From: joel@upchrch.UUCP (Joel Upchurch  )
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Text: New Brady Bill
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 15:26:48 EST
Organization: Upchurch Computer Consulting, Orlando FL

miles@ms.uky.edu (Stephen D. Grant) writes:

> bb063@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Christopher J. Crobaugh) writes:
> 
> >            "(II) the transferor has received notice from the chief 
> >        law enforcement officer that the officer has no information 
> >        indicating that receipt or possession of the handgun by the 
> >        transferee would violate Federal, State, or local law; 
> 
>      This is the same requirement almost word for word as it appears on
>      Form 4 (for class III transfers). Here in Lexington Ky, the Chief
>      simply refuses to sign. The BATF blesses this position.
>      So, looks like now the Chief will be able to "not sign" for
>      handguns as well. Oh well, maybe the next crazy will open up at the
>      BATF or Senate instead of the CIA.

Unless I'm mistaken the previous paragraph ((ii)(I)) would keep the
police chief from exercising a pocket veto on handgun sales. I believe
some versions of the Brady Bill last year would have worked like you
suggested.

bb063@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Christopher J. Crobaugh) writes:
>         "(ii)(I) 7 days have elapsed from the date the
>     transferee furnished the statement, and the transferor has
>     not received information from the chief law enforcement
>     officer that receipt or possession of the handgun by the
>     transferee would be in violation of Federal, State, or local
>     law; or

Also I think that paragraph (C) means that people with FOIDs and CCWs
in most states won't have to wait.


bb063@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Christopher J. Crobaugh) writes:
>       "(C)(i) the transferee has presented to the transferor a
>   permit which--
>           "(I) allows the transferee to possess a handgun; and
>           "(II) was issued not more than 5 years earlier by the
>       State in which the transfer is to take place; and
>       "(ii) the law of the State provides that such a permit is
>   to be issued only after an authorized government official has
>   verified that the information available to such official does
>   not indicate that possession of a handgun by the transferee
>   would be in violation of law;

Also paragraph (E) seems to imply that waiting period doesn't apply if
the state has an instant background check, although I haven't a clue
about how you can tell if a instant background check complies with
section 6213(a).

bb063@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Christopher J. Crobaugh) writes:
>         "(E) the transferor has received a report from any system
>     of felon identification established by the Attorney General
>     pursuant to section 6213(a) of the Anti-Drug Abuse Amendments
>     Act of 1988, that available information does not indicate that
>     possession or receipt of a handgun by the transferee would
>     violate Federal, State, or local law.


(If your mail bounces use the address below.)
Joel Upchurch/Upchurch Computer Consulting/718 Galsworthy/Orlando, FL 32809
joel@peora.ccur.com {uiucuxc,hoptoad,petsd,ucf-cs}!peora!joel (407) 859-0982