Michigander
Member
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this other than perhaps in the huge CSPAN thread.
So, not only is this man a Republican Senator, but he is also an NRA Director!
:banghead:
NRA Senator Selling out?
- Thread starter Michigander
- Start date
- Status
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this other than perhaps in the huge CSPAN thread.
So, not only is this man a Republican Senator, but he is also an NRA Director!
:banghead:Bartholomew Roberts
Member
Michigander - Check the CSPAN thread...
Senator Craig's bill authorizes the Attorney General to study how a performance based standard (banning any ammo that can penetrate soft body armor) would affect the civilian market and whether it would do anything to reduce threats to officers. The study must be issued in two years.
The other thing this bill would do is enhance the penalties for using armor piercing ammo in violent crimes (including just possession) to a minimum of 15 years.
Nobody has the actual text of the amendment yet, including KABA, so how they can call this a sellout without knowing what was in the amendment, I don't know.
This amendment was also proposed as a counter to the Kennedy amendment - and amendment that would allow the Attorney General to ban any ammunition capable of penetrating soft body armor if he determined that it was "armor-piercing".
Senator Craig's bill authorizes the Attorney General to study how a performance based standard (banning any ammo that can penetrate soft body armor) would affect the civilian market and whether it would do anything to reduce threats to officers. The study must be issued in two years.
The other thing this bill would do is enhance the penalties for using armor piercing ammo in violent crimes (including just possession) to a minimum of 15 years.
Nobody has the actual text of the amendment yet, including KABA, so how they can call this a sellout without knowing what was in the amendment, I don't know.
This amendment was also proposed as a counter to the Kennedy amendment - and amendment that would allow the Attorney General to ban any ammunition capable of penetrating soft body armor if he determined that it was "armor-piercing".
brookstexas
member
Awww C'Mon!!!!
Almost any centerfire rifle ammo will go through. By the time the NRA shills are done I won't have a pellet rifle....
Almost any centerfire rifle ammo will go through. By the time the NRA shills are done I won't have a pellet rifle....
Harry Tuttle
Member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2003
- Messages
- 3,093
IMHO the Craig Amendment was orchestrated to thwart the Mikulski/Kennedy admendments
SodiumBenzoate
Member
IIRC the Kennedy would require banning, this one forces investigation first. Or something like that.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
SodiumBenzoate, the Kennedy bill would basically be a ban. The Craig amendment isn't.
It just requires a study and the enhanced penalties for AP ammo possession or use in violent crime. It doesn't say anything about additional legislation after the study - just that there should be a study.
Neither amendment has been attached yet.
It just requires a study and the enhanced penalties for AP ammo possession or use in violent crime. It doesn't say anything about additional legislation after the study - just that there should be a study.
Neither amendment has been attached yet.
http://www.nra.org/frame.cfm?title=NRA Institute for Legislative Action&url=http://www.nraila.org
Read the above before joining the NRA bashers.
We NRA members want this to be a pure law as much as the next gun lover.
Read the above before joining the NRA bashers.
We NRA members want this to be a pure law as much as the next gun lover.
Michigander
Member
OK, sorry folks. Maybe I jumped the gun. I'll wait until the dust settles on this bill and/or amendments. I don't know enough about the process to make heads or tails of it all. I continue to email and call my Senators (although it may not be much good here in Michigan) until then.
I'll wait until the dust settles on this bill and/or amendments. I don't know enough about the process to make heads or tails of it all. I continue to email and call my Senators (although it may not be much good here in Michigan) until then.As Craig descibed it on CSPAN, the bill would allow AG to study the issue. If AP ammo could be banned in a manner that wouldn't affect hunters, etc... the Senate would reconsider the issue. It's a two year stall to shut Kennedy up.
The penalty increase for using AP in a crime should have been death. Put Kennedy on the defensive for a while.
Off Topic: Sent my Senators a letter supporting police CCW but asking why an officers family deserves protection while traveling interstate more than mine. Eagerly awaiting response.
The penalty increase for using AP in a crime should have been death. Put Kennedy on the defensive for a while.
Off Topic: Sent my Senators a letter supporting police CCW but asking why an officers family deserves protection while traveling interstate more than mine. Eagerly awaiting response.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
IMO, no matter what sort of study is done under the Craig Amendment, it's gonna find that hunting ammo is as much of a hazard as AP. Just as a for instance, why would .308 AP be more effective--or hazardous--than, say, .338 hunting ammo?
This study, then, would put the politically-passive hunter into the activist ranks if he thinks his own particular interest is threatened. Ergo, to wit and therefore, we come back to "Cherchez le money--and le votes."
, Art
This study, then, would put the politically-passive hunter into the activist ranks if he thinks his own particular interest is threatened. Ergo, to wit and therefore, we come back to "Cherchez le money--and le votes."
, ArtArt Eatman is right. Think about it. Very soon the word is going to get out that Kennedy and the Democrats are trying to ban ORDINARY AMMUNITION USED IN HUNTING RIFLES! That should wake up a lot of folks who have been sitting on their hands because they don't care about "Evil Black Rifles" so long as they aren't effected. What Kennedy did was tip his hand to what the gun-grabbers really want, and in a way he may have insured that Bush will be re-elected. On his part it was a major mistake.
It is unlikely the amendment will go anywhere. Every one of the congress-critters in the House is up for election, and this isn't an issue they want to explain unless they represent a urban district.
This is not a good time to push the panic button. But do keep those letters, FAX's, e-mails and phone calls going on. Turn up the heat!
It is unlikely the amendment will go anywhere. Every one of the congress-critters in the House is up for election, and this isn't an issue they want to explain unless they represent a urban district.
This is not a good time to push the panic button. But do keep those letters, FAX's, e-mails and phone calls going on. Turn up the heat!
Brett Bellmore
Member
Kerry wins. Two years from now, the AG concludes that AP rounds can be banned without hurting hunters... since some people hunt with bows.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
And this would be different from the various CDC and NIJ anti-gun studies churned out during the Clinton era, how?
cracked butt
Member
I can't wait to see how kennedy craps his size 48 drawers when he finds out that hunting ammo will not only penetrate body armor, but acts like little explosives on body tissues. I can't wait to see him grandstanding against ballistic tip ammo that had a polycarbonate tip and moly coating to ease the bullet through tough armor. :banghead:
All things considered, I think most most knowledgeable and intelligent people if given a choice, would rather be shot with AP ammo than anything made for killing big game or even varmints.
:banghead:All things considered, I think most most knowledgeable and intelligent people if given a choice, would rather be shot with AP ammo than anything made for killing big game or even varmints.
I'm getting tired of all of this Larry Craig bashing. Have you guys seen what has been going on for the last few days? Are we even on the same planet? Larry Craig has been defending us better than any senator ever. The man is putting up one heck of a fight on the floor. He has been smacking antis down left and right.
The Craig/Frist amendment is a toothless little thing put in the way to derail the evil Kennedy amendment which would have destroyed the lawsuit immunity bill.
It commissions a study? And then what? Two years from now they would still need to bring it up and vote on it all over again.
For those of you who thing Craig has betrayed us, I implore you to follow the blow by blow on the C-Span thread, or tune in and watch for yourself.
The Craig/Frist amendment is a toothless little thing put in the way to derail the evil Kennedy amendment which would have destroyed the lawsuit immunity bill.
It commissions a study? And then what? Two years from now they would still need to bring it up and vote on it all over again.
For those of you who thing Craig has betrayed us, I implore you to follow the blow by blow on the C-Span thread, or tune in and watch for yourself.
Here's the text to Larry Craig's amendment.
Mind telling us what is so "left field" about the initial article? Also, mind telling us how it's "bashing" in any way to report the truth?
Oh, it also includes an analysis from an ammo manufacturer and seller, explaining what effect the Craig amendment banning AP ammo would have on his business.
Mind telling us what is so "left field" about the initial article? Also, mind telling us how it's "bashing" in any way to report the truth?
Oh, it also includes an analysis from an ammo manufacturer and seller, explaining what effect the Craig amendment banning AP ammo would have on his business.
Nicki, I'm not very good at legalese, but I can't see where that amendment bans any new sorts of ammo. I see the increased penalties part and the study and report part, but I'm missing how it would ban types of ammo that aren't already covered by something else.
As for bashing, I'm not really talking about Angel's article as much as the hundreds of hysterical posts about the NRA selling out that I have seen over the last few days.
As for bashing, I'm not really talking about Angel's article as much as the hundreds of hysterical posts about the NRA selling out that I have seen over the last few days.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
OK, KABA is now alleging that Senator Craig's bill does ban new AP ammo and has posted the amendment to prove it. I'm not sure how they arrived at that conclusion myself other than they asked a guy in Montana who sells ammo what he thought the bill did.
KABA cites changes to the Unlawful Acts section of Title 18 by the Craig Amendment as proof for their assertion.
Senator Craig's bill changes paragraphs 7 and 8 of Section 922(a) of title 18, United States Code. I've decided to compare the paragraphs side by side with current law, so that everyone can see what has been changed:
Red Text Is Craig Amendment. Black text is current law.
(7) for any person to manufacture or import armor piercing
ammunition, except that this paragraph shall not apply to--
(7) for any person to manufacture or import armor piercing ammunition, unless--
(A) the manufacture or importation of such ammunition for the use of the United States or any department or agency thereof or any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof;
A) the manufacture of such ammunition is for the use of the United States, any department or agency of the United States, any State, or any department, agency, or political subdivision of a State;
(B) the manufacture of such ammunition for the purpose of exportation; and
(B) the manufacture of such ammunition is for the purpose of exportation; or
(C) any manufacture or importation for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Secretary;
C) the manufacture or importation of such ammunition is for the purpose of testing or experimentation and has been authorized by the Attorney General.
(My Note: Since Title 18 was written when BATF was under Treasury, Secretary of the Treasury had discretion. Attorney General has discretion now that ATF is under Department of Justice - thus the difference above)
(8) for any manufacturer or importer to sell or deliver armor piercing ammunition, except that this paragraph shall not apply to--
(8) for any manufacturer or importer to sell or deliver armor piercing ammunition, unless such sale or delivery--
(A) the sale or delivery by a manufacturer or importer of such ammunition for use of the United States or any department or agency thereof or any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof;
(A) is for the use of the United States, any department or agency of the United States, any State, or any department, agency, or political subdivision of a State;
(B) the sale or delivery by a manufacturer or importer of such ammunition for the purpose of exportation;
(B) is for the purpose of exportation; or
(C) the sale or delivery by a manufacturer or importer of such ammunition for the purposes of testing or experimenting authorized by the Secretary;
(C) is for the purpose of testing or experimentation and has been authorized by the Attorney General.''.
Now, it is KABA's contention that the changes you see above will justify the ban of blacktip M2 AP, SS109, and .50BMG AP. Personally, I don't have the slightest idea where they got that idea looking at the two laws side-by-side; but there they are if anyone wants to look at the amendment themselves.
KABA cites changes to the Unlawful Acts section of Title 18 by the Craig Amendment as proof for their assertion.
Senator Craig's bill changes paragraphs 7 and 8 of Section 922(a) of title 18, United States Code. I've decided to compare the paragraphs side by side with current law, so that everyone can see what has been changed:
Red Text Is Craig Amendment. Black text is current law.
(7) for any person to manufacture or import armor piercing
ammunition, except that this paragraph shall not apply to--
(7) for any person to manufacture or import armor piercing ammunition, unless--
(A) the manufacture or importation of such ammunition for the use of the United States or any department or agency thereof or any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof;
A) the manufacture of such ammunition is for the use of the United States, any department or agency of the United States, any State, or any department, agency, or political subdivision of a State;
(B) the manufacture of such ammunition for the purpose of exportation; and
(B) the manufacture of such ammunition is for the purpose of exportation; or
(C) any manufacture or importation for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Secretary;
C) the manufacture or importation of such ammunition is for the purpose of testing or experimentation and has been authorized by the Attorney General.
(My Note: Since Title 18 was written when BATF was under Treasury, Secretary of the Treasury had discretion. Attorney General has discretion now that ATF is under Department of Justice - thus the difference above)
(8) for any manufacturer or importer to sell or deliver armor piercing ammunition, except that this paragraph shall not apply to--
(8) for any manufacturer or importer to sell or deliver armor piercing ammunition, unless such sale or delivery--
(A) the sale or delivery by a manufacturer or importer of such ammunition for use of the United States or any department or agency thereof or any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof;
(A) is for the use of the United States, any department or agency of the United States, any State, or any department, agency, or political subdivision of a State;
(B) the sale or delivery by a manufacturer or importer of such ammunition for the purpose of exportation;
(B) is for the purpose of exportation; or
(C) the sale or delivery by a manufacturer or importer of such ammunition for the purposes of testing or experimenting authorized by the Secretary;
(C) is for the purpose of testing or experimentation and has been authorized by the Attorney General.''.
Now, it is KABA's contention that the changes you see above will justify the ban of blacktip M2 AP, SS109, and .50BMG AP. Personally, I don't have the slightest idea where they got that idea looking at the two laws side-by-side; but there they are if anyone wants to look at the amendment themselves.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
I see we were all typing at the same time...
I'm sure the guy knows ammo; but I don't think he is qualified to give a legal analysis of what the Craig Amendment bans. I'd have to say that it doesn't look like KABA is either; but maybe I'm wrong.
I've highlighted the disputed sections in my post above, can you explain what changes make you believe that the rifle ammo you mentioned will now be banned?
I'm sure the guy knows ammo; but I don't think he is qualified to give a legal analysis of what the Craig Amendment bans. I'd have to say that it doesn't look like KABA is either; but maybe I'm wrong.
I've highlighted the disputed sections in my post above, can you explain what changes make you believe that the rifle ammo you mentioned will now be banned?
Al Norris
Member
I've about had it with this stuff. Angel is using the very same leftist tactics that we have all come to know and loathe... And Some Of You Are Buying It, Hook Line And Sinker!
I also just took the time and trouble to compare the current law with the proposed changes. Side. By. Side. (Thanks for the visual, Bartholomew)
In 922(a) 7 and 8 the ONLY changes is that the authority is moved from the Secratary of the Treasury to the Atty General. This in and of itself imposes No New Bans!
In the NEW proposed addition of section 18USC924(b) 5, it simply lists a set of further penalties dealing with actual crime. The section dealing with the STUDY poses no no bans as the Atty Gen must report back to Congress and can take no action himself. This in and of itself imposes No New Bans!
The current definition of Amor Piercing Ammunition is not changed in any way shape or manner.... As it would have been under the Kennedy amendment. Before people take off and spread rumors, they should take the time to really read what's being done.
Angel is just plain wrong and is fearmongering to boot!
The esteemed Senator form my State may have his flaws, but this is not one of them. Larry Craig has been and still is the staunchest supporter of our Second Amendmnet Rights we have had, bar none.
I also just took the time and trouble to compare the current law with the proposed changes. Side. By. Side. (Thanks for the visual, Bartholomew)
In 922(a) 7 and 8 the ONLY changes is that the authority is moved from the Secratary of the Treasury to the Atty General. This in and of itself imposes No New Bans!
In the NEW proposed addition of section 18USC924(b) 5, it simply lists a set of further penalties dealing with actual crime. The section dealing with the STUDY poses no no bans as the Atty Gen must report back to Congress and can take no action himself. This in and of itself imposes No New Bans!
The current definition of Amor Piercing Ammunition is not changed in any way shape or manner.... As it would have been under the Kennedy amendment. Before people take off and spread rumors, they should take the time to really read what's being done.
Angel is just plain wrong and is fearmongering to boot!
The esteemed Senator form my State may have his flaws, but this is not one of them. Larry Craig has been and still is the staunchest supporter of our Second Amendmnet Rights we have had, bar none.
As Mr. Roberts pointed out, the only things that are "new" in the proposed amendment are the enhanced penalties for using AP in a crime and the following:
(c) STUDY AND REPORT.--
(1) STUDY.--The Attorney General shall conduct a study to determine whether a uniform standard for the uniform testing of projectiles against Body Armor is feasible.
(2) ISSUES TO BE STUDIED.--The study conducted under paragraph (1) shall include--
(A) variations in performance that are related to the length of the barrel of the handgun or centerfire rifle from which the projectile is fired; and
(B) the amount of powder used to propel the projectile.
(3) REPORT.--Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall submit a report containing the results of the study conducted under this subsection to--
(A) the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee of the Senate; and
(B) the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives.
Hmmm. The subject must be studied and a report generated for delivery to two Congressmen. Oh, the HORROR!!!!!!
Then there is this from KABA http://keepandbeararms.com/information/Item.asp?ID=3645 It is already dynamically linked above:
The next one they get will actually be their first, but what they have now is the following:
To bolster the credibility of the shoddy legal interpretation no doubt.
So far so good, but wait for it. . . .
As Mr. Roberts pointed out, nothing will change under the amendment. Rifle ammo will be studied per the section I posted above. In DC, to study something is to never do anything about it--think Social Security reform, studied since the 60s.
Of course this is only possible if one ignores that NOWHERE have centerfire rifle rounds been mentioned for OUTRIGHT BANNING anywhere outside of Kennedy's amendment. Craig's only asks if a uniform standard between handguns and rifles is feasible and requires no legislative or administrative action other than to report the findings to Congress as identified in the amendment. IOW, is it simply velocity that accounts for centerfire rifles all punching through Level IIA body armor or is there some sinister manufacturing process going on?
And this last was just circular reasoning based on the same faulty analysis. Not authoritative at all.
SNIP
I'm tired of KABA's apparent lack of facility with the English language. I can only conclude that they are being unwittingly obtuse (unlikely) or being deliberately idiotic in advancing their own tinfoiler agenda.
(c) STUDY AND REPORT.--
(1) STUDY.--The Attorney General shall conduct a study to determine whether a uniform standard for the uniform testing of projectiles against Body Armor is feasible.
(2) ISSUES TO BE STUDIED.--The study conducted under paragraph (1) shall include--
(A) variations in performance that are related to the length of the barrel of the handgun or centerfire rifle from which the projectile is fired; and
(B) the amount of powder used to propel the projectile.
(3) REPORT.--Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall submit a report containing the results of the study conducted under this subsection to--
(A) the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee of the Senate; and
(B) the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives.
Hmmm. The subject must be studied and a report generated for delivery to two Congressmen. Oh, the HORROR!!!!!!
Then there is this from KABA http://keepandbeararms.com/information/Item.asp?ID=3645 It is already dynamically linked above:
The next one they get will actually be their first, but what they have now is the following:
To bolster the credibility of the shoddy legal interpretation no doubt.
So far so good, but wait for it. . . .
As Mr. Roberts pointed out, nothing will change under the amendment. Rifle ammo will be studied per the section I posted above. In DC, to study something is to never do anything about it--think Social Security reform, studied since the 60s.
Of course this is only possible if one ignores that NOWHERE have centerfire rifle rounds been mentioned for OUTRIGHT BANNING anywhere outside of Kennedy's amendment. Craig's only asks if a uniform standard between handguns and rifles is feasible and requires no legislative or administrative action other than to report the findings to Congress as identified in the amendment. IOW, is it simply velocity that accounts for centerfire rifles all punching through Level IIA body armor or is there some sinister manufacturing process going on?
And this last was just circular reasoning based on the same faulty analysis. Not authoritative at all.
SNIP
I'm tired of KABA's apparent lack of facility with the English language. I can only conclude that they are being unwittingly obtuse (unlikely) or being deliberately idiotic in advancing their own tinfoiler agenda.
TheBluesMan
Senior Member
Boats - Perhaps you should tread a little lighter on KABA.com. There are a *lot* of members on THR who are also members of KABA, myself included. I *really* don't appreciate your accusation of low intelligence or your comparison to wacko conspiracy theorists aimed at people I know and respect. I have contributed many hours of my time to various KABA-related causes and your wide-brush pronouncements do not sit well with me.
At the risk of being called for a lack of facility with the English language, "You have gotten my attention."
Well I only have this to say since I have been warned by many a moderator to "take it easy on the poor KABA-folk:" I'd be showing a lot more restraint were many other people exercising the same.
All of these ill-informed alarm crier "SELL OUT" postings at various spots on the internet remind of nothing less than inept deer hunters who fire away into the bushes without checking for an actual deer. The so-called "smarter ones" resemble the goobers who stop their trucks on the road and fire into the Fish & Game decoy and then try and deny they did it.
My last advice on this topic, and this is not directed at anyone in particular. Learn the process and figure out how to read proposed legislation. FAILING THAT--AND MANY ARE--**** and keep dialing your senators and impressing their staffers with your lack of knowledge. At least to them you represent a potentially lost vote.
All of these ill-informed alarm crier "SELL OUT" postings at various spots on the internet remind of nothing less than inept deer hunters who fire away into the bushes without checking for an actual deer. The so-called "smarter ones" resemble the goobers who stop their trucks on the road and fire into the Fish & Game decoy and then try and deny they did it.
My last advice on this topic, and this is not directed at anyone in particular. Learn the process and figure out how to read proposed legislation. FAILING THAT--AND MANY ARE--**** and keep dialing your senators and impressing their staffers with your lack of knowledge. At least to them you represent a potentially lost vote.
- Status
