Nasty Details of S.374, UBCs

[Kirk Freeman]

Some on INGO have asked why Universal Background Checks would be a bad thing.

Well, here is why, it is an nasty piece of work that will only work to put more of the non-criminal class in prison:

We Have Language for S. 374, the Transfer Ban | Shall Not Be Questioned

 

[ARdysfunction]

Thanks for the link... there are some people I need to send this to.

 

[jgreiner]

Good info Kirk. Thanks!!!

 

[Mosineer]

Thanks Kirk!! Found this link on FOX but it doesn't state the Bill number.

Divided Senate panel approves bill for near-universal gun background checks | Fox News

Is this the same Bill S.374 or a different version in this article?

Never did like Schumer, he has been against the 2nd for decades. He is one hateful worm. Don't know who is worse, him or Doomberg. NY and NYC should be ashamed that they continue to elect them...

 

[Caleb]

Wow...more ways to send people to prison over stupid stuff

 

[Light]

So assuming that the article means it passed the senate, I pray that this bill goes to a house committee to rot.

 

[jkfletcher]

So assuming that the article means it passed the senate, I pray that this bill goes to a house committee to rot.

I think it just past the senate committee for a full senate vote

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

It is clear to me that congressmen believe the key to solving any problem is to make more people felons that are caught performing, what 20-30 years ago would have been simple, innocusous actions.

 

[Caleb]

I think it just past the senate committee for a full senate vote

Oh god....we're in trouble

 

[Colt556]

Holy Crap on a Cracker!!

 

[aaron580]

This had better not pass or fits gonna hit the shan soon I think.....

 

[BogWalker]

That makes perfect sense. Take a bunch of people who own guns and make them really angry. Great way to save the country.

 

[Mosinguy]

If this passes everyone come to my house so we can pass a bunch of guns around in a circle.

 

[kg9aq]

I think the amendment number to S.374 is ALB13180 (from a link at Western Rifle Shooters Association)

The weasel rat slipped the amendment in at the last second.

 

[BigMoose]

I just sent a note to Joe and Dan, everyone else should too.

Now don't panic yet. There is a chance some friendly repubs can jam the bill with an amendment the Dems will hate, and it will be a dead duck.

This doesn't have a snowballs chance in the house ether.

 

[Light]

I just sent a note to Joe and Dan, everyone else should too.

Now don't panic yet. There is a chance some friendly repubs can jam the bill with an amendment the Dems will hate, and it will be a dead duck.

This doesn't have a snowballs chance in the house ether.

I wouldn't go that far, I think that they may try to amend it more in the Senate.

UBC is the "golden boy" of the Dem's right now for gun control.

 

[cosermann]

S.374 assumes there's some way to identify the "owner" of a particular firearm.

Apart from firearm registration to specific individuals, who's to say that a particular firearm doesn't belong to one's wife, child, etc?

Would creating a trust be one way to comply with S.374?

 

[SmileDocHill]

Here is where this road leads to. Kind of long but basically the purpose is to point out how these laws result in silly little things opening you up to HUGE legal consequences.

Warning, a little Language. He is in New Zealand, not the USA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDQm5TpDsv4

 

[cosermann]

He does a good job explaining where this can go using the NZ examples.

What kills me is he said he thought the NZ way is "reasonable" earlier in the video (1:28)!