If the Democrats Win....
- Thread starter ltstanfo
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2005
- Messages
- 5,144
- Reaction score
- 1,243
Ah yes more fear mongering from the Republicans.
Remember last time? There was NO bill put up in this nature by the Dems. Instead the Republicans put up a bill and advertised they had to do this because the Dems were shutting down free speech.. Right. :roll:
Remember last time? There was NO bill put up in this nature by the Dems. Instead the Republicans put up a bill and advertised they had to do this because the Dems were shutting down free speech.. Right. :roll:
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2008
- Messages
- 36
- Reaction score
- 0
This reminds me
I have been trying to find anything about that stuff you told me about Senator Schumer and the limits on ammunition. So far the only stuff I have been able to find is related to the stuff he did circa 1994. The only contemporary references, mostly the NRA-ILA website and various conservative blogs, are a bit thin on actual facts. Is there something more current actually going on with that? Can you tell me where I can actually read the legislation?
Also, regarding the fairness doctrine - what brought that up? Did Rush talk about it on the show recently or something?
I have been trying to find anything about that stuff you told me about Senator Schumer and the limits on ammunition. So far the only stuff I have been able to find is related to the stuff he did circa 1994. The only contemporary references, mostly the NRA-ILA website and various conservative blogs, are a bit thin on actual facts. Is there something more current actually going on with that? Can you tell me where I can actually read the legislation?
Also, regarding the fairness doctrine - what brought that up? Did Rush talk about it on the show recently or something?
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
- Messages
- 578
- Reaction score
- 42
Re: This reminds me
Geoff,
I need to review my web logbook at home but a quick internet search (via NRA ILA) found the following from 2004:
SA 2619. Mr. KENNEDY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1805, to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages resulting from the misuse of their products by others; as follows:
On page 11, after line 19, add the following:
SEC. 5. ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.
(a) EXPANSION OF DEFINITION OF ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.--Section 921(a)(17)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(2) in clause (ii), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(iii) a projectile that may be used in a handgun and that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be capable of penetrating body armor ; or
``(iv)a projectile for a centerfire rifle, designed or marketed as having armor piercing capability, that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be more likely to penetrate body armor than standard ammunition of the same caliber.''.
(b) DETERMINATION OF THE CAPABILITY OF PROJECTILES TO PENETRATE BODY ARMOR.--Section 926 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(d)(1) Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Attorney General shall promulgate standards for the uniform testing of projectiles against Body Armor Exemplar.
``(2) The standards promulgated pursuant to paragraph (1) shall take into account, among other factors, variations in performance that are related to the length of the barrel of the handgun or centerfire rifle from which the projectile is fired and the amount and kind of powder used to propel the projectile.
``(3) As used in paragraph (1), the term `Body Armor Exemplar' means body armor that the Attorney General determines meets minimum standards for the protection of law enforcement officers.''.
Those supporting the amendment (which thankfully was killed):
Akaka (D-HI)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Clinton (D-NY)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (D-FL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hollings (D-SC)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Reed (D-RI)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wyden (D-OR)
Here is the (my) issues...
Many 9mm bullets (particularly +P+ or even +P FMJ) can penetrate body armor that is out now. No body armor has (to the best of my knowledge) been made to stop ANY centerfire rifle round (30-30, 30.06, 7.62, .223, .243, 6.5 mm, 7mm, 8mm, etc... you get the idea). The bill said "minimum standards".
These new "cop-killer" bullets were essentially hunting bullets. Since the first "cop killer" bullets never really existed (those evil black talons...remember them), just like the banned plastic guns.
Regards,
Ltstanfo
eleventhma said:
Geoff,
I need to review my web logbook at home but a quick internet search (via NRA ILA) found the following from 2004:
SA 2619. Mr. KENNEDY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1805, to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages resulting from the misuse of their products by others; as follows:
On page 11, after line 19, add the following:
SEC. 5. ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.
(a) EXPANSION OF DEFINITION OF ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.--Section 921(a)(17)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(2) in clause (ii), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(iii) a projectile that may be used in a handgun and that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be capable of penetrating body armor ; or
``(iv)a projectile for a centerfire rifle, designed or marketed as having armor piercing capability, that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be more likely to penetrate body armor than standard ammunition of the same caliber.''.
(b) DETERMINATION OF THE CAPABILITY OF PROJECTILES TO PENETRATE BODY ARMOR.--Section 926 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(d)(1) Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Attorney General shall promulgate standards for the uniform testing of projectiles against Body Armor Exemplar.
``(2) The standards promulgated pursuant to paragraph (1) shall take into account, among other factors, variations in performance that are related to the length of the barrel of the handgun or centerfire rifle from which the projectile is fired and the amount and kind of powder used to propel the projectile.
``(3) As used in paragraph (1), the term `Body Armor Exemplar' means body armor that the Attorney General determines meets minimum standards for the protection of law enforcement officers.''.
Those supporting the amendment (which thankfully was killed):
Akaka (D-HI)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Clinton (D-NY)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Graham (D-FL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hollings (D-SC)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Reed (D-RI)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wyden (D-OR)
Here is the (my) issues...
Many 9mm bullets (particularly +P+ or even +P FMJ) can penetrate body armor that is out now. No body armor has (to the best of my knowledge) been made to stop ANY centerfire rifle round (30-30, 30.06, 7.62, .223, .243, 6.5 mm, 7mm, 8mm, etc... you get the idea). The bill said "minimum standards".
These new "cop-killer" bullets were essentially hunting bullets. Since the first "cop killer" bullets never really existed (those evil black talons...remember them), just like the banned plastic guns.
Regards,
Ltstanfo
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2008
- Messages
- 36
- Reaction score
- 0
Interesting read
but it still doesn't really address my question. The stuff we had talked about was related to an attempt by Senator Schumer of NY to limit the amount of ammunition that any individual could buy, correct? The stuff you provided is ammunition related, but it has nothing to do with limits on buying any amount of ammunition, but was instead related to a particular type of ammunition. And it was from four years ago.
Keep me posted if you can find the specifics about the buying ammunition limit.
but it still doesn't really address my question. The stuff we had talked about was related to an attempt by Senator Schumer of NY to limit the amount of ammunition that any individual could buy, correct? The stuff you provided is ammunition related, but it has nothing to do with limits on buying any amount of ammunition, but was instead related to a particular type of ammunition. And it was from four years ago.
Keep me posted if you can find the specifics about the buying ammunition limit.
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
- Messages
- 578
- Reaction score
- 42
Re: Interesting read
It is in fact related. And, 2004 is newer than the early 90's stuff that we both know about.
If you outlaw certain calibers of ammo because they can defeat (at the time) body armor then you cannot buy anymore.
I do have the additional material that I need to post here.
Regards,
Ltstanfo
eleventhma said:
It is in fact related. And, 2004 is newer than the early 90's stuff that we both know about.
If you outlaw certain calibers of ammo because they can defeat (at the time) body armor then you cannot buy anymore.
I do have the additional material that I need to post here.
Regards,
Ltstanfo
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2008
- Messages
- 36
- Reaction score
- 0
Not sure what you mean by related
Like I said, I found that an interesting read, but it is clearly not related to the issue we has poken about. The original topic of coversation we had was that there was, according to you, a contemporary attempt by Senator Schumer of New York to get legislation passed that would limit the amount of ammunition that any individual could buy. Specifically, what we talked about was a limit on the number of rounds anyone could have at one time, correct? We talked about how, for example, such a limit would prevent people from buying those big boxes of .22 ammo, remember? Wayne was there, we can ask him if he remembers it that way, but that is certainly how I remember it. The stuff you listed above is about an amendment that was an attempt to expand the definition of "armor-piercing" ammunition (an attempt that apparently failed) and it has nothing to do with numerical limits on rounds that any individual can buy as far as I can see, and like I said, it is not contemporary, it is something that was going on four years ago. Where is the stuff about the contemporary legislation that we were talking about?
Like I said, I found that an interesting read, but it is clearly not related to the issue we has poken about. The original topic of coversation we had was that there was, according to you, a contemporary attempt by Senator Schumer of New York to get legislation passed that would limit the amount of ammunition that any individual could buy. Specifically, what we talked about was a limit on the number of rounds anyone could have at one time, correct? We talked about how, for example, such a limit would prevent people from buying those big boxes of .22 ammo, remember? Wayne was there, we can ask him if he remembers it that way, but that is certainly how I remember it. The stuff you listed above is about an amendment that was an attempt to expand the definition of "armor-piercing" ammunition (an attempt that apparently failed) and it has nothing to do with numerical limits on rounds that any individual can buy as far as I can see, and like I said, it is not contemporary, it is something that was going on four years ago. Where is the stuff about the contemporary legislation that we were talking about?