House Judiciary Committee Sends Magazine Ban to the Floor for Vote

Well, there is this link...

https://youtu.be/sXJSB5uTiPw

Warning the thing is about 8 hours long, the gun stuff starts at about the 3 hour 10 minute mark.

The following bills are discussed:
HR 1236 – "Extreme Risk Protection Order Act of 2019" aka the Red Flag Gun Confiscation bill.
HR 1186 - "Keep Americans Safe Act" aka the high capacity mag bill (10 rounds or less)
HR 2708 - "Disarm Hate Act" makes you ineligible to buy a gun if you’ve been convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime.
 
Looks like HR 1186.
Click to expand...

The Keep Americans Safe Act. I do so love their naming schemes.

It shall be unlawful for a person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, a large capacity ammunition feeding device.
Click to expand...

So, there's no provision for people to keep existing magazines. At least they're not being coy about it any more.
 
Text of bill:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1186/text

The list of sponsors (no surprises) is here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1186/all-info

The companion bill in the Senate is S. 447

It looks like it will grandfather legally possessed magazines similar to the 1994 ban (see para (v)(2) right after the prohibition); however, new magazines will now require serial numbers. Also the usual carve outs from the law for retired LEOs and even campus police?
 
Last edited:
It looks like it will grandfather legally possessed magazines similar to the 1994 ban
Click to expand...

Sure they will in order to increase chances to ket the bill passed and signed. They can allways ban those grandfathered magazines at another date in the future.
 
Also the usual carve outs from the law for retired LEOs and even campus police?
Click to expand...

Shameful pandering. The campus language is kind of odd. Maybe the writers did not know that campus police that are sworn are the same as regular police?

I don't see this going anywhere in the next 14 months. But I am sure it will be talked about.
 
Roughly 14 months until the 2020 elections....

Along with Beto's fiery assurance "Hell yes, we're going to take away your AR-15s", Nadler & Co.'s obsessive intent vis a vis Gun Control Bills provides absolute assurance that gun control will factor significantly into the upcoming elections.

Many potential outcomes could influence positions over the next 14 months, including another mass shooting, but in one sense the continued lurch to the left by Democrats is encouraging. By competing to see who can announce or initiate the most Liberal Progressive gun control measures, candidates and their supporters such as Nadler ensure the rest of the ~330,000,000 American citizens understand exactly the end game gun control advocates have in mind.

More moderate Democrats are even now suggesting Beto has gone too far in saying out loud what many were only thinking. https://www.apnews.com/07f65423a9814f1b9279afd0fba0a50c

Future debate over House Judiciary Committee activities will further portray Democrats as full-throated, no holds barred, gun control (magazine control, ammunition control, etc.) zealots, which may well be a portrayal giving an advantage to Trump.

Tom Servo was right - they're not even trying to be coy about it any longer.
 
Future debate over House Judiciary Committee activities will further portray Democrats as full-throated, no holds barred, gun control (magazine control, ammunition control, etc.) zealots, which may well be a portrayal giving an advantage to Trump.
Click to expand...

I think you are ignoring the number of GOP who are also pretty full throated about things like UBC, RFL and even assault weapons bans..THEY are in a tough spot..support 'gun control' and alienate their base..ignore 'gun control' and alienate a big chunk of moderate, on the fence, voters.

trump needs to stay off TV and twitter bloviating about various things that do nothing but confuse the issue and cause his staff and other GOP to scramble to figure out what he's talking about.
 
"Hell yes, we're going to take away your AR-15s"
Click to expand...

Beto's plan is to take them by executive order. I'm kind of thinking it is one of those "Oh yeah, you and what army?" questions. It will be a bridge too far, not make through a court challenge and be completely unenforceable.
 
MTT TL said:
Beto's plan is to take them by executive order. I'm kind of thinking it is one of those "Oh yeah, you and what army?" questions. It will be a bridge too far, not make through a court challenge and be completely unenforceable.
Click to expand...

The Affordable Care Act was unconstitutional in several respects, and Roberts distinguished himself by treating it as a tax sometimes and a non-tax for other analyses. It violated peoples' freedoms of speech, religious practice and association, and it is still a political issue.

The National Recovery Act was unconstitutional, but that Sup Ct decision didn't stop FDR from undertaking a basic and longstanding change in the scope of federal government.

I don't note that in a hope that your observation is false, but to serve as context for a question. If The Robert Francis O'Rourke Hell Yes Act of 2021 is enacted but unconstitutional, will it matter if your rifles have been crushed by the time the Sup Ct decides the issue? I understand that this has the character of a thought exercise, but how interested will people be in a civil right to something they've already been compelled to give up?
 
Last edited:
I don't note that in a hope that your observation is false, but to as context for a question. If The Robert Francis O'Rourke Hell Yes Act of 2021 is enacted but unconstitutional, will it matter if your rifles have been crushed by the time the Sup Ct decides the issue? I understand that this has the character of a thought exercise, but how interested will people be in a civil right to something they've already been compelled to give up?
Click to expand...

Only those unlucky enough to caught in the first night of raids will be in that position. And maybe the second night. After that, it's gonna get bloody. Perhaps Mr O'Roarke is trying to start a civil war? Because that's how you get a civil war.

Or maybe he's both stupid and evil, and thinks only white gun owners and the police will be affected (and if they kill each other that's a good thing because he hates both)
 
zxcvbob said:
Only those unlucky enough to caught in the first night of raids will be in that position. And maybe the second night.
Click to expand...

Raids? Who needs those?

How many people would risk a 10 year imprisonment or six figure fine? Or even a simple "buy-back" of a soon to be illicit arm?

The ACA is still being litigated.
 
Perhaps Mr O'Roarke is trying to start a civil war? Because that's how you get a civil war.
Click to expand...

We're not the people we were 250 years ago. Sorry. The average gun owner has a family and a career, and he doesn't fancy having the ATF bulldoze his house or hold his family at gunpoint. He certainly doesn't want to go to prison and watch the media brand him a domestic terrorist.

A revolution would take leadership, organization, and will. Considering that the vast majority of gun owners can't even take five minutes to email their congressman about a bill, I find it hard to believe they're going to take up arms against the government.

That's just where we are.
 
Unfortunately, sad and true. A small minority that would be willing to take up arms against big brother would be put to rest rather quickly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top