Slashdot Mirror
Senate Rejects FBI Bid For Warrantless Access To Internet Browsing Histories (zdnet.com)
Zack Whittaker, reporting for ZDNet:An amendment designed to allow the government warrantless access to internet browsing histories has been narrowly defeated in the Senate. The amendment fell two votes short of the required 60 votes to advance. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) switched his vote at the last minute. He submitted a motion to reconsider the vote following the defeat. A new vote may be set for later on Wednesday. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) introduced the amendment as an add-on to the commerce, justice, and science appropriations bill earlier this week. McCain said in a statement on Monday that the amendment would "track lone wolves" in the wake of the Orlando massacre, in which Omar Mateen, who authorities say radicalized himself online, killed 49 people at a gay nightclub in the Florida city. The amendment, which may be reconsidered in the near future, aims to broaden the rules governing national security letters, which don't require court approval. These letters allow the FBI to demand records associated with Americans' online communications -- so-called electronic communications transactional records.
For those not familiar with parliamentary rules, this is the archetypal dick move:
>Mitch McConnell (R-KY) switched his vote at the last minute. He submitted a motion to reconsider the vote following the defeat.
In generic rules of order, when a motion is voted down, only someone who voted against it is allowed to submit a motion to reconsider. So if it looks like you don't have enough votes to pass you motion, you vote against it and then file a motion to reconsider. The motion to reconsider has a lower vote threshold, so the failed motion is resurrected like a zombie.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
Here's the full list. Note that 4 didn't vote, so they may try again later - this thing isn't dead by any means. Also, McConnell switched his vote at the last minute so he can bring it up again, so the actual tally is 59.
https://www.govtrack.us/congre...
Party breakdown:
For: 46 R, 11D, 1I
Against: 7R, 30D, 1I
Not Voting: 1R, 3D
They're not done at all. The vote failed to advance 58-38, with 4 not present. It was actually 59-37, but McConnell switched his vote at the last minute, because that allows him to try the vote again later (by the Senate rules). So now he's going to go arm twist the 4 that weren't present. Given the names that didn't vote, he's almost certainly going to push it forward unless a few of the "yes" votes are persuaded to change their mind.
You better be very careful.
All private sales in California must employ a licensed firearms dealer as middleman, and the dealer must perform a background check. Connecticut and Delaware require background checks on all private sales. Each county in Florida may or may not require a check. Hawaii requires anyone purchasing a firearm from anyone to acquire a permit involving a background check. In Illinois, anyone not a licensed firearms dealer must coordinate the transferee's Firearms Owner ID Card with the state, and await approval. Illinois does have a loophole for gifts to close relatives. In Iowa, anyone providing or acquiring a handgun without the transferee possessing a valid annual permit is a criminal. Private transfers of handguns and "assault weapons" in Maryland must be conducted through licensed dealers, with a background check. Massachusetts basically outlaws private transfers completely, but with a loophole for "not more than four" weapons in one year. Private sales must be reported by both sides to the "Department of Criminal Justice Information Services". In Michigan, when purchasing a handgun from other than a licensed firearms dealer, the buyer must have a handgun purchase license or a license to carry a concealed handgun. New York requires a National Instant Criminal Background Check by a licensed dealer before any private transfer other than to immediate family. Oregon requires private sellers to perform a background check. And so on.
TL;DR: it's a hodgepodge of state laws. Plenty of states require background checks, and just about all of them make it an illegal act to knowingly transfer to an unsavory party. And there are a significant number of states where it is almost impossible for an ordinary person to legally even POSSESS a firearm, let alone carry it.