HR 4900: BATFE Reform Act

[Guest David Waldrip]

H.R. 4900: The “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform and Firearms Modernization Act of 2007”

Representatives Steve King (R-Iowa) and Zack Space (D-Ohio), have introduced H.R. 4900 the “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform and Firearms Modernization Act of 2007.” The bill would roll back unnecessary restrictions, correct errors, and codify longstanding congressional policies in the firearms arena. This bipartisan bill is a vital step to modernize and improve BATFE operations.

Of highest importance, H.R. 4900 totally rewrites the system of administrative penalties for licensed dealers, manufacturers and importers of firearms. Today, for most violations, BATFE can only give a federal firearms license (FFL) holder a warning, or totally revoke his license.

H.R. 4900 would allow fines or license suspensions for less serious violations, while still allowing license revocation for the kind of serious violations that would block an investigation or put guns in the hands of criminals. This prevents the all-too-common situations where BATFE has punished licensees for insignificant technical violation—such as improper use of abbreviations, or filing records in the wrong order.

Among its other provisions, H.R. 4900:

• Clarifies the standard for “willful” violations—allowing penalties for intentional, purposeful violations of the law, but not for simple paperwork mistakes.

  
  

• Improves the process for imposing penalties, notably by allowing FFLs to appeal BATFE penalties to a neutral administrative law judge, rather than to an employee of BATFE itself.

  
  

• Allows a licensee a period of time to liquidate inventory when he goes out of business.

  
  

• Allows a grace period for people taking over an existing firearms business to correct problems in the business’s records—so if a person inherits a family gun store (for example), the new owner couldn’t be punished for the previous owner’s recordkeeping violations.

  
  

• Reforms the procedures for consideration of federal firearms license applications. Under H.R. 4900, denial of an application will require notification to the applicant, complete with reasons for the denial. Additionally, an applicant will be allowed to provide supplemental information and to have a hearing on the application.

  
  

• Codifies limits on disclosure of firearms trace data—which Congress has already limited through a series of appropriations riders over the past three years, out of concern for gun owners’ privacy and the confidentiality of law enforcement records. The provision would still allow law enforcement agencies full access to trace data for bona fide criminal investigations.

  
  

• Requires BATFE to establish clear investigative guidelines.

  
  Clarifies the licensing requirement for gunsmiths distinguishing between repair and other gunsmith work and manufacture of a firearm.

  
  

• Prevents disclosure of information in FFL records outside of law enforcement agencies.

  
  

• Focuses BATFE’s efforts on violations of firearms, explosives, arson, alcohol and tobacco laws, rather than on broader areas such as gang or drug investigations.

  
  

• Eliminates a provision of the Youth Handgun Safety Act that requires those under 18 to have written permission to use a handgun for lawful purposes (such as competitive shooting or safety training)—even when the parent or guardian is present.

  
  

• Permanently bans taxes or “user fees” on background checks by the federal instant check system—fees that Congress has prohibited in annual appropriations riders since 1998.

  
  

• Permanently bans creation of a centralized electronic index of dealers’ records—a threat to gun owners’ privacy that Congress has barred through appropriations riders for a decade.

  
  

• Allows importation and transfer of machineguns by firearm and ammunition manufacturers for use in developing or testing firearms and ammunition. In particular, ammunition manufacturers fulfilling government contracts need to ensure that their ammunition works reliably.

  
  

• Allows transfer and possession of machineguns for use by federal security contractors. Additionally, H.R. 4900 provides for the transfer and possession of machineguns by professional film and theatrical organizations.

  
  

• Repeals the Brady Act’s “interim” waiting period provisions, which expired in 1998.

  
  

• Gives BATFE sole responsibility for receiving reports of multiple handgun sales. (Currently, dealers also have to report multiple sales to state or local agencies, a requirement that has shown little or no law enforcement value.)

  
  

• Restores a policy that allowed importation of barrels, frames and receivers from non-importable firearms, when they can be used as repair or replacement parts.

  
  

Posted: 12/20/2007 12:00:00 AM

Find this item at

http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=224&issue=018

[molonlabetn]

If only this were a bill to disband the BATFE, and repeal the NFA...

Oh well. One step at a time.

[The Rabbi]

I wouldn't mind doing that.

But you focus on the feasible. This is certainly feasible. John Harris told me about a dealer whose license got revoked because they didn't sign out their guns within 7 business days. This is despite the fact that the rules say you have 7 days without specifying business or calender.

[Guest CrazyLincoln]

• Allows transfer and possession of machineguns for use by federal security contractors. Additionally, H.R. 4900 provides for the transfer and possession of machineguns by professional film and theatrical organizations.

  
  

Does this mean California will get all the machine guns?

Does this law make these guns fully transferable when purchased through a professional film organization?

If so, who wants to start a "professional film organization"? We'll just make documentaries of people at the range.

Methinks if this passes, could get us one step closer to repealing that law from 1986, if only a baby step.........

[Guest David Waldrip]

CrazyLincoln, to be honest, I'm not sure of the background on those points, and raised my eyebrows some when I first read them.

But, you may be on to something. Here in the Memphis area, we could organize as "Flying Elvi Films"..........

By the way, Rep. Steve King is a straight up kind of guy. At the 2005 Annual meeting, he addressed a group of us volunteers during a "social hour" and relayed a story about going deer hunting one day in Iowa. He came out of the field at lunchtime to stop at a diner, out in the middle of nowhere, and get a bowl of chili. Part of the way through the chili, he heard a loud blast from outside and had to stop and wonder what it was. A minute or two later, he heard another. One guy came in and mentioned, in passing, to another table, that one of their buddies was indeed the one outside checking the pattern on his shotgun.

Rep. King thought right then that only in Iowa do the patrons not jump under the table when a shotgun goes off outside, ie, making his point as to what a pro-gun state it is. Much funnier the way he told it as opposed to just reading it off the screen here.

And, another by the way, last week Rep. King endorsed Fred..........

[Guest CrazyLincoln]

And, another by the way, last week Rep. King endorsed Fred.........

I knew I liked something about this guy.

[Guest Len]

Rep. King thought right then that only in Iowa do the patrons not jump under the table when a shotgun goes off outside, ie, making his point as to what a pro-gun state it is. .

I lived in South Dakota for a while, about 90 min from Iowa. The sound of shotguns being fired was more common than that of the corn blowing in the wind. (Well, almost.) Especially during pheasant season! No one thought anything of it. In places like that, people associate the sound of gun fire with hunting. In other, more urban environs, the association is quite different, and therefore the reaction. I grew up learning that gunfire was bad, but in many parts of the country still, its just part of the sound of everyday life, and thats a good thing.

[Guest CrazyLincoln]

UPDATE: Full text of the bill can be found here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-4900

Refers to "transfer" not sure if that means a transfer stamp is issued. Regardless it only gives breaks to gov't contractors and big studios who have to show the AG what they're doing with 3 year reoccurring background checks.

I really don't like the wording, but I hope it gets passed. Then there is a legitimate argument of 'unfair business practices'. So Hollywood can own full autos but other industries can't? What about independent film makers? How about firms that would rather provide their own internal security rather than gov't contractors? I could see this opening a can of worms in our favor.

[Guest David Waldrip]

Hmmmm.....

At first blush, I'm not a big fan of the "unfair business practices" that you describe, as I don't at all like rules that favor different "classes" or citizens. Credit due to John Harris of TFA who did a very good job of explaining that is why he was against the proposed legislation (at the time) that fast tracked retired LEO's. (Nothing against retired LEO's, but just a fast tracking for any different "class" of citizen.)

Anyway, I suppose a 3 year cycle is tolerable in view of all of the other changes being required of the BATFE...............

Thanks for the update.

[DaveTN]

Does this law make these guns fully transferable when purchased through a professional film organization?

If so, who wants to start a "professional film organization"? We'll just make documentaries of people at the range.

I’m in. I even have a camera. It’s a 10 year old Sony, but will be fine for the quality of stuff we would be doing.

[Guest CrazyLincoln]

`(37) The term `professional theatrical purpose' means the use of firearms in a motion picture or television production which is expected to be produced, distributed, marketed, or shown by a member of a nationally recognized professional trade association related primarily to motion picture and television production, as determined by the Attorney General.'.

Too bad indie film makers. You're just not "guildy" enough to use machine guns in films.

[Guest David Waldrip]

http://www.nraila.org/pdfs/batfesullivan.pdf.

Nothing like taking on somebody head on. Go Chris!