Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48

Thread: Another Attempt at Lautenberg Style Ban

  1. #1
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,612

    Another Attempt at Lautenberg Style Ban

    Here we go again -

    Democratic senators offer gun control amendment for cybersecurity bill



    The amendment was sponsored by Democratic Sens. Frank Lautenberg (N.J.), Barbara Boxer (Calif.), Jack Reed (R.I.), Bob Menendez (N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Schumer and Dianne Feinstein (Calif.). S.A. 2575 would make it illegal to transfer or possess large capacity feeding devices such as gun magazines, belts, feed stripes and drums of more than 10 rounds of ammunition with the exception of .22 caliber rim fire ammunition.The amendment is identical to a separate bill sponsored by Lautenberg. Feinstein was the sponsor of the assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004.


    http://thehill.com/video/senate/2406...ontrol-measure
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 07-26-2012 at 10:39 PM.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Lasjayhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    294

  3. #3
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,612
    I'm sorry, but another what?

    Your link does refer to some thoughts on the subject, but is definitely not another amendment or proposed bill.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Schumer defended the Brady law and assault weapons ban on the floor Thursday evening, perhaps in preparation for the coming fight with Republicans and gun rights activists...from the link (I have no doubt as to its veracity)...

    Too bad the FBI report prepared for the review of the brady bill re-vote conflicts with Schumer's conclusions ...

    Ahhhh, facts facts facts facts .... gotta love 'em.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787

    S.A. 2575 - Amendment to Cybersecurity Bill Restricts You to 10 Rounds or Less

    Hello, folks. I wrote the following letter to my Congressmen, urging them to oppose S.A 2575, a measure tacked on to the Cybersecurity Bill by Feinstein and other bleeders. The measure would make it illegal to posses a magazine which holds more than 10 rounds.

    Article. Link to my OP on another forum.

    Please feel free to copy it and send it to your own Congressmen, after modifying it to suit your own background, of course.

    Dear Congressman X:

    Like many here in Colorado, I was appalled by the Aurora shooting. As a retired military veteran, however, I was equally appalled to read about S.A. 2575, which would make it illegal for me to carry more than 10 rounds of ammunition in defense of myself and my loved ones.

    I am appalled because S.R. 2575 is illegal, unethical, and counterproductive to our free society. In fact, it makes shootings like the one in Aurora more likely to happen, as well as more likely to result in greater losses of life.

    As a graduate of Virginia Tech, I have a vested interest in this issue. I was deeply moved by that massacre, and thought, "if only I had been there, I could have curbed at least some of the loss of life."

    "How?" you might ask. Simple: I carry a firearm everywhere I go, and am well-trained in its use.

    As a military officer, I also took the same oath of office as you, Congressman. It reads, "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

    Our Second Amendment became a part of our Constitution when the Bill of Rights was passed. It specifically states: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

    I may be retired, but my oath never expires. It requires me to protect and defend our Constitution, and S.A. 2575 is a threat to our Constitutional rights and freedoms. Those who propose or support S.A. 2575 are the domestic enemies about which our Founding Fathers spoke. One cannot support S.A. 2575 without directly violating one's oath of office.

    Furthermore, this line of effort is counter-productive. Reducing the number of rounds in a magazine makes it increasingly unlikely that an honest, law-abiding citizen will be able to stop a shooter such as James Holmes, clad as he was in body armor.

    I'd like to share with you some facts and myths about "high capacity" firearms:

    Myth: High capacity guns lead to more deadly shootings

    Fact: Much of this myth comes from the fact that the general availability of high-capacity handguns briefly preceded the rise in the crack cocaine trade, which brought a new kind of violence in local drug wars.408

    Fact: The number of shots fired by criminals has not changed significantly even with the increased capacity of handguns and other firearms. Indeed, the number of shots from revolvers (all with a 6-8 round capacity) and semi-automatics were about the same – 2.04 vs. 2.53.409 In a crime or gun battle, there is seldom time or need to shoot more.

    Fact: Fatal criminal shootings declined from 4.3% to 3.3% from 1974 through 1995, when ownership of semi-automatics and large capacity handguns were rising at their fastest rate.410 Fatal shootings of police officers declined sharply from 1988 through 1993.411

    Fact: Drug dealers tend to be “more deliberate in their efforts to kill their victims by shooting them multiple times.”412

    Footnotes:
    408 Targeting Guns, Gary Kleck, 1997.

    409 Urban firearm deaths: A five-year perspective, Michael McGonigal, John Cole, William Schwab, Donald Kauder, Michael Rotondo, Peter Angood, Journal of Trauma, 1993.

    410 FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1966-1995.

    411 Firearm injury from crime, Marianne Zawitz, 1996, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

    412 Epidemiological changes in gunshot wounds in Washington D.C, Webster, Champion, Gainer and Sykes, Archives of Surgery, 1992.

    Source: Gun Facts 6.1 by Guy Smith.

    In light of the above facts, and based on my 23 years of experience carrying a firearm, I urge you, Congressman, to oppose S.A. 2575 and any similar legislation. They do NOT work, and are counterproductive to both our safety and security.

    Reducing the ability of honest, law-abiding citizens to defend themselves as necessary is NOT a viable solution. It is a knee-jerk reaction at best, and a mindless, counter-productive violation of our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

    Thank you for your time.

    Sincerely,
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  6. #6
    Activist Member nuc65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,121

    Senate goes after guns again, hiding it in the cybersecurity bill...

    When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force.

    excerpt By Marko Kloos (http://munchkinwrangler.wordpress.com/?s=major+caudill)

  7. #7
    Regular Member PFC HALE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    earth
    Posts
    492
    yet another attempt at making a law that criminals wont follow....

    @facepalm@

  8. #8
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297
    Just how the f * * k does magazine capacity relate to cybersecurity?
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 07-28-2012 at 05:46 AM.
    Nevada Campus Carry: The Movement Continues
    http://nvcampuscarry.blogspot.com

  9. #9
    Regular Member PFC HALE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    earth
    Posts
    492
    another law criminals wont follow when buying high cap mags illegally...

  10. #10
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    Sounds like I need to stock up on mags.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,929
    Oh good gravy...

    Schumer defended the Brady law and assault weapons ban on the floor Thursday evening, perhaps in preparation for the coming fight with Republicans and gun rights activists.

    Schumer suggested that both the left and right find common ground.

    “Maybe we could come together on guns if each side gave some,” Schumer said.
    Translation: "If those bitter clingers would just stop resisting and go along with us!"

    #@%& you, Chuck Schumer. I don't want the government telling me what is "reasonable" or "rational" for me to own. Get bent.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Be interesting to see who votes for the amendment which is DOA ... I doubt they'll even put this up for a vote.

    No surprise about feinstein, boxer, etc who are likely russian agents (how else can one explain their votes).
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 07-27-2012 at 10:25 AM.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Jay Jacobs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Canton, GA
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by PistolPackingMomma View Post
    #@%& you, Chuck Schumer. I don't want the government telling me what is "reasonable" or "rational" for me to own.

    Ditto, who keeps re-electing that loon anyway?

  14. #14
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Jay Jacobs View Post
    Ditto, who keeps re-electing that loon anyway?
    The same people that elected Bloomberg, probably.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358

    Angry

    Some things, such as a basic right, ought not be compromised upon. The dangerous gun control crowd asking for common ground is like dealing with a rapist. Give any ground and you're gonna get raped eventually. The older I get, the less patience I find within myself for these traitors. They need to get real jobs; time to grow up you loons! The real world isn't 100% safe and it never will be, deal with it.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Jay Jacobs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Canton, GA
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by WhistlingJack View Post
    I get so sick of asshats like Schumer saying we need middle ground and compromise.

    --Moderator edited--


    See how that works?
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 07-28-2012 at 06:00 AM.

  17. #17
    Regular Member DocWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    1,968
    Quote Originally Posted by WhistlingJack View Post
    I get so sick of asshats like Schumer saying we need middle ground and compromise.

    --moderator edited--


    See how that works?
    Have you seen his wife....lol
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 07-28-2012 at 06:01 AM.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Griz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    300
    Jack can close his eyes. It's the point that counts

  19. #19
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Figures they would try it.....Not surprising....I'm sure this is just the tip of the iceberg for the next several months! Idiots!

    Jack....I let you have that job with Schumer's wife!

    "I can live for two weeks on a good compliment."
    ~Mark Twain

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358
    Here, here! Thanks for stepping up to take one for the team.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post
    this is just the tip
    Quote Originally Posted by Griz View Post
    It's the point that counts
    Quote Originally Posted by JmE View Post
    take one for the team.

  22. #22
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Ahhhh, facts facts facts facts .... gotta love 'em.
    I do. Dems don't.

    By the way, I posted at length to this, here.

    I didn't see your thread when I started my own Grapeshot. Please merge the threads. Thanks.

    And this one. Duplicate threads are a hindrance to forum members.
    Last edited by since9; 07-28-2012 at 12:33 AM.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    When the amendment says "shall not be infringed," there is no room for middle ground. In fact, there's no room for any infringement whatsoever.

    That's not an extreme pro-gun stance. That's the Second Amendment's stance: "the right to keep [own] and bear [carry] arms shall not be infringed."

    We need to call the antis bluffs. When they start speaking of middle ground, we need to reiterate the second amendment as is, often enough so that somehow, it finally gets through their ears, or at the very least, the ears of the idiots who vote these idiots into office.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    We need to call the antis bluffs. When they start speaking of middle ground, we need to reiterate the second amendment as is, often enough
    Absolutely!

    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    so that somehow, it finally gets through their ears, or at the very least, the ears of the idiots who vote these idiots into office.
    I think getting through to the voters has more potential than trying to get through to the hardcore antis. I don't think that the most stanch of the anti-RKBA politicians are honestly motivated by what they publicly proclaim when espousing the most outrageous of what the spew forth. Rather, I believe it is the power that they truly crave. They don't fear what will happen to Joe or Jane Smith. They fear that their grasp on power is tenuous as long as the people retain the means to overthrow them. Much as a sociopath might lie without remorse and may even believe their own lies when it suits them; so it's the same with the most rabid and public gun grabbers. The rank and file anti, however, are the "true believers." They operate from, perhaps, a more noble fear than that of their anti-rights puppeteers. Still, it's all fear based to some degree. At the upper-most tier, they fear losing power and at the lowest of tiers they fear losing their false sense of security; i.e. their delusion of power.

    Even amongst gun owners, there are fear based beliefs, albeit more honest about motivations than antis, as to how far an individual's right to keep and bear arms can be restricted. It appears sometimes arbitrary to me (one person's acceptable restriction is another's infringement). But, I'll leave that contentious line of thought hanging right there... We don't need even more division in the ranks of gun owners.

    We ought try to get through to the gun owners that might support the more damaging infringements first. Then, we should attempt to get through to the lowest tier of antis and work our way up. At some point along the line, we'll experience no return on our investment of energy. That is where it's no longer about delusions of safety but about power and retaining it by any means necessary. With people from that point on up, we aren't going to have any real success getting through as they, deep down, know that their fight isn't motivated by what they claim. These people aren't mistaken... they are plainly malevolent and nonredeemable.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358
    And Jack... remember... pics or it didn't happen!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •