Responsible Transfer of Firearms Act - another irresponsible gun control bill

[Cylinder]

Sen Tim Kaine (D, VA) is introducing another gun control bill targeting private transfers. The bill would amend 18 USC §922(d), which currently reads:

It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person [is prohibited from possessing firearms].​

...to read:

Unless the transferor has taken reasonable steps to determine that the recipient is not legally barred from possessing firearms or ammunition under paragraphs, it shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to a person who [is prohibited from possessing firearms].​

Brackets are mine.

What this bill fails to do is to define what steps are reasonable or allow for the most reasonable step (and the current federal gold standard for reasonable steps) - an NICS check -- to be taken. Of course, we can always count on administrative regulation to fill those voids. Joy!

Applying the reasonable person test here is asinine. Federal law cannot dictate every manner in which a person can gain knowledge of another's prohibition of firearm possession. His mom could have told the seller he was a felon, the seller could have read it in a newspaper, etc... There's few practical ways of even proving a person's knowledge. Sure, I visited him in prison but I thought that conviction was overturned. You let him out early, didn't you?

That dimension of uncertainty just doesn't exist when one is talking about a fairly standard set of affirmative steps a person would have to take to verify a person's eligibility. Police have an established procedure. Licensed dealers have an established procedure.

It's almost like the people raising money and gaining power complaining about these issues aren't serious about doing anything about them.

 

[smartcooky]

I don't know a lot about US gun control, but it seems obvious to me that such a law should actually NAME those "reasonable steps"

 

[arthwollipot]

No - there's a reason that Lawyerese works like that, and that's because those reasonable steps may differ in different jurisdictions, may be dependent on circumstances, and may change over time. This is why defining "reasonable steps" is left to the lower-level regulators, which can move and adjust more quickly than legislation can.

(IANAL)

 

[smartcooky]

Oh, I thought 18 USC §922(d) was a Federal Bill, and therefore applies in all jurisdictions within the 50 States.

 

[Cylinder]

Oh, I thought 18 USC §922(d) was a Federal Bill, and therefore applies in all jurisdictions within the 50 States.

Yea, the United States Code applies to all US territories.

 

[Ranb]

It does seem rather vague. I wonder why Kaine doesn't write a bill that allows a person to access NICS for a sale. Or to do so via an FFL free of charge?

Ranb

 

[Noztradamus]

It does seem rather vague. I wonder why Kaine doesn't write a bill that allows a person to access NICS for a sale. Or to do so via an FFL free of charge?

Ranb

cos that might help rather than obstruct.

 

[The Fool]

why not make it compulsory for all weapon sales to be through a regulated weapons dealer.

or would that make it way too difficult to unload that firearm to that guy you met at the game.

 

[Cylinder]

why not make it compulsory for all weapon sales to be through a regulated weapons dealer.

or would that make it way too difficult to unload that firearm to that guy you met at the game.

As opposed to the guy who just walked into the gun store?

 

[Mudcat]

As opposed to the guy who just walked into the gun store?

The guy who just walked into the gun store is probably currently capable of buying guns legally since most people know that gun stores, at the very least, must do a background check (as far as I know).

Which is no comfort if that person than turns around and kills their wife with it or whatever.

 

[PhantomWolf]

In this day and age I don't know why they don't just maintain a nationwide database of those that can't legally obtain firearms, and have it so that it is accessible via a cell phone. Enter the person's full name, DOB, and SSN, and up pops a YES or a NO.

 

[fuelair]

In this day and age I don't know why they don't just maintain a nationwide database of those that can't legally obtain firearms, and have it so that it is accessible via a cell phone. Enter the person's full name, DOB, and SSN, and up pops a YES or a NO.

Works great unless the person is an illegal alien, off the grid, has real good looking paper with a name not on the list, etc.

 

[fuelair]

Note, not against such as long as it is error free on the nobody who should be able to purchase accidentally showing up on the list.

 

[arthwollipot]

Oh, I thought 18 USC §922(d) was a Federal Bill, and therefore applies in all jurisdictions within the 50 States.

That in no way negates what I said.

 

[PhantomWolf]

an illegal alien

No SSN then.

off the grid

How does being off the grid affect your ability to own a gun? If you mean because they can't access it, this is why I suggested cell phone accessible. At the worst, go to the local library and access it there.

has real good looking paper with a name not on the list

which is different to using said bit of paper at a federally licenced shop?

All you're doing is claiming that since no system is absolutely perfect there should be absolutely no system at all.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Any registry of permitted gun owners freaks out the NRA (a powerful NGO with massive lobby power) because that could, in an imaginary future, become a list of people with guns for the g'vt to confiscate.

My counter suggestion of this is to give the NRA the data and let them administer the database. Of course I've been flamed by "that one guy" who opines in most of these gun threads for suggesting it. Apparently it's racist.

 

[LTC8K6]

Yeah, just make the basic NICS DB public for firearms transfers.

The seller can then check on the buyer, and get a piece of paper clearing the transfer.

You can use the full name and just the last four of the SSN to check.

 

[autumn1971]

Any registry of permitted gun owners freaks out the NRA (a powerful NGO with massive lobby power) because that could, in an imaginary future, become a list of people with guns for the g'vt to confiscate.

My counter suggestion of this is to give the NRA the data and let them administer the database. Of course I've been flamed by "that one guy" who opines in most of these gun threads for suggesting it. Apparently it's racist.

Not calling NRA racist, but they are a lobbying group, and are not subject to the same transparency laws as a government body. I would imagine a lot of folks would object to the ACLU administering such a database, based upon similar grounds.

 

[PhantomWolf]

Any registry of permitted gun owners freaks out the NRA (a powerful NGO with massive lobby power) because that could, in an imaginary future, become a list of people with guns for the g'vt to confiscate.

My counter suggestion of this is to give the NRA the data and let them administer the database. Of course I've been flamed by "that one guy" who opines in most of these gun threads for suggesting it. Apparently it's racist.

A publicly accessible registry of permitted gun owners would be all but impossible to do, as you'd have to add every eligible person to the database and keep that maintained. It'd be like having a Fly List that has everyone allowed to fly on it. This is why the suggestion is to have a registry of Not Allowed to Own Guns persons. It's easier to maintain, can't be used for confiscation purposes or to figure out if someone owns a gun, but allows for keeping the guns out of the wrong hands.

 

[arthwollipot]

A publicly accessible registry of permitted gun owners would be all but impossible to do, as you'd have to add every eligible person to the database and keep that maintained. It'd be like having a Fly List that has everyone allowed to fly on it. This is why the suggestion is to have a registry of Not Allowed to Own Guns persons. It's easier to maintain, can't be used for confiscation purposes or to figure out if someone owns a gun, but allows for keeping the guns out of the wrong hands.

For a registry of eligible gun owners to work, you have to restrict the number of people who are eligible, and not just hand out a gun to anyone who wants one.

You have to approach it from a position of restricting by default, and only allowing them for good reason. Which for some reason is basically Communism.