PDA

View Full Version : HR 308 - Carolyn McCarthy "high capacity magazine" bill


cineski
01-18-2011, 4:28 PM
http://carolynmccarthy.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=155&sectiontree=189,155&itemid=1719

"The bill was scheduled to be formally introduced in the House of Representatives later in the evening. It is being carried in the Senate by Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), who will introduce it later this month."

Now HR 308 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:h.r.00308:
//Librarian

Librarian
01-18-2011, 4:39 PM
Not up at Thomas (http://thomas.loc.gov/) yet. Sheesh!

Quser.619
01-18-2011, 4:40 PM
Can imagine the looks on the Brady folks w/ AB962 getting knocked down, AZ not tightening their laws & this piece or trash doesn't make it out of committee? Kind of nice for the anti's to feel our pain once in a while!

ro442173
01-18-2011, 4:42 PM
Though this is going no where. Time to stock up.

Up yours lady!

hellraiser
01-18-2011, 4:45 PM
from the article:

"It closes a gaping loophole in the previous ban in which magazines manufactured before the law went into effect could still be sold or transferred."

So whats that supposed to mean?

sd_shooter
01-18-2011, 4:46 PM
Chair James Winkler of Faiths United to Prevent Gun Violence said: “Gun violence is taking a huge toll on our society and the easy accessibility of large capacity ammunition magazines causes more people to be killed or injured. While we continue to pray for the families and friends of those who died and for the recovery of those injured, we cannot stop at only offering our prayers and sympathy. We simply cannot allow this kind of firepower in our society.”



Executive Director Jackie Hilly of New Yorkers Against Gun Violence said: “The heroes of the Tucson shooting knew instinctively it was critical to stop Jared Loughner and act quickly to take away his high capacity magazine, before he was able to reload and start shooting again. Their actions saved lives during this horrific tragedy because we now know he had several additional high capacity magazines with him. New York State law has limited civilian access to high capacity magazines for many years, but we cannot prevent tragedies like Tucson without federal help. New York State law enforcement, parents and citizens want this sensible federal law enacted to ensure the safety of our children and communities. Banning high capacity magazines will help prevent dangerous people from getting easy, unfettered access to lethal firepower. Congress must act now."



Hildy Saizow, the President of Arizonans for Gun Safety, one of the state members of States United to Prevent Gun Violence, said: "While praying for the victims of this senseless tragedy and their families, we are also more determined than ever to create a society where the deranged, the disgruntled, and the dangerous can no longer have access to lethal firepower. It was the extended magazine, easily available throughout our community, that enabled so many people to be shot, killed or injured in less than a minute. We must reestablish the federal ban on large capacity ammunition magazines.”


The only problem is that bad guys will still be able to get the mags...

zhyla
01-18-2011, 4:52 PM
from the article:

"It closes a gaping loophole in the previous ban in which magazines manufactured before the law went into effect could still be sold or transferred."

So whats that supposed to mean?

Probably that they can't be sold or gifted, just like we have here. Our days of cornering the market on parts kits is over... except this bill will go nowhere.

pointedstick
01-18-2011, 4:59 PM
Just called my congressman's office. He's listed as a co-sponsor, but it can't hurt for them to know how many of us are pissed.

Dutch3
01-18-2011, 5:05 PM
Here is a thought...

Maybe any high-capacity magazines confiscated during the commission of a crime could be re-purposed by being given to law-abiding gun owning citizens.

They would be "recycled" for the good of all, and prevent the seized magazines from ending up in a landfill, providing a pro-environmental aspect for the idea.

Citizens could sign up for the program according to firearm type and caliber. The "orphan" magazines would be "lovingly adopted" and put to Patriotic use.

It sounds like a winner to me. ;)

Window_Seat
01-18-2011, 5:17 PM
Here is a thought...

Maybe any high-capacity magazines confiscated during the commission of a crime could be re-purposed by being given to law-abiding gun owning citizens.

They would be "recycled" for the good of all, and prevent the seized magazines from ending up in a landfill, providing a pro-environmental aspect for the idea.

Citizens could sign up for the program according to firearm type and caliber. The "orphan" magazines would be "lovingly adopted" and put to Patriotic use.

It sounds like a winner to me. ;)

The idea (that the the lawmakers have) is to make it less possible for the law-abiding to have them, for the purpose of criminals having more, so someone will cause a mass kill, and then the lawmakers could further their agenda. The shooting in Tucson was part of it. Go ahead and call me Alex Jones, but think about what folks on radio said long ago about crap like this that is happening today. Who needs terrorists when you have the Brady Campaign, Carolyn McCarthy, Janet Napolitano and the TSA?

It's all in the name of power & control, and ultimately, dictatorship & communism... Gun control is essential for a healthy dictatorship.

Stock up, and be ready.

Erik.

N6ATF
01-18-2011, 5:23 PM
Reid should pick it up out of the hopper, light it on fire, and wave their traitorous asses out of the chamber with it.

Glock22Fan
01-18-2011, 5:31 PM
Reid should pick it up out of the hopper, light it on fire, and wave their traitorous asses out of the chamber with it.


Aren't you glad we've still got Reid, and not, say, Charles Schumer, as many on this forum would have wished?

Maybe Reid won't do it, but as sure as a very warm place down below, Schumer wouldn't have.

Dutch3
01-18-2011, 5:36 PM
The idea (that the the lawmakers have) is to make it less possible for the law-abiding to have them, for the purpose of criminals having more, so someone will cause a mass kill, and then the lawmakers could further their agenda. The shooting in Tucson was part of it. Go ahead and call me Alex Jones, but think about what folks on radio said long ago about crap like this that is happening today. Who needs terrorists when you have the Brady Campaign, Carolyn McCarthy, Janet Napolitano and the TSA?

It's all in the name of power & control, and ultimately, dictatorship & communism... Gun control is essential for a healthy dictatorship.
.

I understand the idea the lawmakers have. My post was simply a suggestion to counter their way of thought.

If hi-caps are BAD and used by criminals, how about putting them in the hands of GOOD citizens who have passed federal and state DOJ screening, where they could be put to LAWFUL use. Something like that.

Reduce waste, save the landfills, etc... for the environmentalists, too. Hi-cap mags are GREEN!

N6ATF
01-18-2011, 5:41 PM
If hi-caps are BAD and used by criminals, how about putting them in the hands of GOOD citizens who have passed federal and state DOJ screening, where they could be put to LAWFUL use. Something like that.

That only includes cops. The rest of us are future mass murderers, or so they would have us believe they think.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/large/224202994.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=0ZRYP5X5F6FSMBCCSE82&Expires=1295402240&Signature=6ly3S%2BvubTr05qvmdDU0v%2BOv2O8%3D

PsychGuy274
01-18-2011, 5:49 PM
The only problem is that bad guys will still be able to get the mags...

Are you stupid? It will be against the law. How can they possibly get high cap magazines if they're against the law?

We need to ban speed reloading while we're at it :rolleyes:

Ding126
01-18-2011, 6:13 PM
Those individuals who blame firearms themselves, as well as “high” capacity magazines, for the actions of humans are unfortunately placing the blame on the wrong culprit.

Fact: Firearms do not fire rounds off on their own!

It takes the action of squeezing the trigger to send the firing pin forward to ignite the primer which sends the projectile out of the muzzle and towards the target which was obviously acquired by a human’s eye. Therefore, firearms and their magazines were not at fault. The blame must be placed solely on those individuals that purchased the firearms legally and decided to commit such heinous acts of violence.

Window_Seat
01-18-2011, 8:32 PM
I understand the idea the lawmakers have. My post was simply a suggestion to counter their way of thought.

If hi-caps are BAD and used by criminals, how about putting them in the hands of GOOD citizens who have passed federal and state DOJ screening, where they could be put to LAWFUL use. Something like that.

I feel that what you suggest above is a possibility if every gun owner, or maybe a significant percentage of all gun owners were to contact every one of their Lawmakers at least once per week, and suggest this kind of solution.

The NRA is HUGE, but all of the organizations put together would be MASSIVE, and literally particlize (not a dictionary word, yet, from "particle") the anti-2A organizations put together, but they all have to work together to stop this Constitution hating propaganda from impacting the individuals in a very bad way.

Getting to the point of your suggestion: Criminals know full well that when their guns are confiscated, those guns (and the accessories) are destroyed, and could care less.

I could see criminals cringing if the confiscated firearms that the LEAs take away from the thug element are actually GIVEN to the law abiding. It would make them cringe even more if those firearms were given to the law abiding for a "donation" to the LEO Associations.

This is something that the majority of our lawmakers would NEVER entertain on a piece of legislation, but I think it could be worthwhile at trying to get implemented, as long as EVERYONE keep on it continuously so it wouldn't be a waste of time.

Why wouldn't the NRA, SAF, CRPA, CGF, JPFO, PPSF, and the other organizations be onboard with something like this?

Reduce waste, save the landfills, etc... for the environmentalists, too. Hi-cap mags are GREEN!

This is a very good point! We could make it one of the selling points to get such a measure implemented. Many of our lawmakers are hellbent on "green" and "solar". Destroying a firearm by melting it down or whatever way they destroy it, probably causes more pollutant emissions than the average number of rounds fired from multiple guns, or it could be the other way around. Would this NOT be a worthwhile study?

AJAX22 began working on projects that was (and is still) considered by some to be astronomically impossible. Those projects being worked on is bringing good things closer to reality.

CalGuns began working on projects that was (and is still) considered by some to be astronomically impossible. We are still working on those projects, which have proven successful, and will continue to into the future.

Erik.
(Signature change pending)

IrishPirate
01-18-2011, 8:47 PM
We don't need them, only cops need them. Because only cops deal with bad guys who also have them. Ordinary citizens will never have to defend themselves from a bad guy with a gun and a hi-cap magazine because ordinary citizens are protected by the police who are always right there when you need them with their hi-cap mags. And if the impossible happens and an ordinary citizen is ever confronted by a bad guy with a gun and a hi-cap magazine, then all they have to do is remind them that hi-caps are not legal and cannot be used to kill anyone. It will work, you just have to trust the legislature because they know what is best for you. The only rights you need are the ones they say you should have. know your place, and shut your face....

http://www.conservativecotton.com/images/t-shirts/gun_control_isnt_about_guns_its_about_control_desi gn.gif

Jake71
01-18-2011, 9:03 PM
I read an article today on CNN that said with all the gun control laws we have and have had in the past, there is NO conclusive proof that crime has decreased.

It mentions the time when in DC, handguns were banned for 33 years and it became the murder capital of the country.

This is kinda like Nazi Germany... the master race is dictating to it's unworthy what they can and cant do... and if they cant have it their way they tax the living **** out of it so you cant afford to do it.

It's almost a shame to be a part of a country that legislates people out of the ability to live.. let alone own a firearm.

Nor-Cal
01-18-2011, 9:53 PM
Let's see where this goes!

dustoff31
01-18-2011, 10:02 PM
Aren't you glad we've still got Reid, and not, say, Charles Schumer, as many on this forum would have wished?

I don't believe it matters. At least not in this case. This will not pass the House.

Dreaded Claymore
01-18-2011, 10:15 PM
This will not pass the House.

I'm calling representatives and senators, just to make sure.

the_quark
01-18-2011, 11:06 PM
I'm calling representatives and senators, just to make sure.

Yes, please do that. "It won't pass" isn't the same as "Don't do anything".

It won't pass, but the reason it won't pass is because everyone's going to call and freak out about it. :cool:

jdberger
01-18-2011, 11:22 PM
I wonder if Reginald Denny would have found a 30 round magazine useful. I wonder if he could have used it to deter the mob who dragged him from his vehicle and crushed his skull with a concrete block.

I wonder if Rep. McCarthy considers that folks such as Reginald Denny who are now handicapped don't have the physical dexterity to quickly reload a pistol in time of distress. That a 15 or 30 round magazine could be the difference between life and death with limited mobility.

I wonder if Carolyn McCarthy thinks of such things when proposing such laws.

Santa Cruz Armory
01-18-2011, 11:34 PM
You can't fix stupid!

otalps
01-18-2011, 11:47 PM
I wonder if Reginald Denny would have found a 30 round magazine useful. I wonder if he could have used it to deter the mob who dragged him from his vehicle and crushed his skull with a concrete block.

I wonder if Rep. McCarthy considers that folks such as Reginald Denny who are now handicapped don't have the physical dexterity to quickly reload a pistol in time of distress. That a 15 or 30 round magazine could be the difference between life and death with limited mobility.

I wonder if Carolyn McCarthy thinks of such things when proposing such laws.

Do you really wonder?

GOEX FFF
01-18-2011, 11:48 PM
My prediction is another 1 million magazines will be sold in a month across the country with this do nothing legislation now brought to the table.
The antis sure love boosting the market!
And when this fails in the GOP controlled House, all they'll have done is prompt more demand for magazines and they'll all be eating crow........................ again.

Werewolf1021
01-19-2011, 12:09 AM
Rep. Gary Ackerman

Rep. Robert Brady

Rep. Steve Cohen

Rep. Judy Chu

Rep. David Cicilline

Rep. William Lacy Clay

Rep. Gerald Connolly

Rep. John Conyers

Rep. Donna Edwards

Rep. Keith Ellison

Rep. Anna Eshoo

Rep. Sam Farr

Rep. Jane Harman

Rep. Alcee Hastings

Rep. Jim Himes

Rep. Mazie Hirono

Rep. Chris Van Hollen

Rep. Rush Holt

Rep. Mike Honda

Rep. Steve Israel

Rep. James Langevin

Rep. Nita Lowey

Rep. Carolyn Maloney

Rep. Doris Matsui

Rep. Betty McCollum

Rep. Jim McGovern

Rep. Gregory Meeks

Rep. George Miller

Rep. James Moran

Rep. Jerrold Nadler

Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton

Rep. Bill Pascrell

Rep. Chellie Pingree

Rep. Mike Quigley

Rep. Jose Serrano

Rep. Brad Sherman

Rep. Jackie Spear

Rep. Louise Slaughter

Rep. John Yarmuth

Rep. Henry Waxman

Rep. Maxine Waters

Rep. Anthony Weiner


Yep. A list of tyranny. The bolded ones are from California 26% of the list, 100% D Party. God help us all.

sawchain
01-19-2011, 12:11 AM
Yep. A list of tyranny.

...+1

N6ATF
01-19-2011, 12:39 AM
You can't fix stupid!

You can however call it what it is, an Academy Award-winning act to cover for evil. There's a way to fix evil, set forth in COTUS, Article III, Section 3.

arsilva32
01-19-2011, 12:51 AM
Yep. A list of tyranny. The bolded ones are from California 26% of the list, 100% D Party. God help us all.



time to write some letters and make some phone calls!

winxp_man
01-19-2011, 1:20 AM
All this is a way to get people to buy huge amounts of mags so tax can be paid and revenue increased for the government. Almost reminds me of the Obama crisis. MHO!

I'm not going to sit there though and not worry about it. I will call and let it be known to our higher ups that this does not sit right with us LAW ABIDING CITIZENS!!!!!!!!

Oceanbob
01-19-2011, 7:51 AM
It's the Indian, not the arrow.

Wherryj
01-19-2011, 10:50 AM
I wonder if Reginald Denny would have found a 30 round magazine useful. I wonder if he could have used it to deter the mob who dragged him from his vehicle and crushed his skull with a concrete block.

I wonder if Rep. McCarthy considers that folks such as Reginald Denny who are now handicapped don't have the physical dexterity to quickly reload a pistol in time of distress. That a 15 or 30 round magazine could be the difference between life and death with limited mobility.

I wonder if Carolyn McCarthy thinks of such things when proposing such laws.

I think that Carolyn McCarthy thinks along these lines.

1. "I don't like guns."
2. "I have an idea for a law that will get rid of the guns that I don't like."
3. "It will probably lead to more violent crime, but I have armed security guards."
4. "My law is a great idea."

paul0660
01-19-2011, 11:04 AM
Anyone know what the bill says, or have a link to the text?

Librarian
01-19-2011, 11:24 AM
Thomas has published it: it's HR 308 -- http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:h.r.00308:
H.R.308
Latest Title: Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act
Sponsor: Rep McCarthy, Carolyn [NY-4] (introduced 1/18/2011) Cosponsors (47)
Latest Major Action: 1/18/2011 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.



*
*

HR 308 IH

112th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 308

To prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 18, 2011

Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York (for herself, Mr. CLAY, Ms. NORTON, Mr. WEINER, Ms. ESHOO, Mr. ISRAEL, Mrs. MALONEY, Mr. ACKERMAN, Mr. MORAN, Ms. MCCOLLUM, Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania, Mr. SERRANO, Ms. PINGREE of Maine, Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California, Mr. MCGOVERN, Ms. HARMAN, Mr. PASCRELL, Ms. HIRONO, Mr. VAN HOLLEN, Mrs. LOWEY, Mr. NADLER, Ms. EDWARDS, Mr. HASTINGS of Florida, Ms. MATSUI, Ms. WATERS, Mr. CICILLINE, Ms. CHU, Mr. SHERMAN, Mr. HOLT, Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia, Ms. SLAUGHTER, Mr. ELLISON, Mr. QUIGLEY, Mr. MEEKS, Mr. HIMES, Mr. HONDA, Mr. LANGEVIN, Ms. SPEIER, Mr. COHEN, Mr. WAXMAN, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. FARR, Mr. YARMUTH, Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas, Ms. WOOLSEY, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Mr. BISHOP of New York, and Ms. DEGETTE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act'.

SEC. 2. 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 off-site 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.'.

jdberger
01-19-2011, 11:30 AM
How does she get all the cool bill numbers?

1022 for the "new & improved" AW ban.
308 for the mag ban

Wasn't there another one that was HR 45?

Or is this just the Leadership's way of making sure that the gunnies can easily recall the bill numbers?

pointedstick
01-19-2011, 12:27 PM
I think that Carolyn McCarthy thinks along these lines.

1. "I don't like guns."
2. "I have an idea for a law that will get rid of the guns that I don't like."
3. "It will probably lead to more violent crime, but I have armed security guards."
4. "My law is a great idea."

Other than #3, you're totally right. These people don't think rationally about the consequences; it's just "guns == bad; ban them; If we can't ban them all right now, ban parts of them!"

willm952
01-19-2011, 12:30 PM
The idea (that the the lawmakers have) is to make it less possible for the law-abiding to have them, for the purpose of criminals having more, so someone will cause a mass kill, and then the lawmakers could further their agenda. The shooting in Tucson was part of it. Go ahead and call me Alex Jones, but think about what folks on radio said long ago about crap like this that is happening today. Who needs terrorists when you have the Brady Campaign, Carolyn McCarthy, Janet Napolitano and the TSA?

It's all in the name of power & control, and ultimately, dictatorship & communism... Gun control is essential for a healthy dictatorship.

Stock up, and be ready.

Erik.

Exactly. Sometimes Alex does sound a bit off but he has credible info.
We don't need gun control like that. I'm surprised no one was carrying concealed there but I've heard Tucson is a tad left.

stix213
01-19-2011, 12:31 PM
Won't make it out of committee in the house, and Reid won't let it come to the floor in the Senate I'm predicting. Still I'll be at least sending an e-mail to my representatives just so I can be tallied in the "against" side.

oldyeller
01-19-2011, 12:46 PM
Exactly. Sometimes Alex does sound a bit off but he has credible info.
We don't need gun control like that. I'm surprised no one was carrying concealed there but I've heard Tucson is a tad left.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-3GTwalrGY&feature=player_embedded

Glock22Fan
01-19-2011, 1:12 PM
I don't believe it matters. At least not in this case. This will not pass the House.

Agree with you on this bill, but there could well be a time when this is more important.

Wherryj
01-19-2011, 1:51 PM
How does she get all the cool bill numbers?

1022 for the "new & improved" AW ban.
308 for the mag ban

Wasn't there another one that was HR 45?

Or is this just the Leadership's way of making sure that the gunnies can easily recall the bill numbers?

"(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"

I know that we're supposed to feel safe with only LEOs having standard cap magazines, but why RETIRED cops? Why not retired military?

Why are retired officers considered to be a still permitted class?

Glock22Fan
01-19-2011, 1:56 PM
It would make a little more sense (although 10% more than nothing is still nothing) if there was also a paragraph banning the possession of more than one loaded firearm. Otherwise a New York reload or two is quite fast enough to kill lots of people with castrated ten round magazines.

I 'm amazed that it's apparently OK to kill ten people without reloading, but not more than ten unless you use a second, third, or fourth handgun.

hatidua
01-19-2011, 2:17 PM
"(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."

Me thinks the poor woman hath no clue how many of these magazines are already out and about...:rolleyes:

tabrisnet
01-19-2011, 3:16 PM
"(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."

Me thinks the poor woman hath no clue how many of these magazines are already out and about...:rolleyes:

Or she knows, but also knows that there's no way the bill could be passed if it were to force forfeiture. Additionally, the bill _still_ gives a way for cops to harass you for possessing said mags.

Further, one may consider that she is just doing it for 'feel good' reasons. Appealing to her base while not angering her opponents beyond limits.

Fate
01-19-2011, 4:42 PM
I wonder if Carolyn McCarthy thinks of such things when proposing such laws.
It's obvious that she does not have a functioning brain cell, let alone capable of "thought" or reasoned logic.

She's Mrs. "That thing that goes up!" after-all!

Fate
01-19-2011, 4:45 PM
Why are retired officers considered to be a still permitted class?

The police union is a powerful ally, even more so as an enemy.

scarville
01-19-2011, 4:52 PM
Careful! After she bans "high" capacity magazines she plans to go after mirrors more than 10 cm in any dimension.

GOEX FFF
01-19-2011, 6:12 PM
I personally don't even think she writes these herself, but looks them over and has them explained to her what they want to do. She nods and signs.
That's why she has no clue what a barrel-shroud is/was.
Maybe we get to hear later about something that "clips" on your groin with hi-capacity that goes down" :rolleyes:

Cali-Shooter
01-19-2011, 10:01 PM
I think that Carolyn McCarthy thinks along these lines.

1. "I hate guns."
2. "I have an idea for a law that will get rid of all guns, or at the very least, piss off as many gun-owners as I possible can."
3. "It will definitely lead to more violent crime, but I have armed security guards."
4. "My law is the greatest idea in the world."

Fixed it for you. Otherwise, excellent talking points on our beloved "Barrel Shroud" Expert.

SickofSoCal
01-19-2011, 10:04 PM
Though this is going no where. Time to stock up.

Up yours lady!

Well said!

The road to hell is paved with good intentions, but I doubt she has any. She is the worst kind of Statist that there is.

jdberger
01-19-2011, 11:42 PM
Robyn Thomas (LCAV) and Chad Ramsey (Brady Campaign) in a video discussing McCarthy's bill. The part of the video in question starts around the 20 minute mark. Feel free to watch the rest, but don't blame me if your head explodes...

aIUbBOFbhbo

Telling is Ramsey's anecdote that Dem lawmakers aren't on board with this bill.

wolf10851
01-20-2011, 12:43 AM
you know the worst part about this is the fact that they are using the incident in AZ as their reasoning for this ban. even though Gifford was extreamly PRO guns!!!!!!!! what a slap in the face! she gets shot then has her own party go and make new laws that she would be opposed to! Democrats = Sad party to be associated with!

NorCalDustin
01-20-2011, 1:09 AM
Pass that and we'll vote you out.

We will vote you out.


You have to remember that the rest of the county has been enjoying their 30rnd mags for the last few years... They'll slam anyone who supports this bill.

Scratch705
01-20-2011, 1:55 AM
considering that only what 2-3 states out of 50 currently have a reduced capacity magazine law in place, there is no way this will pass, even with the dems that are in control cause election year is coming up for some of them.

Carnivore
01-20-2011, 2:15 AM
you know the worst part about this is the fact that they are using the incident in AZ as their reasoning for this ban. even though Gifford was extreamly PRO guns!!!!!!!! what a slap in the face! she gets shot then has her own party go and make new laws that she would be opposed to! Democrats = Sad party to be associated with!

Rats eat each other just like other vermin. Not surprising to see them throw her under the first bus they see to further their agenda.

SanPedroShooter
01-20-2011, 5:56 AM
Robyn Thomas (LCAV) and Chad Ramsey (Brady Campaign) in a video discussing McCarthy's bill. The part of the video in question starts around the 20 minute mark. Feel free to watch the rest, but don't blame me if your head explodes...

aIUbBOFbhbo

Telling is Ramsey's anecdote that Dem lawmakers aren't on board with this bill.

Yeah head explode is about right. JESUS H CHRIST, ITS NOT A ****ING AMMUNITION CLIP!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH....
Two things that jumped out at me, Police chiefs and police unions are for gun control... of course they are, THEY'RE EXEMPTED FROM THESE LAWS. I also have a suspicion that the police union would be in favor of electronic tagging and curfews if it made their jobs easier.
Second, the host says that the NRA is a lobby for big rich gun manufacturers, ITS ALSO THE LOBBY OF TWO AND HALF MILLION INDIVIDUAL GUN OWNERS.
I need to go take my blood pressure meds now...

Tarn_Helm
01-20-2011, 6:32 AM
Yep. A list of tyranny. The bolded ones are from California 26% of the list, 100% D Party. God help us all.

This is the reason why I will never vote for the D party.

(I hated Nixon--but the Ds I dislike even more intensely.)

Typically, they plump for gun control, mag control, shoulder-thing-that-goes-up control, and any other kind of control--except for individual self-control, self-reliance, or responsibility for oneself.

It is the politically perverse party of "There are vast, unseen, mysterious sociological and (now) atmospheric forces out there that compel us to impose restrictions on you for your own safety--because people are safer when they are more helpless, more heavily taxed, more comprehensively and intrusively spied-upon, . . . Freedom is slavery . . . yada, yada, yada."

". . . someone to follow, someone to shame us, some brave Apollo, someone to fool us, someone like you, we want you, Big Brother, Big Brother . . ."
555jxltr9Zo

SanPedroShooter
01-20-2011, 6:34 AM
+1 for bowie
You mind if i quote you?

Mendo223
01-20-2011, 10:50 AM
Can imagine the looks on the Brady folks w/ AB962 getting knocked down, AZ not tightening their laws & this piece or trash doesn't make it out of committee? Kind of nice for the anti's to feel our pain once in a while!

hahaha i hope the bradys are crying themselves to sleep now.

jdberger
01-20-2011, 11:07 AM
<snip>Second, the host says that the NRA is a lobby for big rich gun manufacturers, ITS ALSO THE LOBBY OF TWO AND HALF MILLION INDIVIDUAL GUN OWNERS.
I need to go take my blood pressure meds now...

FOUR million.

The NRA has 4 million members. Roughly 10,000 dues paying members per Congressional District.