Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
Colorado shooting: If not gun control, then bullet control, lawmakers say
Tuesday, July 31, 2012 6:31 AM
NIKI2
Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...
Quote:James Holmes, the man charged with gunning down a dozen people in a Colorado movie theater, was able to buy 6,000 rounds of ammunition over the Internet in a relatively short period of time. No questions asked. His relative ease at obtaining more than enough ammo to supply an Army infantry squad going into combat prompted two Democratic legislators to announce they planned legislation to make it more difficult to buy that many bullets that quickly. But the effort by US Senator Frank Lautenberg (D) of New Jersey and US Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D) of New York faces a tough struggle in Congress, which has shown little interest in passing new gun control legislation. Despite the public’s abhorrence over the July 20 shootings, which killed 12 and also wounded 58, support for gun owner rights remains relatively high. Holmes allegedly used a civilian version of the military’s M-16 rifle with a 100-round drum magazine, a shotgun and two .40 caliber semi-automatic handguns in the massacre. Called the Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act, the idea behind the legislation is that federally licensed gun and ammunition dealers would have to alert the police that an unlicensed individual is buying a lot of ammo. What will the police do? As much as anything Senator Lautenberg sees them as a deterrent: a policeman calling to ask why someone is buying thousands of rounds of ammo might become suspicious if someone gives evasive answers. "I want them to be real nasty,” says Sen. Lautenberg, who, along with Rep. McCarthy, is known for his anti-gun efforts in Washington. Lautenberg and McCarthy both cited a report that Mr. Holmes had called a gun range to inquiry about shooting there. They said the owner of the range thought Holmes sounded unusual and told his staff to deny him access. The legislators said this showed why face-to-face contact was important in gun sales. Other parts of the proposed legislation include a requirement that anyone selling ammunition must be federally licensed. Ammo dealers would be required to maintain records. And anyone buying ammunition who is not a licensed dealer would present a photo ID at the time of purchase—something the legislators say would effectively ban online or mail order purchases of ordinance by civilians. After the attack, a Pew Research poll found 46 percent of Americans thought it was more important to protect American’s rights to own guns while 47 percent felt it was more important to control who owns them. Republicans favored the right of gun ownership by 70 percent while 67 percent of Democrats favored ownership control. Last week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) of Nevada said the Senate’s agenda was too packed to consider any gun control legislation. When asked about next year, he replied, “Nice try.” It’s also unlikely the Republican-dominated House would take up anything similar. Congressional leaders aren’t the only ones reluctant to consider gun control in an election year. Last Thursday the White House said it wouldn’t push for any new legislation. Instead, President Obama says existing laws need to be better enforced. White House spokesman Jay Carney says Obama would still like to see a ban on military-type assault rifles reinstated— that ban expired in 2004—but would not push for legislation. Nevertheless, Sen. Lautenberg says he has had some success in the past including a 1996 law that made it illegal for anyone convicted of the misdemeanor crime of domestic violence to own a gun. “Everyone said it couldn’t be done,” he says. As for Obama, he says: “I believe the President believes in safety, he just needs to hear from his constituents.” The two legislators will get a better sense of how Congress feels on Tuesday when they return to Washington to add co-sponsors. Online ammunition sales became legal in the 1986 after the passage of the McClure-Volkmer Act, also known as the Firearm Owners Protection Act. A spokesman for Ammotogo.com, a large online ammunition dealer in Brenham, Texas that also sells incendiary rounds, said no one was available to discuss the proposed restrictions. A voice mail left with Bulkammo.com was not returned. A spokesman at outdoor goods giant Cabela’s, based in Sidney, Neb., did not immediately return phone calls. The Gun Owners of America, which lobbies against restrictions, says it’s not surprised by the effort by Lautenberg and McCarthy to enact legislation. “The bottom line is they don’t like guns,” says John Velleco, director of federal affairs at the Springfield, Va. organization. Rep. McCarthy has two other gun control proposals before Congress. One of them would ban the sale of high capacity magazines that hold as many as 100 rounds of ammunition at a time. Another would require a background check on all gun buyers, closing what is known as the gun show loophole, which allows individuals to buy guns from a private dealer without a background check. The effort to restrict the sale of bulk ammunition, Velleco says, is just an effort to ban guns. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2012/0730/Colorado-shooting-If-not-gun-control-then-bullet-control-lawmakers-say
Tuesday, July 31, 2012 7:04 AM
JONGSSTRAW
Tuesday, July 31, 2012 7:16 AM
ANTHONYT
Freedom is Important because People are Important
Quote:Called the Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act, the idea behind the legislation is that federally licensed gun and ammunition dealers would have to alert the police that an unlicensed individual is buying a lot of ammo. And anyone buying ammunition who is not a licensed dealer would present a photo ID at the time of purchase—something the legislators say would effectively ban online or mail order purchases of ordinance by civilians.
Tuesday, July 31, 2012 7:22 AM
Quote:just allow us our Constitutional right to bear a hunting rifle
Tuesday, July 31, 2012 7:51 AM
Quote:Originally posted by ANTHONYT: Quote:just allow us our Constitutional right to bear a hunting rifle Hello, I'm not sure that's what it says.
Tuesday, July 31, 2012 8:06 AM
KWICKO
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)
Quote:Originally posted by ANTHONYT: Quote:Called the Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act, the idea behind the legislation is that federally licensed gun and ammunition dealers would have to alert the police that an unlicensed individual is buying a lot of ammo. And anyone buying ammunition who is not a licensed dealer would present a photo ID at the time of purchase—something the legislators say would effectively ban online or mail order purchases of ordinance by civilians. Hello Niki, These provisions are terrible as described. This is not a law designed to be considerate to shooters while enhancing safety and accountability. It is a law designed to stomp on shooters. Many, many recreational shooters buy ammunition in bulk (for obvious reasons) and identifying mass-murderers has never proved to be a difficulty. If someone buys a lot of ammunition, the police are to be notified. Why? Is this a pre-crime initiative? What is the purpose of this notification? And if you force people to present photo-ID IN PERSON it would kill all online purchasing of ammunition... which I see is the declared point of the thing. I have no problem with having to identify myself in order to purchase ammo, but I'd better be able to identify myself remotely. (As I do currently anyway.) These proposals are kneejerk and reflexive, absent logic. They are designed to make things hard on people buying ammunition, they are not designed to prevent tragedy. --Anthony
Tuesday, July 31, 2012 8:07 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Jongsstraw: Quote:Originally posted by ANTHONYT: Quote:just allow us our Constitutional right to bear a hunting rifle Hello, I'm not sure that's what it says. 'Arms' meant a squirrel rifle, a single shot pistol, hatchet or sword. That's all any colonist had or needed.
Tuesday, July 31, 2012 9:22 AM
FREMDFIRMA
Quote:Originally posted by Jongsstraw: 'Arms' meant a squirrel rifle, a single shot pistol, hatchet or sword. That's all any colonist had or needed.
Quote:Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American... the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people. -Tench Coxe, in the Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
Wednesday, August 1, 2012 5:24 AM
CAVETROLL
Quote: [The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. ---James Madison,The Federalist Papers, No. 46
Quote: To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws. ---John Adams, A Defence of the Constitutions of the United States 475 (1787-1788)
Quote: Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive. ---Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).
Quote: [W]hereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it. ---Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
Quote: [W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor... ---George Mason, Comments from the Virginia Convention June 2 through June 26, 1788
Quote: The whole of that Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals...t establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of. ---Albert Gallatin to Alexander Addison, Oct 7, 1789, MS. in N.Y. Hist. Soc.-A.G. Papers, 2.
Quote: [C]onceived it to be the privilege of every citizen, and one of his most essential rights, to bear arms, and to resist every attack upon his liberty or property, by whomsoever made. The particular states, like private citizens, have a right to be armed, and to defend, by force of arms, their rights, when invaded. Roger Sherman quoted in 14 Debates in the House of Representatives, ed. Linda Grand De Pauw. (Balt., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1972), 92-3.
Wednesday, August 1, 2012 5:48 AM
Quote:It is a law designed to stomp on shooters.
Quote:If someone buys a lot of ammunition, the police are to be notified. Why? Is this a pre-crime initiative? What is the purpose of this notification?
Quote:I'd better be able to identify myself remotely
Wednesday, August 1, 2012 6:08 AM
Quote:Boy, that sounds like a demand...which illustrates how gun folk and others think: "You'd better not make it harder for me to get WHATEVER I want HOWEVER I want"...or else what?
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL