10 Round Magazine ban attached to Cyber Security Bill

Status
Not open for further replies.
That didn't take long did it? Would somebody please explain to me how the same players are re-elected time after time? If there is a proposed gun ban or restriction, it is one or all of those fools who proposes it.
 
So far that's the only source for this news (albeit a credible one as far as I can tell). The last line of that article leads me to believe that the amendment was proposed, but hasn't yet been added to the bill. A separate vote is required for the amendment, don't know if this is a committee vote or a floor vote.

Definitely something gun owners should be proactive about, but not yet the end of the world.
 
Would somebody please explain to me how the same players are re-elected time after time?
Click to expand...

Doesn't explain why but choices like Obama or Romney, shows how we end up with the caliber of "leaders". Two anti-gunners. Romney ran Mass. like Obama wants to run the country.
 
Romney promoted and signed into law a Mass. ban on so-called assault weapons...he has never owned a gun and fabricated a story about hunting ducks that cannot be substantiated through his purchase of a hunting license.

he will say anying to get elected and his wife owns prancing horses....

Do I need to say more?
 
lobo9er said:
Doesn't explain why but choices like Obama or Romney, shows how we end up with the caliber of "leaders". Two anti-gunners. Romney ran Mass. like Obama wants to run the country.
Click to expand...
Neither Obama or Romney are going to propose any gun control legislation, and the Obama administration has issued a statement that it has no plans for pursuing it. The only politicians that are actively talking about gun control or proposing anything, are locally elected Senators and the Mayor of New York City. These guys continue to be elected because their constituents support them.
 
could someone please tell me how Dick Shummer keep's getting reelected? Did the people that elected him not see the trial of "Waco". I just don't understand it.
 
Proposed amendements are not included and up for vote. The are simply put forth for debate on inclusion.

If you're actually concerned that this might slip in (and many don't want to see the Cyber Security bill passed anyway) write a real note and actually mail it to your senator saying that you do not support any attempt to amend any legislation to introduce new laws restricting magazine or firearms or ammunition production/sales/ownership. Promise them that with the 2012 elections coming up you will work diligently to support them if they keep all such ill conceived laws from reaching a vote or that you'll work diligently to see their opponent take their seat.
 
The Dems in Congress have never forgotten that former Senator Al Gore's vote on gun legislation probably cost him an election.
There was a mention that at least one Congressman might also have lost due to such a similar vote.

This appears to be why so many of the Dems are keeping quiet, or expressing opinions that tighter guns laws would not have prevented the Aurora massacre. These Senators or Representatives want not only to keep their jobs, but don't want it to cost "The Anointed One" his job.
 
Last edited:
True, but he said that 15 rounds should be the legal minimum. He didn't say "magazine mimimum." And it will still upset 1911 pruist.
 
I posted this in a duplicate thread in the Legal Forum:

So limiting a magazine to 10 rounds will prevent mass shootings? Like Romney has said, that maniac broke a lot of laws and still did what he did. If you are highly motivated to do something highly illegal, then you'll get it done despite silly and ineffectual laws.

How many of us have bought cookies at the store, and congratulated ourselves on selecting the 100-calorie packs? (Or had a loved one do this?) What happens? You still eat 800 calories in cookies...you just have to open more packages. And it probably only took you a few seconds more to do it.

This reminds me of the classic:

"If guns kill people, then spoons make you fat."

It is just wishful thinking that 10-round magazines will stop a motivated maniac. Just like 100-calorie packs won't stop a hungry would-be dieter.
 
FMF Doc said:
True, but he said that 15 rounds should be the legal minimum. He didn't say "magazine mimimum." And it will still upset 1911 pruist.
Click to expand...

And if you look at it even semi seriously (I know it's a joke), it is every bit as bad as a legally imposed maximum. There are benefits to magazines that hold fewer. And I'll bet $$$ that anybody who says 15 should be the minimum probably doesn't carry all the time. I'd be pissed off if the smallest Glock I could buy was a 19, or if I had to use Glock 19 magazines in my 26

Plus there's that whole freedom and choice thing.
 
*sigh*

In the Va tech shootings Cho carried 19 loaded magazines, the largest of which was 15 rounds.

And still managed to kill 32 people.

With handguns.

One of which was a Walther P22.


It's all political chest thumping.
 
k-frame; funny how the lines of reality are distorted by the media and the politicians, isn't it?

Maybe they should have made chaining the doors to buildings illegal and it would have been prevented.

Oh wait.

That WAS illegal, too.
 
There is only one bill I would like to see become law right now, and that would be that ALL bills have to go through congress prima facie. No more of these completely unrealited riders as a sneaky way to undermine.
 
I agree MachIV. I don't like these sneaky bills added to otherwise good legislation. I don't know much about the internet security bill. But I suspect that there will be a fee/tax charged to your internet provider (hence you) to finance any kind of Federal operation.
 
ShadowsEye said:
Neither Obama or Romney are going to propose any gun control legislation, and the Obama administration has issued a statement that it has no plans for pursuing it.
Click to expand...

But if Obama wins a second (and final) term, then he'd no longer have to worry about getting reelected. :uhoh:

Warp said:
Well, revolvers don't use magazines...
Click to expand...

Technically, a revolver cylinder is a magazine.

BearGriz said:
It is just wishful thinking that 10-round magazines will stop a motivated maniac.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I may need higher capacity to stop these guys ;), especially if they're wearing body armor.

MachIVshooter said:
There is only one bill I would like to see become law right now, and that would be that ALL bills have to go through congress prima facie. No more of these completely unrealited riders as a sneaky way to undermine.
Click to expand...

If only.... This will never happen, though--I can't imagine the members of Congress voting for something that would so severely curtail their personal agendas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
The Cyber Security Bill, Gun Ban Added.
Replies
1
Views
505
Larry Ashcraft
Larry Ashcraft
I
  • Locked
Will we see more like this?
Replies
2
Views
253
Sam1911
S
W
  • Locked
Lautenberg attempting to ban high cap mags and online ammunition sales
Replies
5
Views
1K
mljdeckard
mljdeckard
R
  • Locked
High capacity magazine ban added to cyber-security bill.
Replies
4
Views
1K
hso
hso
B
  • Locked
Magazine Ban Amendment Offered to Senate Cybersecurity Bill
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
Bartholomew Roberts
B
Back
Top