PDA

View Full Version : Gun control coming to the House floor in November?


buzz_knox
October 16, 2008, 08:37 AM
Rick DeMilt, VP at FNH, gave an interview in which he discussed a bill to ban the 5.7 round and pistol that is currently in committee and is expected to come out for a vote when Congress comes back in session. Anyone heard anything about it?

http://www.tacticalgunfan.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=331&Itemid=64

Technosavant
October 16, 2008, 10:34 AM
That's news to me. If they could get a new gun control law passed, though, I can't imagine that they'd stop with just the Five-SeveN. It would likely be rolled into a larger bill, like a permanent reauthorization and expansion of the AWB. Going through all that just for ONE handgun that isn't even all that terribly popular just doesn't seem worth the effort for them (well, they'd do it, but if they can get something through, I see them going for more than just that).

Glenn E. Meyer
October 16, 2008, 11:09 AM
From Thomas.gov

H.R.1784
Title: To protect the Nation's law enforcement officers by banning the Five-seveN Pistol and 5.7 x 28mm SS190 and SS192 cartridges, testing handguns and ammunition for capability to penetrate body armor, and prohibiting the manufacture, importation, sale, or purchase of such handguns or ammunition by civilians.
Sponsor: Rep Engel, Eliot L. [NY-17] (introduced 3/29/2007) Cosponsors (12)
Latest Major Action: 4/17/2008 House committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Subcommittee Hearings Held.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY AS OF:
3/29/2007--Introduced.

Protect Law Enforcement Armor Act or the PLEA Act - Amends the federal criminal code to expand the definition of "armor piercing ammunition" to include a projectile that: (1) may be used in a handgun; and (2) the Attorney General determines to be capable of penetrating body armor.

Directs the Attorney General to promulgate standards for the uniform testing of projectiles against Body Armor Exemplar (i.e., body armor that the Attorney General determines meets minimum standards for the protection of law enforcement officers), taking into account variations in performance related to the type of handgun used, the length of the barrel, the amount and kind of powder used to propel the projectile, and the projectile's design.

Prohibits the manufacture, sale, possession, or transfer of the Fabrique Nationale Herstal Five-SeveN Pistol, 5.7 x 28mm SS190 and SS192 cartridges, or any other handgun that uses armor piercing ammunition, except: (1) where manufactured and sold exclusively to U.S. military, law enforcement, or intelligence agencies; and (2) by a licensed manufacturer or contractor for the purpose of examining and testing to determine whether such prohibition applies.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d110:1:./temp/~bdcZBk:@@@D&summ2=m&|/bss/110search.html|

ALL ACTIONS:
3/29/2007:
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
4/20/2007:
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
4/17/2008:
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
3/30/2007:
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E724-725)

--------

Doesn't sound like it is coming up for a vote but what do I know about government - I ain't no PLUMBER!

Bartholomew Roberts
October 16, 2008, 03:05 PM
In practical effect, this bill is much the same as Kennedy's ammo ban. In order to ban the ammunition, it must:

1. Be capable of penetrating a particular vest selected by the Attorney General

2. Have handguns in that caliber

This bill is written so vaguely that the Attorney General (a Presidential appointee) would have massive discretion to ban ammo. If he chooses a Level 4 vest with SAPI plates as the standard then several exotic combos that have literally never been used in crimes will be the only thing banned. If he selects a Level 1 soft vest then almost all ammo is banned.

The good news is this has almost no chance of passing. There is unlikely to be a gun control vote before November and not much time to have one afterwards.

The bad news is if it did pass an as-yet unnamed AG would be setting the standard that other AGs would probably continue to follow.

Musketeer
October 16, 2008, 03:32 PM
Enough holes to march a parade through.

All legislation should be assumed broken until absolutely proven otherwise. At that point it should be simply suspected of being broken!

I agree with Heinlein, there should be two house of Congress. One only passes laws with no less than a 2/3 majority needed. The other only repeals laws with a 1/3 majority needed to be repealed. It makes it very hard to pass stupid legislation and very easy to repeal it.

buzz_knox
October 16, 2008, 03:59 PM
If he selects a Level 1 soft vest then almost all ammo is banned.


This could be the best thing to happen to this country. It would expose the gun grabbers for what they are, and infuriate even the hunters.

44 AMP
October 16, 2008, 07:59 PM
In the gun vs armor race, the gun always wins. Mounted knights of old, modern tanks, police vests, it matters not. There is always a gun powerful enough (or a bow) to penetrate the armor.

This is a bad concept and would make a bad law, especially as open ended as it is written. Isn't already a crime to shoot police officers (vests or no vests?)? If that isn't enough law to prevent it happening, what good does one more law do? And what about icepicks and screwdrivers?

IZinterrogator
October 16, 2008, 08:11 PM
So let me get this straight, they're attempting to ban one round that is already restricted to law enforcement and another that was discontinued in favor of a better design... why are we paying these people? Oh, and it bans a pistol while keeping around the carbine that makes the round much more effective. Brilliant reasoning there, Mr. Engel.

Musketeer
October 17, 2008, 07:56 AM
So let me get this straight, they're attempting to ban one round that is already restricted to law enforcement and another that was discontinued in favor of a better design... why are we paying these people?

Read closer... Just like the AWB was to just ban the Tec 9 and AK yet included a whole host of other items this refers to the 5.7mm in particular and ANYTHING ELSE WHICH MEETS THEIR CRITERIA.

IZinterrogator
October 17, 2008, 09:24 AM
I got that, Musketeer, but my point is that the Tec-9 and the AK-47 were available to the public. SS190 and SS192 aren't, yet he used them as the focal point of the bill. This congressman just threw out a buzzword and called it legislation, which is showing some real intellectual laziness.

buzz_knox
October 17, 2008, 09:47 AM
This congressman just threw out a buzzword and called it legislation, which is showing some real intellectual laziness.

It's not laziness, it's politics as usual. You take the cause de jure ("officer safety" in this case) and wrap your offensive legislation around it.

Fjolnirsson
October 17, 2008, 10:13 PM
Amends the federal criminal code to expand the definition of "armor piercing ammunition" to include a projectile that: (1) may be used in a handgun; and (2) the Attorney General determines to be capable of penetrating body armor.

Right there is the key. If it will penetrate the armor they choose, it's gone, and the peasants aren't allowed to own it. How long do you think it will take them to hot load a round to get it through some crappy armor? It's another end run to ban handguns, that's all.

44 AMP
October 18, 2008, 01:31 AM
Don't bother with reality, just give the Attorney General the legal power to determine what is legal for private citizens to own and all will be well.

We know what is best and what is right, you don't. Just give us the power and we will do all that hard stuff, like thinking, for you. Honest!

These people never give up. And neither should we!