ATF Reform Act
Looks like some good came from the ATF hearings:
Subcommittee Chairman Howard Coble (R-NC) and ranking member Bobby Scott (D-VA) agreed on the need to focus BATFE’s efforts on enforcing current laws against serious criminals, while not pursuing petty violations or undermining civil liberties. To that end, the “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Modernization and Reform Act of 2006” will soon be introduced. This bipartisan bill will update the legal standards for disciplining violations by FFLs. It also calls for a review of BATFE’s enforcement practices, and clarifies BATFE’s responsibilities to keep the Bureau focused on its core mission.
Good!
April 4th, 2006 at 4:24 pm
What does the final “E” stand for? Is it now the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Everything?
April 4th, 2006 at 4:55 pm
Deep link:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?c109:./temp/~c1090p9d6h
Sorry, no time right now to see how this proposed bill modifies existing law. Right now it’s at a manageable 1500 or so words. You will note the last sections does include banning the importation of barrels used to finish domestic receivers.
(blockquote>
SEC. 10. BARREL AND RECEIVER IMPORTATION.
(a) In General- Section 925(e) of title 18, United States Code, is amended–
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking `, and’ and inserting a period;
(2) by adding at the end the following:
`(3) All frames or receivers of rifles, or barrels for firearms other than handguns, if the importation is for repair or replacement purposes.’.
(b) Governmental Imports- Section 925(a)(1) of such title is amended by inserting `, barrel,’ after `or importation of any firearm’.
(c) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
END
Come on critters, if “free trade” is good for GM and Wal-Mart, it’s good for everybody, even us serfs.
I’m unsure if the demilled AKM will still flow after this. You likely still have to still have the proper number of “magic” domestic parts, only now the domestic barrel you will have to buy will be made in the USA. Protectionism for US barrel makers anyone?
April 4th, 2006 at 4:59 pm
X,
Explosives. Though I think Expletives would be a more apt interpretation fo said E. Personally I prefer to substitute the E with a U.
But I’m still skeptical. What I believe this amounts to is giving the ATFU more power (in the form of fines & such) to carry out their “core mission”. Let us not forget that their “core mission” is unconstitutional & therefore little good will ever come from them. Even if we set the constitution aside (which they seem to do with regularity) the ATFU has seemingly been focused on discouraging as many folks as possible from being FFL’s. Giving them the power to lay fines & suspend licenses temporarily on FFL’s instead of just outright taking away their license doesn’t seem to me to be anything we should be happy about. Sure, if someone accepts a Y instead of a yes on a form a fine would be more appropriate than a revokation of their license, but this is the ATFU we’re talking about here. What will happen is they’ll use the fining & suspension process as much as they can to get people to drop their FFL’s without them having to officially revoke them.
Still, the congresscritters seem to be trying to do something, bless their little hearts.
April 4th, 2006 at 5:02 pm
no permlinks for congress-critters. you have to go to thomas:
http://thomas.loc.gov/
and plug in H.R. 5005, and serch for the bill itself.
April 5th, 2006 at 12:40 am
Oh my god I cant beleive how this crap has spread everywhere. THIS BILL DOES NOT DO WHAT YOU SAY IT DOES. You have all been deceived.
If you analyze the text of the bill (which I did on thehighroad.org legal and politics section) you will see that this is basically a bill exempting federal security contractors (blackwater etc) from most of the NFA regulations including the 86 ban. Everything else is just recodification of things that are already law. This will CHANGE NOTHING AT ALL FOR US. Every single one of the “reforms” was already implemented earlier in appropriations bills. The huge change which no one mentions is the fact that the government can now equip and use mercenaries inside the US without obeying federal or state gun control laws. This is huge.
HR5005 IS A VERY BAD BILL. Please stop promoting it. Ask for real reform or nothing.
April 5th, 2006 at 12:43 am
Yes, the NRA is attempting to deceive us. READ THE BILL ON THOMAS.GOV. You will see everything that I have described. This bill is a huge wolf in sheeps clothing. It is not a progun bill so much as it a pro-hessian bill.
WAKE UP.
April 5th, 2006 at 8:07 am
someone else’s analysis over at TheHighRoad: (thanks beerslurpy)
http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=2349024&postcount=24
http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=2349024&postcount=24
still have not gotten time to look at it., AND my “Gun Laws” book is a decade out of date.
stay tuned.
April 5th, 2006 at 9:30 am
That was an early analysis that I retracted later in that thread. The bill does not create loopholes in 922(o) that civilians can use. The “date of enactment” will remain May 86 so all of the post 86 guns stay off the books.
April 5th, 2006 at 11:22 am
well OK then, here’s a link to the entire thread:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=2349024
September 12th, 2006 at 5:35 pm
[…] SayUncle brings us news of ATF Reform being imminent. As he says, good! Some some more info, apparently. What’s bad about the bill, SayUncle? Well if the commenter is right and it does allow the U.S. to use mercenaries inside the borders of the U.S. that would be bad. Not having any gun control laws, on the other hand, is very good indeed. […]