Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Coburn Amendment:Breaking the Glass
pagunblog.com ^ | 14 April, 2013 | Sebastian

Posted on 04/14/2013 9:31:12 AM PDT by marktwain

We suspected from media rumors that there was going to be an, “In the event of gun control, break glass,” strategy from the stronger Republicans. Unfortunately, the Toomey-Manchin deal has given real legs to this issue once again, and given murmurs from the House, including my own Congressman (not surprised), I don’t feel particularly good about the House. Getting a “true conservative” like Toomey on board with the deal, unfortunately, makes a lot of critters think “Well, if Toomey is on board, it must be OK!”

And so Senator Tom Coburn floats an alternative that I think would be far preferable, if I’m going to be required to pick my poison:

Dr. Coburn’s amendment would require a NICS check or validation permit to be presented for non-FFL transfers, exempting family transfers, estate/will transfers, and all temporary transfers.

The requirement can be satisfied in one of four ways:

1) An FFL takes custody ofthe firearm in order to perform a background check on the transferee as mandated in Schumer original and Manchin-Toomey

2) Presentation oftemporary 30 day permit created by running a self-NICS check through a new consumer portal(details below)

3) Usage of a concealed carry permit or any other state issued permit that requires a NICS check to be conducted to obtain

4) Any other alternative that a state comes up with to satisfy the validation requirements for secondary and private market transfers. The amendment also includes a provision that places penalties on ATF agents that abuse records during audits, an IG report on the FBI’s 24 hour destruction rule compliance, a prohibition on records, a prohibition on centralizing records pertaining to gun ownership and a provision that allows states to assume primacy of enforcement of the background check law.

Consumer Portal

The new law will not go into effect until the consumer portal is up and running, and the law will be nullified if the consumer portal is permanently shut down or defunded.
Screw going through an FFL being an alternative though. The alternative should be that FFLs can issue a validation to a prospective buyer, to facilitate a private sale for someone who doesn’t want to use the portal. Also, this all has to be with the FBI. ATF can’t have anything to do with this portal. In fact, I’d be happier with an independent agency, separate from the DOJ, running NICS.

The concern here is that the requirement that records not be kept by the FBI from the check are worth about as much as Cypriot deposit insurance. There needs to be independent, and regular auditing. While in this scheme, the seller presumably would keep the buyer’s certificate, there can’t be any requirement to do so. The enforcement mechanism for this is that if you sell to someone prohibited, obviously you didn’t run the check, and also the fact that most gun owners, to the utter shock of anti-gun folks everywhere, really don’t want to sell guns to criminals. Also, do we still get some things in return for the Coburn proposal? That would be a necessary component.

Again folks, what our options are depends on how people are communicating with lawmakers. If everyone who was lining up at gun shows at the start of all this were calling lawmakers, we would not be here. We worked a gun show to get people to contact, and the number of people who wouldn’t, because they just didn’t think it mattered, was very discouraging. Don’t be those people. Also, just be emphatic that you expect them to vote against all gun control measures, and that yes, background checks are gun control, no matter what Senator Toomey says. You wouldn’t accept background checks for Internet access (to make sure you’re not, say, a child porn convict). Firearms rights should not be any different.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: backgroundcheck; banglist; coburn; constitution; guncontrol; secondamendment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last
The 30 day, self check document is the deal we need to make public. Everyone can see that this satisfies the “universal background check” impulse, and satisfies the requirement not to create a database.

The anti-freedom fascists will never approve of this, because it does not advance their agenda. In fact, it reverses it, because the next logical step is to allow the self-check to be used for FFL approved transfers.

It is a poison pill for the fascists.

1 posted on 04/14/2013 9:31:13 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain

How would any of it have stopped Adam Lanza or James Holmes?


2 posted on 04/14/2013 9:34:18 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth." --Alan Greenspan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Once the requirement is in place for all or most transfers to go through FFL’s the next step will be to regulate them out of business. See how easy that works?


3 posted on 04/14/2013 9:35:38 AM PDT by saganite (What happens to taglines? Is there a termination date?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
How would any of it have stopped Adam Lanza or James Holmes?

It wouldn't, nor will it stop a single gang banger from arming himself and shooting up a block full of kids. It's the fascist's attempt to deprive the citizen of his rights by making it a nuisance to legally own a firearm.

Adam Lanza succeeded doing in Newtown what 0bama/Holder tried to do with F&F, plain and simple.

4 posted on 04/14/2013 9:42:30 AM PDT by RedStateGuyTrappedinCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: saganite
We don't need no stinking background checks.


5 posted on 04/14/2013 9:44:58 AM PDT by spokeshave (The only people better off today than 4 years ago are the Prisoners at Guantanamo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
if I’m going to be required to pick my poison:

Why do you have to pick a poison? We have a constitution which addresses the subject. We have laws which are not being enforced or which are being enforced arbitrarily.
What is this constant urge to do something even if it's wrong?

6 posted on 04/14/2013 9:48:06 AM PDT by oldbrowser (We have a rogue government in Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: saganite; All
Once the requirement is in place for all or most transfers to go through FFL’s the next step will be to regulate them out of business. See how easy that works?

You did not read the article, did you.

This amendment provides an alternative to FFLs, and puts in safeguards, including a way to audit that records from the current FBI system are actually destroyed.

7 posted on 04/14/2013 9:50:19 AM PDT by marktwain (The MSM must die for the Republic to live. Long live the new media!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Shall not be infringed... That means you can’t even make small steps because infringe means anything leaning towards control , not that those collectivists in Congress gave a damn about the oath they took.


8 posted on 04/14/2013 9:52:39 AM PDT by Nateman (If liberals are not screaming you are doing it wrong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

The government, including the republicans, want the civilian population disarmed, period. The federal government has officially declared war on the Constitution and bill of rights, and will stop at nothing to implement their agenda. Defacto gun control will become law, and we can do nothing about it, except to willfully defy their unconstitutional decrees.


9 posted on 04/14/2013 9:54:52 AM PDT by factoryrat (We are the producers, the creators. Grow it, mine it, build it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Doesn’t matter. This alternative won’t pass. The Toomey Manchinl bill is on track and will be the final version. My observation stands.


10 posted on 04/14/2013 9:58:31 AM PDT by saganite (What happens to taglines? Is there a termination date?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: oldbrowser
Why do you have to pick a poison? We have a constitution which addresses the subject. We have laws which are not being enforced or which are being enforced arbitrarily. What is this constant urge to do something even if it's wrong?

A+

11 posted on 04/14/2013 10:32:57 AM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

It seems to me that they should stop targeting sales and start targeting criminals.

There are two broad types of persons associated with crime: convicted and non-convicted persons awaiting criminal trial.

1. Convicted criminals and their SSNs can be loaded into the portals.

2. TROs handle persons awaiting criminal trial. An accused is still innocent but courts have discretion to forbid firearms until a trial is complete. TROs reference SSNs and so these can be handled in a similar manner as convicted criminals.

Non-convicted persons who are wanted for a crime and haven’t been arrested yet need to be booked and brought to trial. If their ID is known, then subject to a warrant their information can be downloaded to portals.

Non-convicted persons implicated in a crime but with no identifying information must be handled by the public and law enforcement on a case by case basis. Such persons may remain unidentified in national portals so it falls to the public to pursue their information.

This leaves law-abiding people alone and free to exercise their rights. Otherwise a self-check clearance or whatever provides information that must be destroyed and between you and the fence post, you can forget information being destroyed in a total 100% manner. Information like energy can be transformed but never destroyed.

Freedom is preserved by never allowing the information to be created in the first place with exception for criminals.


12 posted on 04/14/2013 10:33:22 AM PDT by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

NO. Period.


13 posted on 04/14/2013 10:49:13 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (Seek the lesser of two evils and God is likely to give it to you, and the greater evil too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
No more laws. We have 20,000 gun laws already. And when we "compromise", we never get anything in return.

You want this federal "purchase permit" thing? Okay, then I want to be able to use this "permit" to buy any number of guns, anywhere in the US, from any private individual, gun store, distributor or manufacturer. And having this "federal purchase permit" would legally supersede any restrictive state laws.

I still don't like it, but we would at least be getting something in return. Of course something like this would never pass because we're always giving up ground for nothing in return.

14 posted on 04/14/2013 11:02:06 AM PDT by barefoot_hiker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Requiremnts that FBI delete records are worthless without individual govt employees being made PERSONALLY liable (civil and criminal) for illegally retaining info.


15 posted on 04/14/2013 11:27:26 AM PDT by SauronOfMordor (Hold the pig steady)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

We don’t even own one gun, but I have written 3 emails to my Senators about this issue.


16 posted on 04/14/2013 11:33:25 AM PDT by Shery (in APO Land)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
N O
17 posted on 04/14/2013 11:52:15 AM PDT by tomkat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

Gun Control Nazis do not want to stop criminals... they want to stop honest non-minority folks from owning weapons and defending themselves. Look at all the heavily Black populated cities with Gun Control and see the “success”


18 posted on 04/14/2013 12:00:57 PM PDT by SeminoleCounty (GOP - Greenlighting Obama's Programs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: barefoot_hiker; All

Gottlieb, Toomey, and Coburn have outdone the “progressives” at their own game.

The bill proposed has plenty of trojan horses in it for our side, and takes about 20 steps toward restoring our rights for a very small one backward.

I think the NRA will be with this one as well, and I think Obama may veto it. It is much like when Senator Coburn forced Obama to sign the guns in parks bill as part of the budget he wanted.

This has all kinds of stuff that Obama and the anti-freedom people hate. It is a real “compromise” in where we get a lot, and they get to save face, and get very, very little.


19 posted on 04/14/2013 4:09:59 PM PDT by marktwain (The MSM must die for the Republic to live. Long live the new media!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Nateman; All
Shall not be infringed... That means you can’t even make small steps because infringe means anything leaning towards control , not that those collectivists in Congress gave a damn about the oath they took.

So you are saying we cannot take small steps back away from tyranny as well?

20 posted on 04/14/2013 4:15:14 PM PDT by marktwain (The MSM must die for the Republic to live. Long live the new media!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson