HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Please call/write your re...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:09 PM

Please call/write your rep and ask to support H.R.138 "Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act"

Last edited Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:45 PM - Edit history (1)

This is the bill just introduced by Representative Carolyn McCarthy & Representative Diana DeGette. The news about this has been posted before but the actual bill number just came out recently.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d113:2:./temp/~bdQOOb::|/bss/|

It has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary and here is the contact info for that committee:

http://judiciary.house.gov/about/contact.html

Edit-Just called my rep's D.C. office and also wrote this e-mail:

"H.R.138 Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act

Dear Dr. Benishek,

I am writing to ask you to seriously consider co-sponsoring and support passage of H.R. 138. A bill recently introduced by Representative Carolyn McCarthy and cosponsored by Representative Diana DeGette. This bill is very similar in part to what I wrote to you earlier about gun control legislation but whereas I asked for a 5 round limit, this bill puts the limit at 10 rounds.

This new bill does not prohibit those who already have such magazines from keeping them nor would it affect the hunters of Michigan. The restriction would be a step in the right direction for sensible gun control. In my opinion, there's only two reasons one may want to have large capacity magazines. Some people find them fun to shoot and others use them to create mayham and carnage. People can give up on some of their fun in order to reduce death and violence.

Thank you.

XXX XXXX "





34 replies, 2282 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 34 replies Author Time Post
Reply Please call/write your rep and ask to support H.R.138 "Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act" (Original post)
Kaleva Jan 2013 OP
PDJane Jan 2013 #1
Panasonic Jan 2013 #2
G_j Jan 2013 #3
OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #4
Kaleva Jan 2013 #7
BostonGuy Jan 2013 #5
Tommy_Carcetti Jan 2013 #6
bongbong Jan 2013 #18
Tommy_Carcetti Jan 2013 #19
HappyMe Jan 2013 #20
InformedVoterUSMC Jan 2013 #8
Kaleva Jan 2013 #10
Tommy_Carcetti Jan 2013 #14
Tommy_Carcetti Jan 2013 #15
Tommy_Carcetti Jan 2013 #16
onehandle Jan 2013 #21
bongbong Jan 2013 #31
HappyMe Jan 2013 #11
frylock Jan 2013 #12
ThoughtCriminal Jan 2013 #34
octoberlib Jan 2013 #9
samsingh Jan 2013 #13
nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #17
OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #22
Kaleva Jan 2013 #23
OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #24
NickB79 Jan 2013 #25
elfin Jan 2013 #26
regjoe Jan 2013 #27
Little Star Jan 2013 #28
Kaleva Jan 2013 #29
derby378 Jan 2013 #30
Kaleva Jan 2013 #33
michreject Jan 2013 #32

Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:14 PM

1. Kick and rec. Maybe keeping this at the top is a fine idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:15 PM

2. I don't have to write to my reps.

 

After the shootings in July in Aurora, my congresswoman (DeGette) introduced that bill, even though it happened in her neighboring district (It is Perlmutter's district)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:16 PM

3. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:18 PM

4. What all does the bill do (aside from the obvious)? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneTenthofOnePercent (Reply #4)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:33 PM

7. I beleive it's the same thing as H.R 308 which was introduced in the last Congress

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:23 PM

5. Useless Legislation

 

This won't make any difference, except to make ignorant people feel better. Whether you have ten round mags or 30 round mags, the difference to reload is only a couple seconds.

Why not focus on the criminals?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BostonGuy (Reply #5)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:24 PM

6. You mean the guys with the guns, BostonGuy?

Oh, wait, they all will kill us with hammers and cars instead.

Yeah. Welcome to DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Reply #6)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 04:00 PM

18. Welcome?

 

He got his pizza delivered PRONTO!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #18)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 04:03 PM

19. And tragically, so did his BFF.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Reply #19)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 04:07 PM

20. Sweet.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BostonGuy (Reply #5)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:38 PM

8. Right Step BostonGuy

 

I agree that the focus should not be on how many rounds fit into one magazine but rather who's has control of those magazines. Education in proper weapon handling and understanding the responsibility of owning a firearm needs to be a focus as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to InformedVoterUSMC (Reply #8)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:41 PM

10. So you support strict controls on who can have a gun or guns?

The shooters who commit suicide after killing another or others are not deterred by the possibility of fines and jail time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to InformedVoterUSMC (Reply #8)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:52 PM

14. I like talking to myself, too. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Reply #14)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:52 PM

15. Really! That's awesome!

Me too.

You rock!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Reply #15)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:53 PM

16. No, you rock! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Reply #14)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 04:10 PM

21. Bingo. It's AMAZING how 'many' people sign on to DU just to defend guns.

'Dozens' a day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #21)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 07:35 PM

31. The NRA has deep pockets

 

The Rendon Group, among others, gets lots of dough to post gun-nutz ideas on chatboards.

Also thank the Cock Brothers (via ALEC) for their "contributions".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BostonGuy (Reply #5)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:42 PM

11. Which ignorant people?

I think it's a step in the right direction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BostonGuy (Reply #5)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:49 PM

12. well then it shouldn't be an issue for you to reload your 10 rd mag..

while you're out at the "shooting range," should it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BostonGuy (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 12:45 AM

34. There is a connection between magazine capacity and number of deaths in mass shootings

Parents Against Gun Violence researchers have identified 37 mass shooting incidents (excluding robberies and armed confrontations) involving more than 6 victims in the United States since 1945. In 35 of 37, the perpetrators carried semiautomatic weapons. In 33 of 37, the perpetrators carried magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds. In the recent mass shootings in Tucson, Aurora, and Newtown, the perpetrators sought out inordinately large magazines, including the 100-round drum magazine James Holmes used to shoot 70 people in a movie theater. These mass murderers clearly believe that a higher-capacity magazine will equate to more fatalities.

http://www.parentsagainstgunviolence.com/

I would add that in a number of incidents, the shooter was stopped while reloading.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:40 PM

9. K&R!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:50 PM

13. kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:55 PM

17. Will do, will have to write mine to take into account California Law

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 05:05 PM

22. I wonder if it will apply to themselves as well. Will it have a grandfather clause?

 

Or is this yet another "OK for me but not for thee" piece of legislation? IMO, there are far too many instances where congress or the government can do something where the people cannot.
Will it have a grandfather clause too so that the tens of millions already out there remain legal? Or does it make tens of millinos of people felons overnight?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneTenthofOnePercent (Reply #22)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 05:11 PM

23. In the other bill that was proposed in the preceding Congress,...

those who had such magazines could keep them but they couldn't transfer or sell them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #23)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 05:24 PM

24. I think such a case may have a requirement for just compensation.

 

Private property does not need to be physically confiscated (for public use/benefit) to qualify for just compensation under the 5th amendment. If the value of the property in question is substantially diminished (or devalued completely) by direct government action for public use/benefit then just compensation may still be required - even if the citizen still owns the property in part or whole. I would think that if one were not allowed to sell their magazines, that the invested value of the property would be completely destroyed.

I think such a law would be challenged and it would be an interesting case to watch. I think the ruling would have a good chance of falling either way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 05:25 PM

25. It will be interesting to see how much GOP support this garners

I see this bill as a litmus test of how much political will and capital there is on both sides of the gun argument. This is a gun control bill that would have very little impact on gun owners, but also looks good on paper (not so much in practice). It's a softball for both parties, and if there really is support for new gun laws, this one should be easy to knock out of the ballpark.

If this passes, it gives a glimmer of hope that the GOP will play ball with the Democrats on gun control in the future on more substantial gun legislation.

If this dies from lack of GOP support (which is the more likely result), pretty much any other forms of gun control legislation will be DOA as well.

I'm going to bookmark this; I'll be interested to see what happens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 05:28 PM

26. Will do, BUT my Rep is Senselessbrenner, who already voted against Sandy. Eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 05:32 PM

27. Do you honestly believe

 

something this silly is going to "reduce death and violence?" Even when the vast majority of violence and death is caused by guns that will not be affected by this bill? Seriously?
This isn't even a good first step towards reducing those things.

If people want serious gun control, they are going to have to bring up effective legislation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 05:39 PM

28. k&r I'll do this tomorrow. Thanks for the heads up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Little Star (Reply #28)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 05:48 PM

29. I just called the House Committee on the Judiciary...

and asked the lady who answered that the committee expedite taking action on this bill.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 05:52 PM

30. 10 rounds good, 11 rounds bad!

Honestly, of all the things to jeopardize Medicare, Social Security, and education over - an 11-round magazine? I can't do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to derby378 (Reply #30)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 08:43 PM

33. Restriction ought be 5 rnds which would make the "10 rounds good, 11 rounds bad!" debate irelevent

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 07:58 PM

32. I believe that the full title is:


H.R. 138:

H.R. 138: To prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread