House Judiciary Committee Sends Magazine Ban to the Floor for Vote

[Bartholomew Roberts]

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/go...an-last-night/

Last night the House Judiciary committee reported a magazine ban bill. It goes to the House floor for a vote where it is likely to pass. That leaves the Senate and White House as the next lines of defense.

[Tom Servo]

I've found several articles on it, but none give an actual bill number. 20 Internet Points to whomever can find it.

[zxcvbob]

"H.R.4062 - Blair Holt Firearm Owner Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2019"?

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-.../text?r=46&s=8

[BBarn]

Looks like HR 1186. Passed by Judiciary Committee 23 to 16 Tuesday the 10th.

[Onward Allusion]

<Duplicate>

[DaleA]

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.

[USNRet93]

Originally Posted by Bartholomew Roberts

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/go...an-last-night/

Last night the House Judiciary committee reported a magazine ban bill. It goes to the House floor for a vote where it is likely to pass. That leaves the Senate and White House as the next lines of defense.

Unless trump likes it, it won't even be read in the Senate...

[Tom Servo]

Looks like HR 1186.

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.

So, there's no provision for people to keep existing magazines. At least they're not being coy about it any more.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Text of bill:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-...bill/1186/text

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

[sigarms228]

It looks like it will grandfather legally possessed magazines similar to the 1994 ban

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.

[MTT TL]

Also the usual carve outs from the law for retired LEOs and even campus police?

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.

[Doc Intrepid]

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.

[USNRet93]

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.

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.

[MTT TL]

"Hell yes, we're going to take away your AR-15s"

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.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Originally Posted by USNRet93

I think you are ignoring the number of GOP who are also pretty full throated about things like UBC.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-.../1186/all-info

Yup, just look at all the Rs on that list.

[zukiphile]

Originally Posted by MTT TL

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.

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?

[zxcvbob]

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?

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)

[zukiphile]

Originally Posted by zxcvbob

Only those unlucky enough to caught in the first night of raids will be in that position. And maybe the second night.

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.

[Tom Servo]

Perhaps Mr O'Roarke is trying to start a civil war? Because that's how you get a civil war.

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.

[Don P]

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.

[rickyrick]

Gun owners will simply comply with gun laws as always. If you don’t, then you aren’t a law abiding citizen.
I don’t think they are trying to start a war with the political rhetoric, but I do believe that they are wishing to trigger extremist(s) into committing acts of political or hate related violence. I suspect that more tragedies are to come as the election heats up.

The repeated calls for civil war aren’t helping our cause either. On every political story, including those about gun control, there’s idiots in the comments calling for civil war... just adds to the image that gun owners are blood thirsty and itching for violence.

[zukiphile]

I don’t think they are trying to start a war with the political rhetoric, but I do believe that they are wishing to trigger extremist(s) into committing acts of political or hate related violence. I suspect that more tragedies are to come as the election heats up.

If shooters were motivated by fears of rifle confiscation, that might make sense. The Dayton shooter seems to have been troubled by many of life's challenges, but without a doctrinal motive. The El Paso shooter was a zero population growth environmentalist.

The reason debate participants would offer strident gun confiscation rhetoric is the "hold my beer" phenomenon present when a couple dozen people think they have a shot at winning the allegiance of a small but important activist audience. If Amy Klobuchar quietly affirms that she is for confiscation, she is one-upped by RFO, who says the same thing more loudly and crudely. If you are the sort of emotionally driven activist looking for the least tolerance of opposing views, you won't stop to wonder why RFO didn't take that position running against Ted Cruz. You'll just notice his unreserved demeanor.

[zxcvbob]

The repeated calls for civil war aren’t helping our cause either. On every political story, including those about gun control, there’s idiots in the comments calling for civil war... just adds to the image that gun owners are blood thirsty and itching for violence.

I'm not calling for one. I'm predicting one. And the first shots won't be fired by us.

[BBarn]

There have been a number of countries where guns were banned and or confiscated in the last 100 years. In every case I know of the majority of citizens turned in their applicable arms, most of the citizens choosing to remain law abiding.

[rickyrick]

zxcvbob,

Wasn’t directed at you, but your post did remind me of the nonstop calls for civil war by news-comments-trolls