Skip to comments.Federal Interstate Handgun Sales Ban Ruled Unconstitutional [is this hugh or what?]
Posted on 02/11/2015 10:59:05 AM PST by NewJerseyJoe
In another excellent victory for civil rights by attorney Alan Gura, United States District Court Judge Reed OConnor struck down the federal interstate handgun sales ban earlier today, finding it unconstitutional (both facially and as-applied) under the Second Amendment and the Fifth Amendments Due Process Clause.
(Excerpt) Read more at firearmspolicy.org ...
I’m popping a popper!!!
Go online and find the best price, have it shipped to a local dealer for the transfer/background check. $25 transfer fee and away you go.
You can go on Gunbroker.com, Gunauction.com, Gunsamerica, or others and do so now. My FFL dealer exchanges copies of his and the seller's FFL and the handgun is shipped to my FFL dealer. When it arrives I go to him and fill out the BATF form and he runs the proper checks. I pay him $30 and have my new handgun.
I do not recall that happening. The NRA was against the GCA68 as I recall.
GCA68 was directly aimed at the NRA because it cut off their revenue from ad sales. Mail order sales of guns was big ad revenue money for the NRA in 1967.
The GCA68 had unintended consequences. It drove the NRA to depend on memberships, and that drove it to become a political juggernaut.
The disarmists should be carefuly what they wish for.
I do remember an all-out media push for GCA68. I do not remember the NRA being part of it.
AMERICAN RIFLEMAN MAGAZINE, MARCH 1968 EDITION
WHERE THE NRA STANDS ON GUN LEGISLATION
97-year record shows positive approach to workable gun laws
By ALAN C. WEBBER
THE AMERICAN RIFLEMAN
“I think it is a terrible indictment of the National Rifle Association that they haven’t supported any legislation to try and control the misuse of rifles and pistols in this country.”
That flat assertion was made by Senator Robert Kennedy (N.Y.), Jan. 16 in addressing the New York State University law school in Buffalo.
Terming Kennedy’s accusation “a smear of a great American organization,” NRA Executive Vice President Franklin L. Orth pointed out that “The National Rifle Association has been in support of workable, enforceable gun control legislation since its very inception in 1871.”
A few days later, Orth seconded the request of President Lyndon Johnson, made Jan. 17 in his State of the Union message, for a curb on mail-order sales.
“The duty of Congress is clear,” Orth said, “it should act now to pass legislation that will keep undesirables, including criminals, drug addicts and persons adjudged mentally irresponsible or alcoholic, or juveniles from obtaining firearms through the mails.”
The NRA position, as stated by Orth, emphasizes that the NRA has consistently supported gun legislation which it feels would penalize misuse of guns without harassing law-abiding hunters, target shooters and collectors.
Here is the record over the years:
Item: The late Karl T. Frederick, an NRA president, served for years as special consultant with the Commissioners on Uniform State Laws to frame The Uniform Firearms Act of 1930.
Adopted by Alabama, Indiana, the District of Columbia, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, and Washington, the Act directly attacks the “mail order murder” to which President Johnson referred in his State of the Union Message. It specifically forbids delivery of pistols to convicts, drug addicts, habitual drunkards, incompetents, and minors under the age of 18. Other salient provisions of the Act require a license to carry a pistol concealed on one’s person or in a vehicle; require the purchaser of a pistol to give information about himself which is submitted by the seller to local police authorities; specify a 48-hour time lapse between application for purchase and delivery.
Item: The NRA supported The National Firearms Act of 1934 which taxes and requires registration of such firearms as machine guns, sawed-off rifles and sawed-off shotguns.
Item: The NRA supported The Federal Firearms Act of 1938, which regulates interstate and foreign commerce in firearms and pistol or revolver ammunition, and prohibits the movement in interstate or foreign commerce of firearms and ammunition between certain persons and under certain conditions.
More recently, the spate of articles on gun legislation has spread the erroneous impression that the NRA has always opposed Senator Thomas J. Dodd’s attempts to keep guns out of the hands of juveniles. This is simply untrue. The facts are these:
The NRA worked closely with the Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency, of which Senator Dodd was chairman, in its investigation into the relationship between juvenile crime and the availability of firearms.
The NRA supported the original “Dodd Bill” to amend the Federal Firearms Act in regard to handguns when it was introduced as S.1975 in August, 1963. Among its provisions was the requirement that a purchaser submit a notarized statement to the shipper that he was over 18 and not legally disqualified from possessing a handgun.
In January, 1965, with the continued support of the NRA, Senator Dodd introduced an amended version of his first bill, now designated 5.14 and expanded to cover rifles and shotguns as well as handguns.
The parting of the ways came only when Senator Dodd introduced still another bill (S.1592) in March, 1965, which drastically intensified his earlier bills. The NRA opposed S.1592 and subsequent bills introduced by the Connecticut Senator. If passed into law, S.1592 would, among other things, have ended all interstate shipments of firearms except to persons holding a Federal firearms license. It also would have prohibited even a Federal licensee from selling a pistol to anyone residing in another State.
NRA support of Federal gun legislation did not stop with the earlier Dodd bills. It currently backs several Senate and House bills which, through amendment, would put new teeth into the National and Federal Firearms Acts. The essential provisions which the NRA supports are contained in 2 Senate bills introduced by Senator Roman L. Hruska (Nebr.) and House bills introduced by Congressmen Cecil R. King (17th fist.-Calif.) and Robert L. F. Sikes (1st Dist.Fla.). These bills would:
1. Impose a mandatory penalty for the carrying or use of a firearm, transported in interstate or foreign commerce, during the commission of certain crimes.
2. Place “destructive devices” (bombs, mines, grenades, crew-served military ordnance) under Federal regulation.
3. Prohibit any licensed manufacturer or dealer from shipping any firearm to any person in any State in violation of the laws of that state.
4. Regulate the movement of handguns in interstate and foreign commerce by:
a. requiring a sworn statement, containing certain information, from the purchaser to the seller for the receipt of a handgun in interstate commerce;
b. providing for notification of local police of prospective sales;
c. requiring an additional 7-day waiting period by the seller after receipt of acknowledgement of notification to local police;
d. prescribing a minimum age of 21 for obtaining a license to sell firearms and increasing the license fees;
e. providing for written notification by manufacturer or dealer to carrier that a firearm is being shipped in interstate commerce;
f. increasing penalties for violation.
Through bulletins to its members, the NRA has often voiced approval and support of State and local ordinances designed to keep firearms out of the hands of undesirables. A bulletin of Feb. 20, 1964 notified Virginia members of the introduction in the Virginia House of Delegates of a bill requiring a 72-hour waiting period for purchase of a handgun. In the bulletin, which outlined the provisions of the bill, NRA Secretary Frank C. Daniel commented as follows:
“A number of States and local jurisdictions have a waiting period of varying length for the purchase of a concealable firearm; and, where intelligently and reasonably administered, it has not proved to be an undue burden on the shooter and sportsman. ... The bill from a technical point of view adequately protects citizens of good character from any arbitrary denial of their right to purchase a handgun. It should be judged on the basis of whether or not a waiting period for the purchase of a handgun is desirable for the State.”
The bill was killed in the House Feb. 25, 1964.
When bills were introduced in the Illinois legislature in February, 1965, to provide mandatory penalties for crimes committed while armed with a firearm, the NRA expressed its opinion to Illinois members in these terms:
NRA Secretary Daniel
“The purpose of these bills is to penalize the criminal misuse of firearms and weapons, and not the firearms themselves. This is a sound and reasonable basis for regulation and is aimed in the right direction—that of criminal conduct when armed. Senate Bill No. 351 and House Bill No. 472 are worthy of the support of the sports-men of the State of Illinois.”
The bills were passed by the Senate and House but were vetoed by Gov. Otto Kerner a few months later.
Many other instances of NRA support for worthwhile gun legislation could be quoted. But these suffice to show that Senator Kennedy’s “terrible indictment” of the NRA is groundless.
Sure, the NRA has supported a lot of gun legislation, but just as your post shows, they did not support GCA68.
Read it again.
There were only two provisions they didn’t like.
Hopefully health insurance is next.
“” “Im sure there are antis laying on the floor kicking and screaming or running down the hall, waving thier arms in the air screaming Oh crap, were all gona die!.””
Sooner rather than later, one hopes.
Around here, North Texas, my neighborhood shop asks $15 if you have a concealed carry permit.
But the greater significance of this would be if you could buy a handgun when traveling e.g., on vacation.
That's interesting; I never realized that.
I buy off gun broker all the time, long guns, but in MI I don’t think you can buy handguns online unless you have a CCW. That’s what I was told, but I guess it could be wrong.
It may be a state thing as the Federal law allows the sale as it is a standard transfer between FFLs.
Michigan is my home and I am trying to get my ducks in a row so I can come home in about two years. I have a place south of Cadillac by the Little Manistee River. I have a lot of hunting and fishing to catch up on but I hope they change some of those weird gun laws. The stupid "green cards" I had to get when I bought handguns (registration) needs to go. I hope I can just transfer my Virginia CHP for a card up there without all the extra expense that is required in Michigan. My sister just got her concealed card and she put out quite a bit of cash to get it, even using her DD Form 214.
You still have to go to the sheriff dept to get a purchase permit, but you don’t have to go back for that stupid ‘safety inspection’ after the purchase.
FFL Dealers in Oregon along the borders are popping champaign corks in joy. Buyers are going to stream across to avoid sales tax.
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.