Universal Background Checks - negotiations are stalled

[JLawson]

FTA:

The centerpiece of President Obama’s gun violence agenda is in peril amid a deadlock among Senate negotiators over how to implement and enforce a proposal requiring background checks for private gun sales.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/286163-gun-talks-hit-a-snag-in-senate

We've got to keep the pressure on... no matter where you live, please contact the 'UBC Gang of Four'.  If you think your emails and voicemails are being ignored, then send a fax.  As the article says, time for these negotiations is running out and our constant pressure can make a difference.

Tom Coburn (R-OK)
Fax 202-224-6008
Pho 202-224-5754
http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contactsenatorcoburn?p=ContactForm

Mark Kirk (R-IL)
Fax 202-228-4611
Pho 202-224-2854
http://www.kirk.senate.gov/?p=comment_on_legislation

Joe Manchin (D-WV)
Fax 202-228-0002
Pho 202-224-3954
http://www.manchin.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact-form

Charles Schumer (D-NY)
Fax 202-228-3027
Pho 202-224-6542
http://www.schumer.senate.gov/Contact/contact_chuck.cfm

Let's wear out their fax machines... it may be easy to ignore an email but they can't ignore hundreds or thousands of faxes pouring out of their machines!

[alfsauve]

Do away with all NICS and with 4473 forms.

Now where did you want to compromise? I'll take one or the other ...for now.

[1Buckshot]

Done!

[JLawson]

Here's some good news...

Kirk and Manchin are not backing the legislation Schumer will offer in the Judiciary Committee Thursday.

“We are committed to continuing to work in a bipartisan effort with Sens. Schumer, Coburn and others in order to find a commonsense solution for enhanced background checks, however, Sen. Schumer’s current proposal is one we cannot support as it stands today,” Kirk and Manchin said in a statement Wednesday evening. “Our goal is to pass a bill that will close loopholes in the current background check process in a way that does not burden law-abiding citizens.”

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/286693-schumer-moves-ahead-with-background-check-bill-as-bipartisan-talks-stall

To all who contacted the 'UBC Gang of Four' - feel proud that your voice played a role in this outcome.

[vincewarde]

There is no need to retain a database of transfers in order to require background checks on all transfers.  Here in California we had a law requiring long gun transfers to go through a dealer for decades with no state registration or database.  We should not allow them to get away with establishing registration while calling it something else in order to pass it.

California does show very clearly where this will lead.  Starting January 1st, we will have long gun registration here (handguns have been registered at time of transfer since 1923) - plus at least some of any number of new laws designed to make owning a gun as close to impossible as possible.

Right now, our hopes are basically limited to a veto of the worst bills by Gov. Brown (whom I would call "mildly pro-gun" - his record is decidedly mixed) AND finding at least 3 Dems who then will defect an refuse to override Brown's veto.  After that, it's off to the courts.......

America, learn the lesson well: These people are NEVER satisfied.  They will take every opportunity to pass more restrictive laws until you have no gun rights left.

[Sponsor]

[Solus]

Here is a workable alternative to NICS

"NICS" vs. "BIDS"
FBI Agents vs. Family gun stores
Big Brother vs. Business Owners

Does the public want background safety checks ("BIDS")
or fascist gun-owner lists ("NICS," the current system)?

"BIDS" is cheaper.
Works better.
No Government Registration Lists.



http://pagenine.typepad.com/page_nine/2013/02/background-checks-vs-gun-owner-lists.html

[tombogan03884]

How about neither like the Constitution intended ?

[alfsauve]

Here is a workable alternative to NICS

"NICS" vs. "BIDS"

NOPE.  NADA.  NEGATORY.  Just plain, NO!


Dump it all.  4473, NICS, FFLs.  Take us back to at least 1967.




Next year we'll talk about 1934.

[Solus]

NOPE.  NADA.  NEGATORY.  Just plain, NO!


Dump it all.  4473, NICS, FFLs.  Take us back to at least 1967.




Next year we'll talk about 1934.

Agreed.  But if we don't get it all, we will get them to compromise and back out registration to the BIDS system

[tombogan03884]

Agreed.  But if we don't get it all, we will get them to compromise and back out registration to the BIDS system

Wake up .
Have you no spine ?
We are talking about our Constitutional rights.
Not some cheap trinket in an Arab bazaar.
No more compromise.
"Shall not be infringed" means what it says.