vision2020
propaganda and fact
At 08:33 AM 6/16/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Dear Visionaries,
> If the best defense is a good offense, then the NRA sponsored "gun
>control bill" H.R. 2037 is on the offensive. (see MoveOn.org analysis
>below) Gun control has been separated from the juvenile crime bill in the
>house. Again your cards and letters to your congressional representative
>are encouraged.
>Steve Cooke
>
I agree. Let them know that there are people out here.
--snip--
>Here's a sample phone script you could use in your calls to the Senate:
>
>Hello, my name is [your name]. I'm a constituent calling from [city,
>state]
>and want [Representative X] to know that I support the
*****common-sense gun*****
ie., if you don't agree with me, you have none.
>measures approved by the Senate. Please close the gun-show loophole and
>the
>18-21 handgun loophole. It will save lives.
Is this a wish or a fact?
>
>Could I please have a written response from [Representative X]?"
>
> **** BACKGROUND ****
>
>Despite repeated public promises that
****reasonable gun control ****
this is the new magic phrase bantered about by the people who want this to
pass. I love it!! If I oppose it then *obviously* I am being unreasonable!
>measures would
>be subject to full and open debate in the House Judiciary Committee, House
--snip--
>Not surprisingly, H.R. 2037 actually reopens loopholes in the nation's gun
>laws closed last month by the Senate. Specifically:
>
>** H.R. 2037 defines gun shows so narrowly that it does not cover many
> events at which hundreds of gun are sold, such as flea markets. It
>also
> still allows some unlicensed sellers to sell guns without conducting a
> background check.
Gun Control Act of 1968 licensed dealers and required certain paperwork on
firearms sold by them. (Before that, one could mail-order a gun. So it had
quite the restrictions.) Unlicensed persons, such as private citizens
selling their private property amongst themselves, were not included. This
is not a loophole--this is how it was designed.
>
>** H.R. 2037 weakens law enforcement's ability to conduct a background
> check on a gun purchaser at a gun show by shortening the amount of time
> in which to complete the check. Currently, law enforcement has 3
> business days to complete a check if the initial check indicates a
> potential prohibition on the sale. H.R. 2037 changes that to 72 hours.
> This means that if a background check is requested at noon on a Friday,
> police would have only until noon on Monday, not Wednesday, to complete
> the check. Many court records and other criminal records are
>accessible
> only during regular business hours and this change will enable
> prohibited purchasers to escape detection.
This is plenty of time. If there is some information that they need that
they can't get to, they will just deny it. I would think this would be a
good thing for someone opposed to ownership of firearms.
>
>** H.R. 2037 eliminates the crime gun tracing requirements contained in
>the
> Senate bill. The House bill does not require unlicensed gun sellers at
> gun shows to maintain any records of their sales, thereby obstructing
> law enforcement's ability to trace a gun when it is recovered in a
> crime.
It has been shown time after time that firearms traces work only in
extremely rare cases. The ATF can't even trace firearms that they have in
their possession with all the paperwork also in their possession.
>
>** H.R. 2037 reverses long-standing law that requires gun buyers to
> purchase guns only from dealers in their state of residence. H.R. 2037
> undermines state firearms laws by allowing federally licensed firearms
> dealers to sell guns at gun shows in all 50 states and to ship guns to
> unlicensed buyers across state lines.
>
WRONG!!! (Harsh, annoying buzzer going off.) A little misinformation goes
a long way, it seems. First, the current law is that long guns (ie, rifles
and shotguns) can be purchased across state lines. They must be sold in
the state of the licensee. For example, if a Pullman resident wanted to
buy a rifle from a Moscow dealer, he could. Legally. Today. To get a
pistol or other handgun, the Moscow dealer would have to transfer it to a
Washington dealer for the customer to pick up and the paperwork would have
to be done with the Washington dealer.
>****HR 2037 Gun Show Analysis*****
>
>H.R. 2037 WEAKENS THE SENATE'S GUN SHOW BILL
This is good.
>
>H.R. 2037 reopens the gun show loophole that the Senate bill would have
>closed once and for all.
Loophole is such a biased word.
>Even for events sponsored with the intent described by H.R. 2037, if the
>organizers and sellers arrange to have only 9 'vendors' at the event, there
>would be no background checks, no matter how many guns were being sold.
First, have you ever seen a gun show with less than 10 vendors? (Have you
ever even gone to a gun show to witness the evils that you are against?)
And there is current law regarding being "in the business" of selling guns.
If one sells lots of them, federal law requires them to be licensed.
Licensed dealers have to follow the the laws, regardless of where they are
selling guns.
>
>Even at the events that do meet its test, H.R. 2037 does not even clearly
>cover all unlicensed gun sellers at those events. The legislation does not
>define covered sellers to include unlicensed gun peddlers who do not have
>to
>sign up with the organizer and can walk around anonymously at gun shows
>with
>guns and a 'For Sale' sign. Criminals will flock to these wandering gun
>sellers, who do not come within the House bill's cramped definition.
Like Little Bo Peep: AK-47 instead of a shepherd's crook with a flock of
criminals following. LOL. This just doesn't seem to be a problem to me.
Baaa.
--snip--
>
>H.R. 2037 also makes matters even worse by resurrecting the scheme of
>'special registrants' form the repudiated Craig Amendment to the Senate
>bill. These 'registrants' would be allowed to run background checks on gun
>buyers, but they would NOT be required to keep records of the transfer, or
>even to record the serial number of the gun, which will make it impossible
>for law enforcement to trace guns sold by the 'registrants' that are later
>used in crime.
>
So it's a given that the guns bought after a background check was done will
automatically be used in crime?? Somehow there is a GIANT leap of logic
here that I am missing. I buy a gun....I become a criminal. I see! I
should buy a piano and put it into the corner. I won't have to ever play
it, but by the same logic I should become a concert pianist. Please
explain this one to me, as my poor mind is in a quandry.
>H.R. 2037 lets private individuals access the sensitive, private
>information in the NICS.
I have used this very system to do Brady checks on people. The amount of
information they give you is : You can sell -or- do not sell. They do not
give reasons or will they discuss it with the checker or the person being
checked over the phone. And every single rejection I had went through when
rerun at a later date because they *all* were due to incomplete or
erroneous information int the computers. I could get much more information
about you by stealing one of your trash bags from the curb and going
through it.
>H.R. 2037 reverses long-standing law to allow interstate gun transfers.
>
>In a reversal of current law, H.R. 2037 would undermine State laws by
>allowing federal gun dealers to directly ship guns to unlicensed buyers
>across State lines.
>
Didn't see this in the bill. I am not going to be so blatent as to claim
that it is not in the bill. I do not stoop to such tactics. I am merely
saying I didn't see it. It may be there and I may have missed it. If
someone knows what section it is, please let me know as I would be
interested in looking at it.
_______
>This is a message from the "Gun Safety First" campaign at MoveOn.org.
This is a message from "Me". I at no time used propaganda from either
side. Personally, I prefer to get the information from the source:
http://thomas.loc.gov
If all one does is read someone else's opinion on how one should think,
that person should not have the right to vote or partake in any benefits of
our society. They should go back to being a couch potato and having their
brain sucked out by the television.
Get the facts and make an informed decision.
Marc
Back to TOC