jkh@jade.BERKELEY.EDU (Jordan K. Hubbard) (11/18/86)
Article: 11:14 Because of some requests, I am posting the following information which comes from _Federal_Firearms_Licensee_News_, Fall Edition, 1986. (A publication of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms.) My editorial and explanatory comments are in brackets. ----------------------------- PRESIDENT SIGNS NEW GUN LAW On May 19, and July 8, 1986, President Reagan signed Public Laws 99-308 and 99-360 which amend the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the National Firearms Act. The news laws become effective November 15, 1986, except for the provision on machineguns which became effective on May 19, 1986. The major provisions of the new law include the following: 1. Effective May 19, 1986, the new law bars the future possession or transfer of machineguns, except for government entities. Those persons who lawfully owned machineguns before May 19, 1986, may continue to own, or to transfer ownership after May 19, 1986. 2. The definition of a machinegun includes any combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun and any part designed and intended solely for use in converting a weapon into a machine- gun. [This means that a jig for drilling the hole in the AR-15 receiver to accept the M-16 parts is illegal -- a file is not illegal because it has uses other than "solely for use".] 3. Nonlicensees may acquire rifles and shotguns, but handguns, from licensees outside their resident states as long as the sale, receipt, and delivery complies whith the laws of the states in which the sale is made and where the transferee resides. Interstate shipment or delivery of firearms to nonlicensees is still prohibited. 4. The licensing requirements for dealers in ammunition only and ammunition recordkeeping are eliminated. After November 15, 1986, those who deal in ammunition only need not renew their Federal firearms license. [However, dealers are required to hold onto their ammunition disposition records until November 15, 1988. Dealers will no longer need to take information for handgun ammo purchasers after November 15, 1986. In theory, nonlicensees should be able to buy ammunition interstate without a license -- I suspect a good many of the distributors may not do so to avoid pissing off dealers.] 5. "Engaged in the business" is defined as those who regularly import, manufacture and deal in firearms with the "principal objective of livelihood and profit." However, disposing of firearms without a profit motive to terrorists or for criminal purposes may still be "engaged in the the business." [The BATF has a long history of persuading gun collectors to sell as few as four guns from their collection to an undercover BATF agent, then arresting the guy for "engaging in the business without a license".] 6. Allows licensees to deal in firearms at gun shows located in the state in which the licensed premise is located. [No real difference -- the BATF had started allowing this anyway.] 7. Licensees are not required to record the disposition of "personal firearms" on Forms 4473 where the firearm has been kept in the licensee's personal collection for one year after its transfer from the business inventory. These depositions must still be recorded in a bound book. [I can't see any good reason for this -- filling out a 4473 only takes a couple of minutes. Maybe someone saw the movie _Red_Dawn_ and decided to make life difficult for the invading troops. :-)] 8. Form 4473 - the Firearms Transaction Record - is eliminated for licensed collectors. They need only keep a "bound book" record. 9. A warrant will be required to inspect licensee records and inventory except in the course of a criminal investigation of a person other than the licensee, in one annual inspection and in firearms tracing. These three inspections may be made without prior notice. 10. No license can be denied or revoked, and no forfeiture of firearms or ammunition can be based, upon the same charge brought in a criminal case if the licensee is acquitted of those charges. [BATF has a long history of failing to prove criminal intent, but refusing to return firearms confiscated. The defendant then has to file a civil suit for return of the weapons. No more of THAT nonsense!] 11. No one may sell or deliver firearms to prohibited person such as convicted felons. [Previously it was only against Federal law for *dealers* to sell to convicted felons -- now it's illegal for anyone to do so.] 12. A conviction for a "crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year" is determined by the law of the jurisdiction in which the conviction occurred. State pardons and expunctions would erase the conviction for purposes of Federal firearms laws unless the pardon, expunction or law of the jurisdiction provides otherwise. [This brings the Federal firearms laws in sync with the rest of our legal system.] 13. Allows the granting of relief from Federal firearms disabilities to all proscribed persons and removes the bar to relief for felons whose crimes involved the use of a firearm or other weapon, or whose conviction was for a violation of the Gun Control and National Firearms Acts. [This allows people who are technically felons to petition for permission to own a firearm. At first glance, you might wonder why a felon should ever get such permission. Draft resisters come immediately to mind as people who would be unable to get such permission under the old law.] 14. Provides a Federal right to transport an unloaded, not readily accessible, firearm notwithstanding any state or local law to the contrary, except that the transportation must comply with the laws of the place of origin and destination. [Primarily a guarantee that a hunter travelling from North Carolina to Vermont isn't going to spend the night in jail in New Jersey for transporting a hunting rifle by personal vehicle. This is NOT a guarantee that you can carry a gun from state to state on a long trip. There are still serious questions what exactly is going to be allowed within the definition of "transportation" and "destination".] 15. Expands the terms "silencer" to cover any combination of parts designed or redesigned, and intended for use in assembling or fabricating a firearms silencer and any part intended only for use in such assembly or fabrication. [The "silencer parts kits" that have been offered through the mail for some time, and the "aluminum tubing" offered through the same sources therefore become illegal. Also, the 2-liter plastic soft drink adapter for handguns similarly becomes illegal.] ---------------------------------------- Clayton E. Cramer
jkh@jade.UUCP (12/11/86)
In-Reply-To: your article <1716@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> Thanks to Mr. Cramer for the summary of the new gun laws. Could he provide the current definition of "armor piercing" as defined in the new laws? I strongly suspect that we can look forward to increased BATF zealousness in locating "machine guns" and "silencers." That organization needs a reason to exist. Already, there has been at least one reported raid on a "machine gun" manufacturer in Utah, which led to no arrests, but lots of media hype. The next logical step is for the BATF to re-define "readily convertible" to include all semi-auto weapons. "Readily convertible" is in the eyes of the beholder. Almost all semi-auto guns firing from an open-bolt position have already been banned by BATF edict. Periodically, attempts to define the semi-auto M14 rifles and their copies as "readily convertible" occur. Should this succeed, expect the flood gates to open as HK 91s and 93, AR15s, etc. become illegal. What's really bad is that now there is NO WAY to register these guns in case of such a re-classification, because civilians may not acquire new machine guns. Of course. I'm just speculating. Jon Kaplowitz cbosgd!erc3ba!jfka
jkh@jade.BERKELEY.EDU (Jordan K. Hubbard) (12/16/86)
Article: 12:17 > In-Reply-To: your article <1716@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> > > Thanks to Mr. Cramer for the summary of the new > gun laws. Could he provide the current definition > of "armor piercing" as defined in the new laws? > Sorry, I don't have the legal definition of armor piercing available. What I have read (which may or may not be correct) is that only handgun ammunition is affected by the "armor piercing" ban. I have read in other (less trustworthy places) that iron or steel-core bullets for handguns or rifles are prohibited, and therefore the new 62-grain 5.56mm ammo adopted by NATO is illegal. In brief, there's no way you are going to run into armor-piercing ammo in a gun store, and I think there is an adequate amount of rifle ammunition that will pierce bullet-proof vests to keep politicians in fear. > I strongly suspect that we can look forward to > increased BATF zealousness in locating "machine guns" > and "silencers." That organization needs a reason to exist. > Already, there has been at least one reported raid on > a "machine gun" manufacturer in Utah, which led to > no arrests, but lots of media hype. > If it's the one I'm thinking of, it led to convictions. The manufacturer pleaded guilty to back-dating manufacturing dates on automatic weapon frames. It's hard to believe BATF could be any more zealous than they already are pursuing automatic weapons and silencers. At one time several years ago they were confiscating mailing lists of companies that sold silencer parts "kits" then getting search warrants to search people's homes for completed silencers. (Hence, the ads you will see in Shotgun News from companies emphasizing, "We keep no records except amount of sale for tax purposes.") > The next logical step is for the BATF to re-define > "readily convertible" to include all semi-auto > weapons. "Readily convertible" is in the eyes of the > beholder. Almost all semi-auto guns firing from > an open-bolt position have already been banned by BATF > edict. Periodically, attempts to define the semi-auto > M14 rifles and their copies as "readily convertible" occur. > Should this succeed, expect the flood gates to open > as HK 91s and 93, AR15s, etc. become illegal. What's really > bad is that now there is NO WAY to register these guns > in case of such a re-classification, because civilians > may not acquire new machine guns. > Of course. I'm just speculating. > > Jon Kaplowitz California Assemblyman Art Agnos of San Francisco has made repeated attempts to reclassify semiauto rifles that have, or can accept, magazines with a capacity of 20 rounds or more as machine guns under California law. The law is written so sloppily that it could be used to prohibit the Browning Hi-Power pistol (there are 21-round magazines available). Clayton E. Cramer