Here we go: High Cap Mag Ban attached to Cybersecurity bill

[MattCary]

http://thehill.com/v...control-measure

Here we go.

Proposed is back to 10 round mags. Light up your Congresscritters.

Sponsored by who you'd guess:

The amendment was sponsored by Democratic Sens. Frank Lautenberg (N.J.), Barbara Boxer (Calif.), Jack Reed (R.I.), Bob Menendez (N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Schumer and Dianne Feinstein (Calif.). S.A. 2575 would make it illegal to transfer or possess large capacity feeding devices such as gun magazines, belts, feed stripes and drums of more than 10 rounds of ammunition with the exception of .22 caliber rim fire ammunition.

Edited July 27, 2012 by MattCary

[Guest NashvegasMatt]

figures... because you can't do damage with 10.... what a load of bs

[Guest 6.8 AR]

The question will be answered in the house. That

bill should be dead without that added, because it

destroys the internet.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[frankmako]

it is all ways the same old crap when it comes to gun control. we have a lots of other problems to fix besides gun control.

[jcoosi]

I suppose .22 isnt that dangerous since its only 2 numbers and not 3.

[Ebow1]

My. .45 is only two numbers. So is my 12 gauge.

[QuietDan]

Here's a law to pass:

1.) No public or political figure may advocate for any gun control measure whatsoever without first divesting themselves of all bodyguards or security guards, whether armed or unarmed, whether personally hired or publicly provided.

2.) No business owner or operator may advocate for any gun control measure whatsoever without first divesting themselves of all bodyguards or security guards, whether armed or unarmed, whether personally hired or corporately provided.

3.) No residential owner or rental operator may advocate for any gun control measure whatsoever without first divesting themselves of all bodyguards or security guards, whether armed or unarmed, whether personally hired or homeowners association provided.

4.) Penalties for violations will include sanctions as determined by law; as well as by public naming and shaming in all media, to include radio, television, print, new media, milk cartons and sidewalk chalk; as well as by the requirement to wear in public a pointed paper hat no less than two feet tall, and a round red clown nose.

Edited July 27, 2012 by QuietDan

[Guest 6.8 AR]

That's right. Strip the safeties away from them

and make them live and abide by the rules we

have to abide to.

Good points, Dan.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jonnin]

to possess? Come take it.

Hmm new product: the 223 rimfire

Edited July 27, 2012 by Jonnin

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Says the vote on amendments is next week.

The first question would be, can the D's get 50 senators to vote for this? Some might be sweating re-election too much to vote thataway?

And another question-- Which RINO can run so fast as to beat the other RINOs in line and vote for it first? Olympia Snowe? Susan Collins? Scott Brown? John McCain? Lamar Alexander? I'm not betting on Corker to win because he's not that fast on his feet.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Where did this originate? House? Senate? Was

the amendment part of both/one? Lotsa questions.

One can't do anything without the other, you

know?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jacob]

Glad i just picked up some pmags...

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Hi 6.8

The article said Schumer in the Senate, co sponsored by the usual suspects, Feinstein, Lautenberg, etc.

We all know news sources are rarely if ever wrong, but one part of the article says it would outlaw sales and possession, but another place in the article says it would only apply to sales and transfers after the law takes effect.

Which if enough of our glorious RINOs would support, sounds tougher than the previous hi-cap ban. Sounds like you couldn't sell or even give away a hi-cap mag, but you could keep what you already have. If it only applies after law is passed, sounds like a dealer with a warehouse full of mags wouldn't have to destroy them, but he couldn't sell them either? Bad mojo if it were to pass anyway.

[mikegideon]

to possess? Come take it.

Hmm new product: the 223 rimfire

They're trying to turn it into that

[Caster]

it is all ways the same old crap when it comes to gun control. we have a lots of other problems to fix besides gun control.

That's a mouthful in a very short sentence.

If we fixed HALF the problems this country has we could go back to selling THompsons at the local hardware store with no paper work like in the pre NFA days.

[mikegideon]

This stuff is always proposed by Democrats sitting safely in their commie states. I want to see a Dem from Oklahoma vote for it.

[Wingshooter]

http://thehill.com/v...control-measure

Here we go.

Proposed is back to 10 round mags. Light up your Congresscritters.

Sponsored by who you'd guess:

The amendment was sponsored by Democratic Sens. Frank Lautenberg (N.J.), Barbara Boxer (Calif.), Jack Reed (R.I.), Bob Menendez (N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Schumer and Dianne Feinstein (Calif.). S.A. 2575 would make it illegal to transfer or possess large capacity feeding devices such as gun magazines, belts, feed stripes and drums of more than 10 rounds of ammunition with the exception of .22 caliber rim fire ammunition.

Term limits! I think it's time for a ban on high-capacity oppressors. If the people of this county would demand term limits, these relics might think twice before they just trample on the peolpes' rights. I know it is just a pipe dream though because too many citizens are just sheeple in people's clothing. Hopefully this bill will get 'shot down'.

[RobertNashville]

That's right. Strip the safeties away from them and make them live and abide by the rules we

have to abide to.

I might be misinformed but I thought there was something either in the Constitution or at least an existing law that says (or once said) that Congress already had to live under the same laws as the great unwashed (i.e. you and me).

If that's true it doesn't seem to be working well, for us that is.

[Dolomite_supafly]

I just did a search for bill 2575. It has ZERO to do with cybersecurity and has ZERO mention of magazines.

S. 2575: A bill to reduce the duty on golf club putter heads.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s2575And

It was introduced by Feinstein during this congress. She wants to reduce the cost of her putters.

Diane Feinstein is not a cosponsor on anything related to high capacity magazines.

All other 2575's are from previous sessions. What people need to realize is that every session they have to start out new. So every year when a new session starts the same bills are often introduced. The bill number for one thing one year may be something totally different for the following year. If it doesn't pass in the session it is introduced it is laid to bed and it will liely be reintroduced the following year.

People need to realize there are literally thousands upon thousands of bills introduced and very few actually pass. Do you think they start out at 2500 and go from there, not they don't there are thousands of introduced bills before they get to that number because they actually start out at 1 and then go from there.

I know HR1022 was sent in emails for years as a call to arms but it only involved guns for a single year, 2007. Even to this day you can do a search for HR1022 on the internet and it is full of fear mongering. But this session HR 1022 is has to do with the Buffalo Soldiers in parks study.

The Cybersecurity bill was introduced long before Aurora and has actually passed the house as of April. It DOES NOT contain any mention of highcapacity magazines or anythign else weapon related. Again more fear mongering.

The high capacity bills are introduced several times each year and have been since the AWB expired in 2004.

There is nothing to see here that is not normal. No more legislation than normal. Dealers are now going to use fear mongering to try to sell high capacity magazines for a lot more than what they are worth. I seen it when Obama was elected, one dealer SELLING (yes selling) CCI Stingers for $27 a box of 50. His catch was that they were "pre June" and didn't go bad in 6 months like the "post June" ammo. Of course it was BS but there were people buying his BS as well as his ammo. Had we not bought from people like this at a profit they would have not even thought about continuing doing it. I even seen a dealer selling, yes selling, "greentip" ammo for $750/1,000. Problem was they Walmart ammo that someone had hand painted the bullets on. Even my wife mentioned they looked odd and they were because the green was offset or barely dipped or the whole bullet was dipped.

I can't wait to see the next show. People are going to be selling those $10 magazine for $50 because they are "Pre Aurora" or some BS like that. Or 223 ammo because they are going to ban in in light of the Aurora shooting. I suspect I am going to spend a lot of time calling BS.

We are our own worst enemies!!!

Dolomite

[gjohnsoniv]

All this made me do is go and buy more magazines.

[Dolomite_supafly]

All this made me do is go and buy more magazines.

And you were duped by another sensationalized headline. Hope you didn't pay more than they were a week ago.

Dolomite

[mikegideon]

I've been swimming in mags for the last 10 killings

[gjohnsoniv]

Nope, got them cheaper. Needed some more anyway.

[TMF]

I just want to go back to a simpler time when drunk drivers and texters were the only ones killing mass amounts of Americans everyday. People seemed to accept that way better.

[ttocswob]

Dolomite, the bill is S 3414 - the amendment is SA 2575, per John Richardson