Time to make some calls and/or emails ladies and gents.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

chuter

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
5,326
Reaction score
7,748
Location
over yonder
I used the GOA form to send a email to Lankford, this is what I got back; I'm going to change my registration from Independent to Republican just so I can primary this guy.

Thank you for contacting me about S. 675, the NICS Denial Notification Act. I appreciate the opportunity to hear from you.

I have heard from Oklahomans who both support and oppose this bill. I am a cosponsor of this legislation because I believe information sharing between federal, state, and local partners is integral to effective law enforcement.

I am a strong supporter of our Second Amendment. The right to keep and bear arms cannot be infringed. Under federal law, there are nine categories of individuals who are prohibited from owning, purchasing, possessing, or transferring firearms including: convicted felons, illegal aliens, those convicted of domestic violence, an unlawful user of drugs, those who have been dishonorably discharged from the military, etc. If a prohibited person lies on the background check form when he/she attempts to purchase a firearm from a Federal Firearm Licensee (FFL), the FBI is not required to tell state and local law enforcement that someone in their area just tried to illegally purchase a firearm. This is critical intelligence and the FBI should not have a monopoly on this information.

S. 675 would simply require the Department of Justice (DOJ) to alert state and local law enforcement authorities when an ineligible person attempts to purchase a firearm and fails a background check. It also requires the Attorney General to notify state law enforcement if it is later determined that the individual is not a prohibited person. The bill does not require state or local law enforcement to open an investigation or arrest a person. It is simply information that could be helpful to local law enforcement.

State and local law enforcement have a better understanding and grasp on the threats and risks in their jurisdictions than the federal government. Increased communication and information sharing between local, state, and federal law enforcement is a good thing. For instance, if someone with multiple felonies attempts to buy a firearm, local law enforcement would like to know so they can be aware.

You may be interested to know that this bill was included in the FY22 spending bill that the Senate passed on March 10. I voted against the spending bill for many reasons, but primarily because it included massive overspending and was released only hours before the vote. If you would like to read my statement, please click here.

I hope this information is helpful to you. Please feel free to contact me again via email at www.lankford.senate.gov for more information about my work in the United States Senate for all of us.
 

Slim Deal

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Dec 16, 2017
Messages
1,590
Reaction score
2,666
Location
NE OK
I can only think of one reason why the criminal mf'rs in DC would hide any legislation in a 2000 page document. I can also think of only one way to fix this lying, thieving, treasonous practice being done by our Senators and Congressmen.

 

Fro

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
297
Reaction score
352
Location
ardmore, ok
IF they added a provision that would force them to prosecute those breaking the law on these background checks, then I might be ok with it.
The thing to watch out for is when they finally push through a law baning guns for those who are ACCUSED or SHOWING SYMPTOMS of having mental problems or domestic violence.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom