NRA Members and HR 297 NICS Improvement Bill

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jpk1md

Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2007
Messages
620
The NRA has thrown its weight behind HR 297 along with Caroline McCarthy of NY.

The bill title is H.R.297 To improve the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, and for other purposes.

Please call the NRA and voice your support or opposition to this bill

NRA Grassroots Hotline 800-392-8683

https://secure.nraila.org/Contact.aspx

H.R.297
NICS Improvement Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)

To improve the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title- This Act may be cited as the `NICS Improvement Act of 2007'.

(b) Table of Contents- The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

Sec. 2. Findings.

Sec. 3. Definitions.

TITLE I--TRANSMITTAL OF RECORDS

Sec. 101. Enhancement of requirement that Federal departments and agencies provide relevant information to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Sec. 102. Requirements to obtain waiver.

Sec. 103. Implementation assistance to States.

Sec. 104. Penalties for noncompliance.

TITLE II--FOCUSING FEDERAL ASSISTANCE ON THE IMPROVEMENT OF RELEVANT RECORDS

Sec. 201. Continuing evaluations.

TITLE III--GRANTS TO STATE COURT SYSTEMS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT IN AUTOMATION AND TRANSMITTAL OF DISPOSITION RECORDS

Sec. 301. Disposition records automation and transmittal improvement grants.

TITLE IV--GAO AUDIT

Sec. 401. GAO audit.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:

(1) Approximately 916,000 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, 2004.

(2) From November 30, 1998, through December 31, 2004, nearly 49,000,000 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) Nearly 21,000,000 criminal records are not accessible by NICS and millions of criminal records are missing critical data, such as arrest dispositions, due to data backlogs.

(5) The primary cause of delay in NICS background checks is the lack of--

(A) updates and available State criminal disposition records; and

(B) 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) Automated access to this information can be improved by--

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

(B) making 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) 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 need to improve information-sharing that would enable 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.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

As used in this Act, the following definitions shall apply:

(1) COURT ORDER- The term `court order' includes--

(A) a court order (as described in section 922(g)(8) of title 18, United States Code); and

(B) a protection order (as defined in section 2266(5) of title 18, United States Code).

(2) MENTAL HEALTH TERMS- The terms `adjudicated as a mental defective', `committed to a mental institution', and related terms have the meanings given those terms in regulations implementing section 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code, as in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

(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

(C) does not include a crime described under subparagraph (A) if--

(i) the person was not convicted by the jurisdiction in which the proceeding was held;

(ii) the person was not represented by counsel in the case and did not knowingly or intelligently waive the right to counsel in the case;

(iii) in the case of a prosecution for which a person was entitled to a jury trial in the jurisdiction in which the case was tried--

(I) the case was not tried by a jury; and

(II) the person did not knowingly or intelligently waive the right to have the case tried by a jury, by guilty plea, or otherwise; or

(iv) the conviction has been expunged or set aside, or is an offense for which the person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored unless--

(I) the pardon, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms; or

(II) the person is otherwise prohibited by the law of the jurisdiction in which the proceedings were held from receiving or possessing any firearms.

TITLE I--TRANSMITTAL OF RECORDS

SEC. 101. ENHANCEMENT OF REQUIREMENT THAT FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES PROVIDE RELEVANT INFORMATION TO THE NATIONAL INSTANT CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM.

(a) In General- Section 103(e)(1) of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended--

(1) by striking `Notwithstanding' and inserting the following:

`(A) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding';

(2) by striking `On request' and inserting the following:

`(B) REQUEST OF ATTORNEY GENERAL- On request';

(3) by striking `furnish such information' and inserting `furnish electronic versions of the information described under subparagraph (A)'; and

(4) by adding at the end the following:

`(C) QUARTERLY SUBMISSION TO ATTORNEY GENERAL- If a department or agency under subparagraph (A) has any record of any person demonstrating that the person falls within one of the categories described in subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code, the head of such department or agency shall, not less frequently than quarterly, provide the pertinent information contained in such record to the Attorney General.

`(D) INFORMATION UPDATES- The agency, on being made aware that the basis under which a record was made available under subparagraph (A) does not apply, or no longer applies, shall--

`(i) update, correct, modify, or remove the record from any database that the agency maintains and makes available to the Attorney General, in accordance with the rules pertaining to that database; or

`(ii) notify the Attorney General that such basis no longer applies so that the National Instant Criminal Background Check System is kept up to date.

`(E) ANNUAL REPORT- The Attorney General shall submit an annual report to Congress that describes the compliance of each department or agency with the provisions of this paragraph.'.

(b) Provision and Maintenance of NICS Records-

(1) DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY- The Secretary of Homeland Security shall make available to the Attorney General--

(A) records, updated not less than quarterly, which are relevant to a determination of whether a person is disqualified from possessing or receiving a firearm under subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code, for use in background checks performed by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System; and

(B) information regarding all the persons described in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph who have changed their status to a category not identified under section 922(g)(5) of title 18, United States Code, for removal, when applicable, from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

(2) DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE- The Attorney General shall--

(A) ensure that any information submitted to, or maintained by, the Attorney General under this section is kept accurate and confidential, as required by the laws, regulations, policies, or procedures governing the applicable record system;

(B) provide for the timely removal and destruction of obsolete and erroneous names and information from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System; and

(C) work with States to encourage the development of computer systems, which would permit electronic notification to the Attorney General when--

(i) a court order has been issued, lifted, or otherwise removed by order of the court; or

(ii) a person has been adjudicated as mentally defective or committed to a mental institution.

SEC. 102. REQUIREMENTS TO OBTAIN WAIVER.

(a) In General- Beginning 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act, a State shall be eligible to receive a waiver of the 10 percent matching requirement for National Criminal History Improvement Grants under the Crime Identification Technology Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 14601) if the State provides at least 90 percent of the information described in subsection (c). The length of such a waiver shall not exceed 2 years.

(b) State Estimates-

(1) IN GENERAL- To assist the Attorney General in making a determination under subsection (a) of this section, and under section 104, concerning the compliance of the States in providing information to the Attorney General for the purpose of receiving a waiver under subsection (a) of this section, or facing a loss of funds under section 104, each State shall provide the Attorney General with a reasonable estimate, as calculated by a method determined by the Attorney General, of the number of--

(A) criminal history records for misdemeanors and felonies;

(B) State criminal history records with disposition information;

(C) active court orders in the State; and

(D) State records of persons adjudicated mentally defective or committed to a mental institution.

(2) SCOPE- The Attorney General, in determining the compliance of a State under this section or section 104 of this Act for the purpose of granting a waiver or imposing a loss of Federal funds, shall assess the total percentage of records provided by the State concerning any event occurring within the prior 30 years, which would disqualify a person from possessing a firearm under subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code.

(3) CLARIFICATION- Notwithstanding paragraph (2), States shall endeavor to provide the National Instant Criminal Background Check System with all records concerning persons who are prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm under subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code, regardless of the elapsed time since the disqualifying event.

(c) Eligibility of State Records for Submission to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System-

(1) REQUIREMENTS FOR ELIGIBILITY-

(A) IN GENERAL- From information collected by a State, the State shall make electronically available to the Attorney General records relevant to a determination of whether a person is disqualified from possessing or receiving a firearm under subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code, or applicable State law.

(B) NICS UPDATES- The State, on being made aware that the basis under which a record was made available under subparagraph (A) does not apply, or no longer applies, shall, as soon as practicable--

(i) update, correct, modify, or remove the record from any database that the Federal or State government maintains and makes available to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, consistent with the rules pertaining to that database; or

(ii) notify the Attorney General that such basis no longer applies so that the record system in which the record is maintained is kept up to date.

(C) CERTIFICATION- To remain eligible for a waiver under subsection (a), a State shall certify to the Attorney General, not less than once during each 2-year period, that at least 90 percent of all information described in subparagraph (A) has been made electronically available to the Attorney General in accordance with subparagraph (A).

(D) INCLUSION OF ALL RECORDS- The State shall make every effort to identify and include all of the records described under subparagraph (A) without regard to the age of the record.

(2) APPLICATION TO PERSONS CONVICTED OF MISDEMEANOR CRIMES OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE- The State shall make available to the Attorney General, for use by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, records relevant to a determination of whether a person has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. With respect to records relating to such crimes, the State shall provide information specifically describing the offense and the specific section or subsection of the offense for which the defendant has been convicted and the relationship of the defendant to the victim in each case.

(3) APPLICATION TO PERSONS WHO HAVE BEEN ADJUDICATED AS A MENTAL DEFECTIVE OR COMMITTED TO A MENTAL INSTITUTION- The State shall make available to the Attorney General, for use by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, the name and other relevant identifying information of persons adjudicated as mentally defective or those committed to mental institutions to assist the Attorney General in enforcing section 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code.

(d) Privacy Protections- For any information provided to the Attorney General for use by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, relating to persons prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm under section 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code, the Attorney General shall work with States and local law enforcement and the mental health community to establish regulations and protocols for protecting the privacy of information provided to the system. The Attorney General shall make every effort to meet with any mental health group seeking to express its views concerning these regulations and protocols and shall seek to develop regulations as expeditiously as practicable.

(e) Attorney General Report- Not later than January 31 of each year, the Attorney General shall submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives a report on the progress of States in automating the databases containing the information described in subsection (b) and in making that information electronically available to the Attorney General pursuant to the requirements of subsection (c).

SEC. 103. IMPLEMENTATION ASSISTANCE TO STATES.

(a) Authorization-

(1) IN GENERAL- From amounts made available to carry out this section, the Attorney General shall make grants to States and Indian tribal governments, in a manner consistent with the National Criminal History Improvement Program, which shall be used by the States and Indian tribal governments, in conjunction with units of local government and State and local courts, to establish or upgrade information and identification technologies for firearms eligibility determinations.

(2) GRANTS TO INDIAN TRIBES- Up to 5 percent of the grant funding available under this section may be reserved for Indian tribal governments, including tribal judicial systems.

(b) Use of Grant Amounts- Grants awarded to States or Indian tribes under this section may only be used to--

(1) create electronic systems, which provide accurate and up-to-date information which is directly related to checks under the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (referred to in this section as `NICS'), including court disposition and corrections records;

(2) assist States in establishing or enhancing their own capacities to perform NICS background checks;

(3) supply accurate and timely information to the Attorney General concerning final dispositions of criminal records to databases accessed by NICS;

(4) supply accurate and timely information to the Attorney General concerning the identity of persons who are prohibited from obtaining a firearm under section 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code, to be used by the Federal Bureau of Investigation solely to conduct NICS background checks;

(5) supply accurate and timely court orders and records of misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence for inclusion in Federal and State law enforcement databases used to conduct NICS background checks; and
(6) collect and analyze data needed to demonstrate levels of State compliance with this Act.

(c) Condition- As a condition of receiving a grant under this section, a State shall specify the projects for which grant amounts will be used, and shall use such amounts only as specified.
 
sorry, politicians have abused power long enough. I am glad I let my membership to the NRA lapse. In spite of the good things they do.
 
I would ask that folks refrain from making pro/anti NRA Comments.

Please simply post a "Call Made" and leave it at that.

No discussion beyond the topic for or against the bill.

Tx
 
SoCalShooter;
Supposedly, the states make available to the FBI any records pertaining to court-ordered mental evaluations, domestic violence convictions and any other minor thing that might cause a blip on the NICS radar. They haven't been doing it because they don't have the money or the infrastructure to handle it. This bill would give them some money to do it and would punish those states that didn't.
If you think that NICS is a good thing then this bill is just making it better. If you're one of those paranoid, tin-foil hat wearing freaks that believe NICS is an unconstitutional infringement on the right to keep and bear arms (like me) it's a bad thing.
I think this is a fair (?) assessment of the bill. If anyone has anything else to add, go for it.
 
I oppose HR 297. No MISDEMEANOR should prevent anyone from purchasing firearms. The misdemeanor offense of domestic violence is nothing more than a stepping stone to add more misdemeanor convictions to the BANNED BUYERS LIST!
 
This was what I was afraid of!!
John Dingle, a traitor and former NRA Board Member, is lobbying hard with his former crony's in the NRA to, at least, keep them out of this fight!!
Gun Owners of America is all over this!!
My money is going to them!!
Trust me, the NRA is gonna rape gun owners on this!

Here is the goa pre printed letter along with an english explaination of what this bill actually does!!

www.gunowners.org
Apr 2007
Your Gun Rights Could Soon Hang In The Balance
-- VA Tech shootings now spurring the most far-reaching gun control in a decade
Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102
Springfield, VA 22151
(703)321-8585

ACTION: Now that Congress is moving to restrict YOUR rights in response to the VA Tech shootings, please make sure to take the following three actions after you read this alert:
1. Urge your Representative to OPPOSE HR 297, the Dingell-McCarthy legislation that is designed to take the Brady Law to new heights, turning it into a law on steroids which could one day keep even YOU from buying a gun. (Contact information and a draft letter to your Representative are provided below.)
2. Gin up the e-mail alert systems in your state and forward this e-mail to as many gun owners as you can.
3. Please stand with Gun Owners of America -- at http://www.gunowners.org/ordergoamem.htm -- and help us to continue this fight, as right now, we are combating this latest onslaught ALONE in our nation's capital. GOA spokesmen spent all of last week doing radio and TV debates, interviews for newswires, and opinion editorials for newspapers. This week, we begin the battle in Congress to defeat legislation that could block millions of additional, honest gun owners from buying firearms.

Monday, April 23, 2007

The biggest gun battle of the year is about to erupt on Capitol Hill. Fueled by the recent Virginia Tech shootings, an odd coalition is forming to help expand the number of honest people who now won't be able to buy a gun.

The legislation has been introduced by none other than the Queen of Gun Control herself, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY). But she has picked up a key ally, as the bill (HR 297) is being pushed by a powerful gun group in Washington, DC.

On Friday, The Washington Post reported on the strange coalition. "With the Virginia Tech shootings resurrecting calls for tighter gun controls," the Post said, "the National Rifle Association has begun negotiations with senior Democrats over legislation to bolster the national background-check system."

Rep. John Dingell (D-MI), who was once on the NRA Board of Directors but resigned when he supported and voted for the Clinton semi-auto ban in 1994, is reported to be "leading talks with the powerful gun lobby in hopes of producing a deal [soon]," Democratic aides and lawmakers told the newspaper.

Rep. McCarthy admitted to the Post that her "crusades" for more gun control have made her voice "toxic" in gun circles. "So Dingell is handling negotiations with the NRA," the newspaper reported. "Dingell is also in talks with Sens. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) and Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) and Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner (Wis.), the senior Republican on the House Judiciary Committee."

Despite all this bad news, the Post article does go on to explain that there are some potential pitfalls.

First, you will remember that this is the bill you helped kill last year, when an avalanche of postcards was dumped on Congressional desks by thousands upon thousands of GOA activists. That's why the Post says there is one huge obstacle -- the members of Gun Owners of America.

"The NRA must balance its desire to respond to the worst mass shooting by a lone gunman in the nation's history with its competition with the more strident Gun Owners of America, which opposes any restriction on gun purchases," the Post reported.

SO WHAT DOES HR 297 DO?

Well, the rest of this alert will answer this question. This alert is long, but it is important to read it in its entirety. We need to "arm" ourselves with the facts so that we can keep pro-gun Congressmen from being duped into supporting a bill that, as of now, is being unanimously cosponsored by representatives sporting an "F-" rating by GOA.

HR 297 provides, in the form of grants, about $1 billion to the states to send more names to the FBI for inclusion in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System [NICS]. If you are thinking, "Oh, I’ve never committed a felony, so this bill won't affect me," then you had better think again. If this bill becomes law, you and your adult children will come closer to losing your gun rights than ever before.

Are you, or is anyone in your family, a veteran who has suffered from Post Traumatic Stress? If so, then you (and they) can probably kiss your gun rights goodbye. In 1999, the Department of Veterans Administration turned over 90,000 names of veterans to the FBI for inclusion into the NICS background check system. These military veterans -- who are some of the most honorable citizens in our society -- can no longer buy a gun. Why? What was their heinous "crime"?

Their "crime" was suffering from stress-related symptoms that often follow our decent men and women who have served their country overseas and fought the enemy in close combat. For all their patriotism, the Clinton administration deemed them as mentally "incompetent," sent their names for inclusion in the NICS system, and they are now prohibited from owning guns under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(4).

HR 297 would make sure that more of these names are included in the NICS system.

But, of course, Representatives Dingell and McCarthy tell us that we need HR 297 to stop future Seung-Hui Chos from getting a gun and to prevent our nation from seeing another shooting like we had on Virginia Tech. Oh really?

Then why, after passing all of their gun control, do countries like Canada and Germany still have school shootings? Even the infamous schoolyard massacre which occurred in Ireland in 1997 took place in a country that, at that time, had far more stringent gun controls than we do.

Where has gun control made people safer? Certainly not in Washington, DC, nor in Great Britain, nor in any other place that has enacted a draconian gun ban.

IMPORTANT TALKING POINTS FOR CAPITOL HILL

Regarding Cho's evil actions last Monday at Virginia Tech, your Representative needs to understand three things:
1. If a criminal is a danger to himself and society, then he should not be on the street. If he is, then there's no law (or background check for that matter) that will stop him from getting a gun and acting out the evil that is in his heart. (Remember that Washington, DC and England have not stopped bad guys from getting guns!) So why wasn't Cho in the criminal justice system? Why was he allowed to intermix with other college students? The justice system frequently passes off thugs to psychologists who then let them slip through their fingers and back into society -- where they are free to rape, rob and murder.
2. Background checks DO NOT ULTIMATELY STOP criminals and mental wackos from getting guns. This means that people who are initially denied firearms at a gun store can still buy one illegally and commit murder if they are so inclined -- such as Benjamin Smith did in 1999 (when he left the gun store where he was denied a firearm, bought guns on the street, and then committed his racist rampage less than a week later).

NOTE: In the first five years that the Brady Law was in existence, there were reportedly only three illegal gun buyers who were sent to jail. That is why in 1997, a training manual produced by Handgun Control, Inc., guided its activists in how to answer a question regarding the low number of convictions under the Brady Law. The manual basically says, when you are asked why so few people are being sent to jail under Brady, just ignore the question and go on the attack. [See GOF's Gun Control Fact Sheet.]
3. Background checks threaten to prevent INNOCENT Americans like you from exercising your right to own a gun for self-defense. No doubt you are familiar with the countless number of times that the NICS system has erroneously blocked honest Americans from buying a gun, or have heard about the times that the NICS computer system has crashed for days at a time, thus preventing all sales nationwide -- and effectively shutting down every weekend gun show.

Perhaps the most pernicious way of denying the rights of law-abiding gun owners is to continuously add more and more gun owners' names onto the roles of prohibited persons. Clinton did this with many military veterans in 1999. And Congress did this in 1996, when Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) successfully pushed a gun ban for people who have committed very minor offenses that include pushing, shoving or merely yelling at a family member. Because of the Lautenberg gun ban, millions of otherwise law-abiding Americans can never again own guns for self-defense. HR 297 will make it easier for the FBI to find out who these people are and to deny firearms to them.

GOA has documented other problems with this bill in the past. In our January alert on HR 297 we pointed out how this bill will easily lend itself to bureaucratic "fishing expeditions" into your private records, including your financial, employment, and hospital records.

HR 297 takes us the wrong direction. The anti-gun Rep. Dingell is trying to sell the bill to the gun owning public as an improvement in the Brady Law. But don't be fooled! The best improvement would be to repeal the law and end the "gun free zones" that keep everyone defenseless and disarmed -- except for the bad guys.

CONTACT INFORMATION: You can visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center to send your Representative the pre-written e-mail message below. And, you can call your Representative toll-free at 1-877-762-8762.
----- PRE-WRITTEN LETTER -----

Dear Representative:

I am a Second Amendment supporter who strongly opposes HR 297 -- the NICS Improvement Act of 2007 -- and I strongly agree with Gun Owners of America that this bill should be defeated.

The minor improvements this bill makes to the Brady instant check are insignificant when compared to the outrageous invasions of our privacy it would permit.

Gun Owners of America has posted an analysis of HR 297 on its website, showing how the bill will target millions of law-abiding gun owners, including thousands of combat veterans who served our country bravely.

Supporters of this bill say we need it to stop future Seung-Hui Chos from getting a gun and to prevent our nation from seeing another shooting like the one at Virginia Tech. But honestly, what gun law has stopped bad guys from getting a gun? Not in Canada, where they recently had a school shooting. Certainly not in Washington, DC or in England!

I think we've got to stop treating criminals like medical patients, thus allowing them to slip through the cracks. If we are not going to incarcerate dangerous people, then all the gun laws in the world will never stop them from getting firearms.

Don't be misled into thinking that this is a bill that gun owners endorse. Most gun owners want Brady repealed, not "fixed." The law has done nothing to prevent criminals from obtaining guns, but it has violated the Second Amendment rights of millions of law-abiding Americans.
Click to expand...
 
I don't read legalese very well, But there may be a few points that may help me, on the restoration side. If it worked that way.
I still think its lipstick on a pig.
 
Tell me in logical terms why I should be against strengthening the system we already have as opposed to adding restrictions? I guess I need to grasp why anyone would want a Mental Defective and or Batterer of Women and Children to have the same access to weapons that I do?
 
It's still in committee, right? Without knowing how the final version reads how do I tell them to support it or not support it? John

"Last Action: Feb 2, 2007: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security."
 
MDig, you show a profound misunderstanding of what, exactly, is included in the broad category of "misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence." It can mean a shove, or even a shouting match, if a neighbor happens to call the police.

I'm glad you're not a mental defective. I'm also glad you are not a batterer of women and children. I'm not so glad you are so cavalier about having your fundamental rights abridged by something as trivial as a misdemeanor conviction. The Lautenberg amendment is an abomination. It is not aimed even primarily at "batterers of women and children," nor, even facially, is it limited to them. It was and is an effort to sweep a broader and broader segment of the population into the "prohibited" class.

I, for one, am having none of it. Inasmuch as the NRA supports this dreck, they've lost my support.
 
What does it take for the idiots in this world to realize all the laws that could be passed won't stop people from killing each other.

This is one more step toward total confiscation for good folks like myself.

Thanks for the sell out nra.

NEA
 
Alright, glad I have been too busy the past week to give them money. What the hell do we keep the NRA around for if all they do is give ground to the gun banners? NO ONE WAS SERIOUSLY CONSIDERING PASSING ANYTHING until the NRA spoke up and supported a gun control bill.

This is nonsense. The NRA needs to be pushing for a repeal of NICS, not pushing for more restrictions and more funding.

No more money for them until they change their ways.
 
If this law passes, I believe that will put the Claire Wolfe Countdown Clock at 11:59
 
So, what happens if HR 297 gets passed? Will State Police contact people informing them they must surrender their F.O.I.D. cards and guns or will they just start making door-to-door arrests?
 
I see no problem with a Background check...I have absolutely NO problem with a Domestic Violence CONVICTION eliminating you from owning a gun... those things ALWAYS escalate... There is hard proof of this.... guys just don't know when to stop...

If the Background check system was better funded, maybe the VT thing would not have happened (at least with a gun bought at a gunshop, he would have had to go on the black market for one..and he may not have known how to do that???)..

Look, we all know a felon would have NO problem going into a gunshop to buy a gun to do more crimes...hell, look at all the declines they get(guys that actually DO try, even though they can get one)....This is one thing I have NO trouble with... everything else goes bye bye though(including 4473 forms)
 
"In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."
-Pastor Niemoller
 
"The NRA needs to be pushing for a repeal of NICS"

Trying to repeal NICS would be waste of time this year and probably for the near future.

Heck, HR 297 has been shot down in the Senate year after year. Will it fair any better this year even if they work on it and work on it and work on it?

Maybe, but probably not.

The part I like about is the requirement for updated, corrected info on individuals to be included in NICS when submitted by the states. Required. No longer would inaccurate and flat out wrong info be there forever like it is now.

John
 
Folks, I started the thread for folks to take action and CALL/e-mail the NRA and express their opinion for/against their support of the bill.

Quit yappin and start callin'
 
Tell me in logical terms why I should be against strengthening the system we already have as opposed to adding restrictions?
Click to expand...

Agreed. If the NRA is on board, they wont allow more 'restrictions' - think that is a political non-reality.
 
Voted NO....

Lautenberg for gun owners who may have once met a psychiatrist or psychologoist....

If you call deleting people's gun rights because they voluntarily sought treatment an improvement, fine. I don't....
 
I won't mind this law too much IF they changed it to "involuntarily commited" instead of just "commited." Or better yet, if a JUDGE did the commiting or whatnot. And I believe that domestic violence is a disqualifier in many places anyway, like I believe here in Virginia it is. Besides if wifebeaters are so concerned about their ability to get guns, they really shouldn't be beating their wives. (At least that's what I think domestic violence is... please educate me if I'm wrong.) Anyway as long as there's a quick and easy way to get your rights back through the legal system... hahaha quick, easy, and legal system don't really go in the same sentence... what was I thinking?

Oh and the point of this eroding at our gun freedoms etc. is also a reason why I wouldn't want this bill passed.

Honestly I don't really CARE about instant background checks. I'm no criminal and if it doesn't get in the way of me purchasing more fun boomsticks of any kind it's no loss. I guess I'm just a little more moderate than some of you. But I in no way would allow anything restrictive. Licensing of concealed weapons and instant background checks (no waiting periods, no strings) are the only two gun laws that I really don't mind if they are there. As long as nothing else infringes on our rights. (I say repeal all other federal gun control laws. Lower the handgun/ccw age to 18, and have NICS cover felons and court-mandated crazy people. That would be my ideal situation.)

I mean except for the whole commited thing (I was voluntarily placed in hospital care for mental reasons) none of this law would prevent me from buying more shiny toys.^^;

Think of it this way: Preventing criminals from buying weapons at gun stores gives US A BIGGER SELECTION! =D (Sorry just trying to lighten the mood.)

Sorry just my 50 cents. Because reading my rantings should net you enough compensation for the aspirin you'll need to take care of that headache I just gave you.^^
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
H.R. 297: NICS Improvement Act of 2007...McCarthy at it again!
2 3
Replies
60
Views
3K
TooTaxed
T
J
  • Locked
Text of H.R.137 Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013
Replies
3
Views
508
Bubba613
B
J
  • Locked
Text of H.R.21: NRA Members' Gun Safety Act of 2013
Replies
6
Views
586
coloradokevin
coloradokevin
J
  • Locked
HR 34: Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2013
Replies
2
Views
643
Buck Kramer
B
L
  • Locked
PRO GUN BILL NEEDS YOUR HELP TO PASS ASAP!
2 3
Replies
57
Views
2K
woerm
W
Back
Top