BREAKING: Federal High Cap Mag Ban Bill on January 3

House Democrats will introduce a bill to ban the production of high-capacity magazines on the first day of the next congressional session. This according to someone at the office of Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), one of the lawmakers sponsoring the bill, who had a little chinwag with huffingtonpost.com. Who said this about that: “The Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act will mirror a failed bill introduced during the 112th Congress. Its authors hope that in the wake of the shooting deaths of 20 first grade students in Newtown, Conn., there will be heightened political urgency to act when it is reintroduced on Jan. 3. Backed by DeGette and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), the legislation has gained a wave of Democratic co-sponsors since the shooting, which also claimed the lives of 7 adults. But few Republicans have come forward to offer their support. Even more critical to the bill’s political prospects, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has not indicated whether he will allow it to come to the floor for a vote.” I wonder why that is . . .

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

86 Responses to BREAKING: Federal High Cap Mag Ban Bill on January 3

  1. avatarMatt in FL says:

    You know all those letters that you guys said you were going to write a few days ago, but never quite got around to because of the holiday hustle?

    Sharpen your pencils.

    Oh, and save the document, because you’ll need it again. And again. Change the relevant details, and send it off again. Each and every time something new is proposed, fix it and send it. Don’t do a “one and done” because this fight’s going to be longer than that.

  2. avatartdiinva says:

    Grandstanding. The Bill is DOA

    • avatarMashashin says:

      Your lips God’s ear

    • avatarRalph says:

      It’s far from DOA. Either it will come to the floor or not, and it will be enacted or not. If either one of the “nots” rule, then it will be the club that the Democrats will try to use — along with the so-called fiscal cliff and the demonization of the NRA — to take back the house in 2014. And then things will get much, much worse.

      • avatartdiinva says:

        From the recent polling it’s clear that the only people who would be outraged if the House leadership killed the bill are people who wouldn’t vote for a Republican if Adolph Hitler were running as a Democrat. While I agree that the Dems would try to use this club it would be to the Republicans advantage if they did so because it would distract from more important issues.

        Now I agree that the fiscal cliff negotiations are the key to control of Congress in 2015. It is clear that Obama’s strategy is not so much to stigmatize the Republicans to the general electorate. He wants to the Republican Party to turn on itself and make sure that conservative and libertarian leaning voters stay home like they did in 2006 and to some extent in the 2012 Presidential election. The Republicans are in danger of repeating the mistake made by the Democrats during the Reagan years and sticking to untenable purist positions. I think this is what has prevented Boehner from turning the tables on Obama by agreeing to let his bill come before the House and letting Pelosi pass it without Republican support. There are too many members of the caucus who would rather go over the cliff on principle then let their opponents get stuck with the fallout. Sometimes you have to make a tactical retreat to win the strategic battle. Purists would rather follow General Pickett up that hill.

        • avataruncommon_sense says:

          “… the only people who would be outraged if the House leadership killed the bill are people who wouldn’t vote for a Republican if Adolph Hitler were running as a Democrat.”

          That is priceless … I haven’t laughed that hard and long in quite a while. I really needed that laugh.

      • avatarpat says:

        Ralph. You are spot on in that there can be NO underestimating both the liberals desire and ability to curtail our second amendment rights. In the end, Barry just may be arrogant and uncaring enough of his own parties midterm fortunes and sign an Executive Order anyway.

      • avatarSanchanim says:

        One side thought. the house can simply ignore it. when asked they can say they are waiting for DiFi’s legislation to come through.

    • avatarmforest says:

      you clearly underestimate the real and intense rage the conn. shooting has engendered in the nonshooters of this country.

      • avatarpat says:

        This mess is a 1st order danger to the 2nd amendment, and as such, must be taken with deathly seriousness.

      • avatartdiinva says:

        Nonshooters who are outraged vote Democratic anyway. Are some the fence sitters swayable by Newtown? Yes, but they won’t base there 2014 vote on gun control. This is America where attention spans are short. Much air has already been let out of the gun control bubble. Congress has more important things to do then waste time on side issues like gun control.

  3. Writing letters is good, but the must effective thing will be the NRA’s ability to say that their membership has grown by “X” amount because people don’t want any more gun rights restrictions. The only reason this would not even to the House floor for a vote is because of the strong unity of NRA members.

    Keep supporting the NRA… and keep writing those letters too.

  4. avatarJohn Fritz says:

    … Boehner (R-Ohio) has not indicated whether he will allow it to come to the floor for a vote …

    Boner’s shit is weak right now. He doesn’t need anyone more pissed off at him than there already is.

    • avatarSwarf says:

      Shhh! You’ll make him cry.

    • avatarMatt says:

      He might be weak, but if no ‘compromise’ is made on the fiscal cliff deals, the House Republicans may as well refuse to vote on any gun control legislation. What do they have to lose? They are already being blamed for every problem we have in this country.

    • avatarWilliam says:

      He’s also as likely to stab us in the back as anyone on either side of the aisle, with the exception of Oleaginous Schumer and DiFi with her flying monkeys. So don’t ever turn your back on him.

    • avatarMark says:

      I’m in Boehner’s district and write him often, including today when the subject line of my email was NO “AWB”! John won’t see it but his staff will.

  5. avatarjacquejet says:

    I am reading that the Conneticut shooter didn’t use an AR rifle after all! Only hand guns. Thus high capacity mags weren’t an issue either. Never let facts get in the way of a good fiction!

  6. avatarRKBA says:

    “We The People” must decide:

    Use them, or Lose them.

  7. avatarBeninMA says:

    From the article:

    The bill would also exempt retired and current law enforcement officials who use those devices for “purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty)”

    How does someone who is off duty use a firearm for “purposes of law enforcement”?

    • avatarAccur81 says:

      Usually those things are decided by State Law and / or Departmental Policy, unless specifically enumerated in Federal Law.

    • avatarWilliam says:

      The better question would be, “how does a RETIRED officer use one for law enforcement purposes?”

      • avatarAccur81 says:

        Oops. I mis-read the question. I’ve made an off-duty arrest – well technically a couple of off duty arrests (vandalism and misdemeanor battery, etc.). In one, I had an on-duty officer transport the arrestee until I changed out into uniform.

        A retired LEO would have to make a citizen’s arrest based upon probable cause. That person would then turn over the arrestee to the handling agency, and would subsequently become a witness. The handling agency would verify the facts and circumstances surrounding the arrest, and subsequently make what they deemed to be the appropriate enforcement action.

        Retired LEOs typically purchase the firearm(s) which they used while they were on active duty, and can use and carry their firearms nationwide, with some exceptions. Those magazine are typically standard capacity 15-17 round 9mm, 11-15 round .40s, or 8-13 round .45s. The Federal AWB exemption attempts to placate police unions by continuing to “allow ” them to purchase their Departmental weapons upon honorable separation or retirement.

        • avatarmatt says:

          The Federal AWB exemption attempts to placate police unions by continuing to “allow ” them to purchase their Departmental weapons upon honorable separation or retirement.

          It is nice to know that LEOs are defending our rights rather than only their own interests.

        • avatarrybred says:

          SPOT ON…
          as we’ve been saying in california, there need to be NO exemptions for LEO’s so that they will fight for all of us!

          If it really were about supposed “needs” while on duty, then why do all exemptions pertain to personally to any LEO?!? They COULD say that LEO could ONLY use standard-caps WHILE performing their duties and while on payroll, and that they would need to turn them in to the station at the end of shift etc. But of course NOBODY (the LEO here) would want these restrictions so if they placate the officers, the unions will throw their support behind it. After all, why should they care if it doesn’t affect them? right? Trying to play to selfish human nature.

        • avatarTotenglocke says:

          Retired LEOs typically purchase the firearm(s) which they used while they were on active duty, and can use and carry their firearms nationwide, with some exceptions.

          Remember, all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

          The fact that the animals in the book who considered themselves superior were pigs and police who consider themselves superior are nicknamed “pigs” is a wonderful coincidence.

    • avatarMike in NC says:

      I don’t mean this to be taken as anti-LEO, it is anti-politician:

      One of my quaint and naive constitutional fantasies is that Congress refrain from doling out perks and exemptions for any special class per Article 1, section 9: No title of nobility shall be granted…

      … we now return to your regularly scheduled programming…

      • avatarmatt says:

        It should be a anti-LEO message, because as Accur81 (a California LEO) said, it is the police unions who lobby for such exemptions.

        • avatarAccur81 says:

          I’m merely being honest about some of the relationships between lawmakers and police, and revealing one of the tactics of the antis. If they separate police vs. non-police, it is easier for them to push a bill like this through.

        • avatarSammy says:

          I’m not anti LEO but I am strongly opposed to police unionization. And even more opposed to police union involvement in political policy. Bad mojo.

  8. avatarDavid-p says:

    Any and all pro gun associations are our friend right now. Letters, calls, and email help as well. If boehner is sure he has the votes needed to stop it then he should let it come up for a vote and then kill it. Even better load it so full of pro gun amendments that the democrats end up killing it. That would make sen difi go back to the drawing board, realizing if they can’t get something that the majority of Americans think they want, there will be NO way that they could pass something that the majority of Americans don’t want.

    • avatarDavid-p says:

      The only reason I say bring it to a vote and kill it or get democrats to kill it, because we don’t want the dems to control the house, senate, and WH in 2014.

  9. avatarthe last Marine out says:

    The fast way is to fax your congress members at their sites , they will get it same day , post mail gets opened last , if at all, FAX is best….and i get a reply this way too…and then phone calls , be nice ,but firm !!!!!!!!

  10. avatarWilliam says:

    Let’s see… the homeopathic remedy for acute hysteria is……

  11. avatarOHgunner says:

    Letter sent to Boehner. Hope it makes it past the piles of Fiscal Cliff letters in time for Jan. 3. I also included that I don’t want him to support any AWBs. My wife thinks I’m crazy for writing all these letters to politicians lately… So I make sure to send two copies, one “from” her, and one from me. Haha. One of the perks of being married, my opinion counts twice.

  12. avatarThomas Paine says:

    if true, we can have some sort of litmus test to gauge which way the House is going to go with this type of stuff.

  13. avatarTom jones says:

    I thought the awb limited high cap ?

    • avatarmatt says:

      It does, but the AWB will be harder to pass, they think just a mag ban might get thru if the AWB doesnt.

      • avatarLance says:

        I doubt it will. In the GOP house doubt it would get out of committee. Time fight not just panic buy and give up: fight!

  14. avatarJesse says:

    I wrote both of my state Senators and I wrote the one Representative I can actually vote for. Sadly I live in MD so they are all democrats and I don’t think any of them will actually listen to me much less acknowledge my email. *sigh*

    • avatar40&2000 says:

      The national fight is important but the fight in MD is going to be nasty. Even if national measures are defeated Annapolis will still be pushing for severe restrictions. Join and support MSI. Go to Annapolis if at all possible.

  15. avatarAccur81 says:

    Frankly, I see this passing. There are just way too many people who don’t have the knowledge base to understand why a standard capacity magazine ban is a poor tactical decision. Sure, we understand here, and so do the myriad AK / AR / Mini 14, 9mm etc. owners out there. I oppose this, and will send R-Rep. Gary Miller a letter, but I don’t have a good feeling on this one.

    Please join the NRA, Firearms Policy Coalition, and any other pro-2A association you deem to be worthy.

  16. avatarstateisevil says:

    Fax and call your slavers in Congress. I joined the nra too, something I said I’d never do because of their compromises and support of the Nazi Weapons law of 1968.

  17. avatarch3cooh says:

    I would write a letter to my representative, but she’s the one introducing the bill.

    My apologies guys, I voted against her!

  18. avatarLarry says:

    Called my Senators in PA and also the Speaker of the House to give him my opinion as well. No AWB AND no magazine ban! I also had my wife call.

  19. avatarduke nukem says:

    with a gop controlled house i highly doubt that any bill presented by comrade feinstein would go through

    • avatarLarry says:

      The more Democrats that we can also get to shoot it down, the stronger message it will send. We need to push our Representatives and let them know any attack on our Second Amendment is unacceptable.

  20. avatarWLCE says:

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-sandy-hook-school-massacre-unanswered-questions-and-missing-information/5316776

    I recommend everybody read this and realize that we are being f–king hoodwinked.

    *false flag *cough cough

  21. avatarRoadrunner says:

    I’m already an NRA Life Member, and I’m buying 3 more one-year memberships for family. For $115, I’m quadrupling my clout.

  22. avatarBlehtastic says:

    I really wish that American firearms companies and accessories companies would get on our side and refuse to sell any small arms to the military that are not available to law abiding citizens.

    • avatarTotenglocke says:

      The problem being that most of them are publicly owned and thus it’s the stockholders in control. If more were privately owned (like Barrett), we’d see this happen.

      • avatarmatt says:

        I wish Kel-Tec would stop selling guns to LEOs. Instead LEOs are the only customers who can order direct from KT instead of having to wait god knows how long for your LGS to get it, or pay exorbitant prices on gunbroker.

    • avatarAaron says:

      They’d probably go out of business if they did because the military would go somewhere else, even overseas if necessary.

      • avatarTotenglocke says:

        Only Colt relies on military contracts. Everyone else in the US relies on normal people purchasing from them and maybe makes a few extra bucks from selling to the military / police.

        • avatarmatt says:

          FNH too, they manufacture 80% of the small arms for the US mil. And their piss poor civilian customer service reflects this.

  23. avatarSilver says:

    I swear, people in this country could be standing in the gas chambers and they’d still be screaming, “Let us out or I’ll write my senator!”

  24. avatarMerits says:

    Mark Steyn waxing eloquent about the most infamous magazine….and the serious implications that have little to do with number of rounds.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/336573/laws-are-little-people-mark-steyn

  25. avatarthe last Marine out says:

    The mad rush is on ! went to gun show today in Fl. prices are double on the few mags left, gun and ammo is way up also, even junk used guns now have upped in cost… Everyone is hopping mad , and yes FAX and FAX again, got a intern reply same day, also phone calls we still have tea party GOP support in the house and senate… So keep up the HEAT now or never!

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.