This past Thursday the 26th the House attempted to add Amendment to ban high capacity mags by attaching the amendment to the Cybersecurity Bill.It go's to the Senate next week.
Not surprised at all. One thing that gun control proponents do very well is control how dialogue is used:
An AR-15 is not a sporting rifle; it is an "assault rifle".
A 15 round Glock mag is not standard capacity; it is "high capacity."
AR-15s and AK47s though relatively low-powered; are referred to "high powered rifles"
Conservatives are sometimes complicit too because they often use the same, but incorrect, descriptors.
Accordingly, the language adopted by the gun banners establishes a false premise: "Is there a need for 'high-powered assualt rifles with high capacitiy magazines' to be permitted for civilian use?" Already, they assume the upper hand in the argument by framing it incorrectly.
Wherever and whenever, I am careful to use appropriate language, and to politely correct others when opportunites are presented. Because for the uninformed, it is easy to see how one could come to the conclusion that maybe we do not need "high-powered assault weapons with high capacity magazines" in the hands of everyday civilians.
Really the correct question is, "should law abiding citizens be prohibited from exercising their rights to own varmit-grade sporting rifles with standard capacity magazines?" See what I mean? Sounds like a totally different question. And that would lead to different conclusions by some.
I believe that 2nd amendment advocates in general do not use language in a way that appeals to those that are open to consider our positions. We get it. We understand where we are coming from. We just don't do a very good job explaining in language that is helpful.
Liberals are fantastic wordsmiths, and that is why their positions are often attractive to those that are not well informed. When we hear "high capacity" magazines, we need to correct people. They are "standard capacity" magazines. "High capacity magazines" sounds ominous to some. "Standard capacity magazines" is more placid. We need to tell folks that liberals are advocating to ban standard magazines and to only allow "restricted capacity" magazines. Reframing the premise is a big difference, in my opinion.
Excellent reply, Taterhead. I agree.
Like saying, "spend money to pay for tax breaks". They won't say what it really is.
Yeah, this pisses me off. The proposed legislation would make it illegal to sell or transfer any magazine that holds more than 10 rounds with the exception of .22 caliber rimfire weapons.
It'll get killed in committee. There are a number of these things being stuck in legislation all the time. But the scrutiny that occurs in the wake of high profile events causes reaction on both sides of the aisle.
Best thing to due is keep your NRA membership current and if possible make an extra donation to NRA-ILA. They exist to lobby against these kinds of things.
I live in California, already been screwed over!
I do have a few *cough* 15 *cough* round mags for my G20 though sitting in a SAFE place
Well another Bill being introduced.This one by Lautenberg and McCarthy regarding online ammo sales.
Quote from: sqlbullet on July 28 2012 08:59:17 PM MDT
There are a number of these things being stuck in legislation all the time.
And it's not all limited to the Federal level either. Plenty of stuff within the States, Counties, and Cities/Towns too.
Very difficult for the average Joe to keep track of it all.
You will never stop the man who wants it. They will just weld 1-3 10 rounders together and get them working.
Or print one on their 3D printer.
Quote from: sqlbullet on August 02 2012 09:53:17 AM MDT
Or print one on their 3D printer.
You referring to the 'haveblue' blogger story? 8)
Quote from: EdMc on August 02 2012 11:06:17 AM MDT
You referring to the 'haveblue' blogger story? 8)
That the one. Not sure about this working for a magazine, but the cogent point is you don't have to be a particularly skilled craftsman to make a magazine.
And the cybersecurity bill is dead.
http://www.zdnet.com/senate-blocks-cybersecurity-act-7000002051/
ill say it one and ill say it again.Now it's Shik incident in Wisconcin,more to follow.just a few more incidnts,mag an will be in place,maybe ammo.
We just have to keep up the fight. Keep explaining to people that very,very few crimes statistically are committed with rifles and large capacity magazines.
My current favorite is to ask people how many people are shot with a rifle versus beaten to death in the US each year. They are shocked to find out you are 2.5 times as likely be beaten to death as killed with ANY rifle.
Quote from: sqlbullet on August 05 2012 07:17:16 PM MDT
We just have to keep up the fight. Keep explaining to people that very,very few crimes statistically are committed with rifles and large capacity magazines.
My current favorite is to ask people how many people are shot with a rifle versus beaten to death in the US each year. They are shocked to find out you are 2.5 times as likely be beaten to death as killed with ANY rifle.
Just another
inconvenient truth.....