Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

S.649 Live Debate Thread - CSPAN2

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Bartholomew Roberts, Apr 11, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ohio Gun Guy

    Ohio Gun Guy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,470
    Location:
    Central Ohio
    Text of the Bill, under Transfer

    `(t)(1) Beginning on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013, it shall be unlawful for any person who is not licensed under this chapter to transfer a firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this chapter, unless a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken possession of the firearm for the purpose of complying with subsection (s). Upon taking possession of the firearm, the licensee shall comply with all requirements of this chapter as if the licensee were transferring the firearm from the licensee's inventory to the unlicensed transferee.
    `(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--
    `(A) bona fide gifts between spouses, between parents and their children, between siblings, or between grandparents and their grandchildren;
    `(B) a transfer made from a decedent's estate, pursuant to a legal will or the operation of law;
    `(C) a temporary transfer of possession that occurs between an unlicensed transferor and an unlicensed transferee, if--
    `(i) the temporary transfer of possession occurs in the home or curtilage of the unlicensed transferor;
    `(ii) the firearm is not removed from that home or curtilage during the temporary transfer; and
    `(iii) the transfer has a duration of less than 7 days; and
    `(D) a temporary transfer of possession without transfer of title made in connection with lawful hunting or sporting purposes if the transfer occurs--
    `(i) at a shooting range located in or on premises owned or occupied by a duly incorporated organization organized for conservation purposes or to foster proficiency in firearms and the firearm is, at all times, kept within the premises of the shooting range;
    `(ii) at a target firearm shooting competition under the auspices of or approved by a State agency or nonprofit organization and the firearm is, at all times, kept within the premises of the shooting competition; or
    `(iii) while hunting or trapping, if--
    `(I) the activity is legal in all places where the unlicensed transferee possesses the firearm;
    `(II) the temporary transfer of possession occurs during the designated hunting season; and
    `(III) the unlicensed transferee holds any required license or permit.
    `(3) For purposes of this subsection, the term `transfer'--
    `(A) shall include a sale, gift, loan, return from pawn or consignment, or other disposition; and
    `(B) shall not include temporary possession of the firearm for purposes of examination or evaluation by a prospective transferee while in the presence of the prospective transferee.
    `(4)(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Attorney General may implement this subsection with regulations.
    `(B) Regulations promulgated under this paragraph--
    `(i) shall include a provision setting a maximum fee that may be charged by licensees for services provided in accordance with paragraph (1); and
    `(ii) shall include a provision requiring a record of transaction of any transfer that occurred between an unlicensed transferor and unlicensed transferee accordance with paragraph (1).'.
    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendments-
    (1) SECTION 922- Section 922(y)(2) of title 18, United States Code, is amended, in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking `, (g)(5)(B), and (s)(3)(B)(v)(II)' and inserting `and (g)(5)(B)'.
    (2) SECTION 925A- Section 925A of title 18, United States Code, is amended, in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking `subsection (s) or (t) of section 922' and inserting `section 922(s)'.
    (3) NICS IMPROVEMENT AMENDMENTS ACT- Section 103(f) of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 is amended by striking `section 922(t)' and inserting `section 922(s)'.
    (4) CONSOLIDATED AND FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2012- Section 511 of title V of division B of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2012 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended by striking `subsection 922(t)' and inserting `section 922(s)' each place it appears.

    SEC. 123. LOST AND STOLEN REPORTING.

    (a) In General- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end--
    `(aa) It shall be unlawful for any person who lawfully possesses or owns a firearm that has been shipped or transported in, or has been possessed in or affecting, interstate or foreign commerce, to fail to report the theft or loss of the firearm, within 24 hours after the person discovers the theft or loss, to the Attorney General and to the appropriate local authorities.'.
    (b) Penalty- Section 924(a)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the following:
    `(B) knowingly violates subsection (a)(4), (f), (k), (q), or (aa) of section 922;'.

    SEC. 124. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this title shall take effect 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
     
  2. gc70

    gc70 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,030
    Location:
    North Carolina
    After the vote to proceed, Reid discussed the open amendments process and other procedural details. I was not listening as closely as I should have been, but I thought he said something about moving forward today so Manchin and Toomey would be able to prepare to discuss their amendment on Tuesday morning.
     
  3. akv3g4n

    akv3g4n Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    Messages:
    428
    Location:
    Hiram, OH
    Anyone have a link to find how your Senator voted?
     
  4. gc70

    gc70 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,030
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2013
  5. salvador31c

    salvador31c Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    Messages:
    189
    Location:
    Phoenix,AZ
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2013
  6. Ohio Gun Guy

    Ohio Gun Guy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,470
    Location:
    Central Ohio
    We need lots of folks to hit that site, and make sure their senators know we are looking. Immagine if the traffic crashed the site or hit record numbers....

    Lots of uncomfortable Senators!
     
  7. Old Fuff

    Old Fuff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,908
    Location:
    Arizona
    At this point in time they're is no reason to rush to judgment, and some good reasons not to.

    We should not forget that both the president and NRA are in complete agreement on one point: They both want these bills to go forward far enough to be voted on.

    Why?

    Because then both sides will know who is on what side. When it comes to legislators what they say is meaningless. How they vote is what matters. If supposed friends turn on us now we will deal with them latter in the mid-term 2014 election or later, and fortunately we have time to get ready and hopefully financially support those that really stand fast with us with donations to their campaign funds. Those that turn out to be pretended supporters of the 2nd Amendment will discover they kicked a hornet's nest.

    Even if these bills survive and pass through the Democrat-dominated Senate in they're present form (which is far from a sure thing), they must still be passed in the House of Representatives, that at the present time seems doubtful. Since all of the House members will be up for election in 2014, our communications and e-mails - especially if they continue- will carry additional weight.

    As time passes we will both lose and win some battles, but the war is far from over.
     
  8. Bubbles

    Bubbles Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2004
    Messages:
    3,152
    Location:
    Eastern Panhandle of West Virginia
    ETA: Ohio Gun Guy posted the text of the bill while I was posting this. I don't see anything in the bill that would permit transfers between "neighbors".

    Supposedly this is a synopsis of the bill (firearm-related stuff only), my comments are in red:
    http://www.toomey.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=965
    TITLE ONE: GETTING ALL THE NAMES OF PROHIBITED PURCHASERS INTO THE BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM

    Summary of Title I: This section improves background checks for firearms by strengthening the instant check system.

    • Encourage states to provide all their available records to NICS by restricting federal funds to states who do not comply. - All funds? Some funds?

    • Allow dealers to voluntarily use the NICS database to run background checks on their prospective employees. - While nice, it wouldn't necessarily pick up everything I as a store owner need to know before trusting someone to handle money.

    • Clarifies that submissions of mental health records into the NICS system are not prohibited by federal privacy laws (HIPAA) - This is a MAJOR problem IMO.

    • Provides a legal process for a veteran to contest his/her placement in NICS when there is no basis for barring the right to own a firearm. - I thought one already exists.

    TITLE TWO: REQUIRING BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR FIREARM SALES

    Summary of Title II: This section of the bill requires background checks for sales at gun shows and online while securing certain aspects of 2nd Amendment rights for law abiding citizens.

    • Closes the gun show and other loopholes while exempting temporary transfers and transfers between family members. - 1) There is no "gun show loophole", and 2) what "other loopholes"?

    • Fixes interstate travel laws for sportsmen who transport their firearms across state lines in a responsible manner. The term "transport" includes staying in temporary lodging overnight, stopping for food, buying fuel, vehicle maintenance, and medical treatment. - OK this is good and hopefully will stop places like NYC and Port of NJ from infringing on the rights of air travelers, but I won't hold my breath unless it also includes some sort of punishment for the state or locality.

    • Protects sellers from lawsuits if the weapon cleared through the expanded background checks and is subsequently used in a crime. This is the same treatment gun dealers receive now. - How many private sellers have ever been sued for this?

    • Allows dealers to complete transactions at gun shows that take place in a state for which they are not a resident. - About time.

    • Ensures that sales at gun shows are not prevented by delayed approvals from NICS. - So what if I call NICS at 4:55 pm on Sunday afternoon from a gun show, and I get a delayed response?

    • Requires the FBI to give priority to finalizing background checks at gun shows over checks at store front dealerships. - So now we have to tell NICS if we're calling from a gun show or from the premises? Yeah, figure every weekend every FFL will be calling in from a gun show no matter what.

    • Authorizes use of a state concealed carry permit instead of a background check when purchasing a firearm from a dealer. - Across the board in all states, no matter what standard the state uses to issue permits?

    • Permits interstate handgun sales from dealers. - This is long overdue.

    • Allows active military to buy firearms in their home states. - They can already with appropriate ID.

    • Family transfers and some private sales (friends, neighbors, other individuals) are exempt from background checks. - But what if you see your neighbor at a gun show? How is "neighbor" defined?

    • Adds a 15 year penalty for improper use or storage of records.
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2013
  9. alsaqr

    alsaqr Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    3,431
    Location:
    South Western, OK

    There is one big sticking point. The VA and other federal agencies do not use an adjudification process.
     
  10. tarosean

    tarosean Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Messages:
    5,560
    Location:
    TX
    Or friend for that matter???
     
  11. tarosean

    tarosean Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Messages:
    5,560
    Location:
    TX
    Ohhhhh.. I would have never guessed that with the constant pictures of the slain children. :fire:
     
  12. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    I would love to explain but I am ignorant to the how & why myself. Reid expressed his wish that it go down that way. I don't know if he has the power to do that as Senate Majority Leader or if they are working that out in caucus now during a recess and he was just expressing what he would like.
     
  13. baz

    baz Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    988
    The vote is up. Check this list and see if your Senator is on it:

    Alexander (R-TN), Yea
    Ayotte (R-NH), Yea
    Burr (R-NC), Yea
    Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
    Coburn (R-OK), Yea
    Collins (R-ME), Yea
    Corker (R-TN), Yea
    Flake (R-AZ), Yea
    Graham (R-SC), Yea
    Heller (R-NV), Yea
    Hoeven (R-ND), Yea
    Isakson (R-GA), Yea
    Kirk (R-IL), Yea
    McCain (R-AZ), Yea
    Toomey (R-PA), Yea
    Wicker (R-MS), Yea

    Begich (D-AK), Nay
    Pryor (D-AR), Nay

    Why isn't the NRA "scoring" this vote?
     
  14. Fryerpower

    Fryerpower Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    578
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Grouped By Vote Position

    YEAs ---68
    Alexander (R-TN)
    Ayotte (R-NH)
    Baldwin (D-WI)
    Baucus (D-MT)
    Bennet (D-CO)
    Blumenthal (D-CT)
    Boxer (D-CA)
    Brown (D-OH)
    Burr (R-NC)
    Cantwell (D-WA)
    Cardin (D-MD)
    Carper (D-DE)
    Casey (D-PA)
    Chambliss (R-GA)
    Coburn (R-OK)
    Collins (R-ME)
    Coons (D-DE)
    Corker (R-TN)
    Cowan (D-MA)
    Donnelly (D-IN)
    Durbin (D-IL)
    Feinstein (D-CA)
    Flake (R-AZ)
    Franken (D-MN)
    Gillibrand (D-NY)
    Graham (R-SC)
    Hagan (D-NC)
    Harkin (D-IA)
    Heinrich (D-NM)
    Heitkamp (D-ND)
    Heller (R-NV)
    Hirono (D-HI)
    Hoeven (R-ND)
    Isakson (R-GA)
    Johnson (D-SD)
    Kaine (D-VA)
    King (I-ME)
    Kirk (R-IL)
    Klobuchar (D-MN)
    Landrieu (D-LA)
    Leahy (D-VT)
    Levin (D-MI)
    Manchin (D-WV)
    McCain (R-AZ)
    McCaskill (D-MO)
    Menendez (D-NJ)
    Merkley (D-OR)
    Mikulski (D-MD)
    Murphy (D-CT)
    Murray (D-WA)
    Nelson (D-FL)
    Reed (D-RI)
    Reid (D-NV)
    Rockefeller (D-WV)
    Sanders (I-VT)
    Schatz (D-HI)
    Schumer (D-NY)
    Shaheen (D-NH)
    Stabenow (D-MI)
    Tester (D-MT)
    Toomey (R-PA)
    Udall (D-CO)
    Udall (D-NM)
    Warner (D-VA)
    Warren (D-MA)
    Whitehouse (D-RI)
    Wicker (R-MS)
    Wyden (D-OR)

    NAYs ---31
    Barrasso (R-WY)
    Begich (D-AK)
    Blunt (R-MO)
    Boozman (R-AR)
    Coats (R-IN)
    Cochran (R-MS)
    Cornyn (R-TX)
    Crapo (R-ID)
    Cruz (R-TX)
    Enzi (R-WY)
    Fischer (R-NE)
    Grassley (R-IA)
    Hatch (R-UT)
    Inhofe (R-OK)
    Johanns (R-NE)
    Johnson (R-WI)
    Lee (R-UT)
    McConnell (R-KY)
    Moran (R-KS)
    Murkowski (R-AK)
    Paul (R-KY)
    Portman (R-OH)
    Pryor (D-AR)
    Risch (R-ID)
    Roberts (R-KS)
    Rubio (R-FL)
    Scott (R-SC)
    Sessions (R-AL)
    Shelby (R-AL)
    Thune (R-SD)
    Vitter (R-LA)

    Not Voting - 1
    Lautenberg (D-NJ)
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2013
  15. mdauben

    mdauben Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2011
    Messages:
    2,163
    Location:
    Huntville, AL
    I really have to question this line of thinking. If there is any chance at all of a bill like this passing (and while it may be unlikely, anyone who thinks its impossible is living in a fools paradice) I feel we should take every opportunity that presents itself to stop this bill. :mad:

    Its up now, and there are a lot of suprising (to me at least) votes. I see AZ, GA, and TN, all solidly Republican states, voted for "cloture" (whatever the heck that means). Many other states split their votes, with yet more Republicans voting for "cloture". If they needed 60 votes to pass the motion, it was Republicans who give them the push over the top they needed. :fire:

    At least I have the comfort that both of my Senators voted against the motion.
     
  16. Old Fuff

    Old Fuff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,908
    Location:
    Arizona
    All this vote will do is move the bills to the floor for more debate and possible amendments. The bills in question may not end up looking anything like they do now (which could be good or bad depending how things go, and it could go on for weeks). Also it is highly improbable that all those who voted today to block a filibuster will also vote to support the present bills.

    Then a final vote may or may not be filibustered. If or when it is blocked the final vote will be taken. If it isn't blocked all of the bills will fail.

    If the bills survive they will go on the the House of Representatives, and a whole different environment.

    We are not yet past the middle of this war.
     
  17. salvador31c

    salvador31c Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    Messages:
    189
    Location:
    Phoenix,AZ
    Filibusters and Cloture in the Senate

    http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid='0E,*PLW="P

    If you'd liked to read up on procedure. I don't envision a waiving of those 30 hours or consideration/debate from certain senators.

     
  18. GlockFan

    GlockFan Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2009
    Messages:
    315
    Location:
    Western burbs of Chicago
    I called Kirk's office (R-IL) and it went straight to an automated system. Told him flat out if he sticks with his vote to not count on me for any future endeavors. There is no reason to call Durbin as it is a waste of time. He is a ring leader of this sort of legislation.
     
  19. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    Yes, he said Toomey and Manchin have a lot of work to do and it might be Tuesday morning before they get to the amendment but then he said that was no reason why they shouldn't move forward and reiterated that he wants to deal with Toomey-Manchin, AWB, and mag bans first. I'm guessing they'll have to push Toomey-Manchin back... If none of the Senators have the text, how are they going to debate it?
     
  20. Old Fuff

    Old Fuff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,908
    Location:
    Arizona
    The likelihood of a vote blocking an open debate on these bills through a filibuster was questionable at best, even if 100% of the Republicans supported it. On a straight party vote the Democrats have the majority. Now the senators on our side, Republicans and Democrats, will have a chance to muddle the waters and mess up the bills with amendments which may in the end get them voted down on an individual basis, or so bad that they're is no chance of then getting through the House. Is their a risk? Sure, but it's a small one. The filibuster that matters will be the last one, and if it comes to that you will see an entirely different vote. The opportunities you want to exploit are the ones you have the best chance of winning. This wasn't one of them.
     
  21. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    Ohio Gun Guy posted the text of S.649, not the Toomey-Manchin amendment.
     
  22. JFtheGR8

    JFtheGR8 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Messages:
    693
    Location:
    Central Illinois
    Durbin and Kirk don't give a rat's behind about how you or I would like for them to vote. I've been writing to them both for over a year and don't get any response from Kirk at all and form letters from Durbin. All they care about is Chicago politics.


    Posted from Thehighroad.org App for Android
     
  23. miller.lyte

    miller.lyte Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Messages:
    53
    Location:
    Atlanta
    I wrote both my senators (Franken and Klobuchar) and told them their "Yea"s have lost my vote. I know Klobuchar doesn't give a hoot; Franken might if he remembers how close his election was, but I will do my part to ensure the both of them see the light in 2014. The light of day as they stand waiting in the unemployment line that is. They make me ashamed to call MN my home state.
     
  24. Lennyjoe

    Lennyjoe Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    6,069
    Location:
    Southwestern Ohio
    The following is a list of Republican lawmakers who voted to advance the gun legislation in the Senate Thursday:

    New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte

    Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss

    Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn

    Maine Sen. Susan Collins

    Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake

    Georgia Sen. Johnny Isakson

    Arizona Sen. John McCain

    Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker

    North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr

    North Dakota Sen. John Hoeven

    Illinois Sen. Mark Kirk

    South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham

    Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander

    Tennessee Sen. Bob Corker

    Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey

    Nevada Sen. Dean Heller



    Read more: http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2...ections-senate-gun-legislation/#ixzz2QB9kQGn6
     
  25. RevolvingGarbage

    RevolvingGarbage Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2009
    Messages:
    1,040
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    I am of mixed feelings on proceeding with this bill. Obviously, eliminating private sales is out of the question. I will have to go through the text myself to see the particulars of what else is not going to fly.

    They seem to have thrown us a few bones in a few small ways. Obviously they did so to increase the chances of the bill being voted on, but wouldn't it be kind of nice to flush most of the bill, while cherry picking out all the little bonuses? I for one would be happy to be able to show my valid FL CWL in lieu of waiting on an NICS call. The strengthening of FOPA is also a good thing.

    Of course, we could always strike the whole thing down and next year come out with a bill including all of the little perks from this bill..
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page