Skip to comments.Status Update: New Mexico Firearms Transfer Act, HB-77
Posted on 03/11/2013 10:23:05 AM PDT by CedarDave
The New Mexico Firearms Transfer Act would require background checks for purchase or transfer of firearms at gun shows in the state. Originally the bill would have required background checks for any sale or purchase including between private individuals. Before final NM House passage, it was amended to limit its provisions to gun shows. Passage in the NM house on February 13 was on a 43-26 vote with several Republicans voting in favor.
In the NM Senate, it was assigned to the Public Affairs and Judiciary Committees. It was passed out of the Public Affairs committee on March 7 with a 4-3 vote (Republicans in opposition). It has been assigned to the Senate Judiciary Committee but is not yet on the calendar for hearing.
The Public Affairs Committee made to important changes to the bill. First they added language that would prohibit release of purchase/transfer information under the state public records act (i.e. no newspaper could obtain and publish as in NY state), and the state background check provisions would be repealed if Federal law is changed to require background checks on all purchases/transfers between parties whether or not the transfer takes place at a gun show.
For the proposal to become law, here is what has to happen between now and noon MDT Saturday, March 16:
1. It has to be scheduled and heard by the Senate Judiciary Committee which could be difficult given the competition of other bills for a spot on the calendar. However the chair of the committee is a big lib and also Democrat Majority Floor Leader, so he could push it to the top. (It is not listed on today's committee schedule.)
2. If the committee also approves the bill, it goes to the Senate floor for approval. Again, its place in line depend on politics. For example, today's calendar lists 108 items and House-approved bills start at #85.
3. If it passes the state senate, it will go back to the NM House for concurrence with the amendments. The concurrence calendar is last on the daily calendar.
4. For it to pass, all of this has to happen before noon on Saturday, the last day of the session. However competition to get bills passed will lead to horse trading and scheduling on the calendar is up to the leadership who are all Democrats.
5. If passed, will she sign it?? Governor Susanna Martinez, a Republican and holder of a concealed carry license, has said she would. If passed, polite letters and emails to her might help change her mind.
NM list PING!
I may not PING for all New Mexico articles. To see New Mexico articles by topic click here: New Mexico Topics
To see NM articles by keyword, click here: New Mexico Keywords
To see the NM Message Page, click here: New Mexico Messages
(The NM list is available on my FR homepage for anyone to use. Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from the list.)
Thanks for the update. I lived in NM for 14 years and have lots of friends out west.
This is such BS! there should be NO background checks period! This is what happens when Americans think “some” background checks are reasonable, now the liberal socialist want background checks on firearm sales at all “gun shows” and the next move of the goal post will be for complete background checks or “universal” background checks or in liberal socialist speak, a Federal National Firearm Registry Data Base and firearm confiscation from those Americans the government deems “unworthy” or “mentally” unstable to possess a firearm, effective confiscation of all firearms in the United States, which is the end goal of all liberal socialist in the US government. Liberal socialist walk in step with each other for the one goal of a United States free of those “evil guns.”
Of course this legislature wants to come across as “compromising” and “reasonable” but, actually moves the goal post another inch closer to the stated goal of universal registration and confiscation of all firearms in the US. Go to Brietbart and read about Jan Shatowsky (not proper spelling) and read how she was caught on video stating the real goal of the liberal socialist “ being full confiscation” and had no problem speaking to the person who she thought was a fellow liberal socialist!
All so called “gun control” legislation must be defeated and not looked at as “reasonable” or “compromising” because, if any American supports gun control legislation, not matter how innocuous it may appear, simply moves the goal post another inch in the direction of full confiscation, make no mistake of the intentions of these liberal socialist!
To follow the bill (or committee/floor schedules), go to the link and select the appropriate topic.
Thanks for your comments, true enough.
And WELCOME to FR!
Again, thank you and please stay safe through these troubled times in our Country!
Indeed. You might mention that if she signs it, she is not only advancing the "universal" aspect one step further, she is making it easier for some future governor to ban transfers by claiming a State of Emergency and shutting down the checks for "public safety". Ergo, for the most part, a statewide ban on firearms transfers when an unarmed citizen might need it the most.
So, in other words, they are passing a new law, duplicating the Federal Law that has been in place since 1993.
The stupid "gun show loophole" meme lives on, despite there being no loophole at all.
The NM Legislature gets to pretend that they are solving a problem that doesn't exist, to make themselves and their leftist constituents feel better, and open the door to abuse of the constitution at a later date.
Not having been to a gun show, it is my understanding that dealers must be Federally licensed and purchases from them are required to have background checks of the buyer. However, other attendees selling or trading personal firearms can do so without the buyer undergoing a background check. Is that description incorrect?
Dave... That is correct.... but you are perhaps looking at it from the wrong angle:
Private persons selling /buying at a gun show is merely a convenience in making a private sale. The seller could run an ad in the Thrifty nickel, or craigs list, and they could arrange to meet meet at the 7-11 parking lot or whatever.
Or indeed a private seller could make a cardboard sign saying “gun for sale” and walk down the street looking for customers
Plus it is a little safer to do your transaction at a gun show, but there is not a “gun show loophole” the way the media and the politicians try to make people believe.
If they want to make private sales illegal that is a whole different discussion.
Or if they want to make a law saying that gun show organizers can’t allow non-FFL exhibitioners to bring firearms into the show, that is another valid discussion. In fact, back several years ago when I did do some gun shows as an exhibitioner, there was at least one major show organizer that did just that.
You couldn’t bring a gun into the hall unless you were a paid exhibitioner. And I actually supported that idea, because when you pay hundreds or thousands of dollars to exhibit, you don’t want people coming in under general admission and ‘stealing’ potential customers.
But any argument ‘to close the gun show loophole’ is specious.
That is what the bill in its original form did. Private sales were to be made illegal without a background check and registration of the weapon:
...prior to transferring a firearm, a transferor other than a licensed gun dealer shall request by telephone that the department conduct a background check on the recipient to determine if the recipient is qualified to purchase or receive a firearm and shall provide the following information to the department:
(1) the name, address and telephone number of the transferor;
(2) the make, model, caliber and manufacturer's number of the firearm being transferred;
(3) the name, date of birth, race, sex and address of the recipient;
(4) the social security number of the recipient if the recipient voluntarily provides that number;
(5) the address of the place where the transfer is occurring; and
(6) the type, issuer and identification number of a current piece of identification bearing a recent photograph of the recipient presented by the recipient. The identification presented by the recipient shall include one piece of current identification bearing a photograph and the date of birth of the recipient ...
Clearly these provisions would violate both the state and Federal constitutions, though that never seems to bother Dems.
Yeah, Dave, I get that, and understand that the original bill is unconstitutional in both state and federal. When I said “That is a whole different discussion.” it didn’t mean that I approved of it.
I just am trying to point out that there is no ‘gun show loophole’ and the new bill won’t actually stop anything. All it does is to remove a convenience to private buyers and sellers, by making them do their deals in a different venue.
The new stripped down bill is just ‘feel good’ legislation for the lefties and low information voters. A complete waste of time.