Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Senate kills gun control background check amendment

  1. Apr 17, 2013 #1
    Senate rejects background check amendment 54-46
    http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/17/politics/senate-guns-vote/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

    I'm having difficulty finding the actual bill. Does anyone have a link? I'm sick of reading summaries and opinions without reading the actual bill. I tried searching on senate.gov but it's quite frankly a mess.


    I welcome your opinions on the bill and what was wrong/right with it.

    Please keep discussion on the bill. Any hostility or rudeness will be dealt with.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 17, 2013 #2

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

  4. Apr 17, 2013 #3

    nsaspook

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    The FEDS need to stop trying to enact one size fits all uniform guns laws, lets keep this a state issue. Alaska and Montana need different gun laws than the over populated NE states. This bill needed to fail because it was pushed for all the wrong reasons and targets law-abiding citizens with useless restrictions that a criminal with an IQ of 35 could get around.

    SEC. 122. FIREARMS TRANSFERS.

     
  5. Apr 17, 2013 #4

    jedishrfu

    Staff: Mentor

    What made sick was Senator Rand Paul calling the Newtown parents props. It's like when you're a victim of violent crime you can never speak out because someone will say you're still hurting and you're not thinking rationally. So when should these parents speak out against this atrocity?

    President Obama's speech today was direct and to the point and polls have shown that 90% of Americans want this fixed. He said the bill was a compromise and bipartisan. It simply wanted the background check loopholes to be closed that makes it more difficult to circumvent the checks much as locking your car makes it less likely to be broken into. Less guns means less accidents, less violence and less death.

    So why didn't the voting reflect the polls even closely?
     
  6. Apr 17, 2013 #5
    Yeah, that does look like a rather large loophole.
     
  7. Apr 18, 2013 #6

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    The only thing that makes sense is a federal law. having different state laws makes no sense. The NRA lobby wins again.

    Read more: NRA Opposed To Background Checks - The Phony Dance Of Gun Control - Esquire http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/The_Phony_Dance_Of_Gun_Control#ixzz2Qn0Eck6W
     
  8. Apr 18, 2013 #7

    nsaspook

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Of course different state laws makes common sense where commerce is involved. This bill is not really about crime, it regulates commerce (the sale of goods) with a massive centralized system of record checking under the thin veneer of public safety.
    I think legislation at the federal level is needed for true criminal activity that crosses state lines but creating a nation-wide crime of a friend selling a gun to a friend is wasteful of precious federal dollars on an unenforceable law on private transactions.

    "universal background checks" are a sham, an illusion, and a placebo.
     
  9. Apr 18, 2013 #8
    It's helpful if you could explain this opinion.
     
  10. Apr 18, 2013 #9

    turbo

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    It would probably be very expensive to set up an "instant check" system, but it would better (IMO) than allowing each state to set their own standards. Someone who might be ineligible to purchase a firearm in their own state could easily travel to a nearby state and buy one there.

    BTW, I have processed hundreds of checks over the years, and they are rarely "instant". The existing system is inadequate, resulting in delays of (often) days before a firearm can be legally transferred to the buyer. The delays are a drain on legitimate commerce, since potential buyers often back out, even if they are dealing with you at a gun show. It is easier for them to transact their purchases with private (non-FFL) sellers and take the gun home. If they play by the rules, and they are unable to buy, they often walk away.

    Another wrinkle is that "private" sellers could be tracked by the volume of their sales, and be forced to pay for FFL status or face criminal penalties. I haven't thought this facet through well enough to come up with a decent work-around (if there is one), but it's worth considering in light of the proposed universal background-check law. The proposal appears to be DOA, but it will be back, in my opinion.
     
  11. Apr 18, 2013 #10

    nsaspook

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    "Universal background checks" controls the transfer of guns between (99%) law abiding citizens, it does almost nothing to stop gun crime in most cases where knowing the current criminal status of the person receiving the gun is important.

    Our current system:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...4c4fa6e-a2ed-11e2-82bc-511538ae90a4_blog.html

    https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/239272.pdf
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2013
  12. Apr 18, 2013 #11

    jim hardy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    You already can't buy a handgun(legally) outside of your home state.....

    IMHO we should make it easier for joe average to follow the law, not harder.
    Maybe drivers license should indicate whether one is on FBI's "Bad Dude list".

    I could digress but won't.
     
  13. Apr 18, 2013 #12

    OCR

    User Avatar

  14. Apr 18, 2013 #13

    turbo

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    This is inaccurate. I ran a firearms division for an auction company, and people from out-of-state routinely attended those auctions and bought handguns. The trick is to have a Federal Firearms License holder willing to accept the shipment of your handgun(s) and transfer them to you in your own state. Happens all the time. Firearms laws are sieves in the US. There are ways around almost every provision. Form 4473 is a joke.
     
  15. Apr 18, 2013 #14

    jim hardy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    Well then, you have been checked through FBI's NICS system by a FFL holder in your own state and the transfer to you occurred in your home state.
    So to call my statement 'inaccurate' pushes at the margins of truth..

    I'll wager you didn't turn over handguns to out of state buyers. You shipped them to FFL holders in their home state.

    So I amend my statement "You already can't buy a handgun(legally) outside of your home state without a FBI NICS check.

    The 4473 form is like a lock on a door - it doesn't stop the bad dudes.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Senate kills gun control background check amendment
  1. Gun Control? (Replies: 69)

Loading...