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

[Dolomite_supafly]

Have you actually read it?

There is NO mention of high capacity feeding devices, magazines or ammunition.

Again, there is nothing to see here but by all means go out an buy up all the magazines.

Dolomite

[G27]

Have you actually read it?

There is NO mention of high capacity feeding devices, magazines or ammunition.

Again, there is nothing to see here but by all means go out an buy up all the magazines.

Dolomite

http://thomas.loc.go...emp/~r112OlGFGF

Text:

SA 2575. Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. REED, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Mr. SCHUMER, and Mrs. FEINSTEIN) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3414, to enhance the security and resiliency of the cyber and communications infrastructure of the United States; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following

SEC. __. PROHIBITION ON TRANSFER OR POSSESSION OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES.

(a) Definition.--Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after paragraph (29) the following:

``(30) The term `large capacity ammunition feeding device'--

``(A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; but

``( does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.''.

( Prohibitions.--Section 922 of such title is amended by inserting after subsection (u) the following:

``(v)(1)(A)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), it shall be unlawful for a person to transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

[Page: S5403]

``(ii) Clause (i) shall not apply to the possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed within the United States on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection.

``( It shall be unlawful for any person to import or bring into the United States a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

``(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--

``(A) a manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, or a transfer to or possession by a law enforcement officer employed by such an entity for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty);

``( a transfer to a licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining an on-site physical protection system and security organization required by Federal law, or possession by an employee or contractor of such a licensee on-site for such purposes or off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized training or transportation of nuclear materials;

``© the possession, by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving ammunition, of a large capacity ammunition feeding device transferred to the individual by the agency upon that retirement; or

``(D) a manufacture, transfer, or possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney General.''.

© Penalties.--Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

``(8) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(v) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.''.

(d) Identification Markings.--Section 923(i) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following: ``A large capacity ammunition feeding device manufactured after the date of the enactment of this sentence shall be identified by a serial number that clearly shows that the device was manufactured after such date of enactment, and such other identification as the Attorney General may by regulation prescribe.''.

Edited July 27, 2012 by crimsonaudio

[Guest 6.8 AR]

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

I can't wait until we have to register them. I will be dead by the time I find all of them.

They never will, after that.

[Ebow1]

A ban on large capacity feeding devices? I have to warn the other fat people!

[Oh Shoot]

While there's no reason to think it has any real legs, as mentioned by ttocswob the hicap magazine ban is in the proposed amendment (SA 2572), not in the Cyber Security bill itself (S 3414).

This is in the same vein of totally unrelated legislation being tacked on as was handgun carry in national parks onto credit card reform bill. In that instance, BHO's and the Dems' hands were forced, as they weren't politically willing to back away from the main bill itself at that time, and let the amendment become part of it. In this case, looks like even the original bill is pretty iffy, let alone any amendments proposed thus far.

It's not included in formal bill record yet, as has not been officially proposed, only announced to be proposed two days ago -- here it is in the Congressional Record for those who want documentation from the enemy :-) -- begins on page 2, right hand column):

http://www.gpo.gov/f...1-PgS5401-3.pdf

This seems to be essentially the same if not actually verbatim what Lautenberg had submitted as a stand alone bill after the Gabby Giffords et. al. shooting last year.

Full text (bolding mine):

-----------------------

SA 2575. Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself,

Mrs. BOXER, Mr. REED, Mr. MENENDEZ,

Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Mr. SCHUMER,

and Mrs. FEINSTEIN) submitted an

amendment intended to be proposed by

him to the bill S. 3414, to enhance the

security and resiliency of the cyber and

communications infrastructure of the

United States; which was ordered to lie

on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following

SEC. ll. PROHIBITION ON TRANSFER OR POSSESSION

OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION

FEEDING DEVICES.

(a) DEFINITION.—Section 921(a) of title 18,

United States Code, is amended by inserting

after paragraph (29) the following:

‘‘(30) The term ‘large capacity ammunition

feeding device’—

‘‘(A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed

strip, or similar device that has a capacity

of, or that can be readily restored or converted

to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition;

but

‘‘( does not include an attached tubular

device designed to accept, and capable of operating

only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.’’.

( PROHIBITIONS.—Section 922 of such title

is amended by inserting after subsection (u)

the following:

‘‘(v)(1)(A)(i) Except as provided in clause

(ii), it shall be unlawful for a person to

transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition

feeding device.

‘‘(ii) Clause (i) shall not apply to the possession

of a large capacity ammunition feeding

device otherwise lawfully possessed within

the United States on or before the date of

the enactment of this subsection.

‘‘( It shall be unlawful for any person to

import or bring into the United States a

large capacity ammunition feeding device.

‘‘(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to—

‘‘(A) a manufacture for, transfer to, or possession

by the United States or a department

or agency of the United States or a State or

a department, agency, or political subdivision

of a State, or a transfer to or possession

by a law enforcement officer employed by

such an entity for purposes of law enforcement

(whether on or off duty);

‘‘( a transfer to a licensee under title I of

the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 for purposes

of establishing and maintaining an on-site

physical protection system and security organization

required by Federal law, or possession

by an employee or contractor of such

a licensee on-site for such purposes or offsite

for purposes of licensee-authorized

training or transportation of nuclear materials;

‘‘© the possession, by an individual who is

retired from service with a law enforcement

agency and is not otherwise prohibited from

receiving ammunition, of a large capacity

ammunition feeding device transferred to

the individual by the agency upon that retirement;

or

‘‘(D) a manufacture, transfer, or possession

of a large capacity ammunition feeding device

by a licensed manufacturer or licensed

importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation

authorized by the Attorney

General.’’.

© PENALTIES.—Section 924(a) of such title

is amended by adding at the end the following:

‘‘(8) Whoever knowingly violates section

922(v) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned

not more than 10 years, or both.’’.

(d) IDENTIFICATION MARKINGS.—Section

923(i) of such title is amended by adding at

the end the following: ‘‘A large capacity ammunition

feeding device manufactured after

the date of the enactment of this sentence

shall be identified by a serial number that

clearly shows that the device was manufactured

after such date of enactment, and such

other identification as the Attorney General

may by regulation prescribe.’’.

----------------------

- OS

edit: I see part of my post is now an echo.

Edited July 27, 2012 by OhShoot

[E4 No More]

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.

I emailed Lame-mar as if it'll do any good.

[greenego]

Sorry I can't watch or listen to Chunky Schumer.

[Jonnin]

Lamar actually responded (or his people did) to my wife's email about the UN treaty, and said he would not vote for it.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

That's good to hear about Lamar. I hope he sticks to his statement.

[jcoosi]

Lamar actually responded (or his people did) to my wife's email about the UN treaty, and said he would not vote for it.

He did say "unless" in his response here is what I got back from them

Thanks very much for getting in touch with me and letting me know what’s on your mind regarding the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.

A treaty that brings greater transparency to the international trade of arms may indeed be a worthy idea, but not if it undermines the 2nd Amendment or threatens our country’s sovereignty.

On July 22, 2012, I joined Senator Jerry Moran and 46 colleagues in a bipartisan letter to the President and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying we will oppose ratification of the treaty unless it explicitly recognizes the legitimacy of lawful activities associated with firearms, including but not limited to the right of self-defense.

I have heard from many Tennesseans who have concerns about this treaty, and I appreciate your taking the time to let me know where you stand. I’ll be sure to keep your comments in mind as issues surrounding this treaty are discussed and debated in Washington and in Tennessee.

Sincerely,

Lamar

[jcoosi]

It needs to be NO period.None of this unless or if it does this just all out NO.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I wonder why Lamar thinks we should

be signatories to a treaty that would

have nothing to do with us?

Prevent future treaties affecting us?

I still don't trust him. Hell with the UN!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest ArmyVeteran37214]

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Well, considering Lamar was part of the crowd

who doesn't want to do his congressional duty

concerning confirmation of appointments, I

would expect him to be glad to give the UN

carte blanch over guns.

I would strongly consider throwing that response

away. Meaningless. Can we impeach that fool?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SonnyCrockett]

I did order a 75 round drum mag yesterday and I feel

very refreshed .

Im thinking of getting more ....

[eapking]

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.

Look at all these familiar names. All idiots.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

[media=]

[/media]

I guess I don't understand why someone would "-" this. Is it something to do with "killing the messenger" or are you just

hold a big dislike of that particular media outlet?

Grow up!

[Guest BungieCord]

Yuz guyz are asleep at the wheel. S. 3414 (CSA2012 ) failed a cloture vote yesterday. Failing a cloture doesn't kill it DEAD dead, just Ariel Sharon dead. Like the former PM, it's still breathing but it ain't going no further.

[MattCary]

I get my best rest at the wheel.

Let's hope it remains dead. I don't think we'll be so lucky, though.

[Wingshooter]

If Hussein stays in power after the election, this issue will surely come to life again.