Safety Nazis Seek To Create New Limits On Playground “Hazards”

New Playground Safety Requirements Are Absurd

 

 

 

 

” A combination of government regulations and free market innovation has created playgrounds that are incredibly safe for kids… except if they die of boredom. All the fun stuff is gone, but boy is what’s left non-lethal!”

 

 

 

 

 

 

” The CDC reports that in the 10 years from 1990 to 2000, there were just 31 deaths from playground falls, and 70 percent of these were at playgrounds in someone’s backyard. This means that on public playgrounds, there was an average of about one death per year from falling. With about 40,000,000 kids in America under age 10, that means the chances of a child dying or seriously hurting himself in a playground fall are infinitesimal.”

 

 

 

 

 

” Nevertheless, the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) has proposed new standards that would revamp the surfacing materials on playgrounds. ASTM’s stated mission is to prevent concussions and head injuries. But with the chances of these accidents already so low, you have to wonder about their true intentions.”

 

 

    There are no slides , no swings and no seesaws left thanks to this insane pursuit of safety uber alles by the do-gooders of society and yet they are still not content ? What is left to take away from the kids ? More importantly , one wonders how much of this over-regulation of our lives results from a real desire to save lives and how much of the Nanny State is driven by lawyers and the fear of liability ?

   Read on at Reason.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

Policing For Profit Costs Us Our Civil Liberties

Some Police Revenue Streams Are More Outrageous Than Others

 

 

 

 

 

” There has been a lot of news out of Ferguson lately.

  You had the release of the Justice Department report that, while clearing officer Wilson and debunking “Hands up don’t shoot,” hit the police department for racial practices which led to protests, resignations, the shooting of two police officers and, last  weekend, the arrest of Jeffrey Williams, the shooter.

  But in all the news coverage, protests, and resulting spin, there is one aspect of this story that, for several reasons, is worthy of a lot more attention before it’s forgotten:  the outrageous use of policing as a city revenue stream.

 

   From the report:

  The City’s emphasis on revenue generation has a profound effect on FPD’s approach to law enforcement.  Patrol assignment an schedules are geared toward aggressive enforcement of Ferguson’s municipal code, with insufficient thought given to whether enforcement strategies promote public safety or unnecessarily undermine community trust and cooperation.

 

  This practice sets up a perverse reward system if you are a cop, the report explained:

  Officer evaluations and promotions depend to an inordinate degree on “productivity” meaning the number of citations issued.

 

  And the courts aren’t helping either:

  The municipal court does not act as a neutral arbiter of the law or a check on unlawful police conduct.  Instead the court primarily uses its judicial authority as the means to compel the payment of fines and fees that advance the City’s financial interests.

 

  This is not a new issue to some. Rand Paul,for example, has talked about it for a while, most recently at Bowe state university in Maryland: “

 

Read more from DaTechGuy at Watchdog.org

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

Democrats Launch New Gun Control Measure … Target “High Capacity” Magazines

Lawmakers Introduce Measure To Ban High-Capacity Magazines

 

 

View this document on Scribd

 

 

” A group of lawmakers introduced a measure in Washington on Thursday that aims to end the sale of large-capacity ammunition, used by mass shooters in Newtown, Connecticut; Aurora, Colorado; Tucson, Arizona; and Fort Hood, Texas.

  Co-sponsors Rep. Elizabeth Esty of Connecticut and Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, both Democrats, unveiled the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act. The bill would ban the importation, sale, manufacture, transfer, or possession of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

“ The only thing more senseless than the gun violence that has taken too many of our nation’s children and countless innocent Americans is the failure of Congress to pass common sense gun safety measures, like this one, that are supported by 90 percent of the American public,” Menendez said. “

 

Read more

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

Sandy Hook Advisory Commission Proposes Outright Gun Ban In Wake Of Newtown

Newtown School Panel To Include Proposed Gun Ban In Report

 

 

 

” An advisory panel charged with looking at public safety in the wake of the deadly Newtown school shooting agreed Friday to include in its final report a recommendation to ban the sale and possession of any gun that can fire more than 10 rounds without reloading.

  The Sandy Hook Advisory Commission, created by Connecticut Gov. Dannel P. Malloy in the wake of the 2012 school shooting, plans to complete its work next month. The report will include dozens of recommendations in three categories: law enforcement and emergency response; safe school design and operation; and mental health and wellness.

  In its interim report last March, the commission included the proposed gun ban, which is opposed by the gun lobby and manufacturers. It would go much further than a 2013 Connecticut law which, among other things, expanded the state’s assault weapons ban and barred the possession and sale of large-capacity ammunition magazines.

” Whether or not this law would stand the test of constitutionality is not for this commission to decide,” said former Hartford Police Chief Bernard Sullivan, a member of the panel. “The commission has expressed very strongly that this is a statement that is needed regarding the lethality of weapons.” “

 

Morning Journal

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

FAA Issues First “Permits” For Private Drone Operation

FAA Grants Permits For Drones To Monitor Crops, Photograph Real Estate

 

 

 

 

 

” The Federal Aviation Administration on Tuesday issued permits to use drones to monitor crops and photograph properties for sale, marking the first time permission has been granted to companies involved in agriculture and real estate.

  The exemptions to the current ban on commercial drone flights were granted to Advanced Aviation Solutions in Star, Idaho, for “crop scouting,” and to Douglas Trudeau of Tierra Antigua Realty in Tucson, Arizona.

  Advanced Aviation Solutions plans to use its 1.5-pound, fixed-wing eBee drone to make photographic measurements of farm fields, determine the health of crops and look for pests. The aim is to save farmers time walking through fields. The drone also can carry sensors that pick up information invisible to the naked eye, which can help determine which fields need watering.”

 

 

    Will this latest licensing effort by the Feds morph into yet another example of cronyism and reward towards favored , connected corporations ? Of course . Notice that the film industry was one of the first to gain their exemption from the State .

 

CNS News has more

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

 

Police Chief Magazine: It’s All About The Revenue Stream

Generating New Revenue Streams

 

 

 

” The common reaction to a budget crisis is reducing personnel and cutting services. The focus of this article is to provide police agencies with an alternative to personnel and service reductions. This alternative could help the survival of a city and maintain or expand police service through generating new revenue streams as a proactive approach to meet the fiscal crisis of today and the uncertain future of tomorrow.

  While generating revenue streams is not new to most agencies, the focus and resources necessary to meet current and emerging public safety needs are unprecedented in law enforcement’s history. Law enforcement executives are accustomed to the ebb and flow of fiscal budgets. The current trend, however, is much more far reaching and will impact almost all cities in California and most likely all communities in the United States.

  Five years ago, the current state of the economy facing cities and counties was not even a concern. Now, however, many law enforcement agencies are facing the reality of severe budget cuts, reduced workforce, and the elimination or reduction of many law enforcement programs. Today, police chiefs are being asked to look for ways of economizing, increasing efficiency, eliminating redundancies, and finding revenue sources.

  This trend will be prompted in two possible ways. First, increasing financial pressure will require more severe budget cuts to the point that many agencies will be able to provide only basic services. Second, cities will begin to see successes at nearby agencies and look to new revenue streams as a panacea to forestall reduced services or even bankruptcy. Based on the research for this article, there is a clear presumption of need for law enforcement to generate new income streams. A first necessary step in that process is to examine possible revenue-generating ideas.
Possible New Revenue Streams

  A group of experts in the fields of city government, business, real estate, and entrepreneurship assembled in April 2008 to identify possible new income streams that could be initiated by law enforcement.² Their suggested new revenue streams serve as an example of ideas that can be generated in a short period of time. Each idea must be weighed against the feasibility of implementation, profit potential, and appropriateness for law enforcement involvement. Their most prominent recommendations were

• fees for sex offenders registering in a given jurisdiction,

• city tow companies,

• fine increases by 50 percent,

• pay-per-call policing,

• vacation house check fees,

• public hours at police firing range for a fee,

• police department-run online traffic school for minor traffic infractions,

• department-based security service including home checks and monitoring of security cameras by police department,

• a designated business to clean biological crime scenes,

• state and court fees for all convicted felons returning to the community,

• allowing agency name to be used for advertisement and branding,

• triple driving-under-the-influence fines by the court,

• resident fee similar to a utility tax,

• tax or fee on all alcohol sold in the city,

• tax or fee on all ammunition sold in, the city,

• public safety fees on all new development in the city,

• 9-1-1 fee per use,

• police department website with business advertisement for support,

• selling ride-a-longs to the public, and

• police department–run firearm safety classes.

  In addition to concepts that may lie ahead, there are also many examples of revenue-generating ideas that have been tried and proven in actual use. “

 

 

    Yes , as this police chief acknowledges however inadvertently , it’s all about the revenue generation and less about public safety …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

In The Name Of “Public Safety” Mass Police Chiefs Want “Sole Discretion” On Who Owns Guns

Ma Police Chiefs Want ‘Sole Discretion’ To Decide Who May Own A Long Gun

 

 

 

That’s an awfully white crowd of police chiefs demanding more gun people control … must be racists …

 

 

” Massachusetts police chiefs are unhappy with state lawmakers for dropping a provision that would have given them “sole discretion” in deciding who can own a long gun, be it a shotgun or a rifle.

  On July 18, Breitbart News reported that although the state Senate passed new gun control, they first struck down the provision that police chiefs were eager to see passed. 

  According to Fox News, Massachusetts police chiefs already get the final say on who can or can’t have a handgun permit, and the chiefs argue that extending them the same authority for long guns would increase “public safety.”

” Police chiefs from throughout the state and gun control advocates converged on the Statehouse in Boston [on July 22] to blast state senators for removing the provision.” “

 

 

Samuel and John Adams are rolling over in their graves right about now …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

Feds Release Thousands Of Illegal’s Including Murderers , Pedophiles & Drunk Drivers

Feds Released Hundreds Of Immigrant Murderers, Drunk Drivers, Sex-Crimes Convicts

 

 

 

 

 

” Immigration officials knowingly released dozens of murderers and thousands of drunken drivers back into the U.S. in 2013, according to Obama administration statistics that could undercut the president’s argument that he is trying to focus on the most serious criminals in his immigration enforcement.

  Among the 36,000 immigrants whom U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement released from custody last year there were 116 with convictions for homicide, 43 for negligent manslaughter, 14 for voluntary manslaughter and one with a conviction classified by ICE as “homicide-willful kill-public official-gun.”

The immigrants were in deportation proceedings, meaning ICE was trying to remove them from the country and could have held them in detention but released them anyway, according to the Center for Immigration Studies, which published the numbers Monday. The Washington Times also obtained the data.

“This would be considered the worst prison break in American history, except it was sanctioned by the president and perpetrated by our own immigration officials,” said Rep. Lamar Smith, Texas Republican. “The administration’s actions are outrageous. They willfully and knowingly put the interests of criminal immigrants before the safety and security of the American people.” “

More at Washington Times

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

Video At July 4th “DUI Checkpoint” Demonstrates Just How Tyrannical The State Has Become

A Hidden Camera During DUI Checkpoint Exposes the Vileness of the American Police State

 

 

 

 

 

 

” “He’s perfectly innocent, he knows his rights, he knows what the Constitution says.” mutters the power tripping jackboot cop as he tears apart this innocent man’s vehicle for no other reason than to flex his “authority.”

“ It wasn’t a very good alert….” brags the other jackboot about the drug dog “giving them permission” to search this man’s vehicle. He was likely about to confess to just how arbitrary their decision was in violating this innocent person’s rights, when he spots the camera.

“ Hey Jim……” and they realize they’ve been bamboozled.

  Watching this video is incredibly grounding, we can see just how far the US has progressed into a totalitarian police state. These Stasi checkpoints are NOT for your safety, they are to condition innocent people into acquiescing to state intimidation. If you doubt that claim, research how many of these “DUI Checkpoints” actually catch people that are DUI.

Here are the numbers from the checkpoint that night:

•  250 vehicles passed through the checkpoint
•  20 vehicles were detained that required further investigation
•  Three vehicles were searched
•  One misdemeanor arrest was made
•  32 citations were issued: Two child restraint device citations, one DUI, 10 citations for violations of the registration law, four citations for violation of the light law, one revoked/suspended driver’s license, six financial responsibility (no insurance), six other driver’s license law violations, and two safety belt law violations.

  Only one DUI arrest was made. One out of 250. 250 people were stopped, questioned, their rights violated, and faced potential and real harassment so this department could be 0.4% effective at stopping drunk driving.”

 

Free Thought Project has more

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

Citizen Satirizes Proposed Local Firearms Ordinances

Ban All The Things: Man Perfectly Ridicules City Council’s Gun Control Meeting

 

 

 

Published on Feb 7, 2014

2014-02-04
Ashland Oregon

” A citizen speaks to the City Council in opposition to a local “loaded carry” ban ordinance one of the Councilors has brought for consideration. No facts, figures, statistics, or other evidence of any existing problem has been presented by the sponsoring Councilor. She has however, made emotional pleas to “protect the children”, dropped the “Sandy Hook” tragedy as supporting gun regulation, and other such bullshit.

  She actually said “I know there are statistics out there but I didn’t look them up”. WTF

  Meanwhile, the Chief of Police has stated that the town has NEVER had an incident involving an open carrier. Hmmmmm no problem? Why an ordinance then? Oh yeah….to FEEL good.

  This citizen uses satire to point out the idiocy of the proposed ordinance.

  COPYRIGHT INFORMATION: 
  My copyright notice is ONLY for my editing work to clip, sync, etc. the video and audio.
This video (including editing of camera angles) was shot by Rogue Valley Television (RVTV), a partnership of public entities in Southern Oregon.”

 

HT/Soopermexican@IJR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

Get Ready , Feds About To Require GPS Tracking In New Cars … For Your “Safety”

Feds May Require Cars To Talk To Each Other To Avoid Crashes

 

 

 

” Federal officials will decided in the “coming weeks” whether to require new cars to include smart technology that would alert drivers of a coming crash, even in vehicles that are two or three cars away.

  The vehicle-to-vehicle — or V2V — technology has undergone testing in recent years and has already been installed in some cars that are on the road.

  Putting smart cars on the road comes with complications beyond cost, which is expected to be “modest relative to the price of a new vehicle,” according to the GAO.

” Privacy is the real challenge,” Wise said. He said the V2V will likely rely on GPS-type data that could track a person’s movements.

” Who has access and how do you secure the data?” Wise asked rhetorically. He also raised the specter of someone hacking the system and causing havoc on the road. “

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

 

 

Do You Know Why I Am Stopping You ?

Libertarian Party of Georgia

 

 

 

Try this next time you are pulled over . See how far it gets you .

” Well officer , a crime requires an injured party. Seeing as there isn’t one , I can only assume you’re attempting to manufacture my consent to contract with the state’s corporate policy in order to generate revenue as part of a racketeering scam .”

 

 

 

 

—

Auburn PD Whistleblower Fired For Revealing Quotas

Cop Fired for Speaking Out Against Ticket and Arrest Quotas

 

 

 

 

” Auburn, Alabama is home to sprawling plains, Auburn University, and a troubling police force. After the arrival of a new police chief in 2010, the department entered an era of ticket quotas and worse.

Hanners blew the whistle on the department’s tactics and was eventually fired for refusing to comply and keep quiet. He says that each officer was required to make 100 contacts each month, which included tickets, arrests, field interviews, and warnings. This equates to 72,000 contacts a year in a 50,000 person town. His claims are backed up by audio recordings of his superiors he made. The Auburn police department declined requests to be interviewed for this story.

Former Reason staffer Radley Balko, now an investigative reporter for the Huffington Post and author of the new book, Rise of the Warrior Cop, says that this isn’t just a nuisance, it infringes on public safety.

“You have a policy that encourages police to create petty crimes and ignore serious crimes, and that’s clearly the opposite of what we want our police to be doing,” says Balko.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

Gang Of Eight Would Brook No Dissent …

SHERIFFS, IMMIGRATION AGENTS: NO ONE CONSULTED US ON IMMIGRATION BILL

 

 

” Law enforcement officials from around the country coalesced on Thursday against the bipartisan “Gang of Eight” immigration bill, arguing that it did not solve of the nation’s immigration law problems and railing on the senators involved for not including law enforcement experts in their creation of the bill.

“Almost one month ago, we asked for a meeting with the Gang of Eight to discuss law enforcement concerns,” Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents’ union president Chris Crane said at a Thursday press conference. “They told us they weren’t taking meetings but they were meeting all along with special interests and pro-amnesty groups. Finally, after public pressure grew, I got a late Monday night meeting with Sen. Rubio the day before this almost-1,000-page bill was introduced. I raised my many public safety concerns and pleaded with him not to drop the bill until these public safety concerns with law enforcement were addressed. They dropped it anyway.”

Crane went on to say that he thinks the bill will “put the public safety at risk without doubt. It fails on interior enforcement, it’s amnesty first, enforcement perhaps never.

“Unfortunately, I do not believe that the Gang of Eight is a group that we can trust with a matter so important to the safety of American communities and security of our nation,” Crane said.”

 

 

–

Related articles

• ‘Amnesty Is Amnesty’ (freebeacon.com)
• Head of ICE union: Immigration bill will put public safety at risk (thedaleygator.wordpress.com)
• SILENCED: ICE union head Chris Crane ejected from Gang of 8 press event. “Chris Crane, head of the… (pjmedia.com)
• ICE Union Head Chris Crane Ejected From Gang Of 8 Press Event (patdollard.com)
• ICE Union Boss: Don’t Rush Immigration Bill (nationalreview.com)
• Hours after Marco Rubio interview, Mark Levin slams ‘Gang of Eight’ immigration bill (twitchy.com)

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

New York SAFE Website – How To Comply Or Not

Gun Owners

” The SAFE Act prevents criminals and the dangerously mentally ill from buying guns, cracks down on illegal guns and bans only the most dangerous assault weapons. The SAFE Act protects law- abiding citizens right to bear arms and does not restrict New Yorkers’ ability to buy, sell, keep or use their guns.” *

   This is what you will find at the confiscation registration website . Each of the questions is hotlinked to a dropdown menu with the state – approved answer.

   You can register here but you cannot see the registration form until you have already given the State Police all of your personal information . Name , address , DOB , description , driver’s license # etc .

Frequently Asked Questions:

Assault Weapons

Q: I own a gun that I use for hunting, is it an assault weapon?

Q: I own a handgun, is that an assault weapon?

Q: I am not sure if the gun I own is an assault weapon. How do I find out?

Q: I have an assault weapon. Do I have to give it up?

Q: How does registering my gun compare to getting a handgun license?

Q: What do I do if I don’t want to register my assault weapon?

Q: If I modify my gun by removing all design characteristics that makes it an
assault weapon, do I have to register it?

Q: If I don’t currently own an assault weapon, how does the new ban on
assault weapons affect me?

Assault Weapon Registration

Q: Where do I get the assault weapon registration form?

Q: How much does the registration cost?

Q: How do I complete the form?

Q: Once the form is submitted, how will I know that my weapon has been successfully registered?

Q: By when do I have to register my weapon?

Q: What happens if I fail to register my weapon by the deadline?

Q: Will this information be publically available?

Q: Once I’ve registered my weapon, do I ever have to register it again?

Q: Do I have any other obligations associated with registering my assault weapon?

Magazines

Q: How does the SAFE Act impact magazines?

Q: Can I continue to buy 10 round magazines?

Q: How many rounds can I put in my magazine?

Q: Is there anything else I should be aware of?

Antique Guns & Magazines

Q: Is there any exception for historic or antique guns and magazines?

Q: What qualifies as an antique gun or magazine?

Q: I have an antique gun that now qualifies as an assault weapon. Can I transfer it?

Q: I have an antique gun with a magazine that can contain more than ten rounds.
Can I keep the magazine?

Private Sales

Q: What types of private handgun, rifle or shotgun sales or transfers are subject to background check requirements?

Q: What family members are exempt from the private sale/transfer provision?

Q: As a private individual seller/transferor, how do I conduct a background check
on a buyer or transferee?

Q: Do I need to get a background check if I am selling or transferring the firearm
to a relative?

Q: Are dealers required to facilitate a private sale or transfer?

Q: What if I fail to comply with the background check provision?

Safe Storage

Q: When am I required to safely store my gun?

Q: What do I have to do to safely store my gun?

Please note: This website is informational only and does not constitute legal advice.

 

 

* We’ve got a bridge for sale if you believe this .

 

 

 

 

   PS : Here is a poem from the comments at the Breitbart link to the NY State registration story .We thought it very apt for the occasion .

 

John (magnum)  MarvLS1 • 32 minutes ago

• −

America

America is the land of the free,
Millions have died for you and me.
Our Constitution is under attack,
By “The Messiah” , the socialist Barack .

The Democrat party has ceased to be,
They wish total control over you and me.
Socialists and Communists they have become,
Destroy America, their rule number one.

Cutting the military their ultimate goal,
Along with selling their devilish soul.
Drones in the sky in the land of the free,
So they can keep tabs on you and me.

The Second Amendment they HATE you see,
Because it means freedom for you and me.
They tap our phones and e-mail too,
They are afraid of what we can do.

They want my guns, they are saying to me,
Not as long as I breath and able to see.
I took my oath and went to Nam,
They WILL NOT get guns from this old man !

Many have died for the red white and blue,
If the need arises, I will too.
Guns from my hands they will have to pry,
MOLON LABE is the battle cry !!!!!!

John D USN RVN 71, 72, 73, evac 75
3/9/13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

Related articles

• Assault Weapon Registration Begins In NY (newyork.cbslocal.com)
• Sen. Feinstein: Private Gun Sales Play into Terrorists’ Hands (breitbart.com)
• Supreme Court Rejects Challenge To NY Gun Law (newyork.cbslocal.com)
• New York’s ‘assault weapon’ registration to begin (sfgate.com)
• More provisions of SAFE Act take effect today (9wsyr.com)
• Guns: The Left’s True Aim, and How to Thwart It (americanthinker.com)
• Many Republicans Once Favored Gun Control (politicalwire.com)

—

The Full Text Of “The Public Safety And Second Amendment Rights Protection Act”

Sen. Toomey Offers Full Text Of Public Safety And Second Amendment Rights Protection Act Online

 

 

 

 

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) tonight posted the bill text of The Public Safety And Second Amendment Rights Protection Act that he and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) introduced yesterday.

The full text of The Public Safety And Second Amendment Rights Protection Act is available below:

Purpose: To protect Second Amendment rights, ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, and provide a responsible and consistent background check process.

S. 649

To ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale, and for other purposes.

Referred to the Committee on __________ and ordered to be printed
Ordered to lie on the table and to be printed

AMENDMENT INTENDED TO BE PROPOSED BY MR. MANCHIN (for himself, Mr. TOOMEY, Mr. KIRK, and Mr. SCHUMER)
Viz:
Strike title I and insert the following:

TITLE I-PUBLIC SAFETY AND SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS PROTECTION ACT
SECTION 101. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the “Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013”.

SEC. 102. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) Congress supports, respects, and defends the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
(2) Congress supports and reaffirms the existing prohibition on a national firearms registry.
(3) Congress believes the Department of Justice should prosecute violations of background check requirements to the maximum extent of the law.
(4) There are deficits in the background check system in existence prior to the date of enactment of this Act and the Department of Justice should make it a top priority to work with States to swiftly input missing records, including mental health records.
(5) Congress and the citizens of the United States agree that in order to promote safe and responsible gun ownership, dangerous criminals and the seriously mentally ill should be prohibited from possessing firearms; therefore, it should be incumbent upon all citizens to ensure weapons are not being transferred to such people.

SEC. 103. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this title, or any amendment made by this title, shall be construed to-
(1) expand in any way the enforcement authority or jurisdiction of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; or
(2) allow the establishment, directly or indirectly, of a Federal firearms registry.

SEC. 104. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this title or an amendment made by this title, or the application of a provision or amendment to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid for any reason in any court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this title and amendments made by this title, and the application of the provisions and amendment to any other person or circumstance, shall not be affected.
Subtitle A-Ensuring That All Individuals Who Should Be Prohibited From Buying a Gun Are Listed in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System
SEC. 111. REAUTHORIZATION OF THE NATIONAL CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORDS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
Section 106(b) of Public Law 103-159 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended-
(1) in paragraph (1), in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking “of this Act” and inserting “of the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013”; and
(2) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
“(2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.-There are authorized to be appropriated for grants under this subsection $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2014 through 2017.”.
SEC. 112. IMPROVEMENT OF METRICS AND INCENTIVES.
Section 102(b) of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended to read as follows:

“(b) Implementation Plan.-

“(1) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013, the Attorney General, in coordination with the States, shall establish for each State or Indian tribal government desiring a grant under section 103 a 4-year implementation plan to ensure maximum coordination and automation of the reporting of records or making records available to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

“(2) BENCHMARK REQUIREMENTS.-Each 4-year plan established under paragraph (1) shall include annual benchmarks, including both qualitative goals and quantitative measures, to assess implementation of the 4-year plan.

“(3) PENALTIES FOR NON-COMPLIANCE.-

“(A) IN GENERAL.-During the 4-year period covered by a 4-year plan established under paragraph (1), the Attorney General shall withhold-
“(i) 10 percent of the amount that would otherwise be allocated to a State under section 505 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3755) if the State does not meet the benchmark established under paragraph (2) for the first year in the 4-year period;
“(ii) 11 percent of the amount that would otherwise be allocated to a State under section 505 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3755) if the State does not meet the benchmark established under paragraph (2) for the second year in the 4-year period;
“(iii) 13 percent of the amount that would otherwise be allocated to a State under section 505 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3755) if the State does not meet the benchmark established under paragraph (2) for the third year in the 4-year period; and
“(iv) 15 percent of the amount that would otherwise be allocated to a State under section 505 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3755) if the State does not meet the benchmark established under paragraph (2) for the fourth year in the 4-year period.

“(B) FAILURE TO ESTABLISH A PLAN.-A State that fails to establish a plan under paragraph (1) shall be treated as having not met any benchmark established under paragraph (2).”.

SEC. 113. GRANTS TO STATES FOR IMPROVEMENT OF COORDINATION AND AUTOMATION OF NICS RECORD REPORTING.
(a) In General.-The NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended-
(1) by striking section 103 and inserting the following:

“SEC. 103. GRANTS TO STATES FOR IMPROVEMENT OF COORDINATION AND AUTOMATION OF NICS RECORD REPORTING.
“(a) Authorization.-From amounts made available to carry out this section, the Attorney General shall make grants to States, Indian Tribal governments, and State court systems, in a manner consistent with the National Criminal History Improvement Program and consistent with State plans for integration, automation, and accessibility of criminal history records, for use by the State, or units of local government of the State, Indian Tribal government, or State court system to improve the automation and transmittal of mental health records and criminal history dispositions, records relevant to determining whether a person has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, court orders, and mental health adjudications or commitments to Federal and State record repositories in accordance with section 102 and the National Criminal History Improvement Program.
“(b) Use of Grant Amounts.-Grants awarded to States, Indian Tribal governments, or State court systems under this section may only be used to-
“(1) carry out, as necessary, assessments of the capabilities of the courts of the State or Indian Tribal government for the automation and transmission of arrest and conviction records, court orders, and mental health adjudications or commitments to Federal and State record repositories;
“(2) implement policies, systems, and procedures for the automation and transmission of arrest and conviction records, court orders, and mental health adjudications or commitments to Federal and State record repositories;
“(3) create electronic systems that provide accurate and up-to-date information which is directly related to checks under the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, including court disposition and corrections records;
“(4) assist States or Indian Tribal governments in establishing or enhancing their own capacities to perform background checks using the National Instant Criminal Background Check System; and
“(5) develop and maintain the relief from disabilities program in accordance with section 105.
“(c) Eligibility.-

“(1) IN GENERAL.-To be eligible for a grant under this section, a State, Indian Tribal government, or State court system shall certify, to the satisfaction of the Attorney General, that the State, Indian Tribal government, or State court system-
“(A) is not prohibited by State law or court order from submitting mental health records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System; and
“(B) subject to paragraph (2), has implemented a relief from disabilities program in accordance with section 105.

“(2) RELIEF FROM DISABILITIES PROGRAM.-For purposes of obtaining a grant under this section, a State, Indian Tribal government, or State court system shall not be required to meet the eligibility requirement described in paragraph (1)(B) until the date that is 2 years after the date of enactment of the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013.
“(d) Federal Share.-

“(1) STUDIES, ASSESSMENTS, NON-MATERIAL ACTIVITIES.-The Federal share of a study, assessment, creation of a task force, or other non-material activity, as determined by the Attorney General, carried out with a grant under this section shall be not more than 25 percent.

“(2) INFRASTRUCTURE OR SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.-The Federal share of an activity involving infrastructure or system development, including labor-related costs, for the purpose of improving State or Indian Tribal government record reporting to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System carried out with a grant under this section may amount to 100 percent of the cost of the activity.
“(e) Grants to Indian Tribes.-Up to 5 percent of the grant funding available under this section may be reserved for Indian tribal governments for use by Indian tribal judicial systems.
“(f) Authorization of Appropriations.-There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2014 through 2017.”;
(2) by striking title III; and
(3) in section 401(b), by inserting after “of this Act” the following: “and 18 months after the date of enactment of the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013”.
(b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.-The table of sections in section 1(b) of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended by striking the item relating to section 103 and inserting the following:
“Sec.103.Grants to States for improvement of coordination and automation of NICS record reporting.”.

SEC. 114. RELIEF FROM DISABILITIES PROGRAM.
Section 105 of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended by adding at the end the following:
“(c) Penalties for Non-compliance.-

“(1) 10 PERCENT REDUCTION.-During the 1-year period beginning 2 years after the date of enactment of the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013, the Attorney General shall withhold 10 percent of the amount that would otherwise be allocated to a State under section 505 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3755) if the State has not implemented a relief from disabilities program in accordance with this section.

“(2) 11 PERCENT REDUCTION.-During the 1-year period after the expiration of the period described in paragraph (1), the Attorney General shall withhold 11 percent of the amount that would otherwise be allocated to a State under section 505 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3755) if the State has not implemented a relief from disabilities program in accordance with this section.

“(3) 13 PERCENT REDUCTION.-During the 1-year period after the expiration of the period described in paragraph (2), the Attorney General shall withhold 13 percent of the amount that would otherwise be allocated to a State under section 505 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3755) if the State has not implemented a relief from disabilities program in accordance with this section.

“(4) 15 PERCENT REDUCTION.-After the expiration of the 1-year period described in paragraph (3), the Attorney General shall withhold 15 percent of the amount that would otherwise be allocated to a State under section 505 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3755) if the State has not implemented a relief from disabilities program in accordance with this section.”.

SEC. 115. ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS FOR OUR VETERANS.
(a) In General.-Chapter 55 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
“5511. Conditions for treatment of certain persons as adjudicated mentally incompetent for certain purposes
“(a) In General.-In any case arising out of the administration by the Secretary of laws and benefits under this title, a person who is determined by the Secretary to be mentally incompetent shall not be considered adjudicated pursuant to subsection (d)(4) or (g)(4) of section 922 of title 18 until-
“(1) in the case in which the person does not request a review as described in subsection (c)(1), the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date on which the person receives notice submitted under subsection (b); or
“(2) in the case in which the person requests a review as described in paragraph (1) of subsection (c), upon an assessment by the board designated or established under paragraph (2) of such subsection or court of competent jurisdiction that a person cannot safely use, carry, possess, or store a firearm due to mental incompetency.
“(b) Notice.-Notice submitted under this subsection to a person described in subsection (a) is notice submitted by the Secretary that notifies the person of the following:
“(1) The determination made by the Secretary.
“(2) A description of the implications of being considered adjudicated as a mental defective under subsection (d)(4) or (g)(4) of section 922 of title 18.
“(3) The person’s right to request a review under subsection (c)(1).
“(c) Administrative Review.-(1) Not later than 30 days after the date on which a person described in subsection (a) receives notice submitted under subsection (b), such person may request a review by the board designed or established under paragraph (2) or a court of competent jurisdiction to assess whether a person cannot safely use, carry, possess, or store a firearm due to mental incompetency. In such assessment, the board may consider the person’s honorable discharge or decoration.
“(2) Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013, the Secretary shall designate or establish a board that shall, upon request of a person under paragraph (1), assess whether a person cannot safely use, carry, possess, or store a firearm due to mental incompetency.
“(d) Judicial Review.-Not later than 30 days after the date of an assessment of a person under subsection (c) by the board designated or established under paragraph (2) of such subsection, such person may file a petition for judicial review of such assessment with a Federal court of competent jurisdiction.
“(e) Protecting Rights of Veterans With Existing Records.-Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013, the Secretary shall provide written notice of the opportunity for administrative review and appeal under subsection (c) to all persons who, on the date of enactment of the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013, are considered adjudicated pursuant to subsection (d)(4) or (g)(4) of section 922 of title 18 as a result of having been found by the Department of Veterans Affairs to be mentally incompetent.
“(f) Future Determinations.-

“(1) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 180 days after the enactment of the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013, the Secretary shall review the policies and procedures by which individuals are determined to be mentally incompetent, and shall revise such policies and procedures as necessary to ensure that any individual who is competent to manage his own financial affairs, including his receipt of Federal benefits, but who voluntarily turns over the management thereof to a fiduciary is not considered adjudicated pursuant to subsection (d)(4) or (g)(4) of section 922 of title 18.

“(2) REPORT.-Not later than 30 days after the Secretary has made the review and changes required under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report detailing the results of the review and any resulting policy and procedural changes.”.
(b) Clerical Amendment.-The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 55 of such title is amended by adding at the end the following new item:
“5511. Conditions for treatment of certain persons as adjudicated mentally incompetent for certain purposes.”.
(c) Applicability.-Section 5511 of title 38, United States Code (as added by this section), shall apply only with respect to persons who are determined by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, to be mentally incompetent, except that those persons who are provided notice pursuant to section 5511(e) shall be entitled to use the administrative review under section 5511(c) and, as necessary, the subsequent judicial review under section 5511(d).

SEC. 116. CLARIFICATION THAT FEDERAL COURT INFORMATION IS TO BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE NATIONAL INSTANT CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM.
Section 103(e)(1) of Public Law 103-159 (18 U.S.C. 922 note), is amended by adding at the end the following:

“(F) APPLICATION TO FEDERAL COURTS.-In this subsection-
“(i) the terms ‘department or agency of the United States’ and ‘Federal department or agency’ include a Federal court; and
“(ii) for purposes of any request, submission, or notification, the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts shall perform the functions of the head of the department or agency.”.

SEC. 117. CLARIFICATION THAT SUBMISSION OF MENTAL HEALTH RECORDS TO THE NATIONAL INSTANT CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM IS NOT PROHIBITED BY THE HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT.
Information collected under section 102(c)(3) of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) to assist the Attorney General in enforcing section 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code, shall not be subject to the regulations promulgated under section 264(c) of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (42 U.S.C. 1320d-2 note).

SEC. 118. PUBLICATION OF NICS INDEX STATISTICS.
Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, and biannually thereafter, the Attorney General shall make the National Instant Criminal Background Check System index statistics available on a publically accessible Internet website.

SEC. 119. EFFECTIVE DATE.
The amendments made by this subtitle shall take effect 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
Subtitle B-Providing a Responsible and Consistent Background Check Process

SEC. 121. PURPOSE.
The purpose of this subtitle is to enhance the current background check process in the United States to ensure criminals and the mentally ill are not able to purchase firearms.

SEC. 122. FIREARMS TRANSFERS.
(a) In General.-Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-
(1) by repealing subsection (s);
(2) by redesignating subsection (t) as subsection (s);
(3) in subsection (s), as redesignated-
(A) in paragraph (1)(B)-
(i) in clause (i), by striking “or”;
(ii) in clause (ii), by striking “and” at the end; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
“(iii) in the case of an instant background check conducted at a gun show or event during the 4-year period beginning on the effective date under section 130(a) of the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013, 48 hours have elapsed since the licensee contacted the system, and the system has not notified the licensee that the receipt of a firearm by such other person would violate subsection (g) or (n) of this section; or
“(iv) in the case of an instant background check conducted at a gun show or event after the 4-year period described in clause (iii), 24 hours have elapsed since the licensee contacted the system, and the system has not notified the licensee that the receipt of a firearm by such other person would violate subsection (g) or (n) of this section; and”;
(B) in paragraph (3)(C)(ii), by striking “(as defined in subsection (s)(8))”; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
“(7) In this subsection-
“(A) the term ‘chief law enforcement officer’ means the chief of police, the sheriff, or an equivalent officer or the designee of any such individual; and
“(B) the term ‘gun show or event’ has the meaning given the term in subsection (t)(7).
“(8) The Federal Bureau of Investigation shall not charge a user fee for a background check conducted pursuant to this subsection.
“(9) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, upon receiving a request for an instant background check that originates from a gun show or event, the system shall complete the instant background check before completing any pending instant background check that did not originate from a gun show or event.”; and
(4) by inserting after subsection (s), as redesignated, the following:
“(t)(1) Beginning on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of this subsection and except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for any person other than a licensed dealer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed importer to complete the transfer of a firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this chapter, if such transfer occurs-
“(A) at a gun show or event, on the curtilage thereof; or
“(B) pursuant to an advertisement, posting, display or other listing on the Internet or in a publication by the transferor of his intent to transfer, or the transferee of his intent to acquire, the firearm.
“(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply if-
“(A) the transfer is made after a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken possession of the firearm for the purpose of complying with subsection (s), and upon taking possession of the firearm, the licensee-
“(i) complies with all requirements of this chapter as if the licensee were transferring the firearm from the licensee’s business inventory to the unlicensed transferee, except that when processing a transfer under this chapter the licensee may accept in lieu of conducting a background check a valid permit issued within the previous 5 years by a State, or a political subdivision of a State, that allows the transferee to possess, acquire, or carry a firearm, if the law of the State, or political subdivision of a State, that issued the permit requires that such permit is issued only after an authorized government official has verified that the information available to such official does not indicate that possession of a firearm by the unlicensed transferee would be in violation of Federal, State, or local law;
“(B) the transfer is made between an unlicensed transferor and an unlicensed transferee residing in the same State, which takes place in such State, if-
“(i) the Attorney General certifies that State in which the transfer takes place has in effect requirements under law that are generally equivalent to the requirements of this section; and
“(ii) the transfer was conducted in compliance with the laws of the State;
“(C) the transfer is made between spouses, between parents or spouses of parents and their children or spouses of their children, between siblings or spouses of siblings, or between grandparents or spouses of grandparents and their grandchildren or spouses of their grandchildren, or between aunts or uncles or their spouses and their nieces or nephews or their spouses, or between first cousins, if the transferor does not know or have reasonable cause to believe that the transferee is prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm under Federal, State, or local law; or
“(D) the Attorney General has approved the transfer under section 5812 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
“(3) A licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer who processes a transfer of a firearm authorized under paragraph (2)(A) shall not be subject to a license revocation or license denial based solely upon a violation of those paragraphs, or a violation of the rules or regulations promulgated under this paragraph, unless the licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer-
“(A) knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the information provided for purposes of identifying the transferor, transferee, or the firearm is false;
“(B) knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the transferee is prohibited from purchasing, receiving, or possessing a firearm by Federal or State law, or published ordinance; or
“(C) knowingly violates any other provision of this chapter, or the rules or regulations promulgated thereunder.
“(4)(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, except for section 923(m), the Attorney General may implement this subsection with regulations.
“(B) Regulations promulgated under this paragraph may not include any provision requiring licensees to facilitate transfers in accordance with paragraph (2)(A).
“(C) Regulations promulgated under this paragraph may not include any provision requiring persons not licensed under this chapter to keep records of background checks or firearms transfers.
“(D) Regulations promulgated under this paragraph may not include any provision placing a cap on the fee licensees may charge to facilitate transfers in accordance with paragraph (2)(A).
“(5)(A) A person other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer, who makes a transfer of a firearm in accordance with this section, or who is the organizer of a gun show or event at which such transfer occurs, shall be immune from a qualified civil liability action relating to the transfer of the firearm as if the person were a seller of a qualified product.
“(B) A provider of an interactive computer service shall be immune from a qualified civil liability action relating to the transfer of a firearm as if the provider of an interactive computer service were a seller of a qualified product.
“(C) In this paragraph-
“(i) the term ‘interactive computer service’ shall have the meaning given the term in section 230(f) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230(f)); and
“(ii) the terms ‘qualified civil liability action’, ‘qualified product’, and ‘seller’ shall have the meanings given the terms in section 4 of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (15 U.S.C. 7903).
“(D) Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to affect the immunity of a provider of an interactive computer service under section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230).
“(6) In any civil liability action in any State or Federal court arising from the criminal or unlawful use of a firearm following a transfer of such firearm for which no background check was required under this section, this section shall not be construed-
“(A) as creating a cause of action for any civil liability; or
“(B) as establishing any standard of care.
“(7) For purposes of this subsection, the term ‘gun show or event’-
“(A) means any event at which 75 or more firearms are offered or exhibited for sale, exchange, or transfer, if 1 or more of the firearms has been shipped or transported in, or otherwise affects, interstate or foreign commerce; and
“(B) does not include an offer or exhibit of firearms for sale, exchange, or transfer by an individual from the personal collection of that individual, at the private residence of that individual, if the individual is not required to be licensed under section 923.”.
(b) Prohibiting the Seizure of Records or Documents.-Section 923(g)(1)(D) is amended by striking, “The inspection and examination authorized by this paragraph shall not be construed as authorizing the Attorney General to seize any records or other documents other than those records or documents constituting material evidence of a violation of law,” and inserting the following: “The Attorney General shall be prohibited from seizing any records or other documents in the course of an inspection or examination authorized by this paragraph other than those records or documents constituting material evidence of a violation of law.”.
(c) Prohibition of National Gun Registry.-Section 923 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
“(m) The Attorney General may not consolidate or centralize the records of the-
“(1) acquisition or disposition of firearms, or any portion thereof, maintained by-
“(A) a person with a valid, current license under this chapter;
“(B) an unlicensed transferor under section 922(t); or
“(2) possession or ownership of a firearm, maintained by any medical or health insurance entity.”.
(d) Technical and Conforming Amendments.-

(1) SECTION 922.-Section 922(y)(2) of title 18, United States Code, is amended, in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking “, (g)(5)(B), and (s)(3)(B)(v)(II)” and inserting “and (g)(5)(B)”.

(2) CONSOLIDATED AND FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2012.-Section 511 of title V of division B of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2012 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended by striking “subsection 922(t)” and inserting “subsection (s) or (t) of section 922” each place it appears.

SEC. 123. PENALTIES.
Section 924 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-
(1) in subsection (a), by adding at the end the following:
“(8) Whoever makes or attempts to make a transfer of a firearm in violation of section 922(t) to a person not licensed under this chapter who is prohibited from receiving a firearm under subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 or State law, to a law enforcement officer, or to a person acting at the direction of, or with the approval of, a law enforcement officer authorized to investigate or prosecute violations of section 922(t), shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
“(q) Improper Use of Storage of Records.-Any person who knowingly violates section 923(m) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both.”.

SEC. 124. FIREARMS DISPOSITIONS.
Section 922(b)(3) of title 18, United States Code, is amended-
(1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking “located” and inserting “located or temporarily located”; and
(2) in subparagraph (A)-
(A) by striking “rifle or shotgun” and inserting “firearm”;
(B) by striking “located” and inserting “located or temporarily located”; and
(C) by striking “both such States” and inserting “the State in which the transfer is conducted and the State of residence of the transferee”.

SEC. 125. FIREARM DEALER ACCESS TO LAW ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION.
Section 103(b) of Public Law 103-159 (18 U.S.C. 922 note), is amended-
(1) by striking “Not later than” and inserting the following:

“(1) IN GENERAL.-Not later than”; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:

“(2) VOLUNTARY BACKGROUND CHECKS.-Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013, the Attorney General shall promulgate regulations allowing licensees to use the National Instant Criminal Background Check System established under this section for purposes of conducting voluntary preemployment background checks on prospective employees.”.

SEC. 126. DEALER LOCATION.
Section 923 of title 18, United States Code, is amended-
(1) in subsection (j)-
(A) in the first sentence, by striking “, and such location is in the State which is specified on the license”; and
(B) in the last sentence-
(i) by inserting “transfer,” after “sell,”; and
(ii) by striking “Act,” and all that follows and inserting “Act.”; and
(2) by adding after subsection (m), as added by section 122(c), the following:
“(n) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prohibit the sale, transfer, delivery, or other disposition of a firearm or ammunition not otherwise prohibited under this chapter-
“(1) by a person licensed under this chapter to another person so licensed, at any location in any State; or
“(2) by a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer to a person not licensed under this chapter, at a temporary location described in subsection (j) in any State.”.

SEC. 127. RESIDENCE OF UNITED STATES OFFICERS.
Section 921 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:
“(b) For purposes of this chapter:
“(1) A member of the Armed Forces on active duty, or a spouse of such a member, is a resident of-
“(A) the State in which the member or spouse maintains legal residence;
“(B) the State in which the permanent duty station of the member is located; and
“(C) the State in which the member maintains a place of abode from which the member commutes each day to the permanent duty station of the member.
“(2) An officer or employee of the United States (other than a member of the Armed Forces) who is stationed outside the United States for a period of more than 1 year, and a spouse of such an officer or employee, is a resident of the State in which the person maintains legal residence.”.

SEC. 128. INTERSTATE TRANSPORTATION OF FIREARMS OR AMMUNITION.
(a) In General.-Section 926A of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
“926A. Interstate transportation of firearms or ammunition
“(a) Definition.-In this section, the term ‘transport’-
“(1) includes staying in temporary lodging overnight, stopping for food, fuel, vehicle maintenance, an emergency, medical treatment, and any other activity incidental to the transport; and
“(2) does not include transportation-
“(A) with the intent to commit a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year that involves a firearm; or
“(B) with knowledge, or reasonable cause to believe, that a crime described in subparagraph (A) is to be committed in the course of, or arising from, the transportation.
“(b) Authorization.-Notwithstanding any provision of any law (including a rule or regulation) of a State or any political subdivision thereof, a person who is not prohibited by this chapter from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm or ammunition shall be entitled to-
“(1) transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where the person may lawfully possess, carry, or transport the firearm to any other such place if, during the transportation-
“(A) the firearm is unloaded; and
“(B)(i) if the transportation is by motor vehicle-
“(I) the firearm is not directly accessible from the passenger compartment of the motor vehicle; or
“(II) if the motor vehicle is without a compartment separate from the passenger compartment, the firearm is-
“(aa) in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console; or
“(bb) secured by a secure gun storage or safety device; or
“(ii) if the transportation is by other means, the firearm is in a locked container or secured by a secure gun storage or safety device; and
“(2) transport ammunition for any lawful purpose from any place where the person may lawfully possess, carry, or transport the ammunition, to any other such place if, during the transportation-
“(A) the ammunition is not loaded into a firearm; and
“(B)(i) if the transportation is by motor vehicle-
“(I) the ammunition is not directly accessible from the passenger compartment of the motor vehicle; or
“(II) if the motor vehicle is without a compartment separate from the passenger compartment, the ammunition is in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console; or
“(ii) if the transportation is by other means, the ammunition is in a locked container.
“(c) Limitation on Arrest Authority.-A person who is transporting a firearm or ammunition may not be-
“(1) arrested for violation of any law or any rule or regulation of a State, or any political subdivision thereof, relating to the possession, transportation, or carrying of firearms or ammunition, unless there is probable cause that the transportation is not in accordance with subsection (b); or
“(2) detained for violation of any law or any rule or regulation of a State, or any political subdivision thereof, relating to the possession, transportation, or carrying of firearms or ammunition, unless there is reasonable suspicion that the transportation is not in accordance with subsection (b).”.
(b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.-The table of sections for chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking the item relating to section 926A and inserting the following:
“926A. Interstate transportation of firearms or ammunition.”.

SEC. 129. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this subtitle, or an amendment made by this subtitle, shall be construed-
(1) to extend background check requirements to transfers other than those made at gun shows or on the curtilage thereof, or pursuant to an advertisement, posting, display, or other listing on the Internet or in a publication by the transferor of the intent of the transferor to transfer, or the transferee of the intent of the transferee to acquire, the firearm; or
(2) to extend background check requirements to temporary transfers for purposes including lawful hunting or sporting or to temporary possession of a firearm for purposes of examination or evaluation by a prospective transferee.

SEC. 130. EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) In General.-Except as provided in subsection (b), this subtitle and the amendments made by this subtitle shall take effect 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
(b) Firearm Dealer Access to Law Enforcement Information.-Section 125 and the amendments made by section 125 shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act.
Subtitle C-National Commission on Mass Violence

SEC. 141. SHORT TITLE.
This subtitle may be cited as the “National Commission on Mass Violence Act of 2013”.

SEC. 142. NATIONAL COMMISSION ON MASS VIOLENCE.
(a) Establishment of Commission.-There is established a commission to be known as the National Commission on Mass Violence (in this subtitle referred to as the “Commission”) to study the availability and nature of firearms, including the means of acquiring firearms, issues relating to mental health, and all positive and negative impacts of the availability and nature of firearms on incidents of mass violence or in preventing mass violence.
(b) Membership.-

(1) APPOINTMENTS.-The Commission shall be composed of 12 members, of whom-
(A) 6 members of the Commission shall be appointed by the Majority Leader of the Senate, in consultation with the Democratic leadership of the House of Representatives, 1 of whom shall serve as Chairman of the Commission; and
(B) 6 members of the Commission shall be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, in consultation with the Republican leadership of the Senate, 1 of whom shall serve as Vice Chairman of the Commission.

(2) PERSONS ELIGIBLE.-

(A) IN GENERAL.-The members appointed to the Commission shall include-
(i) well-known and respected individuals among their peers in their respective fields of expertise; and
(ii) not less than 1 non-elected individual from each of the following categories, who has expertise in the category, by both experience and training:
(I) Firearms.
(II) Mental health.
(III) School safety.
(IV) Mass media.

(B) EXPERTS.-In identifying the individuals to serve on the Commission, the appointing authorities shall take special care to identify experts in the fields described in section 143(a)(2).

(C) PARTY AFFILIATION.-Not more than 6 members of the Commission shall be from the same political party.

(3) COMPLETION OF APPOINTMENTS; VACANCIES.-Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the appointing authorities under paragraph (1) shall each make their respective appointments. Any vacancy that occurs during the life of the Commission shall not affect the powers of the Commission, and shall be filled in the same manner as the original appointment not later than 30 days after the vacancy occurs.

(4) OPERATION OF THE COMMISSION.-

(A) MEETINGS.-

(i) IN GENERAL.-The Commission shall meet at the call of the Chairman.

(ii) INITIAL MEETING.-The initial meeting of the Commission shall be conducted not later than 30 days after the later of-
(I) the date of the appointment of the last member of the Commission; or
(II) the date on which appropriated funds are available for the Commission.

(B) QUORUM; VACANCIES; VOTING; RULES.-A majority of the members of the Commission shall constitute a quorum to conduct business, but the Commission may establish a lesser quorum for conducting hearings scheduled by the Commission. Each member of the Commission shall have 1 vote, and the vote of each member shall be accorded the same weight. The Commission may establish by majority vote any other rules for the conduct of the Commission’s business, if such rules are not inconsistent with this subtitle or other applicable law.

SEC. 143. DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION.
(a) Study.-

(1) IN GENERAL.-It shall be the duty of the Commission to conduct a comprehensive factual study of incidents of mass violence, including incidents of mass violence not involving firearms, in the context of the many acts of senseless mass violence that occur in the United States each year, in order to determine the root causes of such mass violence.

(2) MATTERS TO BE STUDIED.-In determining the root causes of these recurring and tragic acts of mass violence, the Commission shall study any matter that the Commission determines relevant to meeting the requirements of paragraph (1), including at a minimum-
(A) the role of schools, including the level of involvement and awareness of teachers and school administrators in the lives of their students and the availability of mental health and other resources and strategies to help detect and counter tendencies of students towards mass violence;
(B) the effectiveness of and resources available for school security strategies to prevent incidents of mass violence;
(C) the role of families and the availability of mental health and other resources and strategies to help families detect and counter tendencies toward mass violence;
(D) the effectiveness and use of, and resources available to, the mental health system in understanding, detecting, and countering tendencies toward mass violence, as well as the effects of treatments and therapies;
(E) whether medical doctors and other mental health professionals have the ability, without negative legal or professional consequences, to notify law enforcement officials when a patient is a danger to himself or others;
(F) the nature and impact of the alienation of the perpetrators of such incidents of mass violence from their schools, families, peer groups, and places of work;
(G) the role that domestic violence plays in causing incidents of mass violence;
(H) the effect of depictions of mass violence in the media, and any impact of such depictions on incidents of mass violence;
(I) the availability and nature of firearms, including the means of acquiring such firearms, and all positive and negative impacts of such availability and nature on incidents of mass violence or in preventing mass violence;
(J) the role of current prosecution rates in contributing to the availability of weapons that are used in mass violence;
(K) the availability of information regarding the construction of weapons, including explosive devices, and any impact of such information on such incidents of mass violence;
(L) the views of law enforcement officials, religious leaders, mental health experts, and other relevant officials on the root causes and prevention of mass violence;
(M) incidents in which firearms were used to stop mass violence; and
(N) any other area that the Commission determines contributes to the causes of mass violence.

(3) TESTIMONY OF VICTIMS AND SURVIVORS.-In determining the root causes of these recurring and tragic incidents of mass violence, the Commission shall, in accordance with section 144(a), take the testimony of victims and survivors to learn and memorialize their views and experiences regarding such incidents of mass violence.
(b) Recommendations.-Based on the findings of the study required under subsection (a), the Commission shall make recommendations to the President and Congress to address the causes of these recurring and tragic incidents of mass violence and to reduce such incidents of mass violence.
(c) Reports.-

(1) INTERIM REPORT.-Not later than 3 months after the date on which the Commission first meets, the Commission shall submit to the President and Congress an interim report describing any initial recommendations of the Commission.

(2) FINAL REPORT.-Not later than 6 months after the date on which the Commission first meets, the Commission shall submit to the President and Congress a comprehensive report of the findings and conclusions of the Commission, together with the recommendations of the Commission.

(3) SUMMARIES.-The report under paragraph (2) shall include a summary of-
(A) the reports submitted to the Commission by any entity under contract for research under section 144(e); and
(B) any other material relied on by the Commission in the preparation of the report.

SEC. 144. POWERS OF THE COMMISSION.
(a) Hearings.-

(1) IN GENERAL.-The Commission may hold such hearings, sit and act at such times and places, administer such oaths, take such testimony, and receive such evidence as the Commission considers advisable to carry out its duties under section 143.

(2) WITNESS EXPENSES.-Witnesses requested to appear before the Commission shall be paid the same fees as are paid to witnesses under section 1821 of title 28, United States Code.
(b) Information From Federal Agencies.-The Commission may secure directly from any Federal agency such information as the Commission considers necessary to carry out its duties under section 143. Upon the request of the Commission, the head of such agency may furnish such information to the Commission.
(c) Information to Be Kept Confidential.-

(1) IN GENERAL.-The Commission shall be considered an agency of the Federal Government for purposes of section 1905 of title 18, United States Code, and any individual employed by any individual or entity under contract with the Commission under subsection (d) shall be considered an employee of the Commission for the purposes of section 1905 of title 18, United States Code.

(2) DISCLOSURE.-Information obtained by the Commission or the Attorney General under this subtitle and shared with the Commission, other than information available to the public, shall not be disclosed to any person in any manner, except-
(A) to Commission employees or employees of any individual or entity under contract to the Commission under subsection (d) for the purpose of receiving, reviewing, or processing such information;
(B) upon court order; or
(C) when publicly released by the Commission in an aggregate or summary form that does not directly or indirectly disclose-
(i) the identity of any person or business entity; or
(ii) any information which could not be released under section 1905 of title 18, United States Code.
(d) Contracting for Research.-The Commission may enter into contracts with any entity for research necessary to carry out the duties of the Commission under section 143.

SEC. 145. COMMISSION PERSONNEL MATTERS.
(a) Compensation of Members.-Each member of the Commission who is not an officer or employee of the Federal Government shall be compensated at a rate equal to the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for level IV of the Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5, United States Code, for each day (including travel time) during which such member is engaged in the performance of the duties of the Commission. All members of the Commission who are officers or employees of the United States shall serve without compensation in addition to that received for their services as officers or employees of the United States.
(b) Travel Expenses.-The members of the Commission shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from their homes or regular places of business in the performance of service for the Commission.
(c) Staff.-

(1) IN GENERAL.-The Chairman of the Commission may, without regard to the civil service laws and regulations, appoint and terminate an executive director and such other additional employees as may be necessary to enable the Commission to perform its duties. The employment and termination of an executive director shall be subject to confirmation by a majority of the members of the Commission.

(2) COMPENSATION.-The executive director shall be compensated at a rate not to exceed the rate payable for level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of title 5, United States Code. The Chairman may fix the compensation of other employees without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of title 5, United States Code, relating to classification of positions and General Schedule pay rates, except that the rate of pay for such employees may not exceed the rate payable for level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of such title.

(3) DETAIL OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES.-Any Federal Government employee, with the approval of the head of the appropriate Federal agency, may be detailed to the Commission without reimbursement, and such detail shall be without interruption or loss of civil service status, benefits, or privilege.
(d) Procurement of Temporary and Intermittent Services.-The Chairman of the Commission may procure temporary and intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, at rates for individuals not to exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of such title.

SEC. 146. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Commission and any agency of the Federal Government assisting the Commission in carrying out its duties under this subtitle such sums as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this subtitle. Any sums appropriated shall remain available, without fiscal year limitation, until expended.

SEC. 147. TERMINATION OF THE COMMISSION.
The Commission shall terminate 30 days after the Commission submits the final report under section 143(c)(2).

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

“The Constitution Did Not Guarantee Public Safety, It Guaranteed Liberty”

CONNECTICUT MAN TOOK THREE DAYS OFF WORK TO DELIVER THIS EPIC TESTIMONY AGAINST GUN CONTROL

 

 

” How do Connecticut residents feel about the crackdown on the Second Amendment? Well, there are people from both sides making passionate arguments on the issue, however, one gentleman last week was able to make a particularly persuasive case against more gun control and in favor of the U.S. Constitution.

Meet Robert Steed, a resident of Vernon, Conn. who took three days straight off work to attend several gun control hearings in Connecticut. On March 14, Steed was more “aggravated” than usual with lawmakers and he let them know it in his fiery testimony, telling them that they were “coloring outside the lines of constitutional parameters.”

” The reason that your jobs are becoming so difficult is because you’re coloring outside the lines of constitutional parameters,” Steed shot back. “That’s the bottom line. You are trying to marriage up public safety with constitutional rights. The Constitution did not guarantee public safety, it guaranteed liberty. And sometimes what comes with liberty is tragedy, unfortunately.” “

 

Related articles

• Are Americans able to arrest a dictatorial president, dictatorial members of parliament, dictatorial judges and justices? Yes we can: Absolutely! (ofthehighest.wordpress.com)
• Connecticut gun maker stages rally against state gun control proposals (foxnews.com)
• Colt stages rally against state gun control proposals (beowulfjournal.wordpress.com)
• Sandy Hook School Father: You Will Have To Take My Guns From My Cold Dead Hands (patdollard.com)
• Sandy Hook Father Bill Stevens Speaks at CT Gun Violence Prevention [W/ VIDEOS] (secretsofthefed.com)

 

 

 

 

—

DHS Drones – For Public Safety

DHS Advances Plan For “Public Safety” Drones

 

 

 

 

” The Department of Homeland Security is advancing its plan to use surveillance drones for “public safety” applications, announcing last week that it had received a deluge of “excellent” responses from potential vendors and was set to carry out more tests of the technology.

New testing of spy drones for “public safety” applications has been rubber stamped by the DHS. Image: YouTube

As we first reported in July last year, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano told a House Committee on Homeland Security that the federal agency was “looking at drones that could be utilized to give us situational awareness in a large public safety [matter] or disaster,” despite the fact that the agency had previously indicated it was reticent to use spy drones to keep tabs on the public.”

Related articles

• Alameda County: Drone meeting ends with no resolution (mercurynews.com)
• 5 Homeland Security ‘Bots Coming to Spy on You (If They Aren’t Already) (wired.com)
• Obama drones creating fear among Americans (ConservativeActionAlerts.com)
• Homeland Security Quietly Runs “Loan-a-Drone” Program for Local Law Enforcement (blacklistednews.com)
• DHS Use Police Depts to Gather Intel on Citizens & Label Them Extremist Threats (occupycorporatism.com)
• Seattle Mayor Bans Police From Using Drones (dprogram.net)
• Glimmer of Hope: Washington Residents Force Seattle To Scrap Police Drones (21stcenturywire.com)

Refuse To Arm Their Police Departments

Mayors Against Illegal Guns Threaten Gun Buy Boycott Over Gun Control

 

 

” “If we find out they’re not partners, and if we find out they’re working against us, then we all ought to have a conversation as taxpayers about whether our dollars should be used for people who are not working to reduce gun violence.” That’s the threat issued by Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak (above) against gun and ammo makers who don’t tow the line laid down by The Mayors Against Illegal Guns. minnesota.publicradio.org reports that “Rybak told members of the City Council’s Public Safety and Civil Rights Committee that he and mayors from approximately 60 cities are taking a closer look at the companies that manufacture the guns and ammunition that cities buy for police officers . “

Typical statist scapegoating … blame the private sector for the failures of government policies . 

We can’t keep the people safe so it must be … your fault .

 

 

 

Related articles

• Sixty mayors to gang up on gun companies unless they stop defending their rights (fromthetrenchesworldreport.com)
• Dem mayors to ‘grade’ gun-makers (politico.com)
• Mpls. Mayor Rybak Has Strong Message for Makers of Guns and Ammunition (kstp.com)
• Mayors to ‘grade’ gun-makers (oddonion.com)
• Mayors Deciding What to Do With Gun Manufacturers If They Don’t Comply With Gun Laws – This Is Good! (bonjublog.com)
• Obama’s Delight: Mayors prepare boycott of gun mfgs. in order to push gun control (therightofway.net)
• Sylvester Stallone Trips Over ‘Assault Weapon’ Media Misinformation (breitbart.com)

Fear And Submission , Tools Of The State

Lawlessness or Armed Citizens

 

” Are you beginning to get the picture? Anti-gun laws are not and never have been designed to disarm a citizenry for the purpose of public safety. They are a precursor to far more nefarious laws and actions by government agents all of which have been and will be designed to drive individuals into fear and then submission. ”

 

 

 

 

” If you really want to know what you are dealing with when you talk to friends, family members or neighbors who are of the anti-gun persuasion I highly recommend you read and take to heart the wisdom that Rabbi Bendory imparts in his article.

We are dealing with individuals within the executive, legislative, and judicial branches at both the state and federal level who have conspired – along with their money power brokers – to deliberately subdue any group or groups to which they feared loosing their power; hated because of their moral persuasions; or stood as a force against illegal proclamations which included murder and overt acts of theft. This egregious assault on any human’s natural right to self defense is always draped in the palatable lie of “public safety”.

The convoluted thinking of those in power is brought home in the opinion expressed by Florida Justice Rivers H. Buford in the early part of the 20th century who wrote explaining a Florida gun control statute:

“I know something of the history of this legislation. The original Act of 1893 was passed when there was a great influx of negro laborers in this State drawn here for the purpose of working in turpentine and lumber camps. The same condition existed when the Act was amended in 1901 and the Act was passed for the purpose of disarming the negro laborers . . . . The statute was never intended to be applied to the white population and in practice has never been so applied. . . .[T]here has never been, within my knowledge, any effort to enforce the provisions of this statute as to white people, because it has been generally conceded to be in contravention of the Constitution and non-enforceable if contested.” ”

 

 

Related articles

• Eleven States To Jail Feds Who Violate The 2nd Amendment (fromthetrenchesworldreport.com)
• oldranger_68 liked James Φοίνιξ’s discussion Lawlessness or Armed Citizens (12160.info)
• Oligarchies and tyrants “mistrust the people and therefore deprive them of their arms.” (12160.info)
• Proposed Amendments to 18 U.S.C. 1030 (volokh.com)
• Growing Circuit Split Over Removal Statutes (circuitsplits.com)
• Arizona Legislature Attempting to Make Enforcement of Federal Firearms Law a Felony (thetruthaboutguns.com)

A Must Read Piece On Motor Vehicle Control

WE NEED TO REGULATE CARS THE WAY WE REGULATE GUNS

” I keep hearing people say they want to regulate guns the way we regulate cars. They don’t really mean that, of course. What they mean is they want to make it
acceptable to find more ways to intrude on the right to keep and bear arms.

I propose instead, we regulate cars the way we regulate guns.

Let’s start:
To buy or operate a standard car, one will have to be 18 years old. Under that age, adult supervision will be mandatory. This means the adult must be in the vehicle with the underage driver. To buy a sports car, you will have to be
21.

A “Sports car” will be defined as any
combination of any two of the following: 2 doors instead of 4, spoked rims not requiring hubcaps, aerodynamic effects such as spoilers or air dams, a wheelbase under 100 inches, a manual
transmission, a curb weight under 3000 lbs, fiberglass or other non-metal construction, or painted logos. For every purchase, you will have to fill out a questionnaire confirming you’re a US citizen, do not use drugs or abuse alcohol, have never had a conviction for
alcohol related incidents or reckless
driving. Lying on this form will be
punishable by 10 years in prison and/or a $10,000 fine.

New cars will only be purchased from Federal Automobile Licensees who must provide fingerprints, proof of character, secure storage for all vehicles, and who must call the Federal Bureau of Motor
Vehicles to verify your information
before purchase. They may approve or decline or delay the sale. If they decline, you may appeal the decision in writing to
a review board. If they delay, it becomes an approval automatically after 10 days. However, the dealer may decline to complete such a sale in case of later problems. “

What’s Wrong With Michigan ?

  For a progressive stronghold Michigan is sure leading the way in the fight for liberty . God bless them and here’s hoping that Governor Snyder doesn’t let the emotions of the day deter him from signing Senate Bill 59 into law immediately .

Bill Allowing Concealed Guns In Michigan Schools, Churches Heads To Governor

” Lawmakers in both the House and Senate approved Senate Bill 59 to allow concealed weapons in several gun-free zones Thursday, as well as doing away with county boards currently overseeing concealed pistol licensing.

“If you have pistol free zones they are actually mass murderer empowerment zones,” said Steve Dulan, attorney for the Michigan Coalition of Responsible Gun Owners, who represents sportsman clubs throughout Michigan backing the bill. “If you actually look at the history, even over the past 10 years in the U.S., you find that maybe all but one mass shooting has occurred in a so-called gun free zone.”

Michigan law currently prohibits concealed weapons in schools, churches, day cares, hospitals, dorms, casinos and any public entertainment venue able to hold more than 2,500 people. Violators can be charged a civil infraction with a $500 fine and six-month concealed pistol license suspension. Repeat offenses can lead to a four-year felony, $5,000 fine and concealed pistol license being revoked. “

Related articles

• Michigan governor reviewing new gun bill; stance unclear (news.terra.com)
• Michigan gun owners with extra training could carry concealed weapons in schools under bill OK’d by House panel (mlive.com)
• Bill Expanding Concealed-Carry Access Enacted (detroit.cbslocal.com)
• BREAKING: Mass Shooting at Clackamas Town Center Mall (Gun-Free Zone) (thetruthaboutguns.com)

DHS To Test Spy Drones For “Public Safety” Applications

RAPS System Will Keep Tabs On Americans

 

 

  ” The Department of Homeland Security has announced in a solicitation to drone manufacturers that it will begin testing “Robotic Aircraft For Public Safety” at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, indicating that small spy drones will be used to keep tabs on Americans in the near future.

 

As Infowars reported back in July, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano told a House Committee on Homeland Security that the federal agency was “looking at drones that could be utilized to give us situational awareness in a large public safety [matter] or disaster.”

This represented an about-face of sorts for the agency, which had previously been reticent about the idea of using surveillance drones to spy on the public.

However, a recent solicitation posted on the FedBizOpps website confirms that the DHS is launching its Robotic Aircraft for Public Safety (RAPS) project and is asking small unmanned aerial systems (SUAS) vendors to take part.

The drones are set to be used for applications such as “law enforcement operations, search and rescue, and fire and hazardous material spill response” and will fly for 30 minutes to two hours at a time, weighing around 25 pounds so they can be launched by hand.”