Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 2/2/2011 11:03:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/2/2011 11:04:09 AM EDT by FLASH-HIDR]
Well, here it is folks; Better call your senators. Obamas lackeys are going to try and add a mag ban to a FAA bill being voted on in the Senate....


112th CONGRESS
1st Session

S. 32
To prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes.


IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
January 25 (legislative day, January 5), 2011

Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. KERRY, Mr. REED, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. FRANKEN, Mr. SCHUMER, and Mr. DURBIN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 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.'.
Link Posted: 2/2/2011 12:01:30 PM EDT
and so it begins............. let's hope this shit doesn't go very far.
Link Posted: 2/2/2011 12:05:10 PM EDT
What is your’s sources? I can’t find anything about it! When is the vote?
Link Posted: 2/2/2011 12:17:03 PM EDT
How will they prove if a hi cap mag was purchased before the bill? should I keep my receipts?


this is ludicrous. next they will be restricting how much ammo you can have on hand...
Link Posted: 2/2/2011 12:26:56 PM EDT
Originally Posted By gundam999:
What is your’s sources? I can’t find anything about it! When is the vote?


These are basically my thoughts on the matter. I'm calling BS on this one. First, this is HR 308, which is a stand-alone bill. It would be much more useful if you could quote the actual section of this FAA bill that the committee amended.

If democrats really have successfully amended this bill during committee,The NRA would have something on it, and I'm sure that there are a few gun-rights supporters on whatever committee this is who would leak this. So far, nothing. The 3 biggest pieces of news are the upcoming saiga 12 ban, HR 308, and the (IMHO dubious) newsweek article that says that Obama will begin to push gun control in coming weeks. A reverting to pre-2004 magazine limits would overshadow all those issues because they affect far more gun owners, and because this has a much better chance of passing.

On a side note, We might actually have reason to be optimistic about this upcoming saiga 12 ban. It's not really a ban, but an ATF study to determine whether the Saiga 12, as imported, is a "sporting" weapon. Previous studies of this nature were conducted on rifles, and greatly expanded the scope of banned weapons simply because they only qualified competitive target shooting and hunting as "sports", and they discounted "plinking" as a sport. But, they also noted that tactical/practical shooting has become far more popular in recent years and may actually decide to say that a shotgun is a sporting rifle if it is particularly suited to be used in tactical/practical shooting.

That means that they may apply this definition to rifles, which may mean that we can once again import double-stacked AK rifles, like the MAK90 (but the mak90 is banned for reasons other than the GCA of 1968)
Link Posted: 2/2/2011 12:33:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/2/2011 12:33:29 PM EDT by HeavyMetal]
This stuff belongs in GD-HM
Top Top