Amy Schumer joins cousin Senator Chuck Schumer in fight for gun control:

[DeepModem Mom]

Nearly two weeks after a gunman opened fire during a screening of one of her movies, killing two people and himself, actress and comedienne Amy Schumer is teaming up with her cousin, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., as he unveils new legislation to combat gun violence.

The proposed legislation, which the two presented at a news conference Monday, would reward states that submit information to the background-check system and penalize states that don't comply.

During a July screening of Amy Schumer's film "Trainwreck" at a movie theater in Lafayette, Louisiana, John Houser shot 11 people, killing two women before eventually turning the gun on himself. He legally purchased the gun he used at a pawn shop.

The new push for gun control in Congress also comes after the FBI reported that a breakdown in the system made it possible for Charleston church shooter Dylann Roof to purchase a gun.

"These shootings have got to stop. I don't know how else to say it," Amy Schumer said at the press conference Monday....

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/03/politics/amy-schumer-chuck-schumer-gun-control/index.html via CNN

[bluestateguy]

1. Because when you're a Hollywood celebrity you can afford armed private security

and all those other little people can just make do on their own.

[Electric Monk]

2. Cleary this is not the group for you, with an attitude like that. So, you're blocked. nt

[DeepModem Mom]

3. Hi! This is the Gun Control Reform Group, not a Forum. But thanks for stopping by. nt

[Paladin]

5. Standard NRA Talking Point garbage. You won't be happy in this group. (nt)

[DashOneBravo]

4. I think this is a great idea.

And if they would open the background check to people who are not firearms dealers it would make an impact on the gun show loophole and private sales.

[Lizzie Poppet]

7. Agreed.

A secure system of access by private individuals would remove one (small) stumbling block in universal background check systems: the fee charged by FFL dealers to run the checks.

[flamin lib]

9. The problem is that the records of the sale have to kept and the easiest way to do that is to

transfer the ownership to a FFL and have the FFL enter the purchase/sale into their record keeping. Then, should the gun show up at a crime scene and be traced to the original owner it would be a simple matter of contacting the FFL for the record of the sale.

Even at that the fee for a transfer is usually only $25 which is a paltry sum to have somebody else be responsible for the check and record keeping.

[Lizzie Poppet]

10. Would the FFL be creating a 4473 on these checks, I wonder?

To the best of my knowledge, the only legally mandated records* an FFL holder has to maintain is the federal Form 4473, the record of firearms transfer. Since they're not the entity actually making the transfer (they never had ownership of the weapon), I wonder if there's any such requirement. The 4473 has always been for original transfer of a new firearm.

If not, then this is an area which needs to be addressed in universal background check laws. I'll take a look, when I have time, at Oregon's new universal background check law and see if there's anything in this area.

* records of firearms, that is...obviously they have other required records, like accounting books, etc.

[flamin lib]

11. As I understand the way things work from this article:

http://www.knoxnews.com/business/store-will-do-gun-transfers-for-free_73072735

The FFL has to enter the firearm into inventory just as if it came from any other manufacturer/distributor. In effect they "buy" the gun and chain of possession passes to them. Then the FFL "sells" the firearm just as if it were any other piece of inventory meaning they fill out the 4473, run the check and file the form in their records. Money for the transfer ($25) is collected by the FFL and the money for the firearm is between the two people buying/selling the gun.

I'd happily pay someone the $25 to maintain those records and clear me of any responsibility for the use of the gun after it leaves my hands. Sounds pretty cheap to me.

[Lizzie Poppet]

12. That works.

I downloaded the PDF of the Oregon universal background check law, and I'll read through it when I have a bit more time (20 pages, densely formatted...ain't politicians/lawyers grand? =P ). I suspect there are similar record-keeping provisions.

[sir pball]

13. I have always sold through an FFL and yes there is a 4473.

In terms of technical details, whether the FFL is an intermediate owner of the gun or just facilitating the transfer, I don't know, but the buyer does fill out the 4473, check is run, I get the money and a private bill of sale with names, date, serial, and FFL name from the buyer, and pay the FFL $25 (funny that, a lot of them have initially whined that it's just sooo hard they need more, one guy wanted $75 + 10% cost, but they always seem to get reasonable when I offer to shop around).

Worth it for both the peace of mind of legally covering my ass, and making as sure as I can that I'm not putting a deadly weapon into hands that shouldn't have one. Personally I think it should be the only way to transfer, but tinfoilers think even tens of millions of individual hard-paper records literally scattered across the country is a "registry"

[DashOneBravo]

14. Private sales: I'm thinking

more along the lines of entering the info and getting a simple yes or no.

[Lizzie Poppet]

6. Getting as much of this information into the system as possible is critical.

Background checks can work, can help reduce the death toll...but the more records that never make it into the NICS database, the more likely that an unqualified person will slip through the cracks. As, tragically, we have just seen happen. States shouldn't need a carrot-and-stick approach to get these records into the system in a timely manner...but it seems they do.

This is a perfect example of the kind of gun control measures that a lot of gun owners like me gladly support. No one benefits from unsuitable persons having easy access to weapons.

[flamin lib]

8. Thanks for the support.

Last edited Tue Aug 4, 2015, 10:34 AM - Edit history (1)

Now if all those gun owners, and there are a LOT of them, would only bring their support to the NRA's attention perhaps the $1.3 Billion already allocated to upgrade the states' reporting could be budgeted.

It's on thing to pass legislation, another to get it funded when the NRA owns so many congress critters.

edit to correct the money allocated to upgrade reporting from $1.4 B to the real $1.3 B.