License no longer exempts from NICS check

Discussion in 'GWL News & Information' started by Gunstar1, Nov 4, 2005.

  1. Gunstar1

    Gunstar1 Administrator

    8,460
    5
    38
  2. ICP_Juggalo

    ICP_Juggalo Professional Troll

    1,926
    3
    38
    Thats odd. I wonder why? I just recently purchased a Savage Arms side by side 12GA this past halloween and I only had to so my ID and GFL and after I filled out the 4473, I paid and walk out with the gun. :?
     

  3. gundawg

    gundawg New Member

    17
    0
    0
    looks like a lot of states aren't on the list

    Did the BATF just remove a ton of states from the list? What gives?
     
  4. Mike from Philly

    Mike from Philly New Member

    787
    0
    0
    This is all a result of Georgia's recent repeal of the $5 fee for the Georgia background check for gun purchases. Now background checks are done at the national level, thus no $5.

    Sounds good, eh? Not really, now we are at the whim of the federal government to maintain and operate the system. What happens if the system goes down or worse Hitlery decides to turn off the system for national security reasons. We will be SOL.

    I'd rather pay the $5, even with a firearms license.
     
  5. Gunstar1

    Gunstar1 Administrator

    8,460
    5
    38
    I don't think it is. The law that was recently changed was for handgun purchase background checks. Before the law was changed, long gun purchase background checks were done through NICS for free and handgun purchase background checks were done through Georgia's GCIC with a $5 fee.

    The new law says that handgun purchase background checks are now to go through NICS for free.

    What has been said is that the ATF re-evaluated the exempted permits of every state and the probable cause is that Georgia does not have a reliable system in place for revoking licenses of people who commit a crime on the prohibited list.

    Which is true. Just think about someone who has a license and a year or so after getting it he/she is caught in another county in possesion of a joint. They are charged, and pled no contest to. He/she paid a fine and that is the end of it.

    Unless the DA or Judge of almost any drug case "conviction" calls the Probate court Judge in the county the defendant lives in to first check if they have a permit and then to report that it should be revoked. To my knowledge this is not done and is what the ATF did not like.
     
  6. gundawg

    gundawg New Member

    17
    0
    0
    I've now been told that the ATF wants the issuing authority to at least run annual checks on license carriers. This is supposedly why the exemption was pulled.
     
  7. Gunstar1

    Gunstar1 Administrator

    8,460
    5
    38
    The open letter to FFL's on the ATF website does not give the specific reason for the change but it does say that a license term up to a 5 years is ok.

    Of the 2 things listed as needed for exemption, the only one Georgia does not do fully is denial of permits.
     
  8. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,351
    383
    83
  9. Gunstar1

    Gunstar1 Administrator

    8,460
    5
    38
    I just sent an email to the GBI asking them what the ATF's problem with Georgia's license is.
     
  10. ICP_Juggalo

    ICP_Juggalo Professional Troll

    1,926
    3
    38
    4Real Gunstar, it looks as if the GBI dropped the ball on the license review and screwed us with the ATF. The open letter on the ATF web site says the GBI didn't address their concerns before Spetember 30, 2005. And now we are paying for their neglegence :roll:
     
  11. jrm

    jrm Sledgehammer

    3,458
    1
    38
    GBI didn't exactly drop the ball

    I called to find out why the GA license doesn't qualify anymore. GBI told me that our statute does not require (explicitly) a NICS check, and it does not require denial of a license for someone who is federally prohibited.

    GBI referred the matter to the governor's office, as the GBI does not have any authority on its own (obviously) to change the statute. Supposedly, the governor declined to do anything about it, but then the generaly assembly isn't in session, either.

    It will take a minor statute correction to restore the ability of the GA license to qualify as an alternative again.

    I have written the governor and my legislators, asking them to do so.
     
  12. ICP_Juggalo

    ICP_Juggalo Professional Troll

    1,926
    3
    38
    Re: GBI didn't exactly drop the ball

    Don't look to the governor for help on this issue. I remember him mentioning to someone here or there :roll: that he didn't want a gun control related issue to come before him during his re-election.

    Based on an email conversation another poster had with Lt. Gov Mark Taylor, he seems that he is more pro-gun and open minded to changing the law than chicken man Purdue.
     
  13. Gunstar1

    Gunstar1 Administrator

    8,460
    5
    38
  14. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,351
    383
    83
    I find myself curious whether the GBI deigned to respond at this date, almost half a year later?


    Deign:

    Pronunciation: 'dAn

    Function: verb

    Etymology: Middle English, from Old French deignier, from Latin dignare, dignari, from dignus worthy -- more at DECENT

    intransitive senses : to condescend reluctantly and with a strong sense of the affront to one's superiority that is involved

    transitive senses : to condescend to give or offer
     
  15. jrm

    jrm Sledgehammer

    3,458
    1
    38
    MP, see my Nov. 9 post above. GBI told me over the phone what the problem was, and they were right friendly about it to boot.
     
  16. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,351
    383
    83
    Re: GBI didn't exactly drop the ball

    From your Nov 9 post:
    Well, now that the General Assembly session is over, is it your learned opinion that what they did is sufficient?

    For the life of me, I can't figure it out!
     
  17. jrm

    jrm Sledgehammer

    3,458
    1
    38
    Based on what GBI told me, I would say yes. GBI said the problem was that the statute does not specifically deny a GFL to someone federally ineligible to purchase a gun. The bill that passed the legislature specifically does. Seems like it ought to work now.

    The operational problem I see is that licenses issued under the current statute aren't "fixed." Judging by what has happened in other states, I'm expecting the ATF to say something on the order of, "GFLs issued prior to 7/1/06 are not exempt from the NICS check. GFLs issued after 7/1/06 are."
     
  18. Gunstar1

    Gunstar1 Administrator

    8,460
    5
    38
    Hopefully that was enough.