On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:48:34 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:15:42 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

This provision alone would have me voting against the bill:

"Beginning on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of the Fix Gun Checks Act of
2013, it shall be unlawful for any person who is not licensed under this chapter to transfer a
firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this chapter, unless a licensed importer,
licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken possession of the firearm for the purpose
of complying with subsection (s). Upon taking possession of the firearm, the licensee shall comply
with all requirements of this chapter as if the licensee were transferring the firearm from the
licensee’s inventory to the unlicensed transferee."

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s649/text

The bill doesn't exclude alcoholics from purchasing a firearm, as best as I can see. I suppose
that's so the Ted Kennedy's of the world can buy pistols.


Salmonbait

Is this the bill that they are calling the background check bill? (the
one they got the 68 vote cloture on)

I really have not been paying that much attention and won't until they
finally get something on the floor.

I believe so. It's the Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013, which is what all the hollering
is about.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:58:21 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:15:42 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

This provision alone would have me voting against the bill:

"Beginning on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of the Fix Gun Checks Act of
2013, it shall be unlawful for any person who is not licensed under this chapter to transfer a
firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this chapter, unless a licensed importer,
licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken possession of the firearm for the purpose
of complying with subsection (s). Upon taking possession of the firearm, the licensee shall comply
with all requirements of this chapter as if the licensee were transferring the firearm from the
licensee’s inventory to the unlicensed transferee."

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s649/text


OK that is the bill.

They are trying to outlaw all private sales.


They allow private sales, but the gun has to be first transferred to a licensed dealer and then the
dealer has to go thru the hoops that he would if he were making a sale to the buyer.

What a pain in the ass. And, unless I were law abiding as hell, I'd probably just sell the gun to my
neighbor, or whomever, and forget all the **** (unless, of course, I'd already completed a 4473 on
the damn thing - then I'd be trapped).

Maybe the NRA's got the right idea after all.

Hell, many folks won't even have an ID, 'cause it's too onerous to obtain and would prevent them
from voting.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 13:26:56 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:34:22 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:58:21 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:15:42 -0400, J Herring
wrote:

This provision alone would have me voting against the bill:

"Beginning on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of the Fix Gun Checks Act of
2013, it shall be unlawful for any person who is not licensed under this chapter to transfer a
firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this chapter, unless a licensed importer,
licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken possession of the firearm for the purpose
of complying with subsection (s). Upon taking possession of the firearm, the licensee shall comply
with all requirements of this chapter as if the licensee were transferring the firearm from the
licensee’s inventory to the unlicensed transferee."

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s649/text


OK that is the bill.

They are trying to outlaw all private sales.


They allow private sales, but the gun has to be first transferred to a licensed dealer and then the
dealer has to go thru the hoops that he would if he were making a sale to the buyer.

That pretty much stops being a private sale at that point doesn't it?

What a pain in the ass. And, unless I were law abiding as hell, I'd probably just sell the gun to my
neighbor, or whomever, and forget all the **** (unless, of course, I'd already completed a 4473 on
the damn thing - then I'd be trapped).

Why, aren't they telling us there is no federal registry? ;-)



Maybe the NRA's got the right idea after all.

Hell, many folks won't even have an ID, 'cause it's too onerous to obtain and would prevent them
from voting.

Let's see what the Senate ends up sending to the house. That is why I
have not been that interested in watching this bill day to day.
I would not be surprised to see paragraph 2 get modified or simply cut
out all together.

Wait a sec... you want to wait and see??? Well, ****, that's not what
you usually say.

In article ,
says...

On 4/12/2013 10:45 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 4/12/13 10:42 AM, J Herring wrote:
On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:20:39 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/12/13 10:15 AM, J Herring wrote:
This provision alone would have me voting against the bill:

"Beginning on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment
of the Fix Gun Checks Act of
2013, it shall be unlawful for any person who is not licensed under
this chapter to transfer a
firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this chapter,
unless a licensed importer,
licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken possession
of the firearm for the purpose
of complying with subsection (s). Upon taking possession of the
firearm, the licensee shall comply
with all requirements of this chapter as if the licensee were
transferring the firearm from the
licensee?s inventory to the unlicensed transferee."

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s649/text

The bill doesn't exclude alcoholics from purchasing a firearm, as
best as I can see. I suppose
that's so the Ted Kennedy's of the world can buy pistols.


Salmonbait

--
Hope you're having a spectacular day!


Was it booze you gave up, or just cigarettes?

- - - - -

The sayings of Silvertongue Herring:

"What's so special about a warm dildo?

"Oh...****...never mind."


You should have put Wayne's comment in your sig line also. Then it
would be even funnier!

If you'd paid attention to my posts over the years, you could probably
answer your question
yourself. Why are you interested?

I'm interested in your 'special circumstances' as a learning experience.


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.



I just don't remember, John, because, really, so little of what you post
is memorable. Probably cigs, and if you were able to beat the habit, it
was probably the best thing you've ever done for yourself. You don't
seem to be a substance addict, and I wouldn't want to accuse you of
that. I just don't recall.

So, you like your dildos cold, eh?



Um, you are the one who complained about dildo ads on your computer,
turns out you were at a site that used "targeted ads" based on your past
surfing history.. LOL!!!

What's so bad about that?

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 00:02:54 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:15:32 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

Let's see what the Senate ends up sending to the house. That is why I
have not been that interested in watching this bill day to day.
I would not be surprised to see paragraph 2 get modified or simply cut
out all together.

Wait a sec... you want to wait and see??? Well, ****, that's not what
you usually say.

It is what I usually say when something is as fluid as this.

Except when it comes to things like the end of social security and
medicare and the financial collapse of the US. All of which is much
less "fluid" as in not happening.