Modest gun-control measure passes US lower house

[bubba23]

Jun 13, 2007, 20:55 GMT
Washington - Spurred by the Virginia Tech shootings, the US House of Representatives voted Wednesday to improve a national database meant to prevent criminals and the mentally ill from buying guns.

The measure - also meant to 'reduce delays for law-abiding gun purchasers' - passed the Democratic-led lower house on a voice vote with broad support from President George W Bush's Republicans. The administration's top health official welcomed the initiative.

Reflecting US states' primacy over gun control, the measure encourages them to provide the names of people who should be barred from buying handguns to the database kept by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

Action on gun control is notoriously difficult in the US because rules vary from state to state. But the April 16 shootings at the Blacksburg, Virginia, university, the deadliest spree in US history, shocked the nation.

Virginia Tech shooter Cho Seung-Hui, 23, killed 32 people after buying two handguns. He was not listed in the database, even though a Virginia judge had ruled in 2005 that Cho posed a danger to himself or others.

'As the Virginia Tech shooting reminded us, there is an urgent national need to improve the background check system,' House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, said in a statement.

A government report ordered by Bush after the shootings faulted states Wednesday for failing to provide up-to-date information for federal background checks. Accurate data is 'essential' to keeping guns from falling into the wrong hands, the report said.

'We do need to do a better job in being able to have complete and accurate information into the instant check,' US health secretary Mike Leavitt said.
The Bush administration views the House measure as 'a very important set of goals, and we're broadly supportive of it,' Leavitt told reporters.

'Obviously, there's a long ways to go before the bill would reach his desk,' he added.

External Link: http://news.monstersandcritics.com/u...US_lower_house

[KeithPA]

hmmm I guess I'll figure out whether this is good or bad once I figure out what an in state FFL backround check has to do with interstate commerce Oh wait, it doesn't

[ChamberedRound]

FWIW, this bill in it's current form doesn't seem to be a gun-control bill. I've skimmed through the text of the bill, and in this case (although not always) I agree with what the NRA has to say about it. See here:

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=3097
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactShe...=219&issue=018

Also see Wayne LaPierre's blog entry here:
http://www.nranews.com/blogarticle.aspx?blogPostId=247

[D-FENS]

Originally Posted by ChamberedRound

FWIW, this bill in it's current form doesn't seem to be a gun-control bill.

First of all, it's our tax dollars that will "encourage" states to report to the FedGov. Then how much more outside of the "encouragement" to implement and maintain a system to track the information. We don't need more FedGov involvement in the State's processes. Sure, this may not be an AWB or something but it's still a concession and it's a "small-time" concession. All this will do is encourage the Congress to push harder and more when another random shooting happens.

"Give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile."

So States will need to report things to the FedGov. Why? What's next? Why not report people who have AIDS?

This IS gun control and it's a small step in a direction we don't want to go. Don't let the NRA lobby tell you what to think. Soon, the NRA will (and has) made all sorts of concessions. If you let them tell you when to rise up, when to speak up and when to sit down and STFU, you've lost your voice and won't be getting it back any time soon.

[XD45]

I dont see how this is going to work. is this going to be people with mental health arrests? or if you go see a shrink as soon as you walk out the door are they gonna pick up the phone and start calling and telling people? you cant keep a database on what people are thinking, this just seems pointless to me. I dont believe I heard the VA tech shooter got off on crime charges because of his mental capacity so this wouldnt have stopped him from getting a gun. I'm all for keeping guns out of peoples hands who shouldnt have them, as in the long run they will cause more problems for us who do it legally... but come on the laws need to make sense

[WhiteFeather]

here is another article one the same subject

http://www.reuters.com/article/domes...29926420070612

House set to pass post-Virginia Tech gun bill
Tue Jun 12, 2007 6:17PM EDT
By Thomas Ferraro

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Spurred by the deadliest shooting rampage in modern U.S. history, the Democratic-led House of Representatives is expected to approve a bill to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, lawmakers said on Tuesday.

The legislation -- which the House is to take up on Wednesday -- was drafted in consultation with the 4-million-member National Rifle Association, the country's biggest gun rights group, after a deranged gunman killed 32 others and himself in April at Virginia Tech University.

The NRA generally fights legislation that restricts gun ownership.

Negotiators reached agreement in recent days on the measure, which would be the first major gun control bill enacted into law since 1994. It would provide financial incentives for states to provide mental health and criminal records to a data base used for federal background checks on gun buyers.

"It's going to pass," said Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, a New York Democrat and a chief sponsor of the bill, echoing the sentiment of many on Capitol Hill. "It's a good deal, and it's going to save lives."

Wayne LaPierre, the NRA's executive vice president, agreed -- provided lawmakers do not try to attach a lot of other gun control amendments to it.

"We've always been vigilant about protecting the (gun) rights of law-abiding citizens, but we have been equally vigilant about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and mental defectives and other people who shouldn't have them," LaPierre said in a telephone interview.

'PREDICT IT WILL PASS'

"If this bill is kept in its present form, I predict it will pass the House and Senate and be signed into law" by President George W. Bush, LaPierre said.

"But if they turn it into a gun-control wish list, we will withdraw our support," LaPierre said, adding he believes such a sweeping measure would be rejected.

"I think chances are very good this will pass," said a Senate Republican aide said.

McCarthy and Democratic Rep. John Dingell of Michigan, who is a former NRA board member, began conferring with the NRA shortly after the Virginia Tech shootings.

The two lawmakers unveiled details of the legislation at a closed-door meeting of their Democratic colleagues on Tuesday.

Congress has long been reluctant to tackle the politically explosive issue of gun control. Lawmakers acted after it was disclosed that a judge earlier had deemed the Virginia Tech gunman as dangerous, but the information never reached a background check system for gun buyers.

The 1968 Gun Control Act prohibits anyone adjudicated to be "a mental defective" from possessing a gun. It also bars eight other groups, including felons, fugitives, drug addicts and wife abusers.

But because of state privacy laws and fiscal restraints, most states have failed to fully report such records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

The effort has draw bipartisan support but some mental health groups warn it would discourage the mentally ill from seeking help and fail to take into consideration that people can be cured.

[WhiteFeather]

GOA has a different view on this issuse

http://www.gunowners.org/a061207.htm

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

While the entire nation was focused on the immigration bill the past couple of weeks, the gremlins on Capitol Hill were finalizing a "compromise" on gun control legislation.

The good news is that your tremendous outpouring of opposition to Rep. Carolyn McCarthy's Brady enhancement (HR 297) has sent a strong signal to Capitol Hill that this bill is unacceptable as written. The bad news is that there are some seemingly pro-gun Congressmen who are driven to get anything passed, just so they can say they did something about Virginia Tech.

So what's going on?

On Saturday, The Washington Post reported [ see http://tinyurl.com/23cgqn ] that both the Democrats and the NRA leadership had reached a "deal" on legislation similar to the McCarthy bill. This "deal" involves a new bill that has been introduced by Rep. McCarthy (HR 2640) -- a bill that has not yet been posted on the Thomas legislative service. While all the legislative particulars are not yet available, one thing is clear: it is, as reported by the Post, a deal with Democrats. And it involves legislation introduced by the most anti-gun member of the House, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY).

The Post says that, under the new language, the federal government would pay (that is, spend taxpayers' money) to help the states send more names of individual Americans to the FBI for inclusion in the background check system. If a state fails to do this, then the feds could cut various law enforcement grants to that state. In essence, this is a restatement of what the original McCarthy bill does. The states will be bribed (again, with your money) to send more names, many of them innocent gun owners, to the FBI in West Virginia -- and perhaps lots of other personal information on you as well.

Under the terms of this compromise, the Post says, "individuals with minor infractions in their pasts could petition their states to have their names removed from the federal database, and about 83,000 military veterans, put into the system by the Department of Veterans Affairs in 2000 for alleged mental health reasons, would have a chance to clean their records."

Oh really? The Brady law already contains a procedure for cleaning up records. But it hasn't worked for the 83,000 veterans that are currently prohibited from buying guns. Gun Owners of America is aware of many people who have tried to invoke this procedure in the Brady Law, only to get the run around -- and a form letter -- from the FBI. The simple truth is that the FBI and the BATFE think the 83,000 veterans, and many other law-abiding Americans, should be in the NICS system.

After all, that's what federal regulations decree. Unless these regs are changed, Congress can create as many redundant procedures for cleaning up these records as it wants, but the bottom line is, there is nothing that will force the FBI to scrub gun owners' name from the NICS system.

Not only that, there is a Schumer amendment in federal law which prevents the BATFE from restoring the rights of individuals who are barred from purchasing firearms. If that amendment is not repealed, then it doesn't matter if your state stops sending your name for inclusion in the FBI's NICS system... you are still going to be a disqualified purchaser when you try to buy a gun.

Moreover, will gun owners who are currently being denied the ability to purchase firearms -- such as the military veterans who have suffered from post-traumatic stress -- be recompensed in any way for their efforts to "clean their records"? They will, no doubt, have to spend thousands of dollars going to a shrink for a positive recommendation, for hiring lawyers to take their case to court, etc.

And this is not to mention the fact that this procedure turns our whole legal system on its head. Americans are presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty. But these brave souls, who risked their lives defending our country, were denied the right to bear arms because of a mental illness "loophole" in the law. Their names were added to the prohibited purchasers' list in West Virginia without any due process, without any trial by jury... no, their names were just added by executive fiat. They were unilaterally, and unconstitutionally, added into the NICS system by the Clinton administration. And now the burden of proof is ON THEM to prove their innocence. Isn't that backwards?

One wonders if these military veterans will be any more successful in getting back their gun rights than the gun owners in New Orleans who tried to get back their firearms which were confiscated in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. (Gun owners in the Big Easy have found it very difficult to prove their case and get their guns back, even though the courts have ruled that the police acted improperly in confiscating their firearms.) But isn't that the problem when honest people are thrust into the position of PROVING their innocence to the government, rather than vice-versa.

The fact is, current federal law -- combined with BATFE's interpretations of that law -- will make it very unlikely that any court will restore the Second Amendment rights of those 83,000 veterans.

Finally, the Post article also says the "federal government would be permanently barred from charging gun buyers or sellers a fee for their background checks." Well, that sounds good, but GOA already won this battle in 1998 when we drafted and pushed the Smith amendment into law.

GOA had to overcome opposition from certain pro-gun groups to help Senator Bob Smith (R-NH) introduce and push his language as an amendment to an appropriations bill. The Smith amendment barred the FBI from taxing gun buyers, something which the Clinton administration was considering doing.

GOA won the vote in the Senate with a veto-proof majority and the Smith amendment has been law ever since. But now we're being told that we need to swallow McCarthy's poison pill so that the Smith amendment -- which is currently law -- will stay on the books. Huh?!

ACTION: Gun Owners of America is the only national pro-gun organization opposing the McCarthy bill, so it is imperative that you contact your representative immediately. Please take action today and spread the word about HR 2640! We need all the help we can get.

You can visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center to send your Representative a pre-written e-mail message. You can call your Representative at 202-225-3121, or you can call your Representative toll-free at 1-877-762-8762.

[Emptymag]

The effort has draw bipartisan support but some mental health groups warn it would discourage the mentally ill from seeking help and fail to take into consideration that people can be cured.

Funny, I was thinking about that.
What about those who are falsely accused of being "nuts" or someone who voluntarily seeks help during a difficult time in their life?

I don't know... the leftists seem to welcome rapists and murderers back into society after they've been "cured" by prison, seems they should be equally accepting and supportive of someone who seeks help (which they push) and improves their lives because of it.

I question how much "good" will come of this.
I'm sure more jobs will be created as a result of the additional time/paperwork that will be involved. That's a good thing, right?
Oh yeah, maybe not, we'll ALL be paying for those "jobs".

[D-FENS]

The only dissenting vote in the short House debate on the bill was voiced by GOP presidential aspirant Ron Paul of Texas. He described the bill as "a flagrantly unconstitutional expansion of restriction on the exercise of the right to bear arms protected under the 2nd Amendment.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19209310

At least he's wise enough to see through this bull.

[LastManOut]

Would the criminals and mental patients also loose their right to free speech, or right to privacy in their papers and person, how about freedom to worship as they choose or to publish a book? Maybe a database for them too?