[Vision2020] A Libertarian Case for Expanding Gun Background Checks

[Art Deco]

  [image: The New York Times] <http://www.nytimes.com/>

------------------------------
April 26, 2013
A Libertarian Case for Expanding Gun Background Checks By ROBERT A. LEVY

NAPLES, Fla.

LAST week, senators blocked a compromise measure that would have compelled
unlicensed sellers at gun shows and online gun sellers to conduct
background checks, despite polls that showed that 90 percent of the public
supported the idea.

I’m a libertarian who played a role in reducing handgun restrictions in the
nation’s capital. In 2008, in a landmark case I helped initiate, Heller v.
District of Columbia, the Supreme Court declared for the first time that
the Second Amendment protected an individual’s right to bear arms.

But the stonewalling of the background check proposal was a mistake, both
politically and substantively. Following a series of tragic mass shootings,
public opinion is overwhelmingly in favor of reasonable legislation
restricting the ownership of guns by people who shouldn’t have them. There
was also plenty in the proposal that gun-rights proponents like me could
embrace.

The compromise — carefully negotiated by two moderate gun-rights
supporters, Senators Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, and
Patrick J. Toomey, Republican of Pennsylvania — should be reintroduced in
the Senate. I am convinced that, with some modifications, it could still be
passed, because it would add reasonable protections for both gun owners and
sellers.

Gun-rights advocates should use this interval to refine their priorities
and support this measure, with a few modest changes. If they don’t, they
will be opening themselves to accusations from President Obama and others
that they are merely obstructionists, zealots who will not agree to
common-sense gun legislation.

The focus on background checks should not distract gun owners from the
positive provisions in the Manchin-Toomey proposal.

It would allow Americans to buy handguns from out-of-state sellers, which
is not allowed currently.

It would explicitly prohibit the creation of a national gun registry, and
make it a felony, punishable by up to 15 years in prison, to misuse records
from the national database used for background checks.

It would affirm that unloaded guns with a lock mechanism in place can be
transported across state lines.

It would immunize private gun sellers from lawsuits if a gun they have sold
is used unlawfully, unless the seller knows or should have known that the
buyer provided false information or was otherwise ineligible to buy a gun.
Extending background checks to unlicensed sellers shouldn’t be cause for
alarm. Background checks are already required for purchases from federally
licensed dealers, whether at stores or gun shows, over the Internet or by
mail. Moreover, gun buyers would be exempt from background checks if they
had a carry permit issued within the last five years.

To my mind, the Manchin-Toomey proposal needs additional improvements to
satisfy the demands of certain gun rights advocates. These changes might
have helped save the proposal, which was supported by 54 senators — six
votes short of the supermajority needed to overcome a filibuster.

The proposal should also exempt certain rural residents who live too far
from a licensed gun dealer for a background check to be practicable.

Currently, dealers can charge up to $125 for background checks. If these
fees are supposed to promote public safety, the taxpayers — and not just
law-abiding gun owners — should foot some of the bill. And more F.B.I.
staff members to manage the database would also help expedite the process.

In the current proposal, background checks at gun shows would be given
priority over checks at gun stores. The government needs to hire enough
staff members to promptly conduct checks at both places.

Current law denies gun permits to anyone who uses, or is addicted to, a
controlled substance. The punishment for omitting this information on a
background-check form is up to 10 years in federal prison — a penalty that
is too harsh for someone who has merely smoked marijuana.

In the days since the defeat of the Manchin-Toomey proposal, advocates of
gun restrictions have gone on the offensive. Gun-rights supporters should
not stand in the way of reasonable reform. The Manchin-Toomey proposal,
with the changes I’ve suggested, would offer substantial benefits while
imposing tolerable restrictions, none of which intrude on our core Second
Amendment liberties. Gun-rights advocates should get behind it and push for
its passage.

Robert A. Levy <http://www.cato.org/people/robert-levy>, chairman of the
board of the Cato Institute, is the author, with William Mellor, of “The
Dirty Dozen: How Twelve Supreme Court Cases Radically Expanded Government
and Eroded Freedom.”


-- 
Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
art.deco.studios at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20130427/a2a0dd56/attachment-0001.html>