I want to emphasize that the next handful of points is just a set of rumors. I've seen a few versions that are close to this set, edited from what I first saw from Miguel at Gun Free Zone this morning. The main points of the agreement seem to be close to this:
Of all of these, there is nothing I'd call a positive win. Overall, it leaves things as they are, so if you're inclined to see not losing any more ground as a win, you'll see it as a win. I see it as a waste of millions of dollars and thousands of man hours in defending territory we already hold. Comparatively speaking, I think the anti- side has many times our financial resources. They can just keep doing this year after year, bleeding us dry of money until there's no opposition. Bloomberg alone has more money than all the pro-2A groups put together. I'd think he'd rather not spend all of his own money when there are so many other rich liberals to help, but if he wanted to, he could outspend us by a factor of 10 all by himself.
- All internet sales must go thru FFL
- All Gun Show sales must go thru FFL
- Private sales remain private.
- No Dianne Feinstein AWB or Hi Cap mag BS attached to the bill.
- Federal funding to improve the NCIS system or studies of violence or something.
Now, personally I'd love to know where this magical land is where you can order new guns on the internet and have 'em shipped directly to your door with no FFL involvement, but I've never seen it. Likewise, as we all know, Gun Shows don't exert a magical force field that negates firearms law and lets you buy anything without filling out forms and getting background checks. If private sales remain private, and transfers remain sales, things remain as they've been for a while.
That said, it isn't as bat shit crazy as the president saying we need a criminal background check just to be allowed into a gun show. As sure a sign as any that he's never been inside one in his life. Is he afraid of the assault beef jerky? The military style belts? Assault paracord? Jewelry? Military memorabilia or bumper stickers?
The NRA statement is pretty good, but in light of what's happening in New York, it bothers me. They said:
Expanding background checks at gun shows will not prevent the next shooting, will not solve violent crime and will not keep our kids safe in schools. While the overwhelming rejection of President Obama and Mayor Bloomberg's "universal" background check agenda is a positive development, we have a broken mental health system that is not going to be fixed with more background checks at gun shows. The sad truth is that no background check would have prevented the tragedies in Newtown, Aurora or Tucson. We need a serious and meaningful solution that addresses crime in cities like Chicago, addresses mental health deficiencies, while at the same time protecting the rights of those of us who are not a danger to anyone. President Obama should be as committed to dealing with the gang problem that is tormenting honest people in his hometown as he is to blaming law-abiding gun owners for the acts of psychopathic murderers. (bold added - SiG)The problem with the emphasis on mental health is the gun and permit confiscation going on in New York right now. New York, in what seems to be a violation of the 4th and 5th amendments along with the federal HIPAA law, is going through the medical records of everyone with a permit to own a gun, finding those who have taken certain drugs, notably SSRIs, and deeming them to be unworthy of the permit.
A lot has been made about the SSRI connections with the Aurora and Newtown shooters, and the connections to mass murders in general. The problem is that these are very common drugs, including Zoloft, Paxil, Prozac and others. Millions of people are prescribed these at some time in their lives, but only an extremely tiny portion will ever get violent. James Alan Fox, the recognized expert in the study of mass shootings, has pointed out that the people who commit these mass murders are virtually impossible to find in advance. The best quote in that piece is from the interviewer, Megan McArdle, who said:
So you have been saying that many of the most popular remedies for mass shootings won't work. They aren't all identifiably crazy before the shooting, so mental health screenings for gun buyers won't stop them. Neither will waiting periods, because they're long-term planners. And restricting certain scary guns (an "assault weapons ban") won't have much effect, because they'll just pick another gun.In our rush to say we need to fix the mental health system, I fear congress is going to fix it as well as they fixed healthcare, gun laws and pretty much everything else. They'll make it a thousand times worse. If all they have to do to kill the 2nd amendment is get you to be prescribed one pill one time in your life, that's pretty dang easy. It would be even easier to define wanting to defend yourself as mental illness. Anybody who would put up with federal laws to own a gun must be out of their mind.