The third rail is still hot!

[T.O.M.]

http://news.yahoo.com/assault-weapons-ban-wont-dems-gun-bill-175804697.html

Harry Reid has announced that an AWB will not be included in the gun control bill that will be introduced.  He says that, best case, they could muster 40 votes.  Without the AWB, he thinks he can at least get the bill out for debate...

where Feinstein intends to attach the AWB as an amendment, killing the bill.

Guess that third rail is still hot, huh?

[makattak]

Unfortunately, it isn't. Universal background checks is far more odious than an "assault weapons" ban.

[brimic]

I wonder if reid is still the NRA's boy?

[Scout26]

Looks like it.  While Harry says he'll allow a vote, if he doesn't see 50+ votes, it won't hit the floor.  Plus if it won't pass the house, it's dead anyway.

[Jamisjockey]

Unfortunately, it isn't. Universal background checks is far more odious than an "assault weapons" ban.

This.  UBC will be the 'compromise'.  Next shooting, its going to be 'registrations'. 

[Waitone]

Plus if it won't pass the house, it's dead anyway.

Operative term is "IF".  Combine moral geldings like Boehner with northeastern republicans adoption of the democrat agenda and you have absolutely no clue what will happen in the House.  I'd like to think the house is a second amendment citadel but then again I tend to take flights of fancy at times.

[Scout26]

I don't see the UBC passing both.  While it *might* pass the Senate (although highly doubtful), it's dead in the water in the House.  Remember the are more then a few blue-dog democrats that know that their career is over if they vote for gun control.

Congresscritters should have visions of 1994 dancing in their heads.  

[Frank Castle]

Happy happy happy happy!

[roo_ster]

Operative term is "IF".  Combine moral geldings like Boehner with northeastern republicans adoption of the democrat agenda and you have absolutely no clue what will happen in the House.  I'd like to think the house is a second amendment citadel but then again I tend to take flights of fancy at times.

This. 

[Ben]

I'm with Mac and Jamis. I don't want to see anything pass, but UBC is WAY worse than an "assault weapon" ban.

[SADShooter]

As long as we can't consistently trump emotional argument with reasoned, this is a holding action until the next incident, when we'll again hear the chants of "why won't those bloodthirsty bitterclingy gun zealots agree to this common-sense compromise for the children?". With the right set of conditions, we'll again sit on the knife edge of a political calculus having nothing to do with principle. This is good news, sure, but the fat lady's just backstage horking down a Big Gulp. She's not nearly finished.

[T.O.M.]

Unfortunately, it isn't. Universal background checks is far more odious than an "assault weapons" ban.

Not disagreeing with you, but I don't see how ubc is that much of an impact on my life.  Now I mean ubc on firearm purchases only, not mags, parts, ammo, or components.  If I buy on-line, I have to go through an FFL dealer, who has to do NICS checks.  If I buy or trade with my friend, well, I either comply or take my chances that they won't be able to prove when the sale occurred.  Absent registration, which may be a line in the sand, I don't see much impact on me.  Please help me understand.

[AZRedhawk44]

Not disagreeing with you, but I don't see how ubc is that much of an impact on my life.  Now I mean ubc on firearm purchases only, not mags, parts, ammo, or components.  If I buy on-line, I have to go through an FFL dealer, who has to do NICS checks.  If I buy or trade with my friend, well, I either comply or take my chances that they won't be able to prove when the sale occurred.  Absent registration, which may be a line in the sand, I don't see much impact on me.  Please help me understand.

UBC is registration.

UBC is registration.

UBC is registration.


You, Chris, will sit in judgement of plain old folks like me and BMoZ, when I sell him a Glock 19 without getting the say-so of our betters.  You will be the arm of enforcement of State Registration.

UBC = nationalized 2nd hand NICS checks.  Who will keep the 4473's for private party transfers?  Obviously, NICS themselves, passing them off to the ATF eventually.

Not disagreeing with you, but I don't see how ubc is that much of an impact on my life.

"First they came for the communists,
and I did not speak out because I was not a communist.
Then they came for the socialists,
and I did not speak out because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up, because I was not Catholic.
Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak out."
--Pastor Martin Neimoller

We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.

[Fitz]

Basically what he said

Universal background checks are one gigantic step Towards confiscation

Losing the ability to buy guns in private transfers without government permission Is a massive loss of liberty

[cordex]

In addition, if background checks are implemented as in Colorado then we have an issue with gun stores cooling on the idea of running checks. Even if dealers set the cost, there is an increase in cost of the secondary market for guns and a chilling effect on used transfers.

[Ben]

In addition, if background checks are implemented as in Colorado then we have an issue with gun stores cooling on the idea of running checks. Even if dealers set the cost, there is an increase in cost of the secondary market for guns and a chilling effect on used transfers.

Refer to California, where it can cost $100 for a transfer. That $500 gun you were selling? Either you are taking a loss on it, or the buyer is paying $600 for a $500 gun, or you're each taking half of the *expletive deleted*it sandwich.

[longeyes]

What Reid does or doesn't do doesn't affect what is going on in certain states of the Union.  Mine, for example (California).  I expect the worst.  Will SCOTUS step in?  Who knows?

UBC is the anteroom.  It amounts to ceding final control to central gov't of what is supposed to be an inalienable right.  I think most of us recognize that.  But what about Schumer's transfers corollaries?  Let a friend at the range shoot your gun and both of you are felons liable to serious jail time in a Federal penn?  WTF.

"It's alive.  Get the axe."

[T.O.M.]

Okay.  I get it now.  Hadn't thought of the records.  And didn't know details of the Colorado law.

As forme enforcing it, not likely.  I work state Common Pleas court so only address state laws.  Fed. law doesn't mean jack in my courthouse, though I wouldn't mind fed. magistrate pay.

[Marnoot]

I don't see the UBC passing both.  While it *might* pass the Senate (although highly doubtful), it's dead in the water in the House.  Remember the are more then a few blue-dog democrats that know that their career is over if they vote for gun control.

Congresscritters should have visions of 1994 dancing in their heads.  

This. My rep is a blue-dog democrat (liberals would call him a DINO), and his seat is under constant (and close) attack from republicans in a very conservative area. If he voted anti-gun he could kiss it goodbye tout de suite, and I think it's a similar story for many/most blue dog democrats.

[vaskidmark]

Wasn't DiFi told the AWB would/could not go forward alone, but that she might be able to introduce it as  an amendment (to just about anything)?

It aint over till someone drives a wooden stake through the heart.  And gift-wraps it in garlic.  In a coffin made of silver crosses.

stay safe.

[p12]

I had a bad thought today.

What are the chances of a gun ban being part of obamacare? 

Have guns have higher premiums.

[AJ Dual]

Wasn't DiFi told the AWB would/could not go forward alone, but that she might be able to introduce it as  an amendment (to just about anything)?

It aint over till someone drives a wooden stake through the heart.  And gift-wraps it in garlic.  In a coffin made of silver crosses.

stay safe.

Actually, this could work for us...

She could attach it to bills, like say one for UBC's, and if the amendment is not stripped, it kills off the "compromise" gun control bills too.

[Blakenzy]

The Prohibition of Unauthorized Private Transfer of Firearms (let's call it what it is) is like inviting federal agents into your living room. When one of them gets up and starts snooping in your bedroom it will dawn on you why something so seemingly innocent wasn't such a good idea.

[makattak]

Not disagreeing with you, but I don't see how ubc is that much of an impact on my life.  Now I mean ubc on firearm purchases only, not mags, parts, ammo, or components.  If I buy on-line, I have to go through an FFL dealer, who has to do NICS checks.  If I buy or trade with my friend, well, I either comply or take my chances that they won't be able to prove when the sale occurred.  Absent registration, which may be a line in the sand, I don't see much impact on me.  Please help me understand.

Another thing you hadn't considered. Want to give that gun to your son? Or maybe just lend it to him?

You will have to go through an FFL for ANY transfer. If I recall correctly, Schumer's bill makes it clear that any lending of over 5 days is a transfer.

You go out of town for 6 days? Felony, unless you transferred all your guns to your wife through an FFL.

[T.O.M.]

Another thing you hadn't considered. Want to give that gun to your son? Or maybe just lend it to him?

You will have to go through an FFL for ANY transfer. If I recall correctly, Schumer's bill makes it clear that any lending of over 5 days is a transfer.

You go out of town for 6 days? Felony, unless you transferred all your guns to your wife through an FFL.

So, Mak, what you're saying is that by going on a business trip, and leaving my safe and contents behind, this bill would define the acrus as a sale of my firearms and require that I do an FFL transfer to my wife?  Then, when i return, she would have to do an FFL transfer back to me?  And, if we take a trip together, and her parents come stay with the kids, I have to do a transfer to the in-laws, and then back again when I return?  That would be assinine.