Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Battle Monkey of Zardoz on January 14, 2011, 11:22:30 AM
-
I wonder if it means all standard capacity mags
It does
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy’s (D-N.Y.) bill also goes further than than the assault weapon ban that expired in 2004, outlawing the sale or transfer of clips that hold more than ten rounds, even those obtained before the law takes effect, according to a copy of the bill obtained by POLITICO.
The bill closes a loophole in the expired assault weapon ban that let gun owners buy high-capacity magazines made before the ban took effect in 1994.
The bill carries a penalty of up to 10 years in prison.
“The only purpose for the existence of these devices is to be able to shoot as many people as possible as quickly as possible,” McCarthy wrote in a letter to her colleagues that accompanied the bill. “There is no reason that these devices should be available to the general public.”
[/b]
AND
“The United States Constitution guarantees to our citizens the right to keep and bear arms,” McCarthy wrote in a letter to her colleagues that accompanied the bill. “At the same time that we can all acknowledge this basic right, I believe that we should also be able to come together to develop reasonable laws designed to ensure that the right to bear arms is exercised safely and responsibly.”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47565.html
-
[barf]
Well, I tend to think that while this is pretty onerous, it won't go anywhere with the current make-up of kongress.
The bill carries a penalty of up to 10 years in prison.
So if I am caught with a politically incorrect piece of metal, I go to jail for a DECADE? ? ? ? :facepalm:
Geeesh.
Anyway ... as the pundit said; "this, too, shall pass."
-
So far she has no co-sponsors.
Single sponsor bills don't make it out of committee, especially when the opposite party is running the committee. This bill will just amount to grandstanding for her constituents.
I will be interested to see if Lautenberg picks up a co-sponsor. So far he hasn't.
For the time being, it looks like the overwhelming majority of congresscritters see that more gun control would cost too much political capital.
In the wake of the events in Tuscon, I think the 1st Amendment is in more danger of taking a beating than the 2nd.
-
....In the wake of the events in Tuscon, I think the 1st Amendment is in more danger of taking a beating than the 2nd.
+1000 Scary, isn't it?
-
I sure hope you all are right. I'm not so optimistic on this. Since Giffords was one of their own. Never underestimate republicans and democrats coming together when they collectively face a problem to their existence, or a pay raise, or defeating term limits.
-
Ten is the magic number. Remember the Decalogue?
I saw Jane Harman and Carolyn McCarthy last night. They are "experts" on "reasonable gun control" because they have so many feelings about their rationality. Then there's Rachel Maddow, another expert. Using guns to protect yourself or deter cimes is, she is certain, a "fantasy" that contradicts "facts." By facts she means a study some academics who have never used guns in their lives wrote up on a government contract that keeps the wolf from the door.
Stay vigilant. Stay militant. They are coming for us.
-
As has already been said the biggest danger is a "we just have to do something" amendment tied onto something juicy like the defense appropriations or repeal of Obamacare.
-
I sure hope you all are right. I'm not so optimistic on this. Since Giffords was one of their own. Never underestimate republicans and democrats coming together when they collectively face a problem to their existence, or a pay raise, or defeating term limits.
To be sure, vigilance is prudent when congress is in session. Nonetheless, there is a process for passing a bill, and McCarthy's bill can't even pass the first hurdle without at least another co-sponsor.
-
outlawing the sale or transfer of clips that hold more than ten rounds
If this were to become a law, I hope that is the exact language used. I don't know of any 'clips' that hold more than 10 rounds.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.everydaynodaysoff.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F10%2FClipMagazineLesson.jpg&hash=d3b1683d9660a71aca9a531697751b63657c3b5e)
-
If this were to become a law, I hope that is the exact language used. I don't know of any 'clips' that hold more than 10 rounds.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.everydaynodaysoff.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F10%2FClipMagazineLesson.jpg&hash=d3b1683d9660a71aca9a531697751b63657c3b5e)
Sorry, I just had to.... :lol:
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg810.imageshack.us%2Fimg810%2F1381%2Fclipsvschargers.jpg&hash=9fb65305552947465de73993bfebd347cff2da12)
-
Who cares what they're called, legislation will be amended to reference "ammunition loading devices" or some other generic term that includes clips, chargers, magazines, etc.
Chris
-
Who cares what they're called, legislation will be amended to reference "ammunition loading devices" or some other generic term that includes clips, chargers, magazines, etc.
Chris
....hands, fingers..... =|
-
....hands, fingers..... =|
Well, most of us only have ten fingers.
jim
-
What about those dreaded single-shots?
Will they outlaw bandoliers too ..? ;/
-
and the imposable that makes McCarthy's head explode :P :laugh: (http://maglula.tripod.com/Striplula.htm)
>:D