Has anyone actually read the new proposal?

While I was torn between posting it here or in the semi auto section, I felt more would reply here since it could effect all of us at some point in time.

I have not found a copy of the proposed bill by Ms McCarthy but got a lengthy email about it from a friend in VA. If what he sent is correct, the bill will be more restrictive than any legislation thus far.

Certainly I am against any gun control legislation, we all should be concerned about this potentially restrictive law being enacted.

I would like to see a copy of the bill for myself, although already against it or any other restrictive firearm bills.

And this is not a political thread but an informative thread.

Ok, I located a copy as released late last night and I think each of us here should write or call your area congressman to ask this bill be voted down.

It will hurt all of us.

While I don't have a need to read the bill to know I am against it, I will be looking it up after work today. Its always a good idea to read the bill just so we can articulate why we are against it.

__________________
J.D. Roy

I doubt it gets out of committee since her party has been neutered in the House.

Post a link?

__________________
Regards,
Lee Jarrett

I have seen the draft... Upon enactment date bans the sale or transfer of any mag, belt, drum, over 10rd capacity. Possession is ok as long as manufactured before enactment of bill. Exempts .22 rifle tube magazines.

Is this new released Bill any different?

Lee,

This is the closest I can find so far. It's her letter to colleagues and a draft copy of the bill.

http://carolynmccarthy.house.gov/upl...azine_bill.pdf

Hopefully someone can dig up a copy with HR# on it so we can refer to it properly when we write/call our congresscritters.

John

__________________
Age + Treachery = JohnnieB

Your link is where I read it from as well.

When does a Bill get an exact number?

We certainly new this was coming. I was surprised that it took all the way down the first paragraph to see the word(s) "commonsense".



WG840

__________________
Freedom above all else.

Note that she combined two words. She does not know what common sense means due to her narrow minded focus on guns. I am deeply sorry that her husband was killed on a train (subway) but had he had a firearm, he may could have prevented the others from dying.

Mrs McCarthy blames the guns instead of the person using the gun and has done nothing toward keeping criminals in jail.

It bothers me that now a similar bill is being introduced in the Senate (by another Democrat no less).

When will people learn the problem is not with guns but people?

What would have happened if the individual had ran his Chevy Nova at sixty miles per hour into the crowd of 250 people? Would cars be banned or just Chevy Novas? As an expert in accident reconstruction, I can assure all that more than six would have been killed.

these moonbats make my head hurt.
I can understand her emotional motivations since she lost a loved one to a shooting. However, why is it that they seem to gravitate to the school of thought that banning something will stop the madness.
Banning Alcohol in the prohibition era gave rise to the mob while everyone still managed to tip a glass.
bans fail.

Violence is a strange issue. Very few people seem to embrace it as though they think it is possible to outrun their own rectums. Violence is a part of human nature.
Be it that you draw a weapon and directly employ it, or dial 911 for an LEO to do the same is really quite irrelevant. Someone leaves feet first. That is the reality of aggression and like it or not, every last one of us faces the possibility of its use somewhere in our lifetimes.
Had McCarthy's late husband realized this prior to his unfortunate demise, perhaps he'd have been prepared with the tools necessary to save himself.
Even if he could not be made to subscribe to this school of thought, has someone else embraced the unsavory reality, again he might still be by her side.

lets dive yet a little deeper into this reality, from the perspective of a gunman. There you are looking upon a crowd about to commit an inhuman act of irrational violence. Who will you kill first? ... why the armed of course... but who are they?
We have CCW folks, with it we have the ability to make at least some of them think twice. the problem is, there are not enough of us to ensure the odds that resistance will be available to anyone who would attempt these acts.
Stop keeping this right to yourself. Get you, your family, and as many of your friends trained and permitted as you can, everywhere you can.
if we can get just 10% of the population on board. this fashion of madness WILL go out of style.

__________________
it just needs more voltage

Tis in the NRA Grassroots alert e mail. Yet another reason to join the NRA.

NRA-ILA :: Tucson Tragedy Prompts Renewed Calls For Gun Control

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

My best guess is that most on here are NRA members now. A few may not be and a few might favor GOA but in my opinion, GOA has done nothing compared to the NRA. I am not agreeing with all the NRA has done or how they spend the money. Their successes out number their misdeeds and it is the successes we look for.

Was for the folks we knocked off the fence. Just kidding.

__________________
Still Running Against the Wind

CNN has a Poll running right now...so far the Anti's are winning.

CNN.com - Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News

of course ... because its CNN

__________________
it just needs more voltage

Our politicians seem to forget that these laws only affect the law abiding; the criminal will always have the means to get any weapon or accessory they want on the black market.

Banning the "sale or transfer" would be much more restrictive than banning future manufacture as the last one did. That could put the business plans of all the magazine hoarders in jeapordy unless they want to sell them unlawfully. As for myself, I have only squirreled away a double lifetime supply for personal use or burial at sea.

Can you say "blackmarket"?

__________________
James L. "Jim" Rhiner

And how exactly will this be enforced. I know quite a few cops and they are pretty busy with their "frequent flyers." Don't reckon they want to pencil me in on the dance card. I have AR's and mags galore marked "for LE/Export only", are they banned even if they are made before? Puhleese, make it stop. Joe

__________________
Wisdom chases me; I'm faster

The Bill has now been numbered and it is officially H.R. 308.

Read the co-sponsors here:

URGENT: Anti-second amendment H.R. 308 Introduced to The House | NowPublic News Coverage

Let's just suppose the government bans high cap mags? Or even semi-automatic weapons? or any other firearm?
How do they intend on "enforcing" this ban? Legit gun owners most likely are not going to be flocking to turn in ANYTHING...especially with things getting more and more creepy every day.
The government does not have the financial or manpower resources to effectively "enforce" any legislation like this, which would probably be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court.
You might not be able go buy them at a gun show, but they'll still be out there.
Any legislation at this juncture would just be nothing more than rhetoric and while we should always be alert on such things. The possibility of this actually getting anywhere right now I give as about as much of a possibility of three feet of snow in the devil's front yard.

__________________
The Last Standing Knight

ixnay ... ixnay weve had snow in weird places this year ... dont tempt the almighty

__________________
it just needs more voltage

I've sent emails to my congressman and both senators urging them to vote against this knee jerk reaction, hope you will too.

Yes, I called it "unlawfully".

There is a video of her on you-tube. She sponsored a bill to ban guns with barrel shrouds. The interviewer keeps after her to find out if she knows what a barrel shroud is. She finally admits she does not. It is worth watching. I am not sure if posting a link would be alright. But if you go to you-tube and search" barrel shroud" it is the first one. A classic example of a clue less politician.

The government has a special website that you can use to check the current status of any bill. The status can change from day to day.

Go to
THOMAS (Library of Congress)
Click on "Bill Number"
Type in "HR308"
Click on "Search"

good lead and easy to surf around to see the full list of bills.
quite a few bills for both sides here

__________________
it just needs more voltage

Oh great now I have to worry about them banning my Chevy Nova.

Precisely. That she didn't just crawl into a hole after this embarrassing episode aired suggests to me that she is as thick-witted as thick-skinned. I suppose that she is recognized as such by her "colleagues", and has earned their disdain, or so one would hope. I've never heard her name attached to or associated with any serious or significant legislation --- tax or campaign finance reform, international treaties, anything of broad reach or profound change, etc. She's apparently a one-trick-pony, with nothing to offer but misguided attacks on gun owners. Considering her tragic personal loss to a deranged killer, you'd think maybe she'd be advocating for better mental health care, instead of ghoulishly attempting to exploit a similar tragedy in Tucson. At least she's been smart enough to leave "barrel shrouds" off her current list of allegedly objectionable firearm's features.

Please note that this bill has over 50 sponsors in the House. It will get more votes than that once out of committee.

All the gun violence and police officers being shot is drawing a lot of media attention and ruining the image the public has of gun owners.

I think you are correct Oldman45. Especially since the focus of the Nationalized Press and others has NOT been on the criminals but on the alleged unreasonableness of legitimate firearms owners for not rolling over on new gun control laws. It's a given that the national LEO organizations will toe the line and publicly support additional legislation.

For being a random event the timing of the tragedy sure took the wind out of the new Republicans sails and was probably the only way gun control would come back on the table this year.

Yep. Someone in authority said the President needed a good tragedy to boost his ratings and popularity. This may have done it.

Notice that he is about to launch his re-election campaign. Great timing.

Does anybody have some good talking points/responses to address this topic?

When I sometimes comment on various news sites or am talking to somebody, I'd like to know some good arguments to raise.

I know it's just a stupid idea, but I'd rather have inciteful comments.

__________________
"... shall not be infringed."

[QUOTE=bitstream;135788623

I know it's just a stupid idea, but I'd rather have inciteful comments.[/QUOTE]

It probably is just a stupid idea to prefer "inciteful" comments. You, and we, will doubtless be better served if you offer insightful comments, such as pointing out that Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy's husband and son and the other victims of the "Long Island Railroad shootings" had been, contrary to the Constitution, deprived of their right to tools of self-defense and were thus helpless victims of a wanton, deranged killer, the capacity of whose magazines was immaterial to the outcome .

You might point out that magazine capacity, large, or small, can't be shown to be a significant factor in the lethality of any known "shooting spree", and that it is merely a canard to blame inanimate objects for the criminal behavior of insane individuals.

Come to think of it, pointing out these facts, and the illogic of blaming things rather than insane behavior, might be considered inciteful in some quarters....