National Gun-Carry Reciprocity Bill Moves to Mark Up in the House

[motorcarman]

I guess the bill was passed INTACT with the fix NICS.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nate-from-dems-and-gun-control-advocates.html

 

[oldag]

Will die in the Senate for lack of 8 Dems to cross over.

 

[Southpaw]

I guess the bill was passed INTACT with the fix NICS.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nate-from-dems-and-gun-control-advocates.html

 

[Southpaw]

The NRA's response to Rep. Massie:

In a recent Facebook Post, Congressman Thomas Massie (KY-4) included several inaccurate statements about H.R. 4477, the Fix-NICS bill. Below are some facts to set the record straight:

CLAIM: “The bill will also advance former President Obama’s agenda of pressuring every branch of the administration (such as the Veteran’s Administration) to submit thousands of more names to the NICS background check database to deny gun purchases.”

FACT: The bill requires that federal agencies submit the names of anyone who is already prohibited by law from possessing a firearm to the NICS background check database. This differs from former President Obama’s efforts, in which he attempted to administratively create new categories of individuals who were prohibited from possessing a firearm. H.R. 4477, by contrast, is aimed squarely at individuals like the perpetrator of the recent murders in Texas, who should have been reported to NICS because of his disqualifying criminal history.

CLAIM: “The bill is being rammed through, without a hearing, in a very nontransparent process, and it will be passed by attaching it to the popular concealed carry reciprocity bill which already has enough votes to pass on its own.”

FACT: The bill went through a very thorough and public markup session of its own. And like the concealed carry reciprocity bill, the Fix NICS bill would also have enough votes to pass on its own.

CLAIM: “It spends over half a billion dollars to collect more names to include in a list of people who will never be allowed to own a firearm.”

FACT: The bill incentivizes states to transmit the records of individuals who, under current law, are already prohibited from possessing a firearm. It does not create new categories of restriction.

CLAIM: “It compels administrative agencies, not just courts, to adjudicate your second amendment rights.”

FACT: Since 1994, administrative agencies have been required to report individuals who are prohibited under current law from possessing a firearm to NICS. Fix-NICS merely adds additional layers of transparency and accountability to the process, as a well as a new 60-day deadline for the government to resolve claims of records that have been erroneously included in NICS.

 

[AustinN4]

If all of that is true it doesn't sound so bad. I see no problem in making sure people that are already prohibited under current law are reported. What am I missing, if anything?

 

[karlac]

If all of that is true it doesn't sound so bad. I see no problem in making sure people that are already prohibited under current law are reported. What am I missing, if anything?

That criminals will not be effected in the least?

 

[avvidclif]

My 2 cents. By and large most criminals are not stupid. If the current gun laws on the books were being rigidly enforced many would change how they operate to avoid guaranteed time. Heard that from the "pro's" too many times. But then again maybe we have a new breed of criminal as my info is over 30 yrs old.

 

[AustinN4]

That criminals will not be effected in the least?

While true, my comment was on the reporting. I missed nothing about criminals not being affected.

 

[Low_Speed]

What if a feller from Arizona goes to California?

Unlicensed carry being legal back home and such.

Arizona doesn’t give out a license at all? If Texas would go Constitutional Carry I would get a LTC anyway just for travel reasons.

Also, what does states like Arizona do about background checks? Here if you have a CHL it LTC they don’t do the background check when you purchase a gun because you have a license.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Low_Speed]

Couple of issues here:

1. You would still have to comply with the state's laws, just like you do with traffic laws, but at least they could've keep you from carrying something.

Question: Going by your reply a person from a state with no magazine limit would need to get a 10 round limit in states like California or New York that had a round limit?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Shady]

If you think anything the anti gun nuts like Finestine agree to is not bad you better take a closer look.

If all of that is true it doesn't sound so bad. I see no problem in making sure people that are already prohibited under current law are reported. What am I missing, if anything?

 

[easy rider]

The thing I don't like is that we already have laws where the shooter in Sutherland shouldn't have passed a background check, another piece of paper means squat. The Fix NICS bill is like adding a little oil to a machine that's already broke. It's a feel good law and feel good laws often means citizens will end up losing some freedom somewhere.

 

[NavyVet1959]

NFA needs to go away. When that happens I might start to believe the gov has some support for the 2A.

Agreed... And since I cast and reload all my ammo, I don't even particularly have a desire to own a gun that shoots the rounds faster than I can reload the ammo.

 

[AustinN4]

If you think anything the anti gun nuts like Finestine agree to is not bad you better take a closer look.

I was responding to the NRA statement. Is the NRA statement not accurare? If so, which part. If the NRA statement is accurate, what part is bad?

 

[roadkill]

Arizona doesn’t give out a license at all? If Texas would go Constitutional Carry I would get a LTC anyway just for travel reasons.

Also, what does states like Arizona do about background checks? Here if you have a CHL it LTC they don’t do the background check when you purchase a gun because you have a license.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

AZ has a license just for reciprocity but isn’t required for AZ.

 

[busykngt]

GOA’s position is, if you get a speeding ticket from some state while on vacation and fail to pay it, you technically become a fugitive from justice (assuming they issue a bench warrant for you). That’s why GOA has begun to refer to the ‘fix NICS’ bill as the ‘traffic ticket gun control’ bill. And they [GOA] raise some other, even more valid concerns like the cost you will have to bare if your name gets put “on the list” erroneously due to some foul up.

 

[AustinN4]

GOA’s position is, if you get a speeding ticket from some state while on vacation and fail to pay it, you technically become a fugitive from justice (assuming they issue a bench warrant for you). That’s why GOA has begun to refer to the ‘fix NICS’ bill as the ‘traffic ticket gun control’ bill. And they [GOA] raise some other, even more valid concerns like the cost you will have to bare if your name gets put “on the list” erroneously due to some foul up.

How does that square with the NRA statement?

 

[busykngt]

GOA sent an email out this morning asking that everyone contact their senators asking them to put their support behind S.446 bill. This is the Senate version of the reciprocity bill WITHOUT the “fix NICS” portion of the law.

 

[busykngt]

How does that square with the NRA statement?

Not sure BUT I trust GOA more in these matters than the NRA (and I’m a Life Member of both organizations).

 

[JeepFiend]

Personally, I'm not so sure the GOA is right on that one though. The Form 4473 defines fugitive from justice as anyone who has fled from a State to avoid prosecution for a felony or misdemeanor. I know most, if not all, traffic citations in Texas are considered class C misdemeanors, but every other state I've been in classifies them as infractions, unless it's a serious traffic offense. Granted, without clarification, I think it's worthy of concern, but I kind of get the impression the GOA is using that exception as fear mongering to garner support. Just my $0.02.