The Only Proper Response To Schumer's Threat

With the confirmation hearings of Judge Neil Gorsuch coming to a close, Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has announced that he will oppose the confirmation and will encourage his fellow Democrats to filibuster the vote.

In announcing his confrontational approach, Schumer said that Gorsuch “was unable to sufficiently convince me that he’d be an independent check” on Trump. Schumer said later that the judge is “not a neutral legal mind but someone with a deep-seated conservative ideology,” hand-picked for Trump by conservative legal groups.

Thomas C. Goldstein, a Supreme Court practitioner and co-founder of SCOTUSblog, said that Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee did not present a compelling case that Gorsuch was either an illegitimate nominee or that he was outside the conservative mainstream.

“None of the Democrats set the table” for a filibuster, Goldstein said. He speculated that one option for some Democrats would be to allow an up-or-down vote, and then to vote against confirmation.

In addition to Schumer, Sens. Thomas R. Carper (D-Del.), Robert P. Casey Jr. (D-Pa.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) announced Thursday that they would filibuster Gorsuch. Casey is one of 10 Democratic senators running next year in a state that Trump won.

While I have serious doubts about the spine of Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), I think his only proper response to Schumer's threat to filibuster the nomination of a supremely qualified candidate like Judge Gorsuch is this.

"Nuke'em back to the Stone Age!" or at least back to 1917 when cloture of filibusters was first introduced.

While it is a misquotation of Gen. Curtis LeMay, it still has a resonance to it. Those ten Democrats who represent states carried by President Trump may want to heed the warning implied by that threat.

Another threat those Democrats may want to pay attention to came from Chris Cox of the NRA-ILA. Cox sent a letter to McConnell and Schumer  on March 17th saying that Judge Gorsuch has the full backing of the NRA and that they will be scoring the vote on his confirmation. If senators such as Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) or Joe Donnelly (D-IN) don't think the NRA won't go full scorched earth on them if they vote against Judge Gorsuch, then they are living in a Beltway induced dreamworld.

The Revised S. 374 - Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013

Today in the Senate Judiciary Committee business meeting, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) submitted a substitute amendment for S. 374. This substitute not only changed the name of the bill from the Protecting Responsible Gun Owners Act of 2013 to the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013 but it also provided that action component that had been missing from the earlier version.

Title I of the bill deals with records submission by the states to the Federal government for purposes of integrating that information into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. This section provides a carrot and stick approach to getting the states to submit data. It provides for a $100 million appropriation for grants to the states to improve their databases and to help them submit the necessary data to the FBI for NICS check. Up to 10% of this money could be used for a relief from disabilities program. That is, a program to report those to whom firearm rights are restored. I must say this would be a change coming from Chuck Schumer who has stymied the relief from firearms disabilities for years.

The improved data that the bill concerns would be the court records of  those convicted of a felony and those under either a court order or convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence as well as the mental health adjudications that would cause the loss of firearms rights. The stick component that goes with the grants from Attorney General would be a reduction in monies from the grants under Section 505 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. The states would have two years to bring the records submitted to the 50% or greater level or lose 3% of the Federal monies. It goes up to a 4% reduction after three years if the state didn't submit at least 70% of the required records. Finally, after the third year there would be a mandatory 5% reduction for any state at less than 90% compliance.

All in all, I can't argue too much about the intent of Title 1. It is in the interest of everyone to have the records at state level be as accurate as possible and it is also in the interest of everyone that the records in the NICS check system be accurate.

Title II of the S. 374 is a gun controller's wet dream.

First, Section 202 makes it illegal for a firearm transfer to be made between unlicensed persons. It would required a licensed importer, manufacturer, or dealer to first take possession of it, enter it in their bound book, perform a NICS check, fill out a Form 4473, and then and only then, complete the transfer.

The exceptions include:

• Bona fide gifts between spouses
• Bona fide gifts between parents and children
• Bona fide gifts between siblings
• Bona fide gifts between grandparents and grandchildren
• Transfers made from a decedent's estate by will or operation of law
• Temporary transfer between unlicensed persons if
• It occurs in the home or curtilage (adjacent property) of the transferor
• The firearm is not removed from the home
• And the duration is less than 7 days.
• Temporary transfers in connection with lawful hunting or sporting purposes
• At a range if kept within the premises of the range at all times
• At a "target firearm shooting competition" under the auspices of a State agency or non-profit organization and the firearm is kept within the premise of the shooting competition.
• If while hunting to a person with the requisite hunting license during a designated season for a legal game animal.

Section 202 would set a maximum fee for doing the paperwork. It would also require the Form 4473 be kept by the FFL doing the transfer.

The penalty for violating this section is not at all clear. However, it seems to fall upon the FFL who would be liable for a $5,000 civil fine and an up to six months suspension of his or her license. (If you can find another penalty for violating Section 202, please let me know.) Sec. 202 become 18 USC 922 (s) which under 18 USC 924 (D)(5) stipulates a year's imprisonment and a unspecified fine.

Section 203 is equally egregious. It mandates the reporting of lost or stolen firearms within 24 hours of discovery to the "Attorney General and to the appropriate authorities." More importantly, the penalty for knowingly violating this provision is 5 years imprisonment!

If passed, the law goes into effect in 180 days from passage. So far, it has passed out of the Judiciary Committee on a 10-8 party-line vote.

While the gun prohibitionists would like to have bans on standard capacity magazines and semi-automatic firearms with ugly cosmetics, universal background checks is what they really want because the only way to make enforcement of them possible is a national firearms and firearm owners database. As Andy Grove, the former CEO of Intel Corporation, famously said, only the paranoid survive.

Results Of Today's Senate Judiciary Committee Meeting

As I said earlier today, the Senate Judiciary Committee was going to resume meeting to discuss three gun related bills and the nomination of Kenneth Gonzales. They have released the results of the meeting and I have posted it below. Gonzales' nomination was not acted upon nor was Dianne Feinstein's S. 150. However, both Sen. Chuck Schumer's S. 374 and Sen. Barbara Boxer's S. 146 were reported out of committee with amendments.

Results of Executive Business Meeting - March 12, 2013 The Senate Judiciary Committee held a continuation of an executive business meeting to consider pending legislation on March 12, 2013. The Committee was not able to complete action on all pending matters and the meeting recessed subject to the call of the Chair.

Agenda
I. Legislation

S. 374, Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013
Ordered Reported by Roll Call Vote, 10-8

Amendment ALB13180 (Schumer)
Adopted by Unanimous Consent

S. 146, School Safety Enhancements Act of 2013
Ordered Reported by Roll Call Vote 14-4

Amendment OLL13111 (Leahy)
Adopted by Unanimous Consent

Amendment OLL13112 (Grassley)
Withdrawn

 Last week I wrote that I found it strange that Sen. Chuck Schumer's S. 374 - Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013 - did not have an action component. It merely consisted of findings which were more suited to a Senate Resolution than to actual legislation.

That was then and this is now. The amendment that Schumer made today in committee to S. 374 contains the meat of the bill and it isn't pretty. Not only does it have universal background checks but it contains a provision that requires gun owners to report stolen weapons within 24 hours to authorities. The bill has also been renamed to the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013. There is more to the bill and I will have a separate post up about it after I finishing reading the whole thing.

Here is the link to my separate post on the bill.

S. 374 - Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) introduced S. 374 - the Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013- on February 25th and it will be voted for in the Senate Judiciary Committee today. The text of this Orwellian sounding bill is below. If you read it closely, it seems to be missing something. That something is the action component to go with the so-called findings part of the bill.

S 374 IS

113th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 374

To ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

February 25, 2013

Mr. SCHUMER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013'.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress makes the following findings:

(1) Congress supports and respects the right to bear arms found in the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

(2) Congress supports the existing prohibition on a national firearms registry.

(3) There are deficits in the background check system in effect before the date of enactment of this Act and the Department of Justice should make it a top priority to work with States to swiftly input missing records, including mental health records.

(4) If the citizens of the United States agree that in order to promote safe and responsible gun ownership criminals and the mentally ill should be prohibited from possessing firearms, it should be incumbent upon all citizens to ensure weapons are not being transferred to such people.

END

The introduction to the bill calls its a bill to require all prohibited persons be listed in the NICS database AND to require a background check for all gun sales. So the question remains where is the action component of the bill. The bill as written reads like a Senate Resolution minus a whole bunch of whereas's.

The devil is always in the details and I expect the devil to be at play with this bill. What will the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee add to this bill today and what will be added as amendments on the floor of the Senate assuming that this bill, as expected, moves out of committee?

In my opinion, the innocuous sounding text of the bill plus the missing action component makes this a dangerous bill. I see it is a vehicle sponsored by one of the most notorious gun prohibitionists in the Congress to saddle us with gun control that we don't want or need.

Universal Background Checks Or Universal Registration

When Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and the rest of the gun prohibitionists say "universal background checks", I think what they really mean deep down is "universal registration". Without registration, universal background checks are a joke. Now in a Freudian slip (or not), Schumer calls for universal registration.

Scary Picture Of The Day

Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) toured Staten Island yesterday to see the destruction wrought by Hurricane/Tropical Storm Sandy and brought with them promises of aid. The south shore of the  "forgotten borough" was one of the hardest areas in New York.

Gillibrand had the good sense to wear a normal fleece jacket. Schumer, on the other hand, was wearing an official navy windbreaker from FEMA. Now if that isn't a scary sight, I don't know what is. The most anti-gun senator in the Senate wearing a jacket from one of the most inept agencies of the Federal government. I won't even mention that FEMA is the topic of more than one conspiracy theory.
 

Picture from the Staten Island Advance

(Do keep the people of Staten Island in your prayers and thoughts. My cousin Tom and his wife Meryl still live in my grandparent's old house on Staten Island and came through OK. Unfortunately, there are plenty of others who's lives and homes were devastated.)

Never Letting A Tragedy Go To Waste

The gun prohibitionists never let a tragedy go to waste. A gaggle of Democrat Senators led by Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) have proposed an amendment to S. 3414, the Cybersecurity Act of 2012, that would ban all magazines, stripper clips, drums, and belts that would hold more than 10 rounds. They do carve out an exception for .22 LR.

This is similar to the bill that Rep. Carolyn McCarthy proposed following the shooting in Tucson in 2011. Like her bill, while you could possess a pre-ban mag, it doesn't allow you to sell or transfer it.

Sen. Schumer defended the amendment on the floor of the Senate yesterday. The Hill has video of it here. He said in part,

“Maybe we could come together on guns if each side gave some,” Schumer said.

He suggested that Democrats make it clear that their goal is not to repeal the Second Amendment.

“The basic complaint is that the Chuck Schumers of the world want to take away your guns,” Schumer said of the argument made by gun lobbies. “I think it would be smart for those of us who want rational gun control to make it know that that’s not true at all.”

Schumer also pointed out that it would be reasonable for the right to recognize that background checks on those buying guns is necessary — as called for in the Brady law. He also said average Americans don’t need an assault weapon to go hunting or protect themselves.

“We can debate where to draw the line of reasonableness, but we might be able to come to an agreement in the middle,” Schumer said. “Maybe, maybe, maybe we can pass some laws that might, might, might stop some of the unnecessary casualties … maybe there’s a way we can some together and try to break through the log jam and make sure the country is a better place.”

The only problem when gun prohibitionists like Schumer and others of his ilk say "reasonableness", "rational", and "common sense" is that they expect those of us who favor gun rights to give up something so that we don't lose even more stuff. I never see them proposing the end to any of the 20,000 plus bills that are already on the books.

As Sebastian said last night, it is good that this fight is now out in the open. Moreover, now that it is, we need to counter it.

The full text of Senate Amendment 2575 is below:

SA 2575. Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. REED, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Mr. SCHUMER, and Mrs. FEINSTEIN) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3414, to enhance the security and resiliency of the cyber and communications infrastructure of the United States; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following

SEC. __. PROHIBITION ON TRANSFER OR POSSESSION OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES.

(a) Definition.--Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after paragraph (29) the following:

``(30) The term `large capacity ammunition feeding device'--

``(A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; but

``(B) does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.''.

(b) Prohibitions.--Section 922 of such title is amended by inserting after subsection (u) the following:

``(v)(1)(A)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), it shall be unlawful for a person to transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

``(ii) Clause (i) shall not apply to the possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed within the United States on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection.

``(B) It shall be unlawful for any person to import or bring into the United States a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

``(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--

``(A) a manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, or a transfer to or possession by a law enforcement officer employed by such an entity for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty);

``(B) a transfer to a licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining an on-site physical protection system and security organization required by Federal law, or possession by an employee or contractor of such a licensee on-site for such purposes or off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized training or transportation of nuclear materials;

``(C) the possession, by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving ammunition, of a large capacity ammunition feeding device transferred to the individual by the agency upon that retirement; or

``(D) a manufacture, transfer, or possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney General.''.

(c) Penalties.--Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

``(8) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(v) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.''.

(d) Identification Markings.--Section 923(i) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following: ``A large capacity ammunition feeding device manufactured after the date of the enactment of this sentence shall be identified by a serial number that clearly shows that the device was manufactured after such date of enactment, and such other identification as the Attorney General may by regulation prescribe.''.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Dave Kopel On The Fix Gun Checks Act

Dave Kopel appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism Tuesday to testify against Chuck Schumer's S. 436 - the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2011. I used part of his testimony for Wednesday's Quote of the Day in which he described S. 436 as unconstitutional. Here he is discussing his full testimony - and his testimony in favor of HR 822 - with Cam Edwards of NRA News.

I had a chance to meet and chat with Dave on the bus from the airport at the Gun Rights Policy Conference. He is definitely an interesting guy and I'm glad he is on our side.

Unintended Irony

Yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism held a hearing on Sen. Chuck Schumer's bill, S. 436 - Fix Gun Checks Act of 2011. One of the witnesses was Heather Anderson of the Washington State Patrol. Her written testimony spoke to Washington State's submissions for inclusion in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).

In what can only be called an unintended ironic statement she said,

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has determined that Washington State does not meet the requirements of the NIAA for firearm restoration of rights and a relief program. ATF considers Washington’s relief law too permissive in some areas and too restrictive in others. This does not allow Washington to participate in NIAA requests for grant funding. The legislature has not updated state law to match federal requirements. There is continued effort by multiple agencies to accomplish this in the future.

What makes this so ironic is that ATF has not processed ANY request for restoration of firearms rights since October 1992. And the reason that they haven't is because Sen. Chuck Schumer always inserts a clause in the appropriations language to deny them the funds to process these applications for the restoration of firearms rights.

While 18 USC 925(c) does provide for judicial review of applications for the restoration of firearms rights, the Supreme Court ruled in U.S. v. Bean that the courts cannot perform judicial review until such time as an application is rejected by ATF. If ATF is denied the money to process these applications, there can be no denial. In other words, the consummate Catch-22 situation.

Quote Of The Day

The Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism held a hearing yesterday on one of Mayor Bloomberg's pet projects. The bill, S. 436, the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2011, was introduced in the Senate by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY). The witnesses were what might be expected from in the Democrat controlled Senate with one exception.

Attorney David Kopel appeared to testify before the subcommittee in opposition to the bill. He correctly tore the bill to pieces. His conclusion is the quote of the day.

S. 436 violates the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, the Fifth Amendment guarantee of due of law, the Fifth Amendment guarantee of equal protection of the law, and the Tenth Amendment’s reservation of state authority over purely intrastate activities. S. 436 further violates the Tenth Amendment by imposing on the vast majority of states an extremely repressive system of restrictions on law-abiding gun owners which those states have already rejected.

Ever since 1776, Congress has recognized that a national gun registry would be a dangerous violation of the right to keep and bear arms. S. 436 creates such a registry.

S. 436 has no legitimate constitutional basis of authority, because S. 436 attempts to twists Congress’s real power to regulate interstate commerce into the power to regulate what is not interstate and not commercial.

S. 436 treats arrests as if they were convictions.

S. 436 takes the current gun ban for the criminally insane and applies it to non-dangerous people who have been ordered to get counseling for mental problems that have absolutely nothing to do with dangerousness—including stuttering, lack of sexual desire, and nicotine dependence.

Whatever good intentions might lie behind S. 436, the actual bill as drafted is grotesquely overbroad, and a Pandora’s Box of the dangerous consequences that are the inevitable result of making it a felony for law-abiding Americans to possess and use firearms.

Diversionary Tactics (Updated)

Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD), the Ranking Member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has come through on his promise to hold hearings on gun control and the ATF. If you will remember from the June 15th hearing into Operation Fast and Furious, he said he would be exercising his right for a Minority day of hearings. From Cummings' opening statement:

Finally, no legitimate examination of this issue will be complete without analyzing our nation's gun laws, which allow tens of thousands of assault weapons to flood into Mexico from the United States every year, including .50-caliber sniper rifles, multiple AK variants, and scores of others, some of them landing in neighborhoods like mine, the one I represent in Baltimore. When Mexican President Calderon addressed Congress in May, he pleaded for us to stop fielding a full- scale drug war with military-grade assault weapons.

In order to explore these issues further today, I'm exercising my right under the rules, Mr. Chairman, of the House for a minority day of hearings with several witnesses who will testify about these issues in great detail. I did not think it was necessary to call these witnesses for today's hearing, but I will work with the chairman on scheduling these hearings in the near future.

Those hearings are scheduled for tomorrow at 10am EDT according to reports in the Houston Chronicle and the website Main Justice. From the Houston Chronicle:

★ Thursday: Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, will hold a forum on the flow of illegal guns on both sides of the U.S./Mexico border. The forum will be held at 10 a.m. EDT in the Russell Senate Office Building.

Rep. Cummings has not posted a release or notice about the hearings on the House Oversight Committee's website. However, Main Justice had this to report on the hearing speakers:

Speakers at the minority hearing will include Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), a retired ATF agent, and several gun control advocates.

 It seems Cummings is keeping a tight lid on just who the "retired ATF agent, and several gun control advocates" are. If I had to make an educated guess, the retired ATF agent is probably "Waco Jim" Cavanaugh who just last week had an op-ed in TickleTheWire saying that the ATF director should be not be subject to Presidential appointment and subsequent Senate confirmation. Among the gun control advocates will probably be Paul Helmke in his last hurrah before he leaves as head of the Brady Campaign. Of course, this is just speculation.

This "hearing" will be just another in the diversionary tactics being employed to divert attention from Project Gunwalker and on the "need" for more gun control. The Washington Post's ridiculous editorial from Sunday could also be put in this category. For a less diplomatic description of the hearings, I think Mike captures it with his headline here.

UPDATE: Well, I was right about Paul Helmke being there but wrong about "Waco Jim". The complete list of people "testifying" is below:

Senator Charles Schumer (NY)
Michael R. Bouchard, former Assistant Director Field Operations, ATF
Thomas Mahoney, Assistant State’s Attorney Supervisor, Gang Prosecution Unit, Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office
Eric Olson, Senior Associate, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Kristen Rand, Legislative Director, Violence Policy Center
Paul Helmke, President, Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence
Colby Goodman, Author of “U.S. Firearms Trafficking to Mexico: New Data and Insights Illuminate Key Trends and Challenges”

  Cummings says the aim of the forum - which I suppose means the testimony is not sworn - will be:

Law enforcement officials have testified that improvements to our nation’s gun laws are needed to address this increasingly devastating problem, including enhanced penalties for illegal straw purchases, the enactment of a firearms trafficking statute, and a reporting requirement for the purchase of multiple long guns, such as fifty caliber assault weapons and multiple AK variants.

Cummings will issue a report with recommendations to provide U.S. law enforcement with the tools needed to address gun trafficking.

Recent editorials in the New York Times, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times reiterate the need for basic, common-sense improvements to assist law enforcement officials counter violence by international drug cartels operating along the southwest border.

You have to wonder if the testimony would be the exactly the same if it was sworn and perjury charges could be brought.

Mike has more on the witnesses and their background especially former ATF official Michael Bouchard.

NSSF On The Feinstein-Schumer-Whitehouse "Report"

Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Charles Schumer (D-NY), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) issued a so-called report on Monday blaming American guns for the violence in Mexico. Frankly, I think it was timed to draw media attention from the Gunwalker hearings that started that afternoon.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation has responded to that report and takes apart their numbers. Rather than showing 70% of guns being traced from Mexico to the U.S., it actually shows a decline in the number of American firearms being traced by Mexican authorities.

Anti-Gun Report Shows DECLINE in Number of US Firearms Being Traced to Mexico
June 15, 2011
By Larry Keane

Once again anti-gun legislators are attempting to misrepresent firearm tracing data, though this time, with declining numbers and a public wary of political posturing, it may just backfire on them.

A report (“Halting US Firearms Trafficking to Mexico“) released Monday by a trio of anti-gun senators including Diane Feinstein (D-CA), Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) appears to show the number of firearms that have been recovered in Mexico and traced to the United States as actually declining in recent years from an unsubstantiated 90 percent to, now, an unsubstantiated 70 percent.

It is important to note that these percentages do not reflect the total number of firearms recovered. In fact, in a letter to Sen. Feinstein discussing this very report, ATF Acting Director Kenneth Melson admitted, “There are no United States Government sources that maintain any record of the total number of criminal firearms seized in Mexico.”

So to be clear, the 70 percent claim relates only to the very small number of traced firearms – not the total number of firearms recovered. And it’s no surprise that so many come from the United States. We have a very good system for tracing firearms through serial numbers and purchase records (some countries don’t trace them at all). Mexico recognizes this fact and submits for tracing only those firearms that it believes would likely prove trace positive.

Earlier this year a report by the independent research group STRATFOR noted that less than 12 percent of the total number of guns seized in Mexico during 2008 had been verified as coming from the United States. STRATFOR cited a June 2009 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report noting:

30,000 firearms were seized from criminals by Mexican authorities in 2008.
Of these 30,000 firearms, information pertaining to 7,200 of them (24 percent) was submitted to the ATF for tracing.
Of these 7,200 guns, only about 4,000 could be traced by the ATF.
Of these 4,000, some 3,480 (87 percent) were shown to have come from the United States.

The Feinstein report follows an update to the U.S. Firearms Trafficking to Mexico Report issued by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. According to that update, Mexican authorities have submitted trace requests for “tens of thousands of firearms” to the ATF. However, the ATF has stated that many of these requests are duplicative, with some firearms being resubmitted for tracing five times or more. Moreover, the update notes that 75 percent of the firearm traces are not successful and that only eight percent lead to an investigation. Furthermore, as ATF has repeatedly stated, the tracing of a firearm (or the opening of an investigation) in no way indicates criminal wrong-doing by either the retailer or the first purchaser of the firearm.

The Wilson report also notes that most of the traced firearms were originally sold at retail more than five years earlier. The report doesn’t say how much earlier, but ATF has previously said that firearms traced from Mexico were on average 14 years old. This demonstrates that of the small percentage of guns that do come from the United States, these firearms have not been purchased recently.

Despite attempts by anti-gun legislators to utilize these reports as leverage for pushing gun control, no one should be under any illusions; the United States is no more the source of 70 percent of the weapons used by the Mexican cartels than it is 90 percent. These numbers only allege to relate to the small percentage of seized and traceable firearms submitted to the ATF.

Ignore The Man Behind The Curtain

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives along with their friends in the Senate hope that you will ignore the hearings being held before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee into Operation Fast and Furious (aka Project Gunwalker) and the ATF's role in letting guns walk to Mexico.

Cam Edwards of NRA News disposed of the 70% figure last week yet there are some that will continue to repeat it because it buttresses their cause. As Mike at Sipsey Street Irregulars says, "Repeat The Lie" often and loudly so that people will ignore the real stats and the role of ATF in gunrunning to Mexico.

After the hearings tomorrow, that will become harder and harder even with misleading numbers, reports, and press releases from the Feinsteins and Schumers of this world.

Feinstein, Schumer, Whitehouse Report Calls for Stronger U.S. Response to Firearms Trafficking to Mexico

Urges Congress and the Administration to strengthen firearms laws to stem drug-related violence

70% of weapons recovered in Mexico originated in U.S. according to ATF

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Chairman of the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control, along with Senators Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) today released the findings of a Congressional investigation that concludes American military-style weapons are arming Mexico’s brutal drug trafficking organizations at an alarming rate and policymakers are not adequately responding.

“Congress has been virtually moribund while powerful Mexican drug trafficking organizations continue to gain unfettered access to military-style firearms coming from the United States,” said Senator Feinstein. “New ATF data provided last week reveals that more than 70 percent of firearms recovered at crime scenes and traced by Mexican officials actually originated in the United States.”

According to the report, Halting U.S. Firearms Trafficking to Mexico, the overwhelming majority of firearms recovered at crime scenes and traced by Mexican officials originate in the United States. In a recent letter to Feinstein, ATF Acting Director Kenneth Melson indicated that in 2009 and 2010 20,504 of the 29,284 firearms (70 percent) recovered in Mexico and submitted for tracing were United States-sourced.

“This report confirms what many of us already know to be true: although the Senate’s recently passed border measure will help make our Southern border safer, it is still too easy for Mexican drug lords to get their hands on deadly military-grade weapons within our borders,” said Senator Schumer. “We need to redouble our efforts to keep violent firearms out of the hands of these traffickers.”

“This report outlines common sense measures that will help protect our border and our communities by keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of Mexican gangs and drug cartels,” said Senator Whitehouse.

Conclusions of the report:

It will be very difficult to successfully reduce drug-related violence in Mexico without starving the country’s drug trafficking organizations of their military-style weapons.

To do this, the United States must strengthen current firearms laws and regulations. This can be done through a number of key actions by the Obama Administration and Congress, including:

Enactment of legislation to close the gun show loophole;
Better enforcement of the existing ban on imports of military-style weapons;
Reinstatement of the expired Assault Weapons Ban;
Reporting by Federal Firearms Licensees on all multiple firearms sales; and
Senate ratification of the Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking of Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives and Other Related Materials (CIFTA).

The Halting U.S. Firearms Trafficking to Mexico report can be found here. Information from the report was gathered through meetings in Mexico and in U.S. border cities, briefings, interviews, and a review of documents from both government and non-government subject matter experts.

It Depends On Whose Ox Is Being Gored

The Wall Street Journal reported that the Freedom Group's expansion of their Remingon Arms facility in Ilion, NY plant will add 40-50 new jobs there. They are moving their Bushmaster operations from Windham, ME to Ilion in a consolidation of operations. The means that Bushmaster AR-15's - those evil black rifles - will now be made in New York State.

The senior Senator from New York, Chuck Schumer, has a well-deserved reputation for being an enemy of gun owners and gun rights. That is why I find his remarks on the expansion of the Remington plant so ironic. He says he is all for guns if it means jobs for his constituents and if he can push the military to buy more "made-in-New York" firearms.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 22, 2011

SCHUMER: 40-50 NEW JOBS COMING TO REMINGTON’S MANUFACTURING PLANT IN ILION – JOBS WILL BE A HUGE BOOST TO MOHAWK VALLEY’S ECONOMY

Bushmaster Firearms Set To Move Production From Maine Facility To Ilion, Bringing Scores of New Jobs And Economic Opportunity To Central NY

Schumer Is A Long-Time Supporter Of Remington Plant, Helped Bring New Business By Securing Vital Grants And a Level Playing Field to Compete For Government Contracts

Schumer: These Jobs Are Great News For Mohawk Valley Economy

Today, U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer joined Remington officials and plant employees to announce that Bushmaster Firearms is relocating a manufacturing facility from Windham, Maine to Ilion, NY, bringing over forty new jobs to Central New York in the process. Schumer has been a long-time supporter of manufacturing at the Remington plant, urging top Army officials to open up competition for the Army’s small arms contracts to other U.S. manufacturers and domestic producers across the country like the Ilion, New York-based Remington. Today, Schumer applauded Remington’s decision to add new jobs to the productive and capable work force already making the factory an economic powerhouse in the Mohawk Valley.

“What a great day for Remington’s Ilion plant, the Mohawk Valley, and Central New York’s economy,” said Senator Schumer. “Thanks to Remington’s continued confidence in this capable workforce, we’re going to see even more good-paying jobs at the plant, creating positive ripple effects throughout the region. The addition of these jobs strengthens the ability of the Remington plant in Ilion to compete for the many Department of Defense small arms contracts available this year by adding to the skilled workforce and further enhancing the manufacturing capability for M-4 and M-16 style firearms. As I have always done, I will work tirelessly for a fair and open contracting process with the military so the Ilion plant and its workers can compete on a level playing field, and continue to produce the high quality equipment our men and women in uniform deserve and expect.”

Senator Schumer has long been a strong supporter of the Remington facility. He led the effort in Congress to repeal the law that limited competition for small arms contracts, so that Remington can now compete for small arms contracts with the Department of Defense. Schumer also successfully pushed the Army to open up their application process and solicit competing contracts in order to modify Army's M-4 carbine. As a result of this effort, Remington is now competing with other companies to win the contract.

After the Army identified a requirement to upgrade its M-24 sniper rifle used in Afghanistan, Sen. Schumer secured funding for the upgrade from Congress. Schumer’s success in securing funding for this project ultimately allowed Remington to compete for and win a contract to upgrade the Army's 3600 M24 sniper rifles (now called the XM2010). The Army recently ordered an initial quantity of 250 XM2010s, which Remington is currently manufacturing and the Army is shipping to our sniper teams in Afghanistan. Schumer’s push for an open contracting process that allows Remington to compete with other manufacturers has resulted in economic growth and new jobs coming to the Ilion facility.

Given that the Freedom Group's headquarters is in Madison, North Carolina - just north of Greensboro - it is a shame that they didn't bring those jobs South to North Carolina.

S. 436 - Schumer's Latest Gambit (Updated with bill text)

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has finally made good on his promise to introduce a bill concerning NICS and background checks on private sales as well as those through a FFL. His bill, S. 436, is temporarily entitled "A bill to ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale."

Its only co-sponsor so far is Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), who was NRA A-rated when she was in the House of Representatives. Since being appointed and then elected to the Senate, Gillibrand's ambitions obviously have become more important to her than anything called princple as she has jumped fully on the gun control bandwagon.

The bill has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee where Schumer is the fourth ranking Democrat on the committee.

As soon as the text becomes available, I will post it.

UPDATE: The bill will be called the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2011. Mayor Bloomberg's Illegal Mayors group is already touting the bill here. They have even set up a new website called FixGunChecks.org

UPDATE II: The text of the bill was released overnight.

S 436 IS


112th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 436
To ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale.


IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

March 2, 2011
Mr. SCHUMER (for himself and Mrs. GILLIBRAND) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A BILL
To ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title- This Act may be cited as the `Fix Gun Checks Act of 2011'.

(b) Table of Contents- The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title and table of contents.

TITLE I--ENSURING THAT ALL INDIVIDUALS WHO SHOULD BE PROHIBITED FROM BUYING A GUN ARE LISTED IN THE NATIONAL INSTANT CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM

Sec. 101. Penalties for States that do not make data electronically available to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Sec. 102. Requirement that Federal agencies certify that they have submitted to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System all records identifying persons prohibited from purchasing firearms under Federal law.

Sec. 103. Adjudicated as a mental defective; mental health assessment plan.

Sec. 104. Clarification of the definition of drug abusers and drug addicts who are prohibited from possessing firearms.

TITLE II--REQUIRING A BACKGROUND CHECK FOR EVERY FIREARM SALE

Sec. 201. Purpose.

Sec. 202. Firearms transfers.

Sec. 203. Effective date.

TITLE I--ENSURING THAT ALL INDIVIDUALS WHO SHOULD BE PROHIBITED FROM BUYING A GUN ARE LISTED IN THE NATIONAL INSTANT CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM

SEC. 101. PENALTIES FOR STATES THAT DO NOT MAKE DATA ELECTRONICALLY AVAILABLE TO THE NATIONAL INSTANT CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM.

Section 104(b) of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended to read as follows:

`(b) Penalties-

`(1) DISCRETIONARY REDUCTION- For each of fiscal years 2011 and 2012, the Attorney General may withhold not more than 3 percent of the amount that would otherwise be allocated to a State under section 505 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3755) if the State provides less than 50 percent of the records required to be provided under sections 102 and 103.

`(2) MANDATORY REDUCTION-

`(A) FISCAL YEARS 2013 TO 2017- For each of fiscal years 2013 through 2017, the Attorney General shall withhold 15 percent of the amount that would otherwise be allocated to a State under section 505 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3755) if the State provides less than 75 percent of the records required to be provided under sections 102 and 103.

`(B) SUBSEQUENT YEARS- During fiscal year 2018, and each fiscal year thereafter, the Attorney General shall withhold 25 percent of the amount that would otherwise be allocated to a State under section 505 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3755), if the State provides less than 90 percent of the records required to be provided under sections 102 and 103.

`(3) WAIVER BY ATTORNEY GENERAL- If a State provides substantial evidence, as determined by the Attorney General, that the State is making a reasonable effort to comply with the requirements of sections 102 and 103, including an inability to comply due to court order or other legal restriction, the Attorney General may reduce the percentage of the amount that would otherwise be allocated to a State under section 505 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3755) withheld--

`(A) under paragraph (2)(A) to be not less than 5 percent; and

`(B) under paragraph (2)(B) to be not less than 15 percent.

`(4) TRANSFER OF WITHHELD FUNDS- Any funds withheld by the Attorney General under this subsection shall be transferred to the appropriations account appropriated under the heading `STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE' under the heading `Office of Justice Programs' under the heading `DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE'.

`(5) SENSE OF CONGRESS- It is the sense of Congress that any funds transferred under paragraph (4) should be used to carry out the activities described in the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (18 U.S.C. 922 note).'.

SEC. 102. REQUIREMENT THAT FEDERAL AGENCIES CERTIFY THAT THEY HAVE SUBMITTED TO THE NATIONAL INSTANT CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM ALL RECORDS IDENTIFYING PERSONS PROHIBITED FROM PURCHASING FIREARMS UNDER FEDERAL LAW.

Section 103(e)(1) of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(F) SEMIANNUAL CERTIFICATION AND REPORTING-

`(i) IN GENERAL- The head of each Federal department or agency shall submit to the Attorney General a written certification indicating whether the department or agency has provided to the Attorney General the pertinent information contained in any record of any person that the department or agency was in possession of during the time period addressed by the report demonstrating that the person falls within a category described in subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code.

`(ii) SUBMISSION DATES- The head of a Federal department or agency shall submit a certification under clause (i)--

`(I) not later than July 31 of each year, which shall address any record the department or agency was in possession of during the period beginning on January 1 of the year and ending on June 30 of the year; and

`(II) not later than January 31 of each year, which shall address any record the department or agency was in possession of during the period beginning on July 1 of the previous year and ending on December 31 of the previous year.

`(iii) CONTENTS- A certification required under clause (i) shall state, for the applicable period--

`(I) the number of records of the Federal department or agency demonstrating that a person fell within each of the categories described in section 922(g) of title 18, United States Code;

`(II) the number of records of the Federal department or agency demonstrating that a person fell within the category described in section 922(n) of title 18, United States Code; and

`(III) for each category of records described in subclauses (I) and (II), the total number of records of the Federal department or agency that have been provided to the Attorney General.'.

SEC. 103. ADJUDICATED AS A MENTAL DEFECTIVE; MENTAL HEALTH ASSESSMENT PLAN.

(a) Definition- Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(36) The term `adjudicated as a mental defective' includes an order by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, in response to marked subnormal intelligence, mental illness or incompetency, be compelled to receive services--

`(A) including counseling, medication, or testing to determine compliance with prescribed medications; and

`(B) not including testing for use of alcohol or for abuse of any controlled substance or other drug.'.

(b) Mental Health Assessment Plan for Institutions of Higher Education- Part B of title I of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1011 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`SEC. 124. MENTAL HEALTH ASSESSMENT PLAN FOR INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION.

`(a) Restriction on Eligibility- Each college, university, or postsecondary institution that receives Federal funds under this Act or any form of financial assistance under any Federal program, including participation in any federally funded or guaranteed student loan program, shall develop and implement, not later than 1 year from the date of enactment of this section, a mental health assessment plan that, at a minimum, includes--

`(1) a framework through which such college, university, or postsecondary institution will address the risks posed by students, including full-time students and part-time students, who, as a result of apparent mental illness or incompetency, pose a safety risk to themselves or others;

`(2) the establishment of a team that will assess the mental health needs of, and safety risks posed by, any such student, consisting of--

`(A) educators;

`(B) administrators;

`(C) counselors; or

`(D) other qualified members of the educational community;

`(3) a procedure for reporting such students to the team described in paragraph (2);

`(4) a procedure for making voluntary referrals for such students to on- and off-campus mental health resources;

`(5) a procedure for making involuntary referrals for such students to State or local mental health authorities for mandatory evaluation, which shall include reporting such referrals to a State agency responsible for identifying persons described in section 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code; and

`(6) a procedure for informing and educating the families of students who have been identified as posing safety risks to themselves or others.

`(b) Information Availability- Each college, university, or postsecondary institution that provides the plan described in subsection (a) shall make available to the students, faculty, and staff at such college, university, or postsecondary institution, a copy of the mental health assessment plan required under subsection (a).'.

SEC. 104. CLARIFICATION OF THE DEFINITION OF DRUG ABUSERS AND DRUG ADDICTS WHO ARE PROHIBITED FROM POSSESSING FIREARMS.

(a) Inferences of Abuse- Section 921 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(c) Unlawful User of Any Controlled Substance-

`(1) IN GENERAL- An inference that a person is an unlawful user of a controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)) may be drawn based on--

`(A) a conviction for the use or possession of a controlled substance within the past 5 years;

`(B) an arrest for the use or possession of a controlled substance within the past 5 years;

`(C) an arrest for the possession of drug paraphernalia within the past 5 years, if testing has demonstrated the paraphernalia contained traces of a controlled substance;

`(D) a drug test administered within the past 5 years demonstrating that the person had used a controlled substance unlawfully; or

`(E) an admission to using or possessing a controlled substance unlawfully within the past 5 years.

`(2) MEMBERS OF ARMED FORCES- For a current or former member of the Armed Forces, an inference that a person is an unlawful user of a controlled substance may be drawn based on disciplinary or other administrative action within the past 5 years based on confirmed use of a controlled substance, including a court-martial conviction, nonjudicial punishment, or an administrative discharge based on use of a controlled substance or drug rehabilitation failure.'.

(b) Application to Federal Courts- Section 103(e)(1) of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (18 U.S.C. 922 note), as amended by this section 102, is amended--

(1) in subparagraph (C), by inserting `(including any record of a Federal court of any person ordered into a diversion program as described in section 921(a)(37))' after `any person'; and

(2) by adding at the end the following:

`(G) APPLICATION TO FEDERAL COURTS- In this paragraph--

`(i) the terms `department or agency of the United States' and `Federal department or agency' include a Federal court; and

`(ii) for purposes of any request, submission, or notification, the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts shall perform the functions of the head of the department or agency.'.

(c) Definition- Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 103(a), is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(37) The term `addicted to any controlled substance' includes a person ordered by a court into a diversion program designed for abusers of or addicts to controlled substances as part of a criminal or juvenile delinquency proceeding, regardless of whether the person was convicted, whether the court made a finding of guilt, or whether the program accepts participants who are abusers of or addicted to substances other than controlled substances.'.

(d) Conforming Amendment to NICS Improvement Amendments Act- Section 102(b)(1)(C)(iii) of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended by striking `(as such' and all that follows through `adjudications,'.

TITLE II--REQUIRING A BACKGROUND CHECK FOR EVERY FIREARM SALE

SEC. 201. PURPOSE.

The purpose of this title is to extend the Brady Law background check procedures to all sales and transfers of firearms.

SEC. 202. FIREARMS TRANSFERS.

(a) In General- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`Sec. 932. Background checks for firearm transfers by unlicensed persons

`(a) Definitions- In this section--

`(1) the term `unlicensed transferee' means a person who--

`(A) is not licensed under this chapter; and

`(B) desires to received a firearm from an unlicensed transferor; and

`(2) the term `unlicensed transferor' means a person who--

`(A) is not licensed under this chapter; and

`(B) desires to transfer a firearm to an unlicensed transferee.

`(b) Responsibilities of Transferors Other Than Licensees-

`(1) IN GENERAL- It shall be unlawful for an unlicensed transferor to transfer a firearm to an unlicensed transferee, unless the firearm is transferred--

`(A)(i) through a licensed dealer under subsection (d);

`(ii) through a law enforcement agency under subsection (e);

`(iii) after inspecting a permit that confirms a background check under subsection (f); or

`(iv) in accordance with an exception described in subsection (g); and

`(B) in accordance with paragraph (2).

`(2) CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS- Except as provided in subsection (g), an unlicensed transferor--

`(A) subject to subparagraph (B), may not transfer a firearm to an unlicensed transferee until--

`(i) the licensed dealer through which the transfer is made under subsection (d) makes a notification described in subsection (d)(3)(A);

`(ii) the law enforcement agency through which the transfer is made under subsection (e) makes a notification described in subsection (e)(4)(A); or

`(iii) the unlicensed transferee has presented a permit that confirms that a background check has been conducted, as described in subsection (f); and

`(B) may not transfer a firearm to an unlicensed transferee if--

`(i) the licensed dealer through which the transfer is made under subsection (d) makes the notification described in subsection (d)(3)(B); or

`(ii) the law enforcement agency through which the transfer is made under subsection (e) makes the notification described in subsection (e)(3)(B).

`(3) ABSENCE OF RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this section shall permit or authorize the Attorney General to impose recordkeeping requirements on any unlicensed transferor.

`(c) Responsibilities of Transferees Other Than Licensees-

`(1) IN GENERAL- It shall be unlawful for an unlicensed transferee to receive a firearm from an unlicensed transferor, unless the firearm is transferred--

`(A)(i) through a licensed dealer under subsection (d);

`(ii) through a law enforcement agency under subsection (e);

`(iii) after inspecting a permit that confirms a background check in accordance with subsection (f); or

`(iv) in accordance with an exception described in subsection (g); and

`(B) in accordance with paragraph (2).

`(2) CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS- Except as provided in subsection (g), an unlicensed transferee--

`(A) subject to subparagraph (B), may not receive a firearm from an unlicensed transferor until--

`(i) the licensed dealer through which the transfer is made under subsection (d) makes a notification described in subsection (d)(3)(A);

`(ii) the law enforcement agency through which the transfer is made under subsection (e) makes a notification described in subsection (e)(4)(A); or

`(iii) the unlicensed transferee has presented a permit that confirms that a background check described in subsection (f) has been conducted; and

`(B) may not receive a firearm from another unlicensed transferor if--

`(i) the licensed dealer through which the transfer is made under subsection (d) makes a notification described in subsection (d)(3)(B); or

`(ii) the law enforcement agency through which the transfer is made under subsection (e) makes a notification described in subsection (e)(4)(B).

`(d) Background Checks Through Licensed Dealers- A licensed dealer who agrees to assist in the transfer of a firearm between unlicensed transferor and an unlicensed transferee shall--

`(1) enter such information about the firearm as the Attorney General may require by regulation into a separate bound record;

`(2) record the transfer on a form specified by the Attorney General;

`(3) comply with section 922(t) as if transferring the firearm from the inventory of the licensed dealer to the unlicensed transferee (except that a licensed dealer assisting in the transfer of a firearm under this subsection shall not be required to comply again with the requirements of section 922(t) in delivering the firearm to the unlicensed transferee) and notify the unlicensed transferor and unlicensed transferee--

`(A) of such compliance; and

`(B) if the transfer is subject to the requirements of section 922(t)(1), of any receipt by the licensed dealer of a notification from the national instant criminal background check system that the transfer would violate section 922 or State law;

`(4) not later than 31 days after the date on which the transfer occurs, submit to the Attorney General a report of the transfer, which--

`(A) shall be on a form specified by the Attorney General by regulation; and

`(B) shall not include the name of or other identifying information relating to the unlicensed transferor or unlicensed transferee;

`(5) if the licensed dealer assists an unlicensed transferor in transferring, at the same time or during any 5 consecutive business days, 2 or more pistols or revolvers, or any combination of pistols and revolvers totaling 2 or more, to the same unlicensed transferee, in addition to the reports required under paragraph (4), prepare a report of the multiple transfers, which shall--

`(A) be prepared on a form specified by the Attorney General; and

`(B) not later than the close of business on the date on which the transfer requiring the report under this paragraph occurs, be submitted to--

`(i) the office specified on the form described in subparagraph (A); and

`(ii) the appropriate State law enforcement agency of the jurisdiction in which the transfer occurs; and

`(6) retain a record of the transfer as part of the permanent business records of the licensed dealer.

`(e) Background Checks Through Law Enforcement Agencies- A State or local law enforcement agency that agrees to assist an unlicensed transferor in carrying out the responsibilities of the unlicensed transferor under subsection (b) with respect to the transfer of a firearm shall--

`(1)(A) contact the national instant criminal background check system under section 922(t); and

`(B)(i) receive an identification number as described in section 922(t)(1)(B)(i); or

`(ii) wait the period described in 922(t)(1)(B)(ii);

`(2) conduct such other checks as the agency considers appropriate to determine whether the receipt or possession of the firearm by the unlicensed transferee would violate section 922 or State law;

`(3) verify the identity of the unlicensed transferee by--

`(A) examining a valid identification document (as defined in section 1028(d)) of the unlicensed transferee containing a photograph of the unlicensed transferee; or

`(B) confirming that the unlicensed transferor has examined a valid identification document described in subparagraph (A);

`(4) notify the unlicensed transferor and transferee--

`(A) of the compliance by the law enforcement agency with the requirements under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3); and

`(B) of any receipt by the law enforcement agency of a notification from the national instant criminal background check system or other information that the transfer would violate section 922 or would violate State law;

`(5) not later than 31 days after the date on which the transfer occurs, submit to the Attorney General a report of the transfer, which--

`(A) shall be on a form specified by the Attorney General by regulation; and

`(B) shall not include the name of or other identifying information relating to the unlicensed transferor or unlicensed transferee;

`(6) if the law enforcement agency assists an unlicensed transferor in transferring, at the same time or during any 5 consecutive business days, 2 or more pistols or revolvers, or any combination of pistols and revolvers totaling 2 or more, to the same unlicensed transferee, in addition to the reports required under paragraph (5), prepare a report of the multiple transfers, which shall be--

`(A) prepared on a form specified by the Attorney General; and

`(B) not later 24 hours after the transfer requiring the report under this paragraph occurs, submitted to--

`(i) the office specified on the form described in subparagraph (A); and

`(ii) the appropriate State law enforcement agency of the jurisdiction in which the transfer occurs; and

`(7) maintain records of the transfer at such place, and in such form, as the Attorney General may prescribe.

`(f) Purchase Permits Confirming Background Checks- An unlicensed transferor may transfer a firearm to an unlicensed transferee if the unlicensed transferor verifies that--

`(1) the unlicensed transferee has presented a valid permit or license that allows the unlicensed transferee to possess, acquire, or carry a firearm;

`(2) the permit or license was issued not more than 5 years before the date on which the permit or license is presented under paragraph (1) by a law enforcement agency in the State in which the transfer is to take place;

`(3) the law of the State provides that the permit or license is to be issued only after a law enforcement official has verified that neither the national instant criminal background check system nor other information indicates that possession of a firearm by the unlicensed transferee would be in violation of Federal, State, or local law; and

`(4) if the permit or license does not include a photograph of the unlicensed transferee, the unlicensed transferor has examined a valid identification document (as defined in section 1028(d)) of the unlicensed transferee containing a photograph of the unlicensed transferee.

`(g) Exceptions- Unless prohibited by any other provision of law, subsections (b) and (c) shall not apply to any transfer of a firearm between an unlicensed transferor and unlicensed transferee, if--

`(1) the transfer is a bona fide gift between immediate family members, including spouses, parents, children, siblings, grandparents, and grandchildren;

`(2) the transfer occurs by operation of law, or because of the death of another person for whom the unlicensed transferor is an executor or administrator of an estate or a trustee of a trust created in a will;

`(3) the transfer is temporary and occurs while in the home of the unlicensed transferee, if--

`(A) the unlicensed transferee is not otherwise prohibited from possessing firearms; and

`(B) the unlicensed transferee believes that possession of the firearm is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to the unlicensed transferee;

`(4) the transfer is approved by the Attorney General under section 5812 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; or

`(5) upon application of the unlicensed transferor, the Attorney General determined that compliance with subsection (b) is impracticable because--

`(A) the ratio of the number of law enforcement officers of the State in which the transfer is to occur to the number of square miles of land area of the State does not exceed 0.0025;

`(B) the location at which the transfer is to occur is extremely remote in relation to the chief law enforcement officer (as defined in section 922(s)(8)); and

`(C) there is an absence of telecommunications facilities in the geographical area in which the unlicensed transferor is located; or

`(6) the transfer is a temporary transfer of possession without transfer of title that takes place--

`(A) at a shooting range located in or on premises owned or occupied by a duly incorporated organization organized for conservation purposes or to foster proficiency in firearms;

`(B) at a target firearm shooting competition under the auspices of or approved by a State agency or nonprofit organization; or

`(C) while hunting, fishing, or trapping, if--

`(i) the activity is legal in all places where the unlicensed transferee possesses the firearm; and

`(ii) the unlicensed transferee holds any required license or permit.

`(h) Processing Fees- A licensed dealer or law enforcement agency that processes the transfer of a firearm under this section may assess and collect a fee, in an amount not to exceed $15, with respect to each firearm transfer processed.

`(i) Records- Nothing in subsection (e)(7) shall be construed to authorize the Attorney General to inspect records described in such subsection or to require that the records be transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States.'.

(b) Penalties- Section 924(a)(5) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting `or section 932' after `section 922'.

(c) Conforming Amendment- The table of sections for chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`932. Background checks for firearm transfers by unlicensed persons.'.

SEC. 203. EFFECTIVE DATE.

The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
END

ATF, Chuck Schumer, and Andrew Traver

Mike Vanderboegh at Sipsey Street Irregulars has a very interesting post on the Traver nomination being sent back to the White House. Rumor has it that the Traver nomination was sent back with the full approval of notorious anti-gunner Senator Chuck Schumer.

The Chief Counsel's Office at ATF has a reputation for being a nest of vipers. That comes from both ATF agents in the field and pro-gun advocates. They also have good relations with Schumer and have been at his beck and call for years.

The rumor is that Andrew Traver wanted the Chief Counsel's Office cleaned out before he arrived so he wouldn't have to do it. Because of that the CCO worked with Schumer to have the nomination killed or at least stalled.

Remember this is all rumor and conjecture on Mike's part but he was the first one to call the Traver nomination. It was Mike's first post on Traver that got me to doing Google searches on the guy. Read his whole post linked above in the first paragraph.