Magazine Ban Amendment Offered to Senate Cybersecurity Bill

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Bartholomew Roberts, Jul 26, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    http://thehill.com/video/senate/240657-cybersecurity-bill-includes-gun-control-measure

    The usual crowd in the Senate will attempt to amend the Cybersecurity bill with S. Amdt. 2575.

    This bill will ban the transfer and possession of any feeding device (belts, clips, magazines, etc.) of more than 10rds unless it is a .22

    The Senate is expected to debate and vote on amendments to the cybersecurity bill next week. If you haven't contacted your Senators yet, now would be a good time.

    Edit to add:
    Text of amendment is here: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2012-07-25/pdf/CREC-2012-07-25-pt1-PgS5401-3.pdf#page=3

    The law would grandfather existing magazines for possession; but you would be unable to transfer them to anyone. Also the .22LR exception only applies to tubular magazines. 10-22 owners are still hosed. Also requires all new mags to be serial numbered - great fun for servicemembers I bet.
     
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2012
  2. Kubrick

    Kubrick Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2012
    Messages:
    13
    Location:
    Earth
    Gee, thanks for pulling the congressional SOP by adding unrelated amendments to bills. Here is what I would like to say toSchumer and Boxer: :cuss:

    I bought a bunch of mags from midway tonight just in case the prices start going nuts in the morning or next few days. Ugh, not this crap again.
     
  3. Trent

    Trent Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2010
    Messages:
    25,246
    Location:
    Illinois
    I can't say ANYTHING polite at the moment, so I'll keep my mouth shut.
     
  4. BearGriz

    BearGriz Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2011
    Messages:
    182
    Location:
    Utah
    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.
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2012
  5. husbandofaromanian

    husbandofaromanian Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Messages:
    336
    Location:
    Nashville, Tn
    The 22 exemption was only for an attached tubular feeding device.
     
  6. W.E.G.

    W.E.G. Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Messages:
    7,402
    Location:
    all over Virginia
    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2012-07-25/pdf/CREC-2012-07-25-pt1-PgS5401-3.pdf#page=3

    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
    ‘‘(B) does not include an attached tubular
    device designed to accept, and capable of operating
    only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.’’.
    (b) 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.
    ‘‘(B) 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);
    ‘‘(B) 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;
    ‘‘(C) 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.’’.
    (c) 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.’’.
     
  7. gym

    gym member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2007
    Messages:
    5,901
    I can't begin to imagine the problems trying to implament this if they pass it. The last time there weren't many Hi-cap guns out there. Now they are all or most, 10 and over. I doubt that such a law even if passed could be enforced or would be enforced. Tying up law enforcment counting bullets is a really dumb way to accomplish anuthing even for the anti crowd. It's just a stupid wast of time. You end up with a 10 rounder in the gun when you go out, and a 15-20 rounder at home when you walk in the house. So what do they accomplish. If you did shoot someone breaking in, surelly you could put the 10 rounder back in, sounds like hide and seek.
     
  8. Owen Sparks

    Owen Sparks member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2007
    Messages:
    4,523
    Even if they just banned production of new hi-cap magazines, there are still so many MILLIONS that were bought during the 'Obama panic' that they will still be available and somewhat affordable for the rest of our life time. The genie is out of the bottle on this one.
     
  9. Romeo 33 Delta

    Romeo 33 Delta Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    Messages:
    402
    I always laugh at the idiocy these politicians exhibit. It seems that the good old 10 rounder would fill the bill. There are several "IFS", but:

    1. IF the pistol has a good DROP FREE release ...dumping an empty mag and
    inserting a loaded one and releasing the slide is fast, especially with
    practice.

    2. IF a quality 10 rounder would always be a good feeder,
    something that really high capacity magazines sometimes/often seem to
    exhibit a lack of ... the ability to be to be reliable feeding.

    3. IF madman is armed with a quality pistol in a sufficiently lethal caliber,
    with a dozen reliable 10 round magazines loaded with hollowpoint
    ammunition, who has practiced dumping and inserting magazines and
    releasing the slide to a point where his movements are fluid and auto-
    matic he should be able to fire all 120 rounds to very deadly effect unless
    he encounters a stoppage or is fired on by others who are armed.

    Just my thoughts ... I'm thinking this would be far deadlier than an AR with a quirky 100 rounds drum.
     
  10. Radagast

    Radagast Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,148
    Location:
    Australia/OZ
    The Virginia Tech shooter used ten round mags.
    Back in the seventies the Howard Johnson shooter used 5 round mags.

    Here in Australia when standard cap mags were banned I went from 4 15 round Beretta mags to 16 10 round mags. With a little judicious timing of reloads I could shoot an entire one day IPSC match without reloading.

    This is simply the usual suspects pandering to their donors.
     
  11. leadcounsel

    leadcounsel member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,365
    Location:
    Tacoma, WA
    If you want to buy 18 beers, and there store only sells them in 6 packs, does that mean you only buy 6 beers? No. You buy 3 six packs! Same with guns and these silly magazine bans. If 30 round magazines are banned, guess what. Criminals will just use *ding ding ding* 3 ten round magazines!!!!
     
  12. Centurian22

    Centurian22 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2011
    Messages:
    1,242
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Just wrote my first letter (email) to my representative to oppose this amendment and any future attempts at these restrictions. Feels good!
     
  13. Victor1Echo

    Victor1Echo Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    424
    California is the model! People laugh at us like its not coming to a town near you.
    Can you say bullet button? It is up to free states to stay that way. California is hopeless.
     
  14. G27RR

    G27RR Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    Messages:
    1,011
    Location:
    Texas
    Good for you, and more of us need to do the same and continue to do so when any of these things come up. I already wrote my reps about this one, too.
     
  15. viper7342

    viper7342 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2011
    Messages:
    106
    Location:
    In an underground bunker hiding from the STUPID LI
    Just finished writing both of my Senators also.
     
  16. Sebastian the Ibis
    • Contributing Member

    Sebastian the Ibis Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Messages:
    2,071
    Location:
    "The Gunshine State"
    Notice that this has the typical Schumer carve out out for his ex-NYPD cronies. As much as he hates guns he always makes a carve out for this special class of citizens:

    (C) 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
     
  17. Centurian22

    Centurian22 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2011
    Messages:
    1,242
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Thanks G27RR! It feels good to actively participate aside from my NRA membership. I look forward to being a more involved citizen on 'our side'.
     
  18. Landric

    Landric Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2003
    Messages:
    903
    Location:
    North Carolina
    You know, even the gun control Utopia of the first world, the UK, doesn't have a magazine capacity ban. There is no credible evidence that such a ban does anything to prevent or reduce crime of any sort. This is about control, plain and simple. Yes, I know, I'm preaching to the choir.

    That said (and this is not support for any sort of ban, just my opinion on how the antis could be more "successful"), a magazine and/or assault weapons ban would be a lot easier to sell to the public as a whole if they:

    -Changed the capacity limit to 20 rounds (which would leave most handguns unaffected)

    -Exempted .22 rimfire completely from any ban conditions (mag capacity, evil features)

    -Didn't try and control transfer of existing "pre-ban" guns/magazines

    Again, I don't support any sort of ban, but I expect the antis could sell such a ban to the public as a whole if they were not so concerned with being as extreme as possible.

    As for LE being exempt, I was a cop through most of the last ban (I started in 1996), and all the departments I worked for had one issue or another getting hi-cap magazines. Either they were more expensive because the were produced in lower quantities, or they were unavailable for the same reason. My current department issues Mini-14s as patrol rifles that were bought during the ban. Despite the fact that Ruger sold 20 round Mini magazines to LE agencies throughout the ban, the department had less than 1 20 round magazine per rifle because of price and availability issues caused by the ban. Some officers only had one 5 round magazine. I was issued 1-20 and 1-5 round mag when I was hired. Luckily I started there after the ban expired, so I just bought some additional 20 round mags. Now, 8 years after the ban expired the PD still hasn't bought any new mags, and I am sure that a new ban would make additional magazine purchases all the more unlikely.
     
  19. Old Fuff

    Old Fuff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,907
    Location:
    Arizona
    At the present time the Senate is controled by Democrats, but the leadership is not happy about this amendment, which is likely to cost them more votes then they will likely gain. So before this thing is finished in the Senate the amandment may well be gone.

    But then the bill has to go through the House, that is controled by Republicans. They will likely kill it there, after using it for a bit to beat Democrats over the head. House Democrats, all of which are going to be up for election, would for the most part like to see this issue go away until after November.

    If it survives the House we do have something to worry about, and we should be worried, but not in a panic.
     
  20. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    This bill grandfathers possession; but bans the transfer of grandfathered magazines. So there would be no way to legally sell or pass on to your heirs these items.
     
  21. Landric

    Landric Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2003
    Messages:
    903
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Yeah, if something like that ever looks like it is going to happen, I will sign over the lions share of my magazines to my twin sons (50% to each of them) before it goes into effect. Since there is no age requirement for possession of magazines the fact that they are minors won't matter, and it will keep them around for at least another generation.
     
  22. wildbilll

    wildbilll Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    279
    Location:
    L5
    I don't see any prohibition on transfer of a grandfathered magazine:

    (b) 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.

    They know they can't possibly control the transfer of an un-registered magazine, therefore they are not bothering to try.

    A stupid law meant to placate the gun haters. This will never pass.
     
  23. R.W.Dale

    R.W.Dale Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Messages:
    11,558
    Location:
    Northwest Arkansas
    If more active shooters used tapco grade high capacity magazines they'd have more malfunctions and thus the death tolls would be lower.

    Silly politicians
     
  24. Landis

    Landis Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2011
    Messages:
    8
    Did I read correctly that there is a grandfather clause?

    Time for the purchase of some more I see.
     
  25. Old Fuff

    Old Fuff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,907
    Location:
    Arizona
    Follow the link: www.cdnnsports.com

    Download the current catalog and then go shopping.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice