PDA

View Full Version : ACTION! GOA: S. 54 Would Effectively Ban Even More Guns than Feinstein’s Bill!




tangent4ronpaul
03-12-2013, 06:15 AM
http://www.gunowners.org/alert03042013.htm

Violation of state gun bans would make you a “Prohibited Person” all across the country

Do you like Cuomo's semi-auto gun ban? D.C.'s microstamping requirement? Rahm Emaunuel's licensure laws?

The Senate is about to vote to make all of these into federal crimes, turning gun-owning Americans into prohibited persons — meaning they would NOT be able to own a firearm anywhere in the country!

We have talked about some of the problems with Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy's gun “trafficking” bill. Leahy apparently thinks that, if he puts a shiny label on the bill, he can ban as many guns as he wants.

But, at its core, S. 54 would make it a federal crime to violate virtually any state gun law.

Section 5 creates a new "prohibited person" classification which makes it a federal crime to transfer a gun if “prohibited by State or local law ... from possessing [or] selling ... THE firearm or ammunition.” [Emphasis added]

Note the use of the word “the.” We're not talking about a person who's banned from owning ANY firearm. We're talking about a person who's prohibited by ANY state law from possessing a PARTICULAR firearm.

So do you like Andrew Cuomo's massive gun ban? He bans more types of guns than would Feinstein’s so-called “assault weapons” ban. Yet under S. 54, transferring a firearm banned by Cuomo becomes a federal crime, punishable by ten years in a federal prison — at least for New York residents and possibly for others.

Do you like California's proposed ammunition ban? That also becomes a federal crime — at least for California residents and perhaps for others.

So you like gun licensure? A person who doesn't have a license in New York and Illinois is also “prohibited by State ... law ... from possessing [or] selling ... the firearm.” This becomes a federal crime.

Do you agree with D.C.'s efforts to ban firearms by imposing a microstamping requirement? Transferring a non-microstamped firearm would become a FEDERAL crimeunder S. 54 — at least for D.C. residents and maybe others.

By voting for S. 54, your senator will be making guns banned by Andrew Cuomo’s expansive law into federally banned guns, as well. He will be saying, “I like every word of gun control which Rahm Emanuel is pushing.”

By the way, Senator Leahy is trying to sell S. 54 as a supposed crackdown on gun traffickers. But there’s not one word in this bill that would punish (or prevent) what happened in Fast & Furious, where our government helped send thousands of illegal guns south of the border, resulting in the murders of hundreds of Mexicans and at least one federal agent.

Moreover, it’s currently illegal to traffic in firearms. It’s illegal to sell a gun to a prohibited person [18 USC 922(d)]. It’s illegal to serve as a straw man [18 USC 922(d)]. It’s illegal to sell a bunch of guns without a license [18 USC 922(a)]. But that’s not what S. 54 is about. The one thing S. 54 would do is to make gun bans being passed by every anti-gun state into federal crimes as well.

ACTION: Click here to contact your senators. Demand that they oppose S. 54 and speak out against it.

http://capwiz.com/gunowners/issues/alert/?alertid=62464561

-t

Noob
03-12-2013, 06:23 AM
No Gun Control Deals Petition to Congress

http://nagr.org/2013/no-more-gun-deals.aspx?pid=m

tod evans
03-12-2013, 06:36 AM
I want to see this legislation tested on LEOs for a decade before it's ever even submitted for a vote.

LEO are government employees and as such have tacitly agreed to be bound by the terms of their employment, so how about limiting their "rights" as a provision of employment prior to attempting to subject normal citizens to this hooey?

Let those calling for bans on firearms or ammo subject their employees to the proposed bans without passing any new laws...

tangent4ronpaul
03-12-2013, 09:59 AM
//

HOLLYWOOD
03-12-2013, 10:05 AM
INFO: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s54



S. 54: Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013
Introduced:Jan 22, 2013 (113th Congress, 2013–2015)

Sponsor:
Sen. Patrick Leahy [D-VT] (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/patrick_leahy/300065)Status: Reported by Committee
The bill’s title was written by the bill’s sponsor. S. stands for Senate bill.
Track this bill (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s54#)


Overview (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s54#overview)
Summaries (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s54#summary)
Related (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s54#related)

Status
The committees assigned to this bill sent it to the House or Senate as a whole for consideration on March 7, 2013.

Progress
Introduced: Jan 22, 2013
Referred to Committee: Jan 22, 2013
Reported by Committee: Mar 07, 2013

Passed Senate TBD
Passed House TBD
Signed by the President

Prognosis 16% chance of being enacted.
Only 16% of Senate bills that made it past committee in 2011–2013 were enacted.
[show factors (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s54#) | methodology (http://www.govtrack.us/about/analysis#prognosis)]

Cosponsors
3 cosponsors (2D, 1R) (show (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s54#))

Durbin, Richard [D-IL] (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/richard_durbin/300038)
Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT] (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/richard_blumenthal/412490)
(joined Feb 07, 2013)
Collins, Susan [R-ME] (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/susan_collins/300025)
(joined Mar 11, 2013)

Committees Senate Judiciary (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/committees/SSJU)
Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/committees/SSJU/SSJU21)

Noob
03-13-2013, 05:22 PM
stop the Feinstein Gun Ban


http://www.chooseliberty.org/libertydirective.aspx?pid=0129a

http://www.nagr.org/FeinsteinGunBan_Petition.aspx?pid=2

Christian Liberty
03-13-2013, 06:36 PM
Does this actually necessarily mean that New York's draconian gun control laws will become Federal level?

I don't think that's the intent of the bill, although perhaps its a secret intent. But that doesn't look like the most straightforward way to interpret the text. All I THINK its saying is that if I sell a gun that I'm not allowed to have in my state, its a Federal crime. Grant you, that's bad enough. New York's gun laws are total crap. And gun control is total crap. Thanks a lot Reagan for starting it...

satchelmcqueen
03-13-2013, 08:37 PM
nah, the gov would never word something for misuse or abuse. nope...
Does this actually necessarily mean that New York's draconian gun control laws will become Federal level?

I don't think that's the intent of the bill, although perhaps its a secret intent. But that doesn't look like the most straightforward way to interpret the text. All I THINK its saying is that if I sell a gun that I'm not allowed to have in my state, its a Federal crime. Grant you, that's bad enough. New York's gun laws are total crap. And gun control is total crap. Thanks a lot Reagan for starting it...