C-Span Alert (Debate begins this morning @ 9:30am on S. 1805 & Assasult Weapons Ban Renewal)

[conservativefromGa]

Senate debate on the gun manufactures liability bill will begin at 9:30 this morning on C-Span2. Expect Feinstein to attach her Assault Weapons Ban renewal rider on it. Also McCain may attach a rider closing the so called "gun show loophole". This is it folks.

[RockChucker]

OK. I see the light.

I support the bill, with this amendment.

Of course, a AW ban or expansion kills it.

[No.6]

"BTW. It looks like for private owners, you are liable under civil proceedings if someone steals your gun and uses it in a crime because you didn't have it locked up."

At present it is possible for anyone to bring civil suit against you for this. That shouldn't be a surprise; you can bring civil suit against people for lots of things.

This provision does not *add* any new civil liability to us as firearms owners. What it does do is remove all possibility of liability for those who elect to store their firearms in a "secure gun storage or safety device." What does that mean?

Armed with the section 921(a)(34) I found the definition:

(34) The term ''secure gun storage or safety device'' means -
(A) a device that, when installed on a firearm, is designed to
prevent the firearm from being operated without first
deactivating the device;
(B) a device incorporated into the design of the firearm that
is designed to prevent the operation of the firearm by anyone not
having access to the device; or
(C) a safe, gun safe, gun case, lock box, or other device that
is designed to be or can be used to store a firearm and that is
designed to be unlocked only by means of a key, a combination, or
other similar means.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/18/parts/i/chapters/44/sections/section_921.html

That means that if you have your firearm in a safe of any kind, including the quick-release ones, that you will be rendered immune to liability if someone takes it. It does not mean only trigger locks.

Note that the original Boxer amendment 2620 did not have this provision, but the amendment of the amendment 2622 (which is what passed) does.

IMO unless there's a detail (in which case post source) this is a net gain for us, which explains the Republican vote on the matter.

[Dead Corpse]

Under this one, if someone steals your gun, drills out the lock, and uses it in a crime, unless you can PROVE you had the lock on it you are SCREWED.

[Dead Corpse]

Assuming, of course, that you can PROVE your gun was properly locked up according to government stnadards.

[OXENinFLA]

I had to read this for my self after I heard him say this.

Are we now using FICTISIOUS movies to base laws on?

PROTECTION OF LAWFUL COMMERCE IN ARMS ACT--MOTION TO PROCEED -- (Senate - February 25, 2004)

[Page: S1577] GPO's PDF

Mr. LAUTENBERG. I thank the Senator from Idaho.

One thing I know is that we often disagree, but I would never accuse him of these statements. He is an honorable man. We have our differences on things that we ought to be putting into law. But I would like, if I may, to correct my friend's impression because not only was there a phone which was answered but the now owner of the license is a good friend of the former owner.

If one looks at the pictures that we displayed, the weapon used was a pretty sizable piece of equipment. As I remember from what I saw on the film shown on television, there was evidence that this Lee Malvo was carrying a weapon out of that store. The camera saw it. Certainly it could have been negligence. It could have been reckless or maybe the gun was paid for by a friend, and with the wink of the eye, out it went. But to give this criminal credit for telling the truth is something that I--

[Dead Corpse]

People like Lautengoober wouldn't know an AR clone if you smacked 'im in the head with it.

[longtermmemmory]

if anyone is trapped in an office

don't forget http://www.c-span.org

[Dead Corpse]

Yep. Judd Gregg is nattering on about Sierra Leon (sp?) right now.

[looscnnn]

"As I remember from what I saw on the film shown on television,"

I think he was talking about the security tapes from Bullseye.

[No.6]

"Assuming, of course, that you can PROVE your gun was properly locked up according to government stnadards."

That's why if someone drilled out my bedside safe and took my firearm I'd be filing a report with the police. That little report is your immunization. (MI law requires me to file a report on any stolen firearm anyway within 24 hours).

[looscnnn]

SEC. 5. ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.

(a) UNLAWFUL ACTS.--Section 922(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking paragraphs (7) and (8) and inserting the following:

``(7) for any person to manufacture or import armor piercing ammunition, unless--

``(A) the manufacture of such ammunition is for the use of the United States, any department or agency of the United States, any State, or any department, agency, or political subdivision of a State;

``(B) the manufacture of such ammunition is for the purpose of exportation; or

``(C) the manufacture or importation of such ammunition is for the purpose of testing or experimentation and has been authorized by the Attorney General.

``(8) for any manufacturer or importer to sell or deliver armor piercing ammunition, unless such sale or delivery--

``(A) is for the use of the United States, any department or agency of the United States, any State, or any department, agency, or political subdivision of a State;

``(B) is for the purpose of exportation; or

``(C) is for the purpose of testing or experimentation and has been authorized by the Attorney General.''.

(b) PENALTIES.--Section 924(c) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``(5) Except to the extent that a greater minimum sentence is otherwise provided under this subsection, or by any other provision of law, any person who, during and in relation to any crime of violence or drug trafficking crime (including a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime that provides for an enhanced punishment if committed by the use of a deadly or dangerous weapon or device) for which the person may be prosecuted in a court of the United States, uses or carries armor piercing ammunition, or who, in furtherance of any such crime, possesses armor piercing ammunition, shall, in addition to the punishment provided for such crime of violence or drug trafficking crime or conviction under this section--

``(A) be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than 15 years;

``(B) if death results from the use of such ammunition--

``(i) if the killing is murder (as defined in section 1111), be punished by death or sentenced to a term of imprisonment for any term of years or for life; and

``(ii) if the killing is manslaughter (as defined in section 1112), be punished as provided in section 1112.''.

(c) STUDY AND REPORT.--

(1) STUDY.--The Attorney General shall conduct a study to determine whether a uniform standard for the uniform testing of projectiles against Body Armor is feasible.

(2) ISSUES TO BE STUDIED.--The study conducted under paragraph (1) shall include--

(A) variations in performance that are related to the length of the barrel of the handgun or centerfire rifle from which the projectile is fired; and

(B) the amount of powder used to propel the projectile.

(3) REPORT.--Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall submit a report containing the results of the study conducted under this subsection to--

(A) the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee of the Senate; and

(B) the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives.



SA 2626. Mr. FRIST (for himself and Mr. MCCONNELL) proposed an amendment to the bill S. 1805, to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages resulting from the misuse of their products by others; as follows:


At the end, add the following:

SEC. __. MAKING THE PROVISIONS OF THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 1965 PERMANENT.

(a) PERMANENCY OF PRECLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS.--Section 4(a)(8) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 1973b(a)(8)) is amended to read as follows:

``(8) The provisions of this section shall not expire.''.

(b) PERMANENCY OF BILINGUAL ELECTION REQUIREMENTS.--Section 203(b)(1) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 1973aa-1a(b)(1)) is amended by striking ``Before August 6, 2007, no covered State'' and insert ``No covered State''.

(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.--The amendments made by this section shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act.



Does not look good, especially in the study and report section: Variations of powder, barrel length, etc. Could ban guns of certain barrell lengths and handloading.

[DBrow]

``(II) at the time access was gained by the person not
so authorized, the handgun had been made inoperable by use
of a secure gun storage or safety device; and

I retract, if I may, my previous post. If you store in a safe or use a lock in good faith you are not liable.

[looscnnn]

"That's why if someone drilled out my bedside safe and took my firearm I'd be filing a report with the police. That little report is your immunization. (MI law requires me to file a report on any stolen firearm anyway within 24 hours). "

Problem is that if you are on vacation for a week and someone steals your gun & kills someone before you get back, you can be held liable because you did not file a report before crime happened.

[looscnnn]

"the handgun had been made inoperable by use
of a secure gun storage or safety device"

I know I am hashing bits here, but if you want to be technical a gun safe does not truely make the gun inoperable, just inaccessible.

[IGOTMINE]

It's on again.

Larry Craig is doing a HELLUVA job castigating the bottom feeders pushing these "junk lawsuits"

"I define junk lawsuits as predatory legislation looking for a convenient deep pocket to pay for someone else's criminal behaivior."

[Dead Corpse]

Or if you can't afford a gun safe, or the prosecutor pulls a fast one, or you are set up by someone who doesn't like you, or the judge is having a bad day.

No thanks. If your property is no longer in your control, you should not be held culpable. Period.

[cc2k]

Dead Corpse wrote:

---

Now THAT is a lie. My posts clearly state that the BOXER AMENDMENT needs to be removed before passage of this bill.

---

Well, there's really almost no way to do that within the rules and procedures in the Senate.

If you opposed this amendment, and you wanted to write/fax/call your Senator about it, the best time to do that was before the vote yesterday.

Now that it's in the S.1805 bill, your choices are pretty limited. You can ask your Senator to vote against final passage of S.1805 because it contains this amendment.

Your other choice is to wait before making any more contact with the Senate until after S.1805 as amended is passed, then contact the Republican leadership in the Senate and make it clear that you wish to see those provisions removed in the conference committee. Also, write your representatives in the House and make sure that this provision doesn't make its way into the House version.

As it is, the actual Boxer/Kohl amendment that passed isn't that objectionable, and if S.1805 with this amendment is the best we can get, I think it's good enough.

I'm more worried about some of the other amendments. The Frist amendment about the Mohamed/Malvo victims could be bad. It could open the door to judges totally gutting the law based on 14th amendment "equal protection" claims.

And of course, any renewal/extension/permanent enactment of the "Assault Weapons" Ban is unacceptable.

Dead Corpse wrote:

---

Under this one, if someone steals your gun, drills out the lock, and uses it in a crime, unless you can PROVE you had the lock on it you are SCREWED.

---

No, this pertains to civil actions. In a civil action, the plaintiff bears the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence standard. The plaintiff would have to have some evidence to prove that the gun was unlocked when it was stolen.

[OXENinFLA]

No, I think he's talking about the made for TV movie USA(TV) ran not to long ago.

I didn't watch it, but I'd doubt that the TV movie would show the actual surveillance footage.

[Dead Corpse]

If you opposed this amendment, and you wanted to write/fax/call your Senator about it, the best time to do that was before the vote yesterday.

I did. Much good it did me trying to get everyone I could reach in time to do the same. Cornyn voted against. The RINO Hutchinson voted for it.

The final vote isn't until Tuesday. Floor action could get this removed on a new vote. Put on enough pressure and they could bring it back up for consideration again.

You've got to understand, we have been getting nickle and dimed to death for decades. It HAS to stop while we have any firearms Rights LEFT. Once they are gone, they are going to rahter difficult to get back. On top of the firearms issue, this is blatant expansion of the Commerce Clause abuse that has screwed up our legal code so badly and allowed for near limitless expansion of Federal power.

In the end, this can't be good no matter how small a thing it may seem.

[looscnnn]

"Or if you can't afford a gun safe"

Unfortunately, this is the case for me at the present time.