by Dave Workman
Senior Editor

Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) and fellow Democrats, including New York’s Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, are under fire from gun rights advocates for a new “anti-crime” package that includes a number of anti-gun provisions.

S-16, also known as the 21st Century Law Enforcement, Crime Prevention and Victims Assistance Act, is a far-reaching piece of legislation with provisions aimed directly at gun shows.

Co-sponsors of the bill include a Who’s Who of Democratic anti-gunners in addition to Daschle and the former first lady. Signing on with Daschle and Clinton, are Sens. Barbara Boxer (CA), Charles Schumer (NY), Carl Levin (MI), Jon Corzine (NJ), Richard J. Durbin (IL), Daschle’s South Dakota colleague, Tim Johnson, John D. Rockefeller III (WV), Patrick J. Leahy (VT), plus Louisiana Sen. John Breaux.

This latest anti-gun Senate proposal was filed by Democrats despite the recent recommendation by some House Democrats that their party abandon its high profile link to gun control (See related story in this issue.)

A fact sheet prepared by the Democratic Policy Committee says S-16 would provide expanded protection for police and the judiciary and “build on the successes of Project Exile and the Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative.” It would prohibit juveniles who commit violent crimes or serious drug offenses from ever possessing firearms.

There is also a section on victims rights, “Because Democrats want to ensure that crime victims are treated with fairness and respect.” The legislation creates an ombudsman program for crime victims, and increases training for police and court personnel to better deal with the needs of crime victims.

Daschle, according to sources with the National Rifle Association, has greatly shifted his voting record on firearms rights. When he was first elected to Congress nearly 25 years ago, his votes supported gun rights. However, since he ascended to the Senate in 1986, his voting record has turned decidedly against guns.

The bill has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where gun rights advocates hope it will languish.

“S-16 includes a number of anti-gun proposals masquerading as anti-crime measures,” cautioned John Michael Snyder, public affairs director for the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. “While there may be provisions in the bill which, if taken separately and individually, could be of benefit in helping to fight crime in our society, there are a number of provisions…which are, to put it quite simply, anti-gun and anti-law-abiding gunowner. We don’t see any societal value in these provisions.”

Snyder was especially critical of the gun show provisions. He said S-16 requirements “attempt to target gun shows so severely that it would curtail them seriously, if not entirely close them down.”

He acknowledged there are some provisions in the bill that should not raise the objections of gunowners. However, there are other sections that he blasted, noting, “We feel at present that, because of the anti-gun provisions now contained in S-16, we must oppose the bill as it has been introduced and as it now stands.”

Here are some of the tenets Snyder said gunowners find objectionable:

S-16 would make it unlawful for any person to organize, plan, promote or operate a gun show unless that person registers with the government in accordance with Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) regulations and pays a fee to be determined by the government.

Prior to the gun show’s opening, the promoter would have to verify the identity of each gun show vendor by examining a valid identification document that contains a photograph of the vendor.

Also before the gun show opens, the promoter would have to require each vendor to sign a ledger with identifying information concerning the vendor, and a notice advising the vendor of his or her obligation under the law.

The gun show promoter would have to notify each person who attends the gun show of the requirements of federal law, as the government may require.

If any part of a firearm transaction takes place at a gun show, it would be unlawful for any person not licensed under federal law to transfer a firearm to another person who is not licensed under federal law, unless the firearm is transferred through a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer.

Transfers could not be made without conducting a National Instant Check System (NICS) inquiry under the Brady Law provisions.

A federal licensee who agrees to assist a private person who is not a federal licensee, in carrying out his or her federal legal responsibilities with regard to any firearms transfer, would have to enter information about the firearm into a separate bound record. The FFL must record the transfer on a government form, and comply with federal law as if the firearm were being sold by the licensee.

In addition, the licensee would have to notify the prospective buyer and seller whenever a NICS produces a notification that the proposed transfer would violate federal or state law.

Within 10 days of the transfer, the licensee would have to inform ATF on a form that would not include the name or other identifying information relating to any person involved in the transfer, who is not a licensee.

The legislation is even more complicated. It further requires FFL holders who help non-licensees to transfer two or more handguns at the same time, or during any period of five consecutive business days, to fill out a report of multiple transfers on the same day the transfer occurs.

Also alarming to Snyder is a provision requiring licensees to submit reports to the US Treasury Department on firearms transactions with non-licensees at gun shows within 10 days of the show. That report shall not include the name or any other identifying information relating to the transfer.

Violations of these provisions could result in fines and/or imprisonment for from two to five years.

Yet another gun control element in S-16, Snyder noted, is a proposed national requirement for test firing and automated storage of ballistics records. This section of the law is known as the Ballistics, Law Assistance and Safety Technology (BLAST) Act.

Under this provision, a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer would have to test fire each firearm they manufacture or import, prepare a digitized ballistics image of the fired bullet and cartridge casing, and make the records available to the Treasury Department in a computerized database. Fired bullets and cartridge casings would be stored by the manufacturer or importer for a period required by the Treasury Department.

This provision, according to the legislation, would not create a cause of action against any federal firearm licensee or any other person for any civil liability except for the imposition of a civil penalty under the provision.

BLAST would stipulate that the Treasury and Justice Departments assist manufacturers and importers in complying with the law through the acquisition, disposition and upgrades of ballistics equipment and bullet recovery equipment. Also under this provision, both Treasury and Justice departments would set up a computer system through which state and local law enforcement agencies could access ballistics records.

The bill calls for a $20 million annual appropriation through 2005 for the purpose of implementing the BLAST system. Manufacturers of digital imaging cameras, computers and related ballistic software, as well as manufacturers of filing cabinets and other accessories needed by manufacturers and importers to store the fired bullet and casing samples of every gun are likely to be among those lobbying for passage, since the BLAST proposal would create a lucrative new market.