Obama Administration's New Proposed Gun Regulation for Border States Met With Bipartisan Dissent

[shadowrider]

The Obama administration's plan to force new reporting requirements on thousands of gun dealers near the Mexico border is under fire from members of his own party.

At least three Democrats in the Senate and several more in the House are voicing opposition to a proposed regulation from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that would require about 8,500 gun dealers in four states – California, New Mexico, Arizona and Texas – to report gun sales of two or more high-powered rifles sold within five consecutive business days.

--snip--

Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, has asked the ATF to withdraw its request to the White House for emergency authority to enact the regulation.

"While I understand the importance of cracking down on violence and gun trafficking along the U.S.-Mexico border, this wide-reaching regulation would punish law-abiding American gun owners and impede their Second Amendment rights,"

--snip--

The proposal also faces opposition from Montana's two Democratic senators, Max Baucus and Jon Tester, as well as 36 House members in both parties who say the regulation would subject gun dealers to burdensome requirements.

--snip--

In a letter to President Obama last month, House members, including Reps. Dan Boren, D-Okla, Nick Rahall, D-W. Va., Mike Ross, D-Ark., Denny Rehberg, R-Mont., and Ron Paul, R-Texas,said the regulation should be reviewed by Congress first.

--snip--

Obama resubmitted the nomination (Of Traver) last week after it died in the last session of Congress. But Traver still faces fierce opposition from groups such as the National Rifle Association.

"Traver has been deeply aligned with gun control advocates and anti-gun activities," the NRA said in a statement last week. "This makes him the wrong choice to lead an enforcement agency that has almost exclusive oversight and control over the firearms industry, its retailers and consumers."

--snip--

Melson called the gun dealers who would be affected by the regulation "good citizens who share ATF's interest and commitment in keeping guns out of criminal hands."

"Working together, we can do that without infringing on the rights of law abiding citizens," he said.

--snip--

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence strongly supports the proposal.

"It makes sense that law enforcement should be alerted if someone is buying five, 10 or 100 assault weapons, when it's likely that those guns could be headed to drug cartels in Mexico," said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign.

"It will give ATF the same amount of information about people who buy military-style assault weapons in bulk that they already have had for more than 40 years about people who buy handguns in bulk," he said in a statement. "It's the kind of crime-fighting information that our law enforcement officials ought to have if we want to reduce the number of assault weapons being trafficked illegally to Mexico, as well as to American cities."

==================

Nice to see some Dems "get it".

Yes, it's Fox, but that doesn't automatically make the info wrong (as many will claim)

Edited to add the link:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/15/obama-administrations-new-proposed-gun-regulation-border-states-met-bipartisan/

[shadowrider]

1. And if this somehow gets approved

Lawmaker: We already have this for border states. There's no reason we can't expand it to ALL states.

Watch.

[The Wielding Truth]

2. A little regulation is sensible. This is not a radical step to control gun violence.

[shadowrider]

3. "A little regulation".

We've been over this, and over this and over this in the past week.

What do YOU consider "A little regulation"?

[frazzled]

4. I consider the proposed new rule "very little" to ask in regulation

Who the heck needs more than one high-powered rifle within 5 days?

I think the "absolutely no regulation" people are going to have to whine. The tide is turning. No right is completely unlimited, not even free speech. (Witness rules to prevent Westboro Baptist folk from "speaking" in the faces of funeral attendants.)

[shadowrider]

5. No responsible gun owner on this forum has EVER argued

for "absolutely no regulation". Show me one, and you can go back years if you'd like.

I'll wait.

[Euromutt]

6. It's not about whether it's a little or a lot to ask; it's whether it'll do any good

This goes a damn sight further than requirements to report purchases "in bulk" unless you consider two firearms to constitute a "bulk" purchase.

Look, the idea is that this reporting requirement would provide the ATF with leads on people buying large numbers of rifles, possibly with an eye to smuggling them into Mexico. That's fair enough as it goes. But intelligence work isn't just a matter of having the piece of intelligence, it's a matter of recognizing it as being significant in the midst of all the insignificant pieces of information you have, and also being able to do something about it.

By setting the bar this low, at two firearms in a five business day period, the ATF could get quite a lot of reports, of which a comparatively small number could be straw purchasers/traffickers. As a result, they might simply get snowed under, and by the time they get round to tracking down some actual straw purchaser, the guns will be long gone.

And in the meantime, this provides an additional burden of paperwork on FFLs, and there'll be more bitching about FFLs being "in violation of the rules" (i.e. not crossing every t and dotting every i, and not filling in the buyer's county of residence even when the city and state have been) and how hard it is to close them down.

In short, it'll make a lot of people's lives a bit harder, for little to no payoff.

As an aside, what do you consider to be a "high-powered rifle"? Anything that isn't a .22 rimfire?

[shadowrider]

9. Can you direct me to the nearest "Department of Need" office?

I'd like to check with them and see what else they feel I "need".

[TheWraith]

11. You know almost all rifles are "high powered," yes?

Anything other than the weakest available round, a .22, is considered "high powered," including antique bolt-action rifles used in World War II.

And despite your perceptions, there are no "absolutely no regulation" people. The difference is that most people think that the 22,000 odd gun regulations the US already has is enough, and that we don't need more. It's already harder to get a gun than it is virtually anything else you can buy, but some people insist on the belief that that's not the case.

[SteveM]

7. ...a little here, a little there, a little more over that way, some more...

There can be little doubt efforts will be made to make the regulations permanent and nation-wide, in Helmke's never-ending search for "assault weapons," a definition as fluid and as encompassing as he wants it.

A quick review of these threads over the last week or two will reveal the desire to expand gun-control in numerous ways. 'Seems "common sense" has become a fill-in-the-blank definition. Like "assault weapons."

[SteveM]

8. This proposal may violate the "commerce clause"....

in that it penalizes businesses which are located within some rather arbitary range of the border(s). Further, due process could be violated because there seems to be little room for "appeal" of a BATF regulation.

[guruoo]

10. Best not to touch the new third rail. nt