1998-12-01 - Re: New Brady Bill Implications

Header Data

From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
To: Steve Schear <cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Message Hash: 4d050ce71115566b3f4982d0533d54016bf5e4024b2c6e74c084f4c3d7488448
Message ID: <199812011936.LAA23593@smtp.well.com>
Reply To: <>
UTC Datetime: 1998-12-01 20:23:44 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 04:23:44 +0800

Raw message

From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 04:23:44 +0800
To: Steve Schear <cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: New Brady Bill Implications
In-Reply-To: <>
Message-ID: <199812011936.LAA23593@smtp.well.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

It does not affect sale of firearms by non-dealers (non-FFL holders). Look
for the Clinton administration to try to change this; at a press conference
today the DC reporter rat-pack was moaning about unregulated gun shows.

It does affect non-sale transfers by FFLs. Per the DoJ rule: "NICS checks
apply to transfers and are not limited to firearm sales."

I have an article up at www.wired.com shortly about the privacy implications.


At 09:40 AM 12-1-98 -0800, Steve Schear wrote:
>>Hash: SHA1
>>I'm watching Headline News, and they are reporting
>>that "now", under new provisions in the Brady Bill,
>>and 'instant' background check is being made. This
>>even is for simple rifles and shotguns.
>How does this affect private, that is non-dealer, gun sales (like at swap