Press Release found here….
“Protection Act would require states and the federal government to send all necessary records on criminals and the violently mentally ill to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The bill extends the existing background check system to gun shows and online sales.
The bill explicitly bans the federal government from creating a national firearms registry, and imposes serious criminal penalties (a felony with up to 15 years in prison) on any person who misuses or illegally retains firearms records.”
- We don’t want criminals or violently mentally ill having firearm access.
- Penalties for misuse or illegal retention of firearm records. This is good, because it has been done and has been abused. Stiff penalties would be an improvement.
- NICS records could be used to form a de facto registry, it’s been done.
- Are their assurances for removal of name from NICS if mental illness is no longer a factor. The loss of a loved one, a divorce, etc, could lead one to be prescribed Zoloft and other meds. That should not cause one to permanently lose their rights. Nor should military returning from wars lose rights due to PTSD.
“TITLE ONE: GETTING ALL THE NAMES OF PROHIBITED PURCHASERS INTO THE BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM
Summary of Title I: This section improves background checks for firearms by strengthening the instant check system.
- Encourage states to provide all their available records to NICS by restricting federal funds to states who do not comply.
- Allow dealers to voluntarily use the NICS database to run background checks on their prospective employees.
- Clarifies that submissions of mental health records into the NICS system are not prohibited by federal privacy laws (HIPAA).
- Provides a legal process for a veteran to contest his/her placement in NICS when there is no basis for barring the right to own a firearm.”
- We want such criminal and violent mental health records reported. And this has not been happening. Which is a problem…
- Allowing dealers to background check prospective employees I do not have a problem with.
- Provides veterans for ability to contest NICS placement, very much support.
- Encourage does not mean enforce mandate. Which means individuals like the Aurora shooter will keep falling through the cracks and be used to attack law abiding gun rights.
- Veterans should not be the only citizens to have a right to contest NICS placement.
“Summary of Title II: This section of the bill requires background checks for sales at gun shows and online while securing certain aspects of 2nd Amendment rights for law abiding citizens.
– Closes the gun show and other loopholes while exempting temporary transfers and transfers between family members.
BAD: Senator Toomey why are you using anti-gun terminology. There is no gun show loophole. Every Federally licensed dealer must process background checks. And most dealers at gun shows are licensed and do so. A few folk walk around selling/trading an old rifle or two they’ve inherited from the death of a family member. But that’s usually it.
– Fixes interstate travel laws for sportsmen who transport their firearms across state lines in a responsible manner. The term “transport” includes staying in temporary lodging overnight, stopping for food, buying fuel, vehicle maintenance, and medical treatment.
GOOD: This is a major problem. The fact that merely traveling, stopping in your travels during a long journey for food or rest, or a vehicle malfunction can lead to an arrest in strict gun control states is unacceptable and has been abused. If any gun laws are passed, this is a necessity.
– Protects sellers from lawsuits if the weapon cleared through the expanded background checks and is subsequently used in a crime. This is the same treatment gun dealers receive now.
GOOD: I presume this expands the protection to dealers, to sellers IF they use the NICS system. I actually think this proposition, combined with “FREE” NICS checks for private sellers would eliminate most of the problem.
– Allows dealers to complete transactions at gun shows that take place in a state for which they are not a resident.
– Permits interstate handgun sales from dealers.
GOOD: If we’re having universal background checks ramrodded down our throats. Then we should be able to purchase both long guns and hand guns in ANY state, so long as we go through a NICS check and the firearm is legal in our state of residency.
– Requires that if a background check at a gun show does not result in a definitive response from NICS within 48 hours, the sale may proceed. After four years, when the NICS improvements are completed, the background check would clear in 24 hours. Current law is three business days.
– Requires the FBI to give priority to finalizing background checks at gun shows over checks at store front dealerships.
GOOD: We had an entire gun show be cancelled because the Pennsylvania PICS system went down for maintenance for 7 days. Imagine if the DMV upgraded its computers, so you couldn’t buy a car for a week. People, especially car dealers, would say that was insane.
– Authorizes use of a state concealed carry permit instead of a background check when purchasing a firearm from a dealer.
GOOD: I’ve long advocated that this should be a valid alternative to background checks.
– Allows active military to buy firearms in their home states.
MIXED: Anyone should be able to buy a firearm from any state if they go through the NICS process.
– Family transfers and some private sales (friends, neighbors, other individuals) are exempt from background checks”
COMPROMISE: This is a total compromise. But would we be willing to give up some private sales so long as we can retain friends & family, in exchange for the other protections. Maybe…but ONLY if we got all those other improvements.
“TITLE THREE: NATIONAL COMMISSION ON MASS VIOLENCE
Summary of Title III: : This section of the bill creates a commission to study the causes of mass violence in the United States, looking at all aspects of the problem, including guns, school safety, mental health, and violent media or video games.
The Commission would consist of six experts appointed by the Senate Majority Leader and six experts appointed by the Speaker of the House. They would be required to submit an interim report in three months and a completed report in six months.”
TOLERABLE: Theater for political charades, not likely to accomplish anything nor come out in our favor. But not really binding in any way. So I can tolerate it.
“WHAT THE BILL WILL NOT DO
The bill will not take away anyone’s guns.
The bill will not ban any type of firearm.
The bill will not ban or restrict the use of any kind of bullet or any size clip or magazine.
The bill will not create a national registry; in fact, it specifically makes it illegal to establish any such registry.
The bill will not, in any way at all, infringe upon the Constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens.”
IT BETTER NOT: If we gained all the above protections, improvements and expansions while retaining the right to sell to family, friends, and neighbors. Then I might be willing to compromise. I’d still like to see a few additions. But if WE DO NOT get those things, then no way in hell. I’m sick and tired of one way compromises.
I’d love to see a National Reciprocity Stamp, that one could get on their carry permits that would mandate recognition between the states much as a driver’s license is recognized.
In the end, the above, if true, would not be so bad a compromise. But I believe Senator Toomey royally blew it by his silence. When we know you’re dealing with the enemy, and you give us no input or guidance, that’s not good. His office should have said that Senator Toomey has been meeting with his fellow senators addressing a number of places where current laws fail the “common sense” test and endeavoring to protect law abiding citizens when for example, their vehicle breaks down while traveling through a gun unfriendly state. And pointing out how poor wording could easily turn law abiding gun owners into felons. Senator Toomey has addressed a number of his fellow Senators reminding them that a compromise is a two way streak.
If he said something to that affect, I think there’d have been far less backlash.