| StrawMan=Corporation |
11-16-2008 05:10 PM |
HR 2666 Full Blown Firearm Licensing and Registration
I did a search and did not find anything with the term HR 2666.
While it looks like this bill is dead in the water this thread if nothing else shows that they are still gunning for us.
WE will be a lot easier to take down if we are unarmed.
My thought for the so called reps that introduce Unconstitutional legislation.
Quote:
My solution for this problem (i.e., legislators submitting or backing stupid and blatantly unconstitutional bills, not random acts of violence) is to treat politicians as the organized crime group they actually are. The best model for our purposes would be the Yakuza. Whenever any legislator introduces, co-authors or votes for any piece of legislation that's later determined to be unconstitutional, they get to apologize to their oyabun (that's you and me) in the traditional manner of yubitsume, cutting of the last digit of a finger, starting with the pinkie for the first offense, then working their way up for subsequent ones. Even if it didn't solve the problem, it would at least provide some entertainment, while identifying serial offenders
|
Quote:
Congress is petty much done until January. In the meanwhile, vote for GovTrack.us, your favorite open-government website, in the Open Web Awards.
Mashable Open Web Awards
GovTrack.us
Congress > Legislation > 2007-2008 (110th Congress)
H.R. 2666: Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2007
To provide for the implementation of a system of licensing for purchasers of certain firearms and for a record of sale system for those firearms, and for other purposes.
Personalize GovTrack by selecting trackers. Tracking H.R. 2666 adds relevant events as they happen to your personal Tracked Events page.
You are not logged in to an account.
Log In | Sign Up (for free) Why sign up?When you sign up, your trackers are stored permanently and you can access them from any computer. Otherwise they are stored in a "cookie" on your computer and could get erased. When you are signed in, your personal tracked events RSS feed will update with your tracker settings, and you can get email updates on tracked events sent to you automatically.
Make a widget for this tracker to display on your web page.
Put the status of this bill on your own web page using a widget.
Overview
Bill Text: Summary | Full TextStatus: http://www.govtrack.us/media/checkmark.gifIntroducedJun 11, 2007 http://www.govtrack.us/media/box.gifReported by Committee- http://www.govtrack.us/media/box.gifVoted on in House- http://www.govtrack.us/media/box.gifVoted on in Senate- http://www.govtrack.us/media/box.gifSigned by President- This bill is in the first step in the legislative process. Introduced bills go first to committees that deliberate, investigate, and revise them before they go to general debate. The majority of bills never make it out of committee. Keep in mind that sometimes the text of one bill is incorporated into another bill, and in those cases the original bill, as it would appear here, would seem to be abandoned. [Last Updated: Nov 6, 2008]
Last Action:Jul 16, 2007: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. Question & Answer
http://www.govtrack.us/media/questions.gif Have a question about this bill? Submit a short fact-oriented question and see if it will be answered by other visitors. (If you have a general question about how Congress works, see this page instead.)
Enter your question. Tips: Be clear and precise. No abbreviations. Don't ask about the status of this bill or when it will be voted on (other users are not likely to know). Don't ask a loaded question or for individual advice: Your question will be rejected.
After submitting your question it will be reviewed, and if approved will appear here.
Articles About This Bill No articles are associated with this bill. You can suggest an article for inclusion here.
Paste the web address (URL) of an article from a well-established publication below.
Only thoughtful news articles from established publications will be accepted. All submissions are approved by a moderator before appearing on this page.
To cite this information, we recommend the following:
GovTrack.us. H.R. 2666--110th Congress (2007): Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2007, GovTrack.us (database of federal legislation) <http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-2666> (accessed Nov 16, 2008)
Because the U.S. Congress posts most legislative information online one legislative day after events occur, GovTrack is usually one legislative day behind.
|
Quote:
HR 2666 Full Blown Firearm Licensing and Registration Here is a link to the whole bill if you want to read it unresponded: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-2666
Here is something that is very eye opening that another person broke down each piece and responded to it with the flaws of the bill, a long read but well worth it!
Contact your state representative and senators, to inform them that you do not support this bill. Feel free to link to this page, on forums, webpages, in email, as needed, to get the word out. You may cut and paste sections, or this in it�s entirety, as needed, to use.
You can locate your local senators and representatives by going to the following website: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/findyourreps.xpd and you can also find this bill in its entirety, as well as related bills in the house, how politicians vote, attended/missed voting sessions, etc�
Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(aa) Firearm Licensing Requirement-
`(1) IN GENERAL- It shall be unlawful for any person other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to possess a qualifying firearm on or after the applicable date, unless that person has been issued a firearm license�
AND
SEC. 103. ISSUANCE OF LICENSE. Section (c) Form of License- A firearm license issued under this section shall be in the form of a tamper-resistant card, and shall include--
(1) the photograph of the licensed individual submitted with the application;
(2) the address of the licensed individual;
(3) the date of birth of the licensed individual;
(4) a license number, unique to each licensed individual;
(5) the expiration date of the license, which shall be the date that is 5 years after the initial anniversary of the date of birth of the licensed individual following the date on which the license is issued (or in the case of a license renewal, following the date on which the license is renewed under section 104);
(6) the signature of the licensed individual provided on the application, or a facsimile of the application; and
(7) centered at the top of the license, capitalized, and in boldface type, the following:
`FIREARM LICENSE--NOT VALID FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE'.
RESPONSE:
1. Qualifying Firearm is defined within this measure as �(i) any handgun; or (ii) any semiautomatic firearm that can accept any detachable ammunition feeding device.� Yet repeatedly, throughout this measure, I counted a total of 23 times that �qualifying firearm(s) was used, and 98 times that simply �firearm(s) was used. This leaves much interpretation open, for advocates of this bill, and subsequently legal interpretation at a later time and date, to apply this bill to any or all firearms, and not specifically �qualifying firearms� as defined within this measure.
2. Why is it that the supporters/sponsors of this bill, predominantly democrat, favor the creation of a �license� for this purpose, yet are so adamantly opposed to a voter identification card or use of any other requirement to that end, when said voter identification would be used to prevent fraud, and enable the precincts to ensure all voters would know where to vote, and that their vote would not be discounted, if they voted at the wrong poll? Creating a license for something they oppose (gun ownership) is ok, but not for something that would actually be of use, to aid in remedying many of the publicized issues with ballots in the last decade?
3. Where does the licensing stop? A television or radio license, as there is in England? A license to own refrigerators, air conditioners, or other Freon containing items? An internet or computer license, a fast food license, so you have to be certified healthy to eat at fast food restaurants?? ANY of these items could also be claimed to exist indistinguishably in interstate commerce, and have some negative impact on society, ability to be used in a crime, or other use of mal-intent.
4. The end of the above section says `FIREARM LICENSE--NOT VALID FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE'. So to what means is this not a valid form of identification? Picture, address, license number? Simply putting this disclaimer on here, to prevent opponents from claiming this is a federally sponsored identification program, does not work. Social Security cards only have ID number on it, no other information, and yet that can be used to attain credit, employment, and it is easily forgeable, yet there is no effort to control that. In this case however, it seems a very stringent control, a leap from nothing, to total and absolute authority.
102 (a) In General- In order to be issued a firearm license under this title, an individual shall submit to the Attorney General (in accordance with the regulations promulgated under subsection (b)) an application, which shall include�
(1/2/3/4/5) omitted�
(6) a certification by the applicant that the applicant will keep any firearm owned by the applicant safely stored and out of the possession of persons who have not attained 18 years of age;
RESPONSE:
1. This is overly restrictive and ambiguous, as one, it states �any firearm� and not �qualifying firearm, as stated above.
2. This prevents parents, family, friends, from EVER placing a firearm legally into the hands of their child or minor relative, to teach them safety, or participate as I do with my teenagers, in shooting range target shooting.
102(a)(7) a certificate attesting to the completion at the time of application of a written firearms examination, which shall test the knowledge and ability of the applicant regarding--
(A/B/C) omitted�
(D) the legal responsibilities of firearms owners, including Federal, State, and local laws relating to requirements for the possession and storage of firearms, and relating to reporting requirements with respect to firearms; and
RESPONSE:
1. This measure inherently supersedes state and local laws by definition. Why insert a caveat into the measure, that even refers to state laws, when further in the measure, under article 601, it states that:
(b) Rule of Interpretation- A provision of State law is not inconsistent with this Act or an amendment made by this Act if the provision imposes a regulation or prohibition of greater scope or a penalty of greater severity than a corresponding prohibition or penalty imposed by this Act or an amendment made by this Act..
This is redundant, and yet it leaves room for interpretation, or a chance to fail to provide a firearm license for a qualifying firearm, if someone is aware of these requirements, but is not aware of state or local law, be they more conservative and therefore within the preview of this measure, or be they less restrictive, therefore not recognized by this measure, and yet still able to be qualifying grounds to prevent issuance of a license. It creates an opportunity for states to attempt to overcomplicate legislation, wording, superseded or cancelled laws, or other means, to justify the refusal to issue a permit to applicants.
102 (c)(2) Fees: FEE AMOUNT- The amount of the fee collected under this subsection shall be not less than the amount determined by the Attorney General to be necessary to ensure that the total amount of all fees collected under this subsection during a fiscal year is sufficient to cover the costs of carrying out this title during that fiscal year, except that such amount shall not exceed $25.
RESPONSE:
1. The wording exists to allow the Attorney General to charge fees necessary, and limits those fees, but no wording exists to limit that fee increase at his/her discretion, at a later date, possibly to an amount making firearm licensing cost prohibitive for all but the elite wealthy among us.
2. Wording was provided however, giving authority to the Attorney General, to amend or change wording in this measure, which would prevent congress from having to vote on this change, but rather, allow the Attorney General to control it instead, thereby giving him a possible chance to raise the fee so high at a later time, that no one can afford. Wording as follows:
SEC. 402. REGULATIONS.
(a) In General- The Attorney General shall issue regulations governing the licensing of possessors of qualifying firearms and the recorded sale of qualifying firearms, consistent with this Act and the amendments made by this Act, as the Attorney General determines to be reasonably necessary to reduce or prevent deaths or injuries resulting from qualifying firearms, and to assist law enforcement in the apprehension of owners or users of qualifying firearms used in criminal activity.
(b) Maximum Interval Between Issuance of Proposed and Final Regulation- Not later than 120 days after the date on which the Attorney General issues a proposed regulation under subsection (a) with respect to a matter, the Attorney General shall issue a final regulation with respect to the matter.
Any matter of changing of these regulations, should have to pass the house and congress, as an amendment, as the bill is currently proposing to do to many sections of CFR�s and existing laws/statutes, rather than change it now, and leave any further change open to a single, unopposed, opinion, outside the purview of checks and balances.
SEC. 301. UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECK REQUIREMENT.
Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by sections 101 and 201 of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(cc) Universal Background Check Requirement-
`(1) REQUIREMENT- Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for any person other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to sell, deliver, or otherwise transfer a firearm to any person other than such a licensee, unless the transfer is processed through a licensed dealer in accordance with subsection (t).
`(2) EXCEPTION- Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the infrequent transfer of a firearm by gift, bequest, intestate succession or other means by an individual to a parent, child, grandparent, or grandchild of the individual, or to any loan of a firearm for any lawful purpose for not more than 30 days between persons who are personally known to each other.'.
RESPONSE: The exception under 301(2) above, itemizes approved family members, but the list is far too limiting. Many families buy firearms as gifts, for brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, aunts, uncles, etc� There should be no limit on family, and even friends of family. It allows you to loan a gun for 30 days between someone who is �personally known� yet you cannot give a gift of a firearm under this regulation, to anyone but the parent/grandparent/child/grandchild. Further, you cannot give a firearm or allow to even handle or possess one, if the person is under 18, which almost exhaustively eliminates child/grandchild from that list, except for middle aged or senior adults. The 30 day limit of a firearm loan seems arbitrary, and some justification should be provided for specific limits that are attempted to be legislated, rather than the approach of �this sounds like a good number�. And finally, yet again, this does not address the issue of �qualifying firearm� but simply uses the catch all �firearm� meaning this applies to every firearm and not the ones that are attempted to be used for justification of this legislation.
SEC. 303. FAILURE TO REPORT LOSS OR THEFT OF FIREARM.
Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by sections 101, 201, 301, and 302 of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(ee) Failure To Report Loss or Theft of Firearm- It shall be unlawful for any person who owns a qualifying firearm to fail to report the loss or theft of the firearm to the Attorney General within 72 hours after the loss or theft is discovered.'.
RESPONSE: No method of �reporting� is described. This creates a crime of administration, should a report be made, and the Attorney Generals office lose the report or documentation, either by deletion, misfiling, computer error, or any other foreseeable glitch that commonly plagues many government, public and private sector departments. No allowance is made for dispute of claims, resolution of conflict, grace periods due to family, work, personal, or other mediating circumstances. 72 hours is vague and random. Does it mean 72 hours absolute, or 72 hours as in �3 business days�? Does it exclude weekends and holidays? It does not define discovery by who? The licensee? A family member?
SEC. 304. FAILURE TO PROVIDE NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS.
Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by sections 101, 201, 301, 302, and 303 of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(ff) Failure To Provide Notice of Change of Address- It shall be unlawful for any individual to whom a firearm license has been issued under title I of Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2007 to fail to report to the Attorney General a change in the address of that individual within 60 days of that change of address.'.
RESPONSE: While constitutionally, freedom to travel is not described (it was included under the articles of confederation) it is an inherent and understood right and personal freedom that would be impinged upon, but requiring a tracking of gun owners that was not imposed upon non-gun owners. This measure requires a 5 year renewal of the permit/license, with a new photo to be submitted for a current and up to date likeness, and if passed, that should be the constraint on updating any out of date information such as address. As written, this measure makes is a crime to forget to send a letter, or for the letter to not be deliverable, and possibly lost in the mail due to the RECENT CHANGE OF ADDRESS without the licensee knowing, until they get denied under the provisions of this measure, for not complying with it and possibly charged with a crime as well.
SEC. 305. CHILD ACCESS PREVENTION.
Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by sections 101, 201, 301, 302, 303, and 304 of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(gg) Child Access Prevention-
`(1) DEFINITION OF CHILD- In this subsection, the term `child' means an individual who has not attained the age of 18 years.
`(2) PROHIBITION AND PENALTIES- Except as provided in paragraph (3), it shall be unlawful for any person to keep a loaded firearm, or an unloaded firearm and ammunition for the firearm, any 1 of which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, within any premises that is under the custody or control of that person, if--
`(A) that person--
`(i) knows, or recklessly disregards the risk, that a child is capable of gaining access to the firearm; and
`(ii) either--
`(I) knows, or recklessly disregards the risk, that a child will use the firearm to cause the death of, or serious bodily injury (as defined in section 1365 of this title) to, the child or any other person; or
`(II) knows, or reasonably should know, that possession of the firearm by a child is unlawful under Federal or State law; and
`(B) a child uses the firearm and the use of that firearm causes the death of, or serious bodily injury to, the child or any other person.
`(3) EXCEPTIONS- Paragraph (2) shall not apply if--
`(A) at the time the child obtained access, the firearm was secured with a secure gun storage or safety device;
`(B) the person is a peace officer, a member of the Armed Forces, or a member of the National Guard, and the child obtains the firearm during, or incidental to, the performance of the official duties of the person in that capacity;
`(C) the child uses the firearm in a lawful act of self-defense or defense of 1 or more other persons; or
`(D) the person has no reasonable expectation, based on objective facts and circumstances, that a child is likely to be present on the premises on which the firearm is kept.'.
RESPONSE:
1. First, to �know or reasonably should know� allows prosecution to apply this without the existence of any negligence or intent on the licensee. Second, courts do not allow testimony or evidence as to what someone should know, or supposed state of mind, because you cannot know what is in the mind of the person, and yet under this article, you �should have known� is enough to prosecute and convict.
2. If the child is capable of gaining access to a firearm, it�s a crime, unless its in a safe, (per exception under 3a) but the qualifier is added under exception 3c that the child can use it in self defense or in the defense of others (so this measure proposes that a gun is safe when locked up, but a child may still gain access to it for defense, but if the child gains access for other than defense, the licensee is still guilty of a crime). Basically, there exists an expectation that a child may gain access and justifiably so, but if the justification does not exist, the licensee and not the child (person under 1http://www.lwrifles.com/forum/images.../icon_cool.gif is not responsible for their actions.
SEC. 402. REGULATIONS.
(a) In General- The Attorney General shall issue regulations governing the licensing of possessors of qualifying firearms and the recorded sale of qualifying firearms, consistent with this Act and the amendments made by this Act, as the Attorney General determines to be reasonably necessary to reduce or prevent deaths or injuries resulting from qualifying firearms, and to assist law enforcement in the apprehension of owners or users of qualifying firearms used in criminal activity.
(b) Maximum Interval Between Issuance of Proposed and Final Regulation- Not later than 120 days after the date on which the Attorney General issues a proposed regulation under subsection (a) with respect to a matter, the Attorney General shall issue a final regulation with respect to the matter.
RESPONSE: This statement give the Attorney General the power to suspend gun ownership if he deems it �reasonably necessary� to reduce or prevent deaths. He can refuse or revoke license, suspend all �firearm� sales, not simply �qualifying firearms� or even redefine �qualifying firearms, to include any and all guns he/she so sees fit. The Attorney General issues proposed and final regulations, so no check or balance exists, no purview of the courts, no congressional or legislative oversight, NOTHING. This article is the true teeth of this measure, to enforce a liberal agenda of revoking all gun ownership. The existence of this article within this measure is indicative of the true intent behind this measure and on this section alone, should be the grounds for revoking, denying, striking down, voting against, and otherwise removing this measure in its current or any future form, from law, as it is a blatant attempt at the circumvention of constitutional rights. If no one elected branch of government (legislative, executive, judicial) can subvert constitutional rights, how can one appointed official be presumed to be able to make that decision?
SEC. 404. ORDERS.
The Attorney General may issue an order prohibiting the sale or transfer of any firearm that the Attorney General finds has been transferred or distributed in violation of this Act, an amendment made by this Act, or a regulation issued under this Act.
RESPONSE: This measure provides no means of identifying firearms which fall under jurisdiction of interstate commerce, and which ones are intrastate commerce and therefore exempted. It does not allow for firearms, by serial number, to be exempted or included under this. Further, it fails to define at which point a firearm becomes an interstate commerce item. For example, is a firearm considered an interstate commerce item due to being shipped across state lines, after final assembly and testing of the firearm, or is it under this definition, pre-assembled, due to different parts of the firearm being assembled in different states, so therefore preassembly, its already a qualifying firearm under this measure? How far can they go? What if a firearm company manufactures all parts of a firearm in a given state, assembles it, and distributes it only within that state, to exempt it from this measure, could it then be interpreted that the raw materials coming from another state now qualify it under this measure? This section is vague, ambiguous, and leaves far too much leeway in interpretation and application of his measure. And AGAIN it says ANY FIREARM rather than �qualifying firearm�.
SEC. 601. EFFECT ON STATE LAW.
(a) In General- This Act and the amendments made by this Act may not be construed to preempt any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision of that State, or prevent a State or political subdivision of that State from enacting any provision of law regulating or prohibiting conduct with respect to firearms, except to the extent that the provision of law is inconsistent with any provision of this Act or an amendment made by this Act, and then only to the extent of the inconsistency.
(b) Rule of Interpretation- A provision of State law is not inconsistent with this Act or an amendment made by this Act if the provision imposes a regulation or prohibition of greater scope or a penalty of greater severity than a corresponding prohibition or penalty imposed by this Act or an amendment made by this Act.
RESPONSE: Section (a) above, is extremely redundant. It basically says that this law does not supersede or affect state law, except for the fact that it supersedes and excepts state law, and then this measure takes precedence. It gives the Federal Government power and authority over states, without allowing state legislature and voting state citizens, a chance to accept or reject this measure.
As a citizen, this entire measure is appalling, and it reeks of governmental control, constitutional rights being suspended, and a slap in the face of self-government practices everywhere. I do not need to be told what is best for me. The government is the least qualified body to make this determination. As demonstrated by the responses above, this measure is vague, ambiguous, and leaves a dangerous amount of leeway in interpretation and implementation, with even more room left to expand the scope of this measure at a later date, as seen fit by the authors, sponsors, and the reckless majority that manages to pass it into law, at the house and senate level.
|
|
