Ok, where are we being mis-lead?
Please vote against the current version of the PATRIOT reauthorization
bill (HR 3199) because it would extend provisions which the FBI claims
would allow it to seize 4473 forms, without the approval of any judge.
This runs contrary to the protections that were gained in the Firearms
Owners Protection Act of 1986, when it prohibited the establishment of any
registration system with respect to firearms [see 18 USC 926(a)(3)]. It
is also significant to note that the law bans inspections of gun dealers
records, excluding four, narrowly tailored exceptions [18 USC
923(g)(1)(b)]. Those exceptions are absent with regard to the FBI's
current practice of soliciting 4473 forms under the PATRIOT Act.
You are certainly familiar with the rule of construction that deems more
recent legislation to trump older legislation when there is a clear
conflict between the two. The protections that were won during the
McClure-Volkmer battle took years to achieve, and it would be a shame to
see those protections superseded by another enactment of gun control --
all in the vain hope that gun owners' purchase records can somehow help
authorities curb terrorism. (Gun registration certainly hasn't worked to
curb crime in any of the states or localities that have implemented it.)
It is imperative that H.R. 3199 be amended to protect gun owner rights.
Please vote against cloture on H.R. 3199, unless gun records are removed
from the records which can be demanded under Section 215 of the PATRIOT
Act -- a move which would return the McClure-Volkmer protections as the
operative law concerning when and where gun records can be demanded.
Wow, sounds like the FBI could just demand every form 4473 from every FFL holder and build a database.
That is until you actually read the law.
Who's records can be attained without a court order?
`(B) the statement of facts contained in the application establishes reasonable grounds to believe that the records or other things sought--
`(i) pertain to a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power;
`(ii) are relevant to the activities of a suspected agent of a foreign power who is the subject of such authorized investigation; or
`(iii) pertain to an individual in contact with, or known to, a suspected agent of a foreign power; and
That seems like they'd be building an awfully limited firearms database.
However, that's not the only limitation. Congress was particularly sensitive to worries about firearms records, so they added this section.
(c) Director Approval for Certain Applications- Section 501(a) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1861(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking `The Director' and inserting `Except as provided in paragraph (3), the Director'; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
`(3) No application shall be made under this section for an order requiring the production of library circulation records, library patron lists, book sales records, book customer lists, firearms sales records, or medical records containing personally identifiable information without the prior written approval of the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Director may delegate authority to approve such an application to the Deputy Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, but such authority may not be further delegated.'.
So it requires the Director of the FBI, or the Deputy Director acting on his authority, to approve each request for firearms sales records.
On top of that this bill does not strike down the provisions from the Firearms Protection Act of 1986 that you mentioned.
Those protections still exist, preventing this from growing into a firearms registration system even if you assume that the FBI could get away with it's director declaring everyone owning a firearm an agent of a foreign power and authorize their firearms sales records seized.
The bill would only authorize obtaining such records as part of an investigation under very limited circumstances and then only if the person being investigated is a foreigner or an agent of a foreign power.
You are certainly familiar with the rule of construction that deems more recent legislation to trump older legislation when there is a clear conflict between the two.
Show me the conflict between HR 3199 and the Firearms Protection Act. Don't quote me third party claims about what someone said some in the FBI said they could do if this were passed, or tell me what the GOA claims unless it's backed up in the bill itself.
Authorizing the seizure of individuals as part of a limited investigation is not authorizing a firearms registry. There is no direct conflict. Even if they could legally do widespread gathering of such records, linking them together into a firearms registry would still be illegal.
Law enforcement has always been able to get firearms records as part of an investigation. The big change is that in this very limited case, they don't need a court order to get them, so it could be done secretly.
The assertion that the the FBI could secretly obtain significant numbers of such records from the approximately quarter million FFL holders in the US is completely and totally absurd!
I see absolutely no way of interpreting HR 3199 as authorizing the legal creation of a firearms registry, or making it significantly easier to organize the current 4473 forms to be more of one than they currently are.
I believe there is justification to argue that the current requirement to keep 4473 forms does constitute a firearms registry, however that does not justify opposition to HR 3199 on that basis, because it doesn't allow the government to create one or facilitate the use of those forms to create one.
Please vote against cloture on H.R. 3199, unless gun records are removed from the records which can be demanded under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act -- a move which would return the McClure-Volkmer protections as the operative law concerning when and where gun records can be demanded.
In my opinion the limitation of this to foreigners and agents of a foreign power, combined with there requirement that the Director or Deputy Director of the FBI approve such requests, protects our rights while giving the FBI the tools the need to go after those who would seek to harm our country.
Read the bill and decide for yourself. But do so based on an informed opinion, which you will not get from reading the GOA press releases.
Hamilton helped write/enact a procedure like this for those who distilled/home-brewed spirits--where they were subject to searches, upon request, during our nation's early days.
I'm a bit curious why the NRA does not seem to be concerned about the PA provision that would potentially lead to a gun registry. At least, I haven't been made aware of any concern.