http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/01/04/1397911/eight-smart-gun-bills/?mobile=nc 1. Banning high-capacity ammunition. HR 138. This bill from Reps. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) and Diana DeGette (D-CO) would ban anyone in the US from owning, buying, or trading high-capacity ammunition clips, like the kinds that are often used in mass shootings. Such clips allow a gunman to fire off as many as 100 rounds without stopping to reload. McCarthy’s connection to gun safety laws is personal: Her husband was killed and son critically injured during a mass shooting. 2. Closing the ‘gun show loophole.’ HR 141. Another measure from McCarthy requires that all gun purchasers undergo a full background check. As-is, the private sales of firearms, and the sale of guns at gun shows, are exempt from the background check requirements that are mandatory for other gun sales. That loophole is currently an easy way for criminals or the mentally ill to access a gun undetected. 3. Making the database of who cannot buy guns effective. HR 137. Currently, states do a terrible job of entering names — of felons or the mentally ill — into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). This measure also from McCarthy is called the Fix Gun Checks Act, and has been introduced in previous legislative sessions. It would create incentives and penalties to encourage the efficient entry of names into NICS. It would also close the gun show loophole. 4. Regulating where and how ammunition is purchased. HR 142. McCarthy’s fourth and final bill would make it mandatory for all ammunition dealers to have a license to sell. It would also require anyone purchasing ammunition to do so in person, face-to-face with a seller. All bulk purchases of ammunition would need to be reported under McCarthy’s law. This bill responds to the criticisms that the internet is an open market for the unlimited sale of ammunition. 5. Requiring handguns to be registered. HR 117. Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) crafted this national law based on his state’s requirements for handgun purchasing. It would require every single handgun sold in the United States to be licensed and registered, without any exceptions or loopholes, and for that registry to be easily accessible. 6. Regulating how gun licenses are issued. HR 34. Like Holt, Rep. Bobby Rush’s (D-IL) bill aims to create a unified system of gun licensing procedures — for both handguns and semi-automatic weapons. Rush’s legislation, a reintroduction of “Blair’s Bill,” named after a murdered Chicago teen, would also require gun safety training for firearm owners. 7. Raising the age of legal handgun ownership to 21. HR 65. In a move that seems pointed toward combating youth street violence, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) proposed this bill that would make it illegal to own a handgun before the age of 21. Some states have such laws in place, but Jackson Lee’s measure would make the law national. 8. Requiring the reporting of stolen guns. HR 21. This bill, which Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA) has introduced to Congress previously and is reintroducing to the new Congress, would also close the ‘gun show loophole’ by requiring all gun-owners to undergo background checks. Additionally, it would make sure that gun owners are required to report stolen guns — a measure that could help law enforcement track illegal guns. 9. & 10. Eliminating ‘gun free zones’ in schools. HR 35 and HR 133. Following the lead of the National Rifle Association, Reps. Steve Stockman (R-TX) and Thomas Massie (R-KY) are both proposing more guns in schools. They want to eliminate “gun free school zones.” In a press statement, Stockman used this highly flawed logic as the reasoning for his bill: “In the 22 years before enactment of ‘gun free school zones’ there were two mass school shootings. In the 22 years since enactment of ‘gun free schools’ there have been 10 mass school shootings.” Discuss.
63,360 inches in a mile. We can't let them keep taking them one at a time Feinstein will be going for a 1/2 - 3/4 mile chunk later this month.
i know some of yall are gonna think this is crazy but ill be happy with this! after all the stuff they are trying to pull in Illinois with taking away our guns and the ignorance that comes from Chicago this is a big relief. i know number 4 is a little crazy but they might be right with that one. but just incase you aint following what illinois tryed to pull, they had a bill on the floor to ban every gun with a mag. including a ruger 10/22. and that means 80% percent of hand gun sold right now would be illeagal. now all that above dont sound so bad does it?
I really don't think any of them are that bad. Some states already have most of those in effect if I don't recall. Number one and four would be the worst ones IMO.
9 and 10 are a good idea, gun free zones prevent teachers from arming themselves and actually being able to do anything about school shooters.
Some lf these aren't bad as somebody else said Illinois already does most of these. The problem I have is what they threw in as the last line for number 1. I'm sorry but why should I, as a voter, have something jammed down my throat because you have a personnel attachment to it. Politicians shouldn't be forcing personnel agendas on the rest of the public.
That's what they're hoping we'll say, "it could have been worse". That's a reason they put so many outlandish things out there, they're hoping for a compromise and they'll still get a part of the agenda. Then next time they go for the next part and so and so forth. Inch at a time. We can't allow them to have any of them. Read the article title, it pretty much sums up a gun control advocates thoughts. 9 and 10 are the two good ones.
I guess my question is why would our federal government even be proposing these types of laws? Wouldn't this type of law fall under the 10th amendment? Where in the constitution do these laws fall in? This is what is wrong with our country, big brother thinks he knows what is best for everyone, and a law that might be necessary in one state, isn't necessarily needed in another. In my opinion, these are the types of laws that need to be looked at on a state level, not federal regulation. Perhaps our elected officials could use a refresher on the constitution, specifically the 2nd amendment and the 10th. No where in the 2nd amendment does it say the government is allowed to decide what is acceptable "arms". 10th amendment. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." I really actually like the last 4 words in the amendment.
So if my gun takes a high cap magazine it is legal. But if it takes a high cap clip its illegal. Fine by me. Dumbasses
Imo, this is a constitutional issue which does fall under national control. Unlike health care. The 2nd ammendnent does give the government the power to regulate firearms. "A well regulated militia" I agree with doing away with gun free zones. Education to own guns. Back ground checks (even at gun shows) Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk 2
Agreed it should be a state issue. Our country was not meant to have such a growing disparity between the powers of the federal vs state governmetts. Also, why is it such a big deal to do a background check on someone at a gun show?
