Now here’s some real movement on gun control

[babylonsister]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/03/04/now-heres-some-real-movement-on-gun-control/

Now here’s some real movement on gun control
Posted by Greg Sargent on March 4, 2013 at 2:36 pm


This is probably the most significant movement in the debate over gun reform that we’ve seen since Obama first unveiled his package of proposals last December.

Later today, Senator Patrick Leahy, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, will roll out a compromise proposal — with bipartisan support — on a key piece of Obama’s gun control agenda: The measure designed to crack down on gun trafficking and so-called “straw purchasers.”

Senate aides familiar with the talks tell me that Senator Susan Collins will support the measure today — a real breakthrough in terms of getting Republican support for significant legislative action on guns. Collins’ office didn’t immediately return an email requesting comment. The other Senators supporting this measure are Kirsten Gillibrand, who has had a leading role in pushing it, Mark Kirk (a second Republican attaching his name to the bill), Dick Durbin, and Leahy. The bill will be marked up in committee later this week.

The new legislation will blend two previously existing proposals — one championed by Leahy and Durbin; the other by Gillibrand and Kirk — into one bill. As one aide put it to me: “This legislation will for the first time make gun trafficking a federal crime in order to provide tools to law enforcement to get illegal guns off the streets and away from criminal networks and street gangs. Currently, there is no federal law that defines gun trafficking as a crime.” The measure will also stiffen penalties for “straw purchasers” who knowingly buy guns for those who are not supposed to have them — a practice that many law enforcement groups and other experts believe contributes to gun violence.

The bipartisan support for the new legislation is significant: It shows there is an a persistent appetite in both parties for Congressional action in the wake of the Newtown slayings. This idea also has Republican support in the House: GOP Rep. Scott Rigell recently rolled out his own version of it, and he is said to be trying to line up GOP backing in that chamber. He recently called on the House GOP leadership to allow a vote on this proposal.

more...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/03/04/now-heres-some-real-movement-on-gun-control/
**********************************************************

UPDATE: Senator Collins spokesman Kevin Kelley confirms to me that she will announce the legislation today with Senator Leahy.

[slackmaster]

1. It's hard for me to accept a Senator being so profoundly ignorant of existing federal law

Title 18, Chapter 44, Section 922 of the United States Code defines numerous firearm-related crimes, including gun trafficking and straw purchasers. It was implemented in 1968 as part of the Gun Control Act.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922

"...Currently, there is no federal law that defines gun trafficking as a crime.”

That's nonsense.

[babylonsister]

2. So that's your comment on this story?

Don't you think it's good news?

[slackmaster]

4. I think it's a non-story about cynical career politicians trying to score political points...

...through empty legislation that appeals to emotion and would "outlaw" things that are already illegal and punishable by long prison terms.

A straw purchase can get a person a five-year sentence for a single offense under current law.

Do they really believe the public is dumb enough to believe there is no law under which gun traffickers or straw purchasers can be prosecuted?



Don't you think it's good news?

I think it's a waste of time. I'd prefer to see efforts directed toward beefing up the data quality in the existing NICS background check system, and making it available for use by non-licensees.

[LAGC]

5. It's meaningless grandstanding.

Trafficking is already illegal.

If this is all they can come up with, just reiterating preexisting Federal law, it just goes to show how little is going to be accomplished on the gun control front.

No action on "assault weapons," no action on "universal background checks," no action on magazine capacity limits...

One big cup of FAIL.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

15. Sort of....

Gun trafficking is illegal IF federal prosecutors can prove that you purchased a gun with the specific intent of reselling it or otherwise providing to a person who you KNEW to be prohibited. So both the purchase AND the resale must have intent proven to be prosecutable. The requirement that the government prove intent is what make gun trafficking crimes so difficult to prosecute.

Proving intent takes time. It takes wiretaps, it takes surveillance, it takes the cultivation of confidential informants. Until you can prove intent, the guy who you're CERTAIN is muling guns to the bad guys can't be prosecuted.

The new state would only require prosecutors to prove that the strawman seller "had reason to know" that the person to whom he was selling the weapon was prohibited. In addition, it amps up the penalties for both the buyer and seller -- we're talking decades in prison.

It's not universal background checks yet, but it's a giant step closer.

[rdharma]

16. "had reason to know"

The current statute already has "knowingly" as the level of culpability "mens rea" needed to prove intent for prosecution.

Unless the level of culpability to prove intent for this crime is reduced to "recklessly" or "negligently", it'll just be "business as usual".

We'll see. But I'm not holding my breath hoping for any drastic change to the existing statute.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

17. Intent

The old standard required prosecutors to basically prove a conspiracy between the strawman purchaser and the eventual buyer. Now all the government has to prove is that the strawman had reason to know the buyer was prohibited.

It's a much lower standard. Under the proposed guidance, basically if you sell a firearm without conducting a background check, you're taking a very big risk.

[OldDem2012]

9. The "movement" is almost identical to a....

....bowel movement. It might seem monumental at the time, but once it's over, it's forgotten.

[upaloopa]

6. It must have worked real good too

Can't do it
Won't work
We tried that
Only good guys will obey the law
Takes away my rights
And the beat goes on

[Hoyt]

7. They need to throw that worthless piece of legislation out, and enact something tough.

[rdharma]

14. "Currently, there is no federal law that defines gun trafficking as a crime.”

BS! 18 USC § 922 - Unlawful acts

I probably don't agree with slackmaster on much of anything....... but he is correct about this one.

It's political grandstanding at it's worse! Disgusting!

It's an attempt to appear to be doing something....... when in reality, they're doing NOTHING!

All I see is an increase in the penalty. I see nothing that makes it easier to track these crimes or make enforcement and prosecution easier.

They just don't have the guts to push for REAL gun laws....... like universal background checks for ALL firearms transfers and a system that can track these weapons back to the "straw dealers".

[spanone]

3. k&r...

[derby378]

8. This isn't really what I'd call "gun control"

If we have laws designed to prevent felons and other undesirables from getting guns, this just codifies one of the offenses as a Federal statute.

I have no problem with this. There's a lot of interstate transactions on the black market that this might cover instead of leaving it as a tug-of-war between two states.

[Recursion]

11. I doubt it will make things worse

Unfortunately sometimes that's the best we can hope for.

[aikoaiko]

10. On the face of it, this seems like status quo.

I'll have to take a look at text of the bill for anything special, but it already is illegal to do business as a gun dealer without a Federal Firearm License and to make straw purchases.

If using the phrase "gun trafficking" and stricter penalties on a law that isn't enforced much is a win for some people, then so be it.

[Recursion]

13. Ah, but this will make it double secret illegal

*sigh*

Appointing an ATF head would probably do more than any law that can pass.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

12. OK, now let's start tacking on some meaningful amendments.