Pelosi, and Shumer would give an inch is to gain a mile.

Click to expand...

They won't support carry reciprocity under any circumstances, even if it's linked to Fix NICS. We're arguing over a moot point. At this stage it's all Kabuki theater.