Posted on 04/10/2013 7:39:43 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
A bipartisan group of senators has struck a deal to expand gun background checks to all commercial sales — whether at gun shows, via the Internet or in any circumstance involving paid advertising, according to Senate aides familiar with the talks.
The proposed agreement would be more stringent than current law, which requires checks only when purchases are made through a licensed dealer, but less than originally sought by President Obama and congressional Democrats, who were seeking to expand background checks to nearly every kind of sale.
The agreement should secure enough bipartisan support for the Senate to proceed to debate on an overarching bill that would expand background checks, make gun trafficking a federal crime for the first time and bolster federal funding for school security plans. Senate Democratic leaders have said they will permit senators of both parties to introduce amendments to the measure.
The deal on background checks was struck by Sens. Joe Manchin III (D-W. Va.), Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Patrick Toomey (R-Pa.), who will introduce the proposal as an amendment to the current gun bill under consideration in the Senate, aides said.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
How bout IGNORE IT. They can make all the phony laws they want. Then try to enforce them!
That may sound like a good idea, but that would be last resort IMHO. Far better to have some distance between bad law and last resort.
Toomey’s a TRAITOR. He’s let the snakes in the back door.
WASHINGTON, D.C. —
A Senate aide and a lobbyist say two senators have struck a bipartisan deal on expanding background checks to more firearms purchases. The agreement could build support for President Barack Obama’s drive to curb gun violence.
http://www.sj-r.com/breaking/x1431006472/Dem-GOP-U-S-senators-reach-gun-background-check-deal
Remember Obmma Care? The same was said about that.
All they need to do is roll 16 Repubs. They can do that.
RE: The agreement could build support for President Barack Obama’s drive to curb gun violence.
That’s the argument... the more important question is this -— WILL IT?
Andrew Malcolm
Political News & Commentary
Obama continues his traveling gun show charade
By Andrew Malcolm
Posted 04/09/2013 09:06 AM ET
President Obama was on again Monday about gun laws, not enforcing the existing ones. But getting some new ones, any new ones so he can claim some kind of political victory after all of the promises and vows he made in the emotional days last December.
But Obama wasn’t working on the senators from his own party who will actually determine the fate of these measures. That would be political leadership.
No, Obama was out of town again, up in Hartford for a photo op with Connecticut legislators and some Newtown families. Of course, it wasn’t so much about everyone coming together to agree on new safeguards to protect children anymore, as he talked way back in December. No, as usual, this latest campaign rally was all about him. The usual suspects yelled their love. Obama mentioned himself 40 times.
Read More At Investor’s Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/politics-andrew-malcolm/040913-651148-obama-senate-background-check-legislation.htm#ixzz2Q4iTMKJp
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook
D.C. forgot to add ... No Criminals will be emboldened by this legislation.
April 10, 2013 4:00 A.M.
A Tax on Freedom
Punitive taxes on guns and ammunition will punish only the law-abiding.
By Charles C. W. Cooke
‘I’m not asking to take away people’s guns,” Maryland legislator Jon Cardin nervously told Politico this week. “I’m just saying that for an activity that is relatively dangerous, obviously, people who participate in that activity should pay the full costs of that activity.” America, witness a guileful new tactic of the gun-control movement.
Cardin (a nephew of U.S. Senator Ben Cardin, a Maryland Democrat), who wishes “to tax bullets at 50 percent,” was outlining an increasingly popular progressive idea: If you can’t regulate something, why not tax it in lieu? Similar proposals — by which states impose specific levies on purchases of firearms and assorted peripheral items — are now being considered in California, Nevada, and New Jersey; and in Chicago,
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/345160/tax-freedom-charles-c-w-cooke
F’ing RINOs.
Ok, so where do YOU draw the line?
Just how, and where, can you buy a gun over the internet? You can’t.
You can see an advertisement for a gun, contact the seller, and come to terms. You then buy it from the seller, legally, without a background check.
This is legal in many states, and legal under federal law as long as the transaction is within the state.
You do not have to be a licensed dealer to buy a firearm. If you are not a licensed firearm dealer (also called an FFL Holder), you must make arrangements with an FFL Holder in your state to receive the item and transfer it to you. Virtually anyone who is involved in the sale or distribution of firearms is an FFL Holder, including gun shops. You must make arrangements with your FFL Holder before placing a bid on an item. By contacting the FFL Holder before bidding, the buyer can verify that all state and federal laws will be observed. For most firearms, the buyer must be able to pass a background check.
So technically you can buy it, but an FFL is still involved, so the checks and balances are there.
Something off topic .... am curious about your date attachment. Did something clue you in ... two days before?
America betrayed by bipartisan treasonous senators one act at a time.
Yeh I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop. All internet sales and also gun show sales already require a background check. I just bought a weapon on the internet and it had to be shipped to my FFL dealer and I had to have the background check. There must be a little paragraph in this bill somewhere that they are not telling us about.
I was in the business of reading the tea leaves...
Statement from the National Rifle Association Regarding Toomey-Manchin Background Check Proposal
Posted on April 10, 2013
Fairfax, Va. - Expanding background checks at gun shows will not prevent the next shooting, will not solve violent crime and will not keep our kids safe in schools. While the overwhelming rejection of President Obama and Mayor Bloomberg’s “universal” background check agenda is a positive development, we have a broken mental health system that is not going to be fixed with more background checks at gun shows. The sad truth is that no background check would have prevented the tragedies in Newtown, Aurora or Tucson. We need a serious and meaningful solution that addresses crime in cities like Chicago, addresses mental health deficiencies, while at the same time protecting the rights of those of us who are not a danger to anyone. President Obama should be as committed to dealing with the gang problem that is tormenting honest people in his hometown as he is to blaming law-abiding gun owners for the acts of psychopathic murderers.
If it truly does nothing more than extend background checks to commercial sales (meaning sales by businesses which do advertising), then this is really doing nothing at all.
I’m surprised there are that many commercial sales that aren’t already done by licensed gun dealers.
This would mean private (owner) sales would not be covered, which was the problematic part of the democrat proposal.
Of course, the devil is in the details.
NEW RULE:
When you give your kid your prized Ruger 10-22, drag him down to the local FFL and make sure he’s got a clean record.
The America of my youth is dead.
If Boehner were a Conservative, he wouldn’t allow any bill to be brought before the House.
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.