Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: M36 on March 19, 2006, 12:58:36 PM
-
Going to get interesting. Had to delete penalties and how it apply's to minors to get this to fit. This is dated March 2005. If it is a repeat post, sorry.
109th CONGRESS
1st Session
S. 645
To reinstate the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
March 16, 2005
Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mr. CORZINE, Mr. SCHUMER, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. DURBIN, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. SARBANES, Mr. REED, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. DODD, and Mrs. CLINTON) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A BILL
To reinstate the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2005'.
SEC. 2. RESTRICTION ON MANUFACTURE, TRANSFER, AND POSSESSION OF CERTAIN SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS.
(a) RESTRICTION- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding after subsection (u) the following:
`(v)(1) It shall be unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon.
`(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of enactment of this subsection.
`(3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any firearm that--
`(A) is manually operated by bolt, pump, level, or slide action;
`(B) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or
`(C) is an antique firearm.
`(4) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--
`(A) the manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, or a transfer to or possession by a law enforcement officer employed by such an entity for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty);
`(B) the transfer to a licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining an onsite physical protection system and security organization required by Federal law, or possession by an employee or contractor of such licensee onsite for such purposes or off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized training or transportation of nuclear materials;
`(C) the possession, by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving a firearm, of a semiautomatic assault weapon transferred to the individual by the agency upon such retirement; or
`(D) the manufacture, transfer, or possession of a semiautomatic assault weapon by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Secretary.
`(5) It shall be unlawful for any person to transfer a semiautomatic assault weapon to which paragraph (1) does not apply, except through--
`(A) a licensed dealer, and for purposes of subsection (t) in the case of such a transfer, the weapon shall be considered to be transferred from the business inventory of the licensed dealer and the dealer shall be considered to be the transferor; or
`(B) a State or local law enforcement agency if the transfer is made in accordance with the procedures provided for in subsection (t) of this section and section 923(g).
`(6) The Attorney General shall establish and maintain, in a timely manner, a record of the make, model, and date of manufacture of any semiautomatic assault weapon which the Attorney General is made aware has been used in relation to a crime under Federal or State law, and the nature and circumstances of the crime involved, including the outcome of relevant criminal investigations and proceedings. The Attorney General shall annually submit the record to Congress and make the record available to the general public.'.
(b) DEFINITION OF SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPON- Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding after paragraph (29) the following:
`(30) The term `semiautomatic assault weapon' means any of the following:
`(A) RIFLES- The following rifles or copies or duplicates thereof--
`(i) AK, AKM, AKS, AK-47, AK-74, ARM, MAK90, Misr, NHM 90, NHM 91, SA 85, SA 93, VEPR;
`(ii) AR-10;
`(iii) AR-15, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, or Olympic Arms PCR;
`(iv) AR70;
`(v) Calico Liberty;
`(vi) Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU;
`(vii) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FNC;
`(viii) Hi-Point Carbine;
`(ix) HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, or HK-PSG-1;
`(x) Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;
`(xi) M1 Carbine;
`(xii) Saiga;
`(xiii) SAR-8, SAR-4800;
`(xiv) SKS with detachable magazine;
`(xv) SLG 95;
`(xvi) SLR 95 or 96;
`(xvii) Steyr AUG;
`(xviii) Sturm, Ruger Mini-14;
`(xix) Tavor;
`(xx) Thompson 1927, Thompson M1, or Thompson 1927 Commando; or
`(xxi) Uzi, Galil and Uzi Sporter, Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle (Galatz).
`(B) PISTOLS- The following pistols or copies or duplicates thereof--
`(i) Calico M-110;
`(ii) MAC-10, MAC-11, or MPA3;
`(iii) Olympic Arms OA;
`(iv) TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10; or
`(v) Uzi.
`(C) SHOTGUNS- The following shotguns or copies or duplicates thereof--
`(i) Armscor 30 BG;
`(ii) SPAS 12 or LAW 12;
`(iii) Striker 12; or
`(iv) Streetsweeper.
`(D) DETACHABLE MAGAZINE RIFLES- A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine, and that has--
`(i) a folding or telescoping stock;
`(ii) a threaded barrel;
`(iii) a pistol grip;
`(iv) a forward grip; or
`(v) a barrel shroud.
`(E) FIXED MAGAZINE RIFLES- A semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, except for an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, 22 caliber rimfire ammunition.
`(F) DETACHABLE MAGAZINE PISTOLS- A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has--
`(i) a second pistol grip;
`(ii) a threaded barrel;
`(iii) a barrel shroud; or
`(iv) the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at a location outside of the pistol grip.
`(G) FIXED MAGAZINE PISTOLS- A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
`(H) SEMIAUTOMATIC SHOTGUNS- A semiautomatic shotgun that has--
`(i) a folding or telescoping stock;
`(ii) a pistol grip;
`(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine; or
`(iv) a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds.
`(I) OTHER SHOTGUNS- A shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
`(J) FRAMES OR RECEIVERS- A frame or receiver that is identical to, or based substantially on the frame or receiver of, a firearm described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (I) or (L).
`(K) CONVERSION KITS- A conversion kit.
`(L) MILITARY OR LAW ENFORCMENT WEAPONS- A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.'.
-
My BB gun as a pistol grip...
Basically:rolleyes:
-
Way to make a statement Nirvana...you da Man.:aok
-
It also has a 50 round magazine and a forward grip, and I bet I could turn it into a semiautomatic weapon if I wanted to. Would be even easier to buy a CO2 powered BB gun and turn it semiautomatic. They leave the door open for this stuff and they are going to get kicked in the mouth because of it. I am more liberal then conservative but damn these anti gun MFers.
Also, they never stated the cartridge size but said that duplicates meaning "lookalikes"? If so then the AR-15 airsoft assault rifle would be put under these restrictions. Politicians are teh smart.
-
did it pass?
-
How come Fat Teddy aint got lead poisoning yet?
-
it never got out of committee. only because republicans control congress, next year could be different if democrats win control.
vote and vote often.
-
Originally posted by john9001
it never got out of committee. only because republicans control congress, next year could be different if democrats win control.
vote and vote often.
No, it wouldnt get past committee.
In case someone isn't paying attention, the actually majority (not the vocal minority) do not vote in favor of gun control.
And, I wouldnt put any money on demodorks getting control of the Congress (or even the Presidency for that matter).
This horrendous bill would require confiscation, and that just won't fly in the USA.
-
I can really see how taking away guns with folding stocks and pistol grips is going to make everyone safer :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Pei
I can really see how taking away guns with folding stocks and pistol grips is going to make everyone safer :rolleyes:
Typical politics. Pass laws (or attempt to) that have no real affect on the status quo. On the left you have the assault ban. On the right, you have partial birth abortion ban.
Much ado about nothing.
-
The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step...
Just look at england.
-
Originally posted by Pei
I can really see how taking away guns with folding stocks and pistol grips is going to make everyone safer :rolleyes:
the theory behind banning folding stocks is that they are easier to hide in say, a trench coat, than one without a folding stock.
-
Did it pass?
No, hasnt passed, but this was my father in laws comment:
"This is done as a vote getter and to drain funds from such orgs as the NRA as they will have to fight it."
-
schumer and his band of morons do this sort of stuff every session.
-
Jackson, I don't see why you're all excited about it.
Don't think we'l believe you if you tell us your 90mm has a folding stock.
duh
-
On the left you have the assault ban. On the right, you have partial birth abortion ban.
====
good analogy. I knew there was a reason for your existence :p
-
Assault waepons are full auto, think the term assault weapon is associated with what the Germans called their light machine guns in WW2. Someone help me here because I may be all wet.
There is no such thing as a semi-auto assault weapon. The term itself is confusing to people who actually know something about guns. It's a PC term designed to confuse. I'm kinda thinking the way semi-autos are being defined by these lawmakers, is not truthful, but rather based on political correctness to a large extent. I mean, if you wanta confuse folks, the first thing to do is change meanings of language, so nobody really knows what you're talking about. It sounds good but many times is gibberish (psychobabble) and people applaud it rather than question it. I'm glad we still can.
Probably won't be able to though once everyone's guns are gone. Don't worry, that's what these people want to begin with.
Les
-
Originally posted by Yeager
On the left you have the assault ban. On the right, you have partial birth abortion ban.
====
good analogy. I knew there was a reason for your existence :p
I aim to please.
-
`(xi) M1 Carbine
I don't care for any of those guns on that list except for this one.
Let it be known, that if they ban the M1 Carbine before I can get my hands on one, I will kick off the revolution that exact moment.
-
henh.
It should be the mission of EVERY American to aquire EVERY gun on that gawdamned list.
.... and yes, I'm working on it. :D
-
I want one, which one of you guys wants to buy me one? Gimme gimme, i'll even pay for yours!
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
I don't care for any of those guns on that list except for this one.
Let it be known, that if they ban the M1 Carbine before I can get my hands on one, I will kick off the revolution that exact moment.
You gonna have a website?
shamus
btw, the carbine is trash, fun to shoot but trash.
-
Why deal with html when you can deal in bullets?
-
Fighting this crap in Illinois again. Just tracked the Chicago Tribune's recent editorial coverage (news and opinion) and sent a detailed analysis of direct bias, lack of basic reporting and inaccuracies in coverage to 3 editors and the publisher. Stuff like printing inaccurate statements from the "anti" side without a rebuttal from the "pro" side over and over again.
The latest big crusade was launched right after the recent failure of the last one a month or so ago, driven by one of the rare killings of an innocent by a criminal using such a weapon. Apparently some criminal gangbanger went to Indiana, used a false ID, illegally bought an AK47 type, illegally converted it to fire automatic and shot some kid who got in the line of fire in a typical drug war neighborhood incident. A bit confusing how this criminal and his criminal behavior is connected to my rights as a legal, law-abiding gun owner. Doesn't seem like he respects gun laws.
And, this type of thing IS exceedingly rare (of course the hysteria and hype makes it sound like people go to sleep to the sound of machine gun fire). According to Chicago Police records for 2004 (latest year posted) only 4 out of 313 murders were committed with ANY type of rifle. Seven people were killed with baseball bats. Good thing the Louisville Slugger lacks a pistol grip and a bayonet attachment or baseball would have to find a new way to hit the ball. 33 people were stabbed... The year before it was 5 out of 400+ killed by "a rifle." Oddly, the local media has neglected to publish such a simple fact (I doubt the question: "How many people are actually killed by these weapons..." was even asked) and ask why Prince Daley and Blojobovich are focusing so much attention to such a non issue. Heaven forbid somebody actually look at the crime problem itself, and not the tools that are used by these criminals (which is exactly what the proponents of the ban hope never happens).
Let it be known, that if they ban the M1 Carbine before I can get my hands on one, I will kick off the revolution that exact moment.
Yup. They want me to sell or deactivate my $700 original feature 1944 Inland M-1 carbine with their ****, if it ever passes. After all, $700 - $1500 Carbines and AR-15s and FALs, and $3000+ .50 Cal. rifles ARE the weapon of choice for gangbangers.
Charon
-
Here's my most recent effort, of several failed efforts recently to get a quality counter point in print:
Dear Ms. Lipinski:
It's hard not to notice (and catalog at the individual article level) some distinct editorializing in the hard news associated with the recent killing of Starkesia Reed. An online search at the Tribune Web site netted 11 hard news articles covering the shooting. Of those, six were fairly neutral in the "who, what, when, where, why" sense. However, four of the other five mirrored the Tribune's stated editorial position by featuring anti-"assault weapon" quotations without any rebuttal. The one that did have a rebuttal, featured three anti-AW positions against a single, weak counter position. The coverage on the opinion page is fairly balanced numerically, however there has yet to be a pro-AW position anywhere near as extensive as the spin-laden piece submitted by Ronald S. Safer on March 10, 2006.
Further, I also have yet to see any basic journalism applied to what is an important, Constitutional rights issue. The spin from Daley and Blagojevich paints a picture of: "Mass Destruction." However, where is the basic reporting to determine what direct impact these weapons have on Chicago's murder toll? Is this a accidental oversight, or is the Tribune taking an active role in debate on your news pages? The death of Starkesia Reed was tragic. But, shortly after Starkesia's death, a youth was stabbed to death in Homewood. You are about eight times more likely to be killed by a knife as by an assault rifle. Yet, nobody is politicizing stabbing death of 17-year-old Maurice Hill. For that matter, you are more likely to be beaten to death by a baseball bat than killed by an AW. Has any Tribune reporter asked any of the following basic questions:
1. How many murders were committed by these weapons in 2005?
2. How many murders were committed the year before the 1994 federal ban? The murder review for 1993 (the year before the ban) is said to show that a Chicagoan was 67 times more likely to be stabbed or beaten to death than killed by an AW (I cannot locate the primary source).
3. Why are Daley and Blagojevich putting so much focus on a weapon that has such a minute impact on Chicago violent Crime?
According to the Chicago Police Murder Report 2004 (the latest year posted on the CPD Web site under statistics and reports) only four out of 313 firearm deaths were related to ANY type of rifle. Shootings involving these weapons were so rare, that you were nearly twice as likely to be beaten to death with a baseball bat than killed with what might be considered an AW. In 2003 it was six out of 442, and you were about as likely to be beaten to death by a baseball bat.
It's also disturbing that the Tribune's formal editorial position (Jan. 26) was pulled almost directly from the aggressive spin found on the Brady Campaign Web site -- point by point. For example, the Tribune noted that the "worst mass shootings in this country" have often involved semiautomatic weapons, and listed five incidents over a 22-year period that resulted in a total of 41 deaths. It is telling that the Brady Campaign had to dig back through 22 years to pump up the AW threat. While these terrible incidents grab tremendous media attention, they are, fortunately, few and far between and represent a statistically minute role in criminal homicide.
Even in the most extreme example cited by the Tribune, the San Ysidro attack where 21 people died, the most lethal of the three weapons used was an an ordinary hunting shotgun. Where mass killings are concerned (even leaving out 9/11 and the Oklahoma City Bombing), arson actually is the primary threat. A few major examples: An arsonist sets the Daegu subway fire in 2003, killing 198 people. Arson at the Happy Land Social Club killed 87 people in 1990. Three employees set the Dupont Plaza Hotel and Casino fire in 1986 killing 97 people. Philip Cline set a hotel Blaze in the Las Vegas Hilton in 1980 that killed eight people.
It is also hypocritical to focus so much on firearm deaths, when alcohol kills at a roughly comparable level. This includes numerous incidents that result in multiple homicide that are in the same general range as many of the Tribune's examples. More than a Columbine's worth of American youth die alcohol-related deaths every day (although, not in nearly as newsworthy a manner). More people under the age of 21 die from alcohol each day than people in the same age group die from all types of firearms. Where's the Tribune call to bring back prohibition? Where's the outrage from Daley and Blagojevich on this alcohol-related carnage?
And, where is the core analysis of the cost (in rights) vs. benefits. How does this regulation of legal gun owners (criminals do not obey gun laws) impact Chicago's rampant, inner-city drug crime? The suspect in the Starkesia Reed killing illegally purchased the weapon in another state. He then illegally converted it to automatic fire. Had a ban been in place it would have had absolutely no impact on Starkesia's death. Would a national ban have any more impact than the national ban on cocaine?
The editorial page is opinion, but one would expect at least some fairness in the news section on a Constitutional rights issue where clearly there are two sides of the story among both state residents and Tribune readers. Many of us own these firearms for collecting purposes, home defense, casual shooting, marksmanship shooting sports and even to hunt "pest" animals like coyotes. This particular right may not be important to the members of the Tribune editorial board (I would imagine there are few editorial voices present with an interest or background in firearms), but how about affording it at least some basic, honest journalistic analysis?
-
Charon, if you need me to hold onto your m1c, I can. That is something that is worth saving, even if it's out of state.
-
I own a nicely restored M1-Carbine. I love the rifle. It is one of the most intuitively operated and natural aiming weapons I have ever fired. It is balanced and compact. Wonderful little utility rifle.
-
Charon, if you need me to hold onto your m1c, I can. That is something that is worth saving, even if it's out of state.
I really hope it doesn't come to that (it's become a yearly, even multiple times per year struggle), but Ill keep it in mind lasersailor.
Charon
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
I don't care for any of those guns on that list except for this one.
Let it be known, that if they ban the M1 Carbine before I can get my hands on one, I will kick off the revolution that exact moment.
I'll join if that ever happens.
Leslie, they combine "Semi-Auto" and "Assault Weapons" in the same context.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by Debonair
Jackson, I don't see why you're all excited about it.
Don't think we'l believe you if you tell us your 90mm has a folding stock.
duh
Yeah, a folding stock won't do much to hide an artillery piece :D
-
but... but.... democrats don't want to take away our guns.... you are just being paranoid..
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
but... but.... democrats don't want to take away our guns.... you are just being paranoid..
lazs
He's being sarcastic. The dem's, collectively; are the folks that wanna 'get the guns'. We've got the same bill being discussed above in front of our Republican Govenor here in NY. He won't sign it. But the next guy, if he's a democrat; will.
-
Its an election year....this is just fodder for votes.
-
the democrats get their money from soros and the anti gun lobby... the republicans get theirs from the NRA and such..
Not all the politicos of every party get the money but.... they tow the line...
The result is... If you want to lose your gun rights then vote for a democrat.
lazs
-
What the heck? a gun thread without "you know who" he must be sick this week.