Support VSSA Advertisers

Friday, April 5, 2013

Friday Was Full of Good Information on the Failings of "Universal Background Checks"

First, this from the Heritage Foundation:
Addington, head of Heritage’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, lays out some of the dangers in Reid’s proposal:
And this one from Dave Kopel on National Review Online that explains how Chuck Schumer's "Fix Gun Checks Act" is based on "model language" that the Bloomberg gun-ban lobby is pushing all over the country:
To see how the Bloomberg bill makes felons of people who do not sell guns, consider a woman who buys a rifle when she is 25 years old. She keeps the rifle her entire life. Yet over her lifetime, she — like most gun owners — engages in dozens of firearms “transfers.” She brings the unloaded rifle to a friend’s house, for instance, because the friend is thinking of buying a gun and wants to learn more about guns. The friend handles the rifle for a few minutes before handing it back. Another time, the woman lends the gun to her niece, who takes it on a camping trip for the weekend.

While the woman is out of town on a business trip for two weeks, she gives the gun to her husband or her sister. If the woman lives on a farm, she allows all her relatives to take the rifle into the fields for pest and predator control — and sometimes, when friends are visiting, she takes them to a safe place on the farm where they spend an hour or two target shooting, passing her gun back and forth. At other times, she and her friends go target shooting in open spaces of land owned by the National Forest Service or the Bureau of Land Management.

Or perhaps the woman is in a same-sex civil union, and she allows her partner to take her gun to a target range one afternoon. Another time, she allows her cousin to borrow the gun for an afternoon of target shooting. If the woman is in the Army Reserve and she is called up for an overseas deployment, she gives the gun to her sister for temporary safekeeping.

One time, she learns that her neighbor is being threatened by an abusive ex-boyfriend, and she lets this woman borrow a gun for several days until she can buy her own gun. And if the woman becomes a firearms-safety instructor, she regularly teaches classes at office parks, in school buildings at nights and on weekends, at gun stores, and so on. Following the standard curriculum of gun-safety classes (such as NRA safety courses), the woman will bring some unloaded guns to the classroom, and under her supervision, students will learn the first steps in how to handle the guns, including how to load and unload them (using dummy ammunition). During the class, the firearms will be “transferred” dozens of times, since students must practice how to hand a gun to someone else safely. As a Boy Scout den mother or 4-H leader, the woman may also transfer her gun to young people dozens of times while instructing them in gun safety.

Under S. 649, every one of the above activities would be a federal felony, subject to precisely the same punishment a person would receive if he had knowingly sold a firearm to a convicted violent felon. S. 649, like other Bloomberg-model bills, has a few exceptions to the ban on transfers, but none of them apply to the situations described above.
And finally, talk show host Mark Levin spent a great deal of time on his program in each hour talking about the background check issue and the 2nd Amendment in general.  It is worth the hour and fifty two minutes to listen to the podcast.

1 comment:

oatka said...

IMO, While the above arguments are beyond dispute, IMO the real elephant in the living room is that once UBC is passed, all law-abiding citizens must then have to get the government's permission to buy/transfer a firearm.

Now some all some future fuhrer (he may be here now) has to do is declare a National Emergency and shut down the UBC computers for "public safety". Viola! An instant ban on any gun transfer (except among the criminals).

During the Los Angeles riots, all gun sales were banned, and look how well that one turned out.

On a state level, the problem is recognized: Arizona, Arkansas and North Dakota have already banned their Governors from restricting gun ownership during a declared emergency and a federal judge in North Carolina has just struck down their power to impose a ban on firearms and ammunition outside the home during a declared emergency.

Why the heck are we yelling bloody murder about this aspect of UBC?