Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 (Introduced in House)

[SUBMAN1]

This ones been flying under the radar.

Basically, you will need to be fingerprinted, have identity, etc.... Well, just read it.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.45:

-S

PS. There are more alarming parts, but this part really irks me!

SEC. 102. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS.

(a) In General- In order to be issued a firearm license under this title, an individual shall submit to the Attorney General (in accordance with the regulations promulgated under subsection (b)) an application, which shall include-- (1) a current, passport-sized photograph of the applicant that provides a clear, accurate likeness of the applicant; (2) the name, address, and date and place of birth of the applicant; (3) any other name that the applicant has ever used or by which the applicant has ever been known; (4) a clear thumb print of the applicant, which shall be made when, and in the presence of the entity to whom, the application is submitted; (5) with respect to each category of person prohibited by Federal law, or by the law of the State of residence of the applicant, from obtaining a firearm, a statement that the individual is not a person prohibited from obtaining a firearm; (6) a certification by the applicant that the applicant will keep any firearm owned by the applicant safely stored and out of the possession of persons who have not attained 18 years of age; (7) a certificate attesting to the completion at the time of application of a written firearms examination, which shall test the knowledge and ability of the applicant regarding-- (A) the safe storage of firearms, particularly in the vicinity of persons who have not attained 18 years of age; (B) the safe handling of firearms; (C) the use of firearms in the home and the risks associated with such use; (D) the legal responsibilities of firearms owners, including Federal, State, and local laws relating to requirements for the possession and storage of firearms, and relating to reporting requirements with respect to firearms; and (E) any other subjects, as the Attorney General determines to be appropriate; (8) an authorization by the applicant to release to the Attorney General or an authorized representative of the Attorney General any mental health records pertaining to the applicant; (9) the date on which the application was submitted; and (10) the signature of the applicant. (b) Regulations Governing Submission- The Attorney General shall promulgate regulations specifying procedures for the submission of applications to the Attorney General under this section, which regulations shall-- (1) provide for submission of the application through a licensed dealer or an office or agency of the Federal Government designated by the Attorney General; (2) require the applicant to provide a valid identification document (as defined in section 1028(d)(2) of title 18, United States Code) of the applicant, containing a photograph of the applicant, to the licensed dealer or to the office or agency of the Federal Government, as applicable, at the time of submission of the application to that dealer, office, or agency; and (3) require that a completed application be forwarded to the Attorney General not later than 48 hours after the application is submitted to the licensed dealer or office or agency of the Federal Government, as applicable. (c) Fees- (1) IN GENERAL- The Attorney General shall charge and collect from each applicant for a license under this title a fee in an amount determined in accordance with paragraph (2). (2) FEE AMOUNT- The amount of the fee collected under this subsection shall be not less than the amount determined by the Attorney General to be necessary to ensure that the total amount of all fees collected under this subsection during a fiscal year is sufficient to cover the costs of carrying out this title during that fiscal year, except that such amount shall not exceed $25.

[Onkel Neal]

Works for me. I mean, firearms, why not account for the sale and distribution? Should make solving crimes easier.

[breadcatcher101]

This is the bill by Bobby Rush, the former black panther if I am correct. I suppose the black panthers will be able to keep their guns.

As is, this will most probably die in committee. The rules are simply too much for even most democrats to contend with. Even if it clears the House I don't think it will clear the Senate. But it does show the agenda that some want impose in this country concerning RKBA.

The democrats have not forgotten the result of the last gun-grabbing move they made which resulted in the turnover at the polls by Americans who opposed it. They are to a degree a bit "gun shy" to try another one at this point. After the 2010 elections, if that goes favorable for them then once again it will be open season on gun owners.

My advice, buy all the high cap mags and ammo you need now before they are banned and taxed.

[SUBMAN1]

Works for me. I mean, firearms, why not account for the sale and distribution? Should make solving crimes easier.

This is the first step to banning firearms. They need to have locations for each. I thought you would be the first to know this?

-S

[SteamWake]

I told you folks.. dont count this out.

[MothBalls]

Registration regulations only make it harder for honest responsible people to own guns.

It doesn't affect criminals at all.

[donut]

Works for me. I mean, firearms, why not account for the sale and distribution? Should make solving crimes easier.
Onkel your a Texan:shucks: >City-slicker?http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/503/nealsp1.jpg (http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/503/nealsp1.jpg)

[UnderseaLcpl]

Works for me. I mean, firearms, why not account for the sale and distribution? Should make solving crimes easier.

We already account for sales and distribution. The Gun Control Act of 1968 or whatever it was called provides for that.

Of course, there are a lot of people who simply don't obey those laws. I'm one of them. I've got three guns that I bought from other people with no paperwork whatsoever, and I'm a mostly law-abiding citizen.

The most effective method of combatting gun violence is to have a healthy economy and to avoid prohibition of controlled substances. To this day, the highest peak ever in American gun violence was during prohibition. Drug prohibition is causing a lot of gun violence in the same fashion.

This type of legislation is just a knee-jerk reaction to the symptoms of the problem, not the cause.

[Kapt Z]

This ones been flying under the radar.

Basically, you will need to be fingerprinted, have identity, etc.... Well, just read it.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.45:

-S

PS. There are more alarming parts, but this part really irks me!

SEC. 102. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS.

(a) In General- In order to be issued a firearm license under this title, an individual shall submit to the Attorney General (in accordance with the regulations promulgated under subsection (b)) an application, which shall include--

(1) a current, passport-sized photograph of the applicant that provides a clear, accurate likeness of the applicant;



(2) the name, address, and date and place of birth of the applicant;



(3) any other name that the applicant has ever used or by which the applicant has ever been known;



(4) a clear thumb print of the applicant, which shall be made when, and in the presence of the entity to whom, the application is submitted;



(5) with respect to each category of person prohibited by Federal law, or by the law of the State of residence of the applicant, from obtaining a firearm, a statement that the individual is not a person prohibited from obtaining a firearm;



(6) a certification by the applicant that the applicant will keep any firearm owned by the applicant safely stored and out of the possession of persons who have not attained 18 years of age;



(7) a certificate attesting to the completion at the time of application of a written firearms examination, which shall test the knowledge and ability of the applicant regarding--




(A) the safe storage of firearms, particularly in the vicinity of persons who have not attained 18 years of age;




(B) the safe handling of firearms;




(C) the use of firearms in the home and the risks associated with such use;




(D) the legal responsibilities of firearms owners, including Federal, State, and local laws relating to requirements for the possession and storage of firearms, and relating to reporting requirements with respect to firearms; and




(E) any other subjects, as the Attorney General determines to be appropriate;



(8) an authorization by the applicant to release to the Attorney General or an authorized representative of the Attorney General any mental health records pertaining to the applicant;



(9) the date on which the application was submitted; and



(10) the signature of the applicant.


(b) Regulations Governing Submission- The Attorney General shall promulgate regulations specifying procedures for the submission of applications to the Attorney General under this section, which regulations shall--

(1) provide for submission of the application through a licensed dealer or an office or agency of the Federal Government designated by the Attorney General;



(2) require the applicant to provide a valid identification document (as defined in section 1028(d)(2) of title 18, United States Code) of the applicant, containing a photograph of the applicant, to the licensed dealer or to the office or agency of the Federal Government, as applicable, at the time of submission of the application to that dealer, office, or agency; and



(3) require that a completed application be forwarded to the Attorney General not later than 48 hours after the application is submitted to the licensed dealer or office or agency of the Federal Government, as applicable.


(c) Fees-

(1) IN GENERAL- The Attorney General shall charge and collect from each applicant for a license under this title a fee in an amount determined in accordance with paragraph (2).



(2) FEE AMOUNT- The amount of the fee collected under this subsection shall be not less than the amount determined by the Attorney General to be necessary to ensure that the total amount of all fees collected under this subsection during a fiscal year is sufficient to cover the costs of carrying out this title during that fiscal year, except that such amount shall not exceed $25.


With the exception of the required safety course, this is almost exactly what I went through to get a FFL in NJ in 1991. Pain in the posterior, but once you have it you're set.

[Platapus]

In many states this is what you have to go through to get a CCW Permit.

Much ado about nutton.

[Enigma]

I'm with Neal, seems reasonable to me, too....

[August]

I'm against it. What's next, a license to speak? How many more constitutional rights will we need a license from the Federal government in order to exercise them?

[Enigma]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that the accounting for sales and distribution of firearms will not lead to needing a license to speak. It's just a theory I have.

[Sailor Steve]

Wanna play dominos?

[Enigma]

No, and neither does anyone else.

[August]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that the accounting for sales and distribution of firearms will not lead to needing a license to speak. It's just a theory I have.

So you don't see a precedent being set here? What other constitutional right requires a license to exercise?

[LobsterBoy]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that the accounting for sales and distribution of firearms will not lead to needing a license to speak. It's just a theory I have.
So you don't see a precedent being set here? What other constitutional right requires a license to exercise?

Which other constitutional right gives a citizen the ability to kill another citizen? I have no wish to remove the right to buy firearms, but there ought to be a system to make sure that those buying them know how to use them. I do think it should be roughly on par with vehicle licensing with education and periodic checks every few years to keep current. I'm not convinced this is a federal issue. Perhaps this is best left to the states.

[Kapt Z]

[quote=LobsterBoy
I'm not convinced this is a federal issue. Perhaps this is best left to the states.[/quote]

The problem with leaving it to the states is that since there are no checkpoints at the state 'border' the state with the most lenient laws wins. Here in NJ we have some of the most stringent firearms laws in the country. Problem is much of our crime is committed with guns that were, at some point, purchased legally in other states and then brought into NJ for illegal use. As a gun owner in NJ I don't want our present state laws relaxed. I want everyone else's to be brought up to speed.

I don't fear a ban on guns anymore than I fear a ban on abortion. We'll go back and forth with the restrictions from time to time, but a all out ban would never fly. You'd never get the votes and it would be impossible to enforce.

[August]

Which other constitutional right gives a citizen the ability to kill another citizen?
I disagree with your premise. There is no constitutional right that gives one citizen the ability to kill another citizen. The right to assemble does not mean the right to riot, nor does the right to keep and bear arms mean the right to kill.

I have no wish to remove the right to buy firearms, but there ought to be a system to make sure that those buying them know how to use them. I do think it should be roughly on par with vehicle licensing with education and periodic checks every few years to keep current.
All very reasonable but nothing i read in that bill prevents the government from just not issuing licenses at all. A defacto gun ban that's an end run around the Constitution. Meanwhile we'll have made millions of independent minded gun owners (yeah I know that's kind of redundant) like UnderseaLcpl into instant criminals.

I'm not convinced this is a federal issue. Perhaps this is best left to the states.
Here's where we agree. This is a matter for each state to decide, in accordance with their own state constitutions, a significant number of which could be found to be in conflict with this federal law.

[A Very Super Market]

I don't see the reasoning behind that. You're saying that this bill will give your government the ability to ban guns entirely. Does this mean that driver's licenses are also threats to your constitutional rights?

[August]

I don't see the reasoning behind that. You're saying that this bill will give your government the ability to ban guns entirely. Does this mean that driver's licenses are also threats to your constitutional rights?

But we do not have a right to drive a car. It is a privilege granted or withdrawn by the state. Government permission the same as a pet license, library card or building permit.

Constitutional rights should never be things that the government gives us permission to exercise.

[Platapus]

So you don't see a precedent being set here? What other constitutional right requires a license to exercise?

That would depend on how stringent the term "license" is applied. If we define "license" as "Official or legal permission to do or own a specified thing." (Answers/com) then the states already require some sort of license for several of our rights.


1. In order to vote I need an authorization from the state. I have to register and the state issues me "Official or legal permission to do or own a specified thing." I can not exercise my right to vote (14th Amendment et al) without permission from the state.

2. If I want to run for state or federal elected offices I need authorization from the state election board. I have to formally request certification from the state. I can not exercise my right to run for state or federal office (various sections of the Constitution depending on the office) without permission from the State Election Board.

3. Depending on the size and venue, if I want to Peaceably Assemble I have to ask permission and be issued a permit (a type of license). In these cases, I can not exercise my right to Peaceably Assemble (1st Amendment) without permission from the State or their legal designee.

When it comes to firearms, our legislative history is full of restrictions and license requirements.

So it is not unprecedented that "rights" have been controlled either by the State or Federal Government. Not saying that this is right or wrong.

[August]

1. In order to vote I need an authorization from the state. I have to register and the state issues me "Official or legal permission to do or own a specified thing." I can not exercise my right to vote (14th Amendment et al) without permission from the state.

2. If I want to run for state or federal elected offices I need authorization from the state election board. I have to formally request certification from the state. I can not exercise my right to run for state or federal office (various sections of the Constitution depending on the office) without permission from the State Election Board.

3. Depending on the size and venue, if I want to Peaceably Assemble I have to ask permission and be issued a permit (a type of license). In these cases, I can not exercise my right to Peaceably Assemble (1st Amendment) without permission from the State or their legal designee.

When it comes to firearms, our legislative history is full of restrictions and license requirements.

So it is not unprecedented that "rights" have been controlled either by the State or Federal Government. Not saying that this is right or wrong.

Not true. You can walk into any polling place in the country and cast a vote, registered or not. I know i have personally done it.

As for needing a permit to peaceably assemble, that is only required when the assembly is not going to be held on somebody elses property. If I want to have 500 people peaceably assemble on my land i don't need permission from anyone.

Regarding running for elections, you'll note that election boards are state entities, not federal agencies.

What is a state going to do when the Feds refuse to issue a firearms license to a person in a situation that violates his states constitutional rights?

[Platapus]

Not true. You can walk into any polling place in the country and cast a vote, registered or not. I know i have personally done it.

I don't know what State you live in and States may have different rules. In my State, if you are not listed on the registration log, you can only cast a provisional vote which will be verified after the voting and before the results are cast. During that verification process, records will be checked to see if the person is 1) eligible to vote 2) registered to vote in the state/county/polling location.

Regarding running for elections, you'll note that election boards are state entities, not federal agencies.

Of course I noted that, that's why I included it in my post! :)

[Sailor Steve]

I find the comparison between guns and cars interesting.

You don't have to have a license to own a car. Nor do you need a license to drive one. You do need a license to drive one on public streets, but on your own property you can race around to your heart's content.

Requiring all firearms to be licensed does seem benign on the surface, especially since it would enable the police to track the use of them in crimes. The problem is that once the federal government knows who has what, it would also make total confiscation that much simpler.

[SUBMAN1]

I find the comparison between guns and cars interesting.

You don't have to have a license to own a car. Nor do you need a license to drive one. You do need a license to drive one on public streets, but on your own property you can race around to your heart's content.

Requiring all firearms to be licensed does seem benign on the surface, especially since it would enable the police to track the use of them in crimes. The problem is that once the federal government knows who has what, it would also make total confiscation that much simpler.

Excellent points man.

-S

[August]

I don't know what State you live in

<---

and States may have different rules. In my State, if you are not listed on the registration log, you can only cast a provisional vote which will be verified after the voting and before the results are cast. During that verification process, records will be checked to see if the person is 1) eligible to vote 2) registered to vote in the state/county/polling location.

But you do get to cast a vote. You are not denied the the ability to exercise your right like you would be if the Feds refuse to issue you their license. As for being registered, in many states, including mine, you are automatically registered if you meet the voter eligibility requirements and that's the way it should be imo.

Regarding running for elections, you'll note that election boards are state entities, not federal agencies.
Of course I noted that, that's why I included it in my post! :)

Sorry, I was a bit hurried and didn't get to finish that thought. Along with elections, gun laws should also be set at the state level, within the limitations set by the US Constitution of course. It's at that level that the citizen has the loudest voice in the process, and where laws are the most pertinent to the local situation.

[Overboard]

I read all of this but still do not understand fully, Are they going to try and take my guns away again?, I fought for so long to get what I have now and it is hart breaking to think that i might lose it all, PLEASE" someone say it ain't so. :down:

[A Very Super Market]

The bill itself does not entail taking your guns away, unless you're a criminal, I guess. But some members believe that giving the government so much information will result in banning guns outright.

Your own opinion below.

[Overboard]

The bill itself does not entail taking your guns away, unless you're a criminal, I guess. But some members believe that giving the government so much information will result in banning guns outright.

Your own opinion below.

Thank you for the very fast post, Iam not a criminal so i dont have any thing to worry about.. right? :up:

[A Very Super Market]

I think you'll have to get tested every so often, but you will keep your guns.

[Rhodes]

You should live in Portugal; you already had gone crazy with our weapons laws...

Possibly 3 years ago, the new weapons laws come out. Basically, none of the common people/population can have a fire arm! The exceptions, beyond the police and army persons (they can have any kind of weapon at home), are politics and government working people. A few professions may have or not a license to carry firearms.
To get the license of hunting, one must do the teorical exam, which one must know everything about the preys and then the practical. But we must pay to someone to give us practical lessons, before taking the exam. Since both exams are one after the other, well it's a lot of money for some wise guys (need to know how the portuguese mind works). And after, we need to take a few psychological exams, to see if one can buy or have the hunting weapon.
And now the best thing (worst) of the new law: all illegal (non license) fire arms, should be delivered to the police. Yes, it's a good thing, but in this category, all your collection weapons are to suffer the same fate. Only kind of weapons that are safe are the one prior to 1850, and even so if the police person finds that a flintlock rifle is a treat (good to have in his fire place), you have the gun apprehended.
If you go to the police, and report that you have 3 or 4 collection weapons, they only let you have it in your place if the weapons are disable, if not, they take the weapons, and give a card saying that you own this kind of gun, and the deposit number. If you are luck or have money to spend legalizing your collection, when you are going to retrieve, you may find that one or two maybe misplace, for ever...
And finally, if you invite someone to your home and he sees your grandfather gun in the living room, hanging in the all. You may have a visit of the police after, to apprehend an illegal weapon, since someone complains about it...

[Platapus]

But you do get to cast a vote. You are not denied the the ability to exercise your right like you would be if the Feds refuse to issue you their license. As for being registered, in many states, including mine, you are automatically registered if you meet the voter eligibility requirements and that's the way it should be imo.


1. In my State, if the person casting the provisional ballot is deemed ineligible, their vote is not counted.

2. In your States, automatically being granted a license is still being granted a licence. :) I congratulate your State for making it very very easy to grant licenses to vote, but they are still granting licensees to vote (registration) that a citizen must have to exercise their right to vote and have their vote counted.

[Platapus]

Sorry, I was a bit hurried and didn't get to finish that thought. Along with elections, gun laws should also be set at the state level, within the limitations set by the US Constitution of course. It's at that level that the citizen has the loudest voice in the process, and where laws are the most pertinent to the local situation.


I agree entirely with this. "MY" interpretation of the Second Amendment is that it restricts the Federal Government from Infringing. The individual States are free to infringe all they want concerning the ownership of weapons.

If State X decides, through their legislation, to out law all guns; the citizens of that State have the right to move to State Y that does allow the legal ownership of guns. :yeah:

You wanna get Constitutional scholars all spun up? Talk about the 14th Amendment!!! While it has the best of intentions, the wording has caused more problems than it has addressed (my opinion). We had some great discussions in some of my Constitutional Law classes on this one Amendment. :damn:

[August]

If State X decides, through their legislation, to out law all guns; the citizens of that State have the right to move to State Y that does allow the legal ownership of guns. :yeah:

Well no, states can't outright deny someone a constitutional right as the recent Supreme Court decision affirms.

[August]

1. In my State, if the person casting the provisional ballot is deemed ineligible, their vote is not counted.

2. In your States, automatically being granted a license is still being granted a licence. :) I congratulate your State for making it very very easy to grant licenses to vote, but they are still granting licensees to vote (registration) that a citizen must have to exercise their right to vote and have their vote counted.

That's not the same things as denying a person from exercising their rights before the fact like gun licensing would do and again registration is at the state level, not the Federal level.

[SUBMAN1]

I read all of this but still do not understand fully, Are they going to try and take my guns away again?, I fought for so long to get what I have now and it is hart breaking to think that i might lose it all, PLEASE" someone say it ain't so. :down:

This is the first step. The same path was done in Europe and now they have no guns.

-S

[LobsterBoy]

I read all of this but still do not understand fully, Are they going to try and take my guns away again?, I fought for so long to get what I have now and it is hart breaking to think that i might lose it all, PLEASE" someone say it ain't so. :down:
This is the first step. The same path was done in Europe and now they have no guns.

-S

Did Europe have constitutional rights to arms? The banning of guns won't happen in this country because it would take a constitutional amendment. Getting that many people to agree on a total gun ban in the US would be impossible. Any law that gets close should be struck down by the courts.

This issue will remain present as crime increases with the contracting economy, but I'm not seriously concerned that this legislation will lead to a ban on guns. As a side note, the 2nd amendment does not protect just firearms, but all arms. So when laser guns are the norm, we can still entertain the same discussion :DL

[Kapt Z]

I find the comparison between guns and cars interesting.

You don't have to have a license to own a car. Nor do you need a license to drive one. You do need a license to drive one on public streets, but on your own property you can race around to your heart's content.

Requiring all firearms to be licensed does seem benign on the surface, especially since it would enable the police to track the use of them in crimes. The problem is that once the federal government knows who has what, it would also make total confiscation that much simpler.

I wouldn't advise doing that in Joisey.....:har:

I understand the logic on the confiscation issue. I just don't believe for a minute the gov't could ever pull it off.

[VipertheSniper]

I read all of this but still do not understand fully, Are they going to try and take my guns away again?, I fought for so long to get what I have now and it is hart breaking to think that i might lose it all, PLEASE" someone say it ain't so. :down:

This is the first step. The same path was done in Europe and now they have no guns.

-S

I don't know about other nations but in Austria it's perfectly legal to own a gun, even for self-defense, not just sports shooting. You have to get a license first tho. I don't know about what nations in Europe you're thinking about but you're definatly tarring with too broad of a brush here.

P.S.: Handguns are legal, I think semi auto assault rifles maybe too but only for sports shooting, hunting rifles can also be obtained but to hunt you first need to make the hunters license. Pump-action shotguns were outlawed in a knee-jerk reaction to some pumpgun related killings in the early 90's, double barreled shotguns are still legal.

P.P.S.: If you didn't do your time in the army, but volunteered for civil service you can't get a weapon license for 15 years, because whatever your reasons are for not joining the army for those lousy 6 months, it is assumed that you don't want to deal with weapons. I think if you weren't eligible for the army for whatever reason you can't carry a weapon ever... but don't quote me on that, I have to look that one up.

Well I looked and looked but on that second part I couldn't find anything. All I know is now, when you volunteered for civil service you've got to wait 15 years until you can get a license.

[A Very Super Market]

Don't the Swiss ALL have guns?

[VipertheSniper]

That's probably taking it a bit too far, but every man who served in the army and is part of the militia has an assault rifle at home. I think I've once read that 80% of the households in Switzerland have a weapon but I'm not sure if I remember that correctly.

[Kapitan_Phillips]

I read all of this but still do not understand fully, Are they going to try and take my guns away again?, I fought for so long to get what I have now and it is hart breaking to think that i might lose it all, PLEASE" someone say it ain't so. :down:
This is the first step. The same path was done in Europe and now they have no guns.

-S

Yes we do, but they're so anal about them that I cant even have a BB gun without a reason.

Of course, that doesnt stop Joe Robber from importing a Mac 10 and threatening me with it when I'm trying to purchase a sausage roll or something.