Posted on 02/25/2013 2:11:34 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Here’s the first hard evidence we’ve seen that the big meeting of the minds on guns that the media’s been touting might be overhyped. Plain and simple, says Coburn, if Democrats demand that records of private gun sales be kept, the compromise is dead.
But wait. Kept by who? By the seller, or by the federal government?
A Senate aide familiar with the process said Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace erred in the question he posed to Coburn. The aides said there is no discussion of allowing the federal government to keep any records of background checks or sales, something that is already illegal and would not change. What is being proposed is having the seller retain a record of a private sale, just as a dealer does now for a sale that happens at a licensed gun store, the aide said.
It’s true, Wallace does seem to think that the Democratic plan would involve the feds retaining records of gun sales. If that wasn’t being kicked around in negotiations, you’d expect Coburn to correct him — but he doesn’t. Does that mean Wallace is stating the Democratic position correctly, much to the chagrin of Schumer et al. who’d prefer to keep that quiet while negotiations are ongoing? Or is Coburn saying he opposes expanded record-keeping of any kind, whether by the feds or otherwise?
WaPo makes it sound like the records would be kept by a private entity, not by the government, but it’s uncertain which private entity that might be:
Democrats say that keeping records of private sales is necessary to enforce any new law and because current federal law requires licensed firearm dealers to keep records...
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
If there is no recordkeeping, then the universal background check just becomes an easily accessable database of forbidden possessors. WE could live with that, and might even turn it into a way of doing away with 4473 records and the NICS (National Instant Check System). My guess is that is what Coburn is willing to do. This sounds like a smart ploy on his part to kill the universal background check, because the Obama administration will never go for it.
“If they can’t be trusted to own and carry weapons, what are they doing running around loose?”
What are you doing with that old 18th and 19th and early 20th century thinking? The “progressive” knows that NO ONE excpt highly trained government agents are to be trusted with firearms.
A little study of North of the Border would be beneficial if they don'y really want to confiscate the guns.
Like the LAPD's (fortunately brief) War on Pickup Trucks.
The “gun show loophole” - isn’t. (Ever notice that “loopholes” only appear in laws that block the liberal agenda?) It was specifically added to the 1968 Gun Control Act as an escape value to prevent a national gun registration/confiscation list. That’s why the Democrats have, ever since, been trying to expand the check.
If all they are concerned with is your criminal/mental history, why do they want the serial number, caliber and type of firearm? (Schumer wants a 4473 for EVERY transaction.)
The elephant in the living room is that if every law-abiding citizen has to get government clearance before buying a firearm, what’s to prevent obama, et al from declaring a “National Emergency” (real or bogus) and shut down the background checks for “public safety”? Ergo, a total ban on gun transfers. Those naive people who believed the police would protect them and didn’t arm themselves will find out the penalty the hard way.
value = valve
(sigh)
I ran into him flying into Tulsa last Friday. Couldn’t even look at him and didn’t want to engage him as I’ve.done in the.past. The system us btoke
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.