I know a few years ago, many of us on here tried to get the LEOSA 2010 amendment to include magazines, but it was too little too late.
I was hoping we could try again.
The gun bill going through the senate right now is a great opportunity.
Although we have no idea how the final bill will turn out, a few pro-RKBA provisions are in the bill, including repealing the interstate handgun sale ban, and strengthening FOPA (interstate transport bill).
I was hoping we all could call or write members of congress to do the following things.
1. Sponsor an amendment to include "ammunition feeding devices not prohibited by federal law" in FOPA (18 USC 926(a) ) and for LEOSA (18 USC 926 b and c ).
2. If you feel brave enough, lets see if they can extend the certification requirement in subsection c from 1 year to 2 years.
I want to know what you guys think about this because this would solve the magazine issue, and since FOPA is already on track to be enhanced with this bill, it's important to be sure they include "ammunition feeding devices" because they are not explicitly protected at this point in time.
I know that the ammo preemption was added in 2010 because a lot of people contacted congress over the New Jersey issue after the original bill was passed, and they listened. Should we try the same approach for magazines?
I was hoping we could try again.
The gun bill going through the senate right now is a great opportunity.
Although we have no idea how the final bill will turn out, a few pro-RKBA provisions are in the bill, including repealing the interstate handgun sale ban, and strengthening FOPA (interstate transport bill).
I was hoping we all could call or write members of congress to do the following things.
1. Sponsor an amendment to include "ammunition feeding devices not prohibited by federal law" in FOPA (18 USC 926(a) ) and for LEOSA (18 USC 926 b and c ).
2. If you feel brave enough, lets see if they can extend the certification requirement in subsection c from 1 year to 2 years.
I want to know what you guys think about this because this would solve the magazine issue, and since FOPA is already on track to be enhanced with this bill, it's important to be sure they include "ammunition feeding devices" because they are not explicitly protected at this point in time.
I know that the ammo preemption was added in 2010 because a lot of people contacted congress over the New Jersey issue after the original bill was passed, and they listened. Should we try the same approach for magazines?

Comment