Mag Ban Bill in the House

[mikegideon]

http://gillreport.com/2012/12/house-dems-to-introduce-high-capacity-magazine-ban-bill-on-day-one/

[RED333]

We knew it was coming, make them calls, and send them e-mails out!

[Wingshooter]

WASHINGTON — House Democrats will introduce legislation to ban the production of high-capacity magazines on the first day of the next congressional session, the office of Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), one of the lawmakers sponsoring the bill, told The Huffington Post.

The Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act will mirror a failed bill introduced during the 112th Congress. Its authors hope that in the wake of the shooting deaths of 20 first grade students in Newtown, Conn., there will be heightened political urgency to act when it is reintroduced on Jan. 3.

Backed by DeGette and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), the legislation has gained a wave of Democratic co-sponsors since the shooting, which also claimed the lives of 7 adults. But few Republicans have come forward to offer their support. Even more critical to the bill’s political prospects, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has not indicated whether he will allow it to come to the floor for a vote.

Still, backers are hopeful, noting that a ban on high-capacity magazines — which have been involved in many of the recent high-profile instances of mass gun violence — would be a smaller concession for gun-rights advocates than a broader assault weapons ban.

The bill Democrats will introduce would limit magazines, belts, drums, feed strips and “similar device[s]” to 10 rounds of ammunition. It would allow people to hold on to the “large capacity ammunition feeding device[s]” that they currently own, but prohibit them from buying others or transferring the ones they have.

Quote via: The Huffington Post.

 

 

And this is the angle they will use to try and get it passed....

Still, backers are hopeful, noting that a ban on high-capacity magazines — which have been involved in many of the recent high-profile instances of mass gun violence — would be a smaller concession for gun-rights advocates than a broader assault weapons ban.

Edited December 29, 2012 by Batman

[Mark@Sea]

I make no concessions.

[mikegideon]

This is definately their favorite killing of all times. The Republicans should know better.

[mikegideon]

I make no concessions.

What he said ^^

[DaveTN]

Also on that page, take a few minutes to watch Michelle Malkins.

"VIDEO: MICHELLE MALKINS RIPS LIBS FOR THEIR KNEE-JERK GUN CONTROL PUSH"

[TNcitizen22]

I make no concessions.

 

This.  

[R_Bert]

I can only imagine David running a 10-round belt through his Browning or Vickers......

[mikegideon]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDglpt8hpyg

Edited December 29, 2012 by mikegideon

[Chucktshoes]

I make no concessions.

Agreed. No matter what restrictions they pass, I shall not comply.

[Guest ThePunisher]

[quote name="Mark@Sea" post="870911" timestamp="1356740471"]I make no concessions.[/quote] No concessions here.

[Guest 270win]

No concessions because after that they will go after semi autos. 

[Oh Shoot]

No concessions because after that they will go after semi autos. 

 

After? Fiend-stein's bill will call for doing away with most all of them as they now exist, rifles and handguns.

 

This bill in the House is just one of the many little "nibble" bills that will probably be introduced just for newsplay and influence in support of  the big kahuna.

 

- OS

Edited December 29, 2012 by Oh Shoot

[seez52]

This is the concession. Why does anyone need anything more than 10 rnds? We'll let you keep your ar's if you'll give up the 30 rounders.

I have an uneasy feeling the Repubs. will fall for this.

But for me and my house we shall.... never concede! Edited December 29, 2012 by seez52

[Oh Shoot]

I have an uneasy feeling the Repubs. will fall for this.

 

Well, the libs won't settle for it alone methinks.

 

I still say the GOP will give enough to end private sales, which won't be the end of the gun world, as long as there's no registry. But whether that's the only sop they'll give, dunno.

 

- OS

[Glock30]

I'm sure the liberals will gladly pay us Tuesday for a hamburger today.

[Oh Shoot]

I'm sure the liberals will gladly pay us Tuesday for a hamburger today.

 

They am what they am and that's all that they am. :)

[Will H]

I would actually be willing to give the liberals their 10 round deal...  So long as the law would also say that the issue of gun control could never again be legislated, dictated, mentioned on the floor of the house, senate, could not be addressed by the executive branch or even mentioned in an official capacity.

 

I don't see that happening, so no, I have no plans on abiding by what they decide.

 

My only hope is in organized state level defiance of what the feds say.  Many people say that a state cannot stand against the feds, but as we have seen with Colorado's approval of weed for recreational use the feds will back down when pushed.

 

Liberal politicians lack the courage of their convictions.

Edited December 29, 2012 by Will H

[mikegideon]

Well, the libs won't settle for it alone methinks.

 

I still say the GOP will give enough to end private sales, which won't be the end of the gun world, as long as there's no registry. But whether that's the only sop they'll give, dunno.

 

- OS

May not have a choice if the house refuses to play. Ending private sales wouldn't bother me, personally. It would have almost zero impact on me, and I would never hear "gun show loophole" again. Not saying I'm for it.

 

All the rest of the crap, including a magazine ban is ugly. I will write off a politician for life over that. I'm thinking there are others that will do the same.

[Oh Shoot]

May not have a choice if the house refuses to play. ..

 

I'm hoping they simply continue to find things that are "more important" to deal with.

 

And likely they will, as will the Senate. Seems likely to moi that America ain't getting through this second term without some major problems that may make the fiscal cliff fiasco into a molehill.

 

- OS

[mikegideon]

I'm hoping they simply continue to find things that are "more important" to deal with.

 

And likely they will, as will the Senate. Seems likely to moi that America ain't getting through this second term without some major problems that may make the fiscal cliff fiasco into a molehill.

 

- OS

We just can't let it look too easy.

[Wingshooter]

I'm hoping they simply continue to find things that are "more important" to deal with.

 

And likely they will, as will the Senate. Seems likely to moi that America ain't getting through this second term without some major problems that may make the fiscal cliff fiasco into a molehill.

 

- OS

 

If a few pro-gun Reps would recognize this, maybe they would start introducing one big bill after another. Bills that would be popular enough to gain support but controversial enough to tie up the chambers... term limits, Flat Tax, etc.

[daddyo]

And exactly how are they going to know how someone ended up with a "high capacity magazine"? Will we be required to carry around a bill of sale for each one?

 

Notice how they have yet to give any details of how this would have had any effect on what happened in CT.

 

This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of.

[Hershmeister]

[quote name='Will H' timestamp='1356759692' post='871165']I would actually be willing to give the liberals their 10 round deal... So long as the law would also say that the issue of gun control could never again be legislated, dictated, mentioned on the floor of the house, senate, could not be addressed by the executive branch or even mentioned in an official capacity. I don't see that happening, so no, I have no plans on abiding by what they decide. My only hope is in organized state level defiance of what the feds say. Many people say that a state cannot stand against the feds, but as we have seen with Colorado's approval of weed for recreational use the feds will back down when pushed. Liberal politicians lack the courage of their convictions.[/quote] Laws like this are prohibited. One Congress cannot bind a future Congresd