Gunleaders Blog

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/17/AR2010121706598.html

“Senior law enforcement sources said the proposal from the ATF was held up by the White House in early summer. The sources, who asked to be anonymous because they were discussing internal deliberations, said that the effort was shelved by then-White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel … The plan… was perceived as too volatile just before midterm elections, the sources said.”

But wait…  [Emanuel spokesman] “LaBolt said that Emanuel recommended Andy Traver of Chicago to be nominated by Obama to be director of the ATF and was the “point man” in the Clinton administration when Congress passed an assault weapons ban and required background checks for gun sales”  Mr. Traver has been exposed all over the internet as a gun owning citizen hater who will stop at nothing to suppress the rights of citizens to own & use firearms.

So in summary, the Obama white house orchestrates a scheme to register long guns.

They craft it under the guise of stemming the alleged flow of guns into Mexico.  That myth has already been debunked.  Realizing that the plan jeopardized the political futures of several prominent Democrats, the administration held it until after the 2010 mid term elections.   The same guy who pushed for holding up the registration plan recommends Andrew Traver to lead BATFE.  It all fits quite nicely.

Text here: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-31761.pdf

Report of Multiple Sale or Other Disposition of Certain Rifles.

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
[OMB Number 1140–NEW]
Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comments Requested
ACTION: 60-Day Emergency Notice of Information Collection Under Review: Report of Multiple Sale or Other Disposition of Certain Rifles.
The Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with emergency review procedures of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. OMB approval has been requested by January 5, 2011. This notice requests comments from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed information collection. If granted, the emergency approval is only valid for 180 days. Comments should be directed to OMB, Office of Information and Regulation Affairs, Attention: Department of Justice Desk Officer (202) 395–6466, Washington, DC 20503.
During the first 60 days of this same review period, a regular review of this information collection is also being undertaken. All comments and suggestions, or questions regarding additional information, to include obtaining a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions, should be directed to Barbara A. Terrell, Barbara.Terrell@atf.gov Firearms Industry Programs Branch, Fax (202) 648–9640, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, 99 New York Avenue, NE., Washington DC 20226.
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

—Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

—Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

—Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

—Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.
Summary of Collection:
(1) Type of information collection: New.
(2) The title of the form/collection: Report of Multiple Sale or Other Disposition of Certain Rifles.
(3) The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the department sponsoring the collection: Form Number: ATF F 3310.12. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Business or For-Profit Other: None.
Need for Collection
The purpose of the information is to require Federal Firearms Licensees to report multiple sales or other dispositions whenever the licensee sells or otherwise disposes of two or more rifles within any five consecutive business days with the following characteristics: (a) Semi automatic; (b) a caliber greater than .22; and (c) the ability to accept a detachable magazine.
(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond/reply: It is estimated that 8,479 respondents will complete a 12 minute form.
(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associaed with the collection: The estimated total public burden associated with this information collection is 1,696 hours.
If additional information is required contact: Lynn Murray, Department Clearance Officer, Policy and Planning Staff, Justice Management Division, United States Department of Justice, 145 N Street, NE., Two Constitution Square, Room 2E–502, Washington, DC 20530.
Dated: December 14, 2010.
Lynn Murray,
Department Clearance Officer, PRA, United States Department of Justice. [FR Doc. 2010–31761 Filed 12–16–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410–FY–P

This regulation attempt is subject to public comment so COMMENT!

This law did basically 2 things.  1) Federally permitted transportation of firearms provided they were legal at the source & destination, and that they were locked / unloaded.  2) banned possession of machine guns manufactured after May, 1986.

See:  http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=1013300&page=5

The excerpted 4/10/1986 Congressional Record

Vote spreadsheet compiled by the researcher.

Quite an impressive bit of research.

Hat tip to the Volokh Conspiracy / Mishaga v. Monken motion to dismiss is DENIED.  The case concerns an Ohio resident raising a 2nd Amendment challenge to the ridiculous IL “FOID” law.  It’s a race to see which state “permit to posses” law falls first and so far IL appears to be winning.  If you’re a non resident visiting the state are you somehow less of a citizen?

See the footnote number 2 though.  Some courts will go to any length to uphold the government’s position no matter how absurd.  Part of this is “telegraphing” what the court wants to see in order to be able to rule for the government.  The subtle message:  ”include this, raise this concern or  I might have to rule for the plaintiff”.

“…The parties do not address whether Mishaga’s right to possess a weapon as a guest may be more limited than the homeowner in Heller because she is not protecting her own home and because her loaded weapon may present dangers to the permanent residents of the home or to other Illinois citizens. At some point in this proceeding, the parties may need to address the exact scope of the constitutional right of a guest to possess a weapon in the home of another person.”

A good answer to footnotes like this are impeachment hearings.