1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

New magazine ban just introduce in congress

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by Brian in Oregon, Apr 19, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Anti-Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)<br>
    <br>
    HR 1859 IH<br>
    <br>
    110th CONGRESS<br>
    <br>
    1st Session<br>
    <br>
    H. R. 1859<br>
    <br>
    To reinstate the prohibition on the possession or transfer of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and to strengthen that prohibition.<br>
    <br>
    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES<br>
    <br>
    April 16, 2007<br>
    <br>
    Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary<br>
    <br>
    A BILL<br>
    <br>
    To reinstate the prohibition on the possession or transfer of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and to strengthen that prohibition.<br>
    <br>
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,<br>
    <br>
    SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.<br>
    <br>
    This Act may be cited as the `Anti-Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act of 2007'.<br>
    <br>
    SEC. 2. REINSTATEMENT OF REPEALED CRIMINAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES.<br>
    <br>
    (a) Reinstatement of Provisions Wholly Repealed- Sections 921(a)(31) and 922(w), and the last sentence of section 923(i) of title 18, United States Code, as in effect just before the repeal made by section 110105(2) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, are hereby enacted into law.<br>
    <br>
    (b) Reinstatement of Provision Partially Repealed- Section 924(a)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the following:<br>
    <br>
    `(B) knowingly violates subsection (a)(4), (f), (k), (r), or (w) of section 922;'.<br>
    <br>
    SEC. 3. STRENGTHENING THE BAN ON THE POSSESSION OR TRANSFER OF A LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICE.<br>
    <br>
    (a) Ban on Transfer of Semiautomatic Assault Weapon With Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device-<br>
    <br>
    (1) IN GENERAL- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after subsection (z) the following:<br>
    <br>
    `(aa) It shall be unlawful for any person to transfer a semiautomatic assault weapon with a large capacity ammunition feeding device.'.<br>
    <br>
    (2) DEFINITION OF SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPON- Section 921(a)(30) and Appendix A of section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as in effect just before the repeal made by section 110105(2) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, are hereby enacted into law.<br>
    <br>
    (3) PENALTIES- Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:<br>
    <br>
    `(8) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(aa) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.'.<br>
    <br>
    (b) Certification Requirement-<br>
    <br>
    (1) IN GENERAL- Section 922(w) of such title, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended-- <br>
    <br>
    (A) in paragraph (3)--<br>
    <br>
    (i) by adding `or' at the end of subparagraph (B); and<br>
    <br>
    (ii) by striking subparagraph (C) and redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (C); and<br>
    <br>
    (B) by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following:<br>
    <br>
    `(4) It shall be unlawful for a licensed manufacturer, licensed importer, or licensed dealer who transfers a large capacity ammunition feeding device that was manufactured on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection, to fail to certify to the Attorney General before the end of the 60-day period that begins with the date of the transfer, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Attorney General, that the device was manufactured on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection.'.<br>
    <br>
    (2) PENALTIES- Section 924(a) of such title, as amended by subsection (a)(3) of this section, is amended by adding at the end the following:<br>
    <br>
    `(9) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(w)(4) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.'.<br>
     
  2. GunDr

    GunDr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,913
    When is this idiot going to get her head out of her ass.

    I've been wondering all week how this Cho got a weapon, when the courts found him mentally unstable.

    Well, I guess THAT blame falls on the gov'ts; state and federal, for failing to share this information. We all know know that he falsely filled out the 4473, but do the criminals follow the law?

    Maybe McCarthy should look at the jobs they're suppose to be doing. Making sure the laws that they have written, ARE FOLLOWED!!
     
  3. slide action

    slide action Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    4,916
    Like all liberal dumbo idiots she is pushing a political agenda and exploiting the Va Tech shootings to use as an avenue to pursue the same. Notice the Vague language for "high capacity" in the bill. This is done in order for liberals to make it mean whatever they want it to!
     
  4. Mac V

    Mac V Guest

    <blockquote>"I've been wondering all week how this Cho got a weapon, when the courts found him mentally unstable."</blockquote>

    Read the article you posted...then don't blame just the Feds...blame the State, the whiners who constantly complain about having to pay adequate taxes and the Republicans who are constantly fighting to keep the Federal government out of the State's business...

    From the link above...

    <blockquote>"Virginia State Police send information on prohibited buyers to the federal government. They maintain that the sale was legal under state law and would have been barred only if the justice had committed Cho to a psychiatric hospital. Barnett ordered outpatient treatment instead...

    <I>The state uses a slightly different standard than the federal government, barring sales to individuals who have been judged "mentally incapacitated."</I>

    George Burke, a spokesman for Democratic Rep. Carolyn McCarthy...of New York, said millions of criminal and mental-health records are not accessible to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, mostly because state and local governments lack the money to submit the records."</blockquote>

    Mike
     
  5. Ken X

    Ken X TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    535
    Sorry Boys, after this thing happened, it IS going to pass!
     
  6. EDGARMCM

    EDGARMCM TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    155
    Like another law is going to stop this kind of incident.
    Is not it already against the law to murder another person?

    Don't we already have laws agains illegal drugs? We all know how well these laws have stopped the drug problem.

    Didn't we at one time have prohibition? And that worked so well that one East Coast family made millions bootleging and became a prominent political family.

    They can make all the laws they want but those determined to get a firearm will get it and the rest of us will be defenseless to protect ouselves.
     
  7. Phil E

    Phil E TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    390
    That piece by Steve Chapman is eerily reasonable and rational, in the midst of all the soap-box grandstanding we're seeing. Phil E
     
  8. GunDr

    GunDr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,913
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryCe4yoRVaA

    Here is MacCarthy on TV with Tucker Carlson, trying to legislate something she knows nothing about.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.