Lawmakers unveil gun licensing proposal

  • Thread starter Thread starter dZ
  • Start date Start date

dZ

New member
http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/05/09/guns.reut/index.html

Lawmakers unveil gun licensing proposal

By Joanne Kenen
Reuters

May 9, 2000
Web posted at: 5:42 p.m. EDT (2142 GMT)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Lawmakers who back tougher gun control Tuesday unveiled a bill
that would require gun owners to be licensed and gun sales to be recorded, a dramatic proposal
that even its sponsors acknowledge cannot be enacted this year.

Flanked by women who are organizing this weekend's Million Mom March on Washington for
gun control, lead sponsor California Democrat Dianne Feinstein said that if car drivers are
licensed, gun owners should be.

Feinstein said she knew that this bill could not be enacted by the current Congress, which has
balked at more modest gun measures. But she said introducing the measure was a way of
responding to the National Rifle Association and other gun control opponents who point to
their Second Amendment right to bear arms.

"We have rights too," Feinstein said. "We have the right to walk down the street and not get
shot. We have the right to send our children to school and not have them get shot."

"You need to have a license to sell real estate. You need to have a license to cut someone's hair,"
said California Democrat Barbara Boxer, one of Feinstein's co-sponsors.

President Clinton called for licensing gun owners in his State of the Union address this year.
The idea is not seen as politically viable in the short-term but is now part of the policy mix of
ideas being discussed in Washington and in political campaigns, not merely part of the fringe of
extreme gun control proposals.

Feinstein's proposal, to be formally introduced in the Senate this week, would apply to
purchases of handguns and semi-automatic weapons that take detachable ammunition clips.
People who already own those types of weapons would have up to 10 years to get a license.

Most hunting rifles and shotguns would be exempt.

Firearms safety test

To get a license, an applicant would have to go to a licensed firearms dealer, pass a written
firearms safety test, and undergo a background check to make sure there is no disqualifying
criminal record or history of severe mental illness.

Gun sales would also be recorded by serial number. To the NRA and other gun owner groups,
both licensing and sales records are anathema.

Massachusetts Democrat Rep. Martin Meehan said he plans to introduce the bill in the House.
But introducing a bill is no guarantee that there will ever be a vote on it, particularly when the
Republican leadership of the House and Senate oppose most new gun legislation.

After the 15 deaths at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado last year, the Senate
passed a package of gun measures in its juvenile justice bill, but the House defeated them when
it did its version of the youth crime legislation. In theory, the two sides are trying to work out a
compromise but there has been no progress in nearly a year.

Organizers of the Million Mom March say they want Congress to get moving on gun
legislation, including licensing and registration. They project at least 150,000 participants on
Washington's Mall this Sunday, Mother's Day.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>"You need to have a license to sell real estate. You need to have a license
to cut someone's hair,"[/quote]


Only if I am a professional in that particular biz. I don't need a license to sell my own property, either real estate or other, and I don't need a license to cut my child's or a friend's hair. Its mine and I can do as I wish. Learn the distinction Senator Moron Fascist Boxer, the Revolution is acoming and you will not enjoy it.

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
We are already "licenced" through the NICS.

All transactions are "registered" through the 4473 form.

Both unconstitutional and "illegal".

------------------
John/az
"When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!
www.cphv.com
 
Another perspective on the 'licensing' is that we have too many licenses right now. IMHO, it is idiotic that so many professions are licensed, not the reverse ... that anything not licensed is automatically suspect. In truth, many of these licenses are a low level of job protection for many of these professions ... rather 'union-like', IMHO.

But, how often do we hear that refrain ... 'X' industry is still not regulated ... an absurd logic, IMHO. When the hell did we get to the point that being 'unregulated' became a pejorative term? So much for a 'free' country.

And, the 'moms' better push for more prisons as well, because some of their children will not obey these unconstitutional and immoral laws. They will see some of their children sent to prisons and jails because we will refuse to go along with this kind of cr*p. In 10 years or 100 years.

Let me offer, again, an alternative idea. Since their stated reason for needing to license gun owners is to prevent guns from falling into the wrong hands, how about a checkbox on your drivers license? The box would say something like 'approved for gun purchase', and either say yes or no. Everyone with a drivers license would have this box so noted, but in this manner, the government would not know whether you own a gun or not. They would only know that you could own a gun. I realize there are detail problems with this idea in various ways, but nothing fatal, IMHO. It would certainly call their bluff, since their stated purpose is probably not the true reason for their proposal(s).

Regards from AZ
 
maybe we need to make them get a license to be a parent, assuming they could pass a test on how to raise the kids so they're not quite as goofy as their parents
 
I like your idea Jeff, that would leave it anonymous. But, that is not what they want is it?
Also, anyone that is checked to own these guns should also be able to buy new full capacity mags at retail cost as well as assault weapons with all the accessories etc. Hey, if I am approved, then I should be approved to buy whatever I want.

The plan is stupid anyway. They want you to have a license saying that you passed the criminal background check to own a gun. Well...you already pass that background check with each and every gun you buy through NICS. What is different???? Where is the advantage of this new system???
The only thing is different is that now they will have a list of exactly what you own, how many, who you are, and where to find you when they decide to come get you. It should be easy to expose this as the fraud it is, because it would gain nothing and cost a lot of money.

The fact is, the BATF and FBI already illegally keep records of NICS checks. And, many of us have CCW permits that are the same a this license they want to pass. So, nothing would change, but still it is over my dead body that they are going to make me take my guns down and register each one of them....again...and carry around another card saying that I am a good guy. It is a matter of principle. Even though nothing would be different, I still refuse to do it because it is crossing the line.

[This message has been edited by Red Bull (edited May 10, 2000).]
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dZ:

Lawmakers unveil gun licensing proposal
[/quote]

I have another name for it… ”Traitor” instead of“lawmaker”.

These misguided @ssholes continue to violate the oath they took to uphold the US Constitution.

Grrrrr...

Skyhawk
 
"Regulation", or taxing, is still another effort of control. Even by their own definition of a "well-regulated militia".

Licensing is done under the auspices of some form of control.
She said you have to have a license to drive a car. You also have to have insurance too. But there are a lot of people out there who drive without insurance. I know, I've had run-ins with a couple...
What that leaves you with is the whole damn bill. Nothing else as for the protection and regulation the laws say they provide...

That's why there's things like uninsured motorist on your coverage sheets. But I suppose she doesn't grasp that thought.

If these aholes get their way, you'll have to have the Digital Angel to get a loaf of bread. That way you're properly licensed. If your license is revoked, for whatever reason, you can't eat. Complete dependency upon government power.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>To get a license, an applicant would have to go to a licensed firearms dealer, pass a written
firearms safety test, and undergo a background check to make sure there is no disqualifying
criminal record or history of severe mental illness.
[/quote]

Who decides who is unfit? A "disqualifying criminal record". Yeah one day you're in good standing, the next you're a criminal. All it takes is an idiot with too damn much time on her hands.

Best Regards,
Don


------------------
The most foolish mistake we could make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms; history shows that all conquerers who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall.
Adolf Hitler

[This message has been edited by Donny (edited May 10, 2000).]
 
I just love it when the spout that 'license to drive a car' BS.

That does NOT stop persons whose licenses have been suspended or revoked for DWI from buying a car and driving it without a license!

I do NOT have to have a drivers' license to buy a car.

I do NOT have to have a drivers' license to drive said car on my private property.

I do NOT have to register my car. I only have to register it if I take it on public roads. I can drive my unregistered car on my own private property all I want!

A drivers license allows me to drive anywhere I want to on public roads--even Washington DC! If I get a Feinsein and Boxer approved firearms owners license, does that mean that I can carry a gun anywhere in the country--even Washington? Even the Peoples Republic of California?
 
I'd think a gun owner like Finkstein would know this:

IT'S NOT A "CLIP"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry, I've just seen her ugly mug on TV too many times talking about "killer clips". I assume that she's talking about hair clips because she's always holding magazines in her hand.
 
i guess that " fake" HCI 5 year plan is coming true:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>FIVE YEAR PLAN
LICENSES:

1. NATIONAL LICENSING OF ALL HANDGUN PURCHASES
This is at the top of our list, however, the political climate may be right to initiate this step immediately. Please refer to our memo outlining our ideas on how this should
be executed.

2. LICENSE FOR RIFLES AND SHOTGUNS
We should take our cues from Great Britain. Strict licensing should be mandatory -- for all firearms whether handguns or not.

3. STATE LICENSES FOR OWNERSHIP OF FIREARMS
We want to take a workable idea from Great Britain, whereas, we should require the states to issue strict licenses for possession and require the licenses to be signed by
at least three public officials --i.e., the police chief, city attorney and mayor, for example, to eliminate ownership by dangerous individuals. It is reasonable to require that
all individuals must prove to the signers that they require a firearm. This should be attached to any legislation requiring purchasers to show a need for a firearm.
[/quote]
http://www.survival.com.mx/hci.html
 
I heard that, Oleg!

Looks like I better prepare to come home and trade my muzzleloading assault rifle in for a breechloader.

What a pain in the patoot. Self loading actions are such a damned CHORE to keep clean. Ammo's expensive, too.

:mad:



[This message has been edited by Munro Williams (edited May 10, 2000).]
 
How about this, a license for politicians. All persons interested in running for elected office must first obtain a license from the FBI office of political affairs (more bureaucratic jobs for the slackers in DC) They would be forced to undergo stringent background checks to insure that they have no criminal background, have no dealings with foreign governments, have no history of domestic violence, no history of tax evasion, no foreign bank accounts, no history of drug abuse or mental illness.

All politician license holders would waive their claims to any part of the bill of rights and would be subject to unannounced home inspections and inspections of their financial records.

I'm sure TFL'ers could come up with more.

Politicians bilk us of large amounts of money and take care of themselves with generous golden parachutes and health care. Why shouldn't they be required to be licensed and come under the same microscope other license holders must.


Geoff Ross

------------------
One reason to vote in the next Presidential election.

It's the Supreme Court, Stupid!
 
What a dumba$$ proposal.
How different is it from present situation? How is it going to deter crime?

The only thing is that the feds will know what guns you have along with serial numbers. And that they can find even now if they choose to.
Its a big waste of taxpayer money.

A Right ceases to be a Right, when licensing comes into the picture. So anything thats licensed can eventually be revoked, at the whim of the Government.
So much for America being a 'FREE' country. Anand
 
Back
Top