"Murphy Mags" And How To Avoid Arrest In New Jersey

As of Monday, December 10th, if you possess a standard capacity magazine that holds more than 10 rounds in the state of New Jersey, you could be found guilty of a Class 4 Felony, spend up to 18 months in prison, lose your voting rights, and be subject to a lifetime ban on firearm ownership. Your options were to destroy the magazines, turn them into police, or remove them out of state. There was no grandfathering under the law nor was there any compensation for what arguably is a taking.

Gun rights attorney Evan F. Nappen is the acknowledged authority on New Jersey gun law. He has just written a guide on what to expect from the police and prosecutors and how to protect yourself.

Here are the action steps he encourages all New Jersey gun owners to take:

Action Items:

1. Make sure that your friends and family are aware of this potential threat.
2. Make sure that your friends and family are aware of the implications of talking with the police and consenting to searches.
3. Make sure that you do not have in your possession any Murphy Mags or other prohibited items.
4. Make sure that you, your family and your friends have the mindset to stand on your rights!

 While he thinks police raids are not likely to occur and that police will use other means such as computerized databases, demand letters, and the like, there are scenarios and reasons, in his opinion, where a police raid, with or without a warrant, might take place.

1. Some highly publicized mass shooting occurs, and the knee-jerk, politically expedient reaction is to go after Murphy Mag possessors.
2. Murphy’s failure to aggressively enforce his ban, gives his political challengers the opportunity to call him out on it. There is already pressure on Murphy to explain how he intends to enforce the ban. Breitbart News also reached out to Murphy’s press secretary, Daniel Bryan, about enforcement of the ban. He confirmed that the Governor “…had not ruled out house-to-house enforcement of the ban either.”
3. New Jersey has a computerized database of registered gun owners & their registered handguns which includes make and model. Many of these handguns came with Murphy Mags. For example, 15 round magazines came standard with the Glock Model 19, Beretta Model 92 and SIG Model P226, just to name three commonly possessed handguns.
4. New Jersey has a long history of abusing gun owners, creating “gun law victims” (destroying people’s lives with arbitrary gun laws) and undermining Second Amendment rights.
5. New Jersey has a liberal news media which actively acts as the propaganda arm for the anti-gun-rights movement.
6. New Jersey law enforcement will obey orders and enforce the law, rather than lose their jobs & pensions.

I suggest reading Evan's entire guide posted to his website. Moreover, if you live in New Jersey, I suggest studying it carefully, plan your response in advance, and make your family including kids aware of the family plan. As Michael Bane said on his podcast today, the law isn't enforced until is. Don't be that guy who Murphy uses as the example to cow the rest of New Jersey gun owners into compliance.

Colorado Bill To Repeal Standard Cap Mag Ban Fails

Earlier this month, the Colorado State Senate passed SB16-113 which would have repealed the ban on standard capacity magazines and would have repealed the requirement that standard capacity magazines manufactured in Colorado have a date stamp on them.

The vote to pass the bill in the Senate was 20 aye and 12 nay with two excused. It had previously passed out of committee on a 3-2 party line vote.

While the Senate is controlled by the Republicans, the House is the domain of the Democrats. While there was some hope that the Democrats might allow the bill out of committee, that hope was dashed last night.

The House State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee voted on the bill last night. The first vote was on a motion to send the bill to the House floor for consideration by the full House. This was defeated on a party line 4-5 vote. Then the committee voted 5-4 to postpone consideration of the bill indefinitely. This means the bill is dead for all practical purposes.

Coloradans can thank Committee Chair and House Majority Whip Su Ryden (D-Arapahoe), Rep. Mike Foote (D-Boulder), Rep. Dianne Primavera (D-Boulder/Broomfield), Rep. Max Tyler (D-Jefferson), and Rep. Susan Lontine (D-Denver) for this bill's defeat. These five were good little minions for Mike Bloomberg and did as they were told. I'm sure the criminal element, especially home invasion specialists, were pleased with this result. As to your average, law-abiding, tax-paying Colorado gun owner, that is another story.

I want to thank my friend Laura Carno as well as attorney David Kopel for taking the time to testify in favor of the bill before the Senate State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee when it held hearings.



H/T Jenna Meek

A Loss In Connecticut

Senior District Court Judge Alfred V. Covello ruled in favor of the State of Connecticut in upholding their assault weapons ban and other restrictions. The case, Shew et al v. Malloy et al, was brought by the Connecticut Citizens Defense League and others challenging the law enacted after the Newtown shootings.

Gun control advocates were buoyed Thursday by a federal court decision in Hartford that upholds Connecticut's toughest-in-the-nation assault weapons ban, calling it a constitutionally valid means of balancing gun rights and the government's interest in reducing gun violence.

"The court concludes that the legislation is constitutional," senior U.S. District Judge Alfred V. Covello wrote in a decision published late Thursday. "While the act burdens the plaintiffs' Second Amendment rights, it is substantially related to the important governmental interest of public safety and crime control."

Just quickly glancing over the opinion that can be found here, it appears that Judge Covello used intermediate scrutiny to decide in favor of Connecticut and relied upon the 2nd Circuit's ruling in Kachalsky v. Cacace.

From the article in the Hartford Courant, it appears that Judge Covello bought into much of the anti-gun nonsense that Connecticut used to defend the law.

Covello, agreeing with the plaintiffs, concluded that the weapons and magazines are commonly owned and legally used in Connecticut and elsewhere. But he parted company with the plaintiffs when he wrote that the state's ownership and sales ban is justified when the government's goal of reducing violence is measured against the ban's impingement on Second Amendment rights.

The Second Amendment rights of gun owners are adequately protected by the large number of alternate weapons that can be used for protection, hunting and sports events, he wrote.

On several occasions, Covello adopted the state's arguments that assault weapons are designed, not for cosmetic purposes, but for "lethality." And he referred to an affidavit by a state expert who asserted that "Connecticut's bans on assault weapons and large capacity magazines, and particularly its ban on (large capacity magazines), have the potential to prevent and limit shootings in the state over the long run."

Covello was appointed to the bench for the District of Connecticut by Pres. George H. W. Bush in 1992.

ISRA Issues Urgent Alert On Mag Ban Legislation

The Illinois State Rifle Association issued an urgent alert this morning regarding moves by State Senator Antonio Munoz (D-Chicago) that, if passed, would result in the banning and confiscation of all magazines over 10 round capacity.

Anti-gun Chicago Sen. Antonio Munoz today filed an amendment to SB1002 that would result in the banning and confiscation of all magazines over 10 rounds.

THE BOTTOM LINE: If Munoz’s bill passes, you’d go to jail longer for having a standard AR-15 magazine in your own home than you would if you robbed a liquor store.

HERE’S WHAT YOU NEED TO DO TO PROTECT YOUR GUN RIGHTS:

1. Immediately contact your State Senator and politely tell the person who answers the phone that you are a law-abiding Illinois firearm owner who opposes SB1002. Advise the person further that you would like the Senator to vote against SB1002 should it come to the floor.If you do not know who your State Senator is, the Illinois State Board of Elections has an interactive search page here: www.elections.state.il.us/DistrictLocator/DistrictOfficialSearchByAddress.aspx

If you already know who your State Senator is and just need the contact info, you can find that here: www.ilga.gov/senate/.

2. Pass this alert on to your friends and family; tell them to make calls as well.

3. Post this alert to any and all Internet blogs and bulletin boards to which you belong.

Interesting Interview With Duane Liptak Of Magpul

Cam Edwards of NRA News interviewed Duane Liptak of Magpul yesterday after Gov. John Hickenlooper (D-CO) signed HB 1224 into law. Mr. Liptak is the Director of Product Management and Marketing for Magpul.

Mr. Liptak had a number of interesting comments during the course of the interview. First, Magpul will be going with a multi-state, multi-location manufacturing approach. While they haven't released just where they are going, certain sites have already been selected. They plan a phased move out of Colorado with the magazine manufacturing being the first part of their company to move for obvious reasons.

When asked about their current employees and the impact the move will have on them, Mr. Liptak said that many of the current employees had expressed a desire to move with the company to the new locations. He seemed rather gratified by this loyalty of the employees to Magpul.

Magpul met with a number of state legislators during the fight against HB 1224. While Magpul presented facts and legal opinions as well as stressing the economic repercussions of the bill, this didn't seem to make any headway with a number of the Democrats. Mr. Liptak noted that every time they went to the state capitol, they always ran into lobbyists from Bloomberg and MAIG. He said they were everywhere. It is a sad day when a New York billionaire can buy a western state legislature so easily. It reminds one of the railroad barons in Frank Norris' The Octopus so dominated California of the late 19th century.

Gun Prohibitionists Crowing

Now that Gov. John Hickenlooper (D-CO) has signed Colorado HB 1224 which now bans magazines with a capacity - or the ability to be readily converted - of over 15 rounds, the gun prohibitionists at Mayor Bloomberg's Illegal Mayors are crowing. I guess they feel they got their money's worth.

Would that these gun prohibitionists cared so much about the lives and jobs of the employees of Magpul and their suppliers that will be leaving Colorado.

Urgent Alert For Illinois Readers

The Illinois State Rifle Association reports that vote on a magazine ban will come up today in the Illinois State House. It will come as Amendment 12 to HB 1156.

This amendment would make it illegal to "to knowingly deliver, sell, receive, transfer, purchase, or cause to be delivered, sold, received, transferred, purchased, or possessed a large capacity ammunition feeding device." A "large capacity ammunition feeding device" is defined as a magazine, etc., that could hold more than 10 rounds. Tubular-fed rimfire rifles and lever action rifles would be exempted from this definition.

Of course, this amendment contains exemptions for those thought to have a higher need to possess a "large capacity ammunition feeding device". Those include cops, the military, and Hollywood. It also contains a provision that would allow the manufacture of magazines so long as it was for cops, the military, and Hollywood. Under the amendment, manufacturers could also make magazines for sale out of state. I call this the "merchant of death" provision given the proponents of this amendment consider these magazines much too deadly for Illinois residents to possess but don't give a big rat's ass what happens outside the friendly confines of the Prairie State.

Read the ISRA alert below and act accordingly.

House Speaker Michael Madigan and his gun-grabber pals have just reintroduced their magazine ban as Amendment 12 to HB1156.

THIS MAGAZINE BAN WILL BE UP FOR A VOTE ON TUESDAY

If this ban passes, you will have to go down to the police station and register your magazines that hold more than 10 rounds and you will have to sign an oath that you will never sell them to anyone else.

GUESS HOW MANY CRIMINALS WILL BE REQUIRED TO REGISTER THEIR MAGAZINES? THE ANSWER IS ZERO!

Of course, sales of new magazines holding more than 10 rounds would be BANNED.

It’s very important that you make these calls. We realize that you’ve been called upon to act many times so far this year. But your continued support is crucial. Madigan and the gun-grabbers are hoping that you will get tired of defending your rights.

MADIGAN NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THAT WE WILL NEVER GET TIRED OF DEFENDING OUR RIGHTS!

HERE IS WHAT YOU MUST DO TO PROTECT YOUR RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS

1. Call your state representative and politely tell them you are a law-abiding gun owner who objects to magazine bans. Politely advise them to vote NO on Amendment 12 – the magazine ban. If you do not know who your state representative is, then the Illinois State Board of Elections has a new interactive search page here:
www.elections.state.il.us/DistrictLocator/DistrictOfficialSearchByAddress.aspx

If you know who your representative is, you can find their contact info here:
www.ilga.gov/house/.

2. Post this alert to any and all Internet Bulletin Boards or blogs to which you subscribe.

3. Pass this alert on to your friends and family and ask them to call their legislators as well.

"Or Readily Converted"

Now that HB 1224 has been amended and passed by both houses of the Colorado legislature, a line in the bill that would effectively ban all magazines with a removable floorplate is finally being noticed. And the bill's primary sponsor Rep. Rhonda Fields (D-Aurora) is not only not concerned about that but fully supports the broad interpretation of the law.

The relevant passage from the definitions section of the engrossed version of HB 1224 in defining what constitutes a "large capacity magazine" reads:

(I) A FIXED OR DETACHABLE MAGAZINE, BOX, DRUM, FEED STRIP, OR SIMILAR DEVICE CAPABLE OF ACCEPTING, OR THAT IS DESIGNED TO BE READILY CONVERTED TO ACCEPT, MORE THAN FIFTEEN ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION

Say, for example, that you had a standard Glock 19 magazine that hold 15 rounds. You think that it is legal if this law is signed by Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) and could be readily transferred. However, you can put a Pearce Grip magazine extension on it which adds two more rounds. That 15 round magazine was just readily converted to a 17 round magazine and is illegal under the law as written.

Denver's 9 News investigated and concluded the above example is a correct interpretation of the law. Moreover, when they interviewed Rep. Fields, she agreed. She also suggested that people could either get existing non-convertible 10 round magazines or that manufacturers would make 15 round magazines for sale in Colorado. She lives in a dreamland if you believes the latter.




Michael Bane has an extended discussion of this in this week's DownRange Radio podcast. You can listen to it here. It explains why he is setting up a gun trust to protect himself.

Under Colorado law, Gov. Hickenlooper has two weeks to veto the bill. His veto must be an affirmative act - just refusing to sign the bill will let it go into effect.

You still have time to contact Hickenlooper using this link. He portrays himself as pro-business and now it is time for him to put up or shut up.

Reading Between The Lines

Rep. Cory Gardner (R-CO) represents the district in which magazine manufacturer Magpul is located. He plans to tour the Magpul plant in Erie, Colorado today and had invited Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) to join him. Hickenlooper won't be able to attend because he is headed to the East Coast for meetings in New York, Philly, and DC as well as attending the National Governors Association meeting.

In making the invitation Gardner said:

Gardner, R-Yuma, said the governor could benefit from the tour because, “as elected officials, I think it is important that we educate ourselves on how legislation can affect our constituents.”

As so often happens, the Congressman's office didn't coordinate with the Governor's office before announcing the invitation.  I've read two reports on this invitation in the Denver press. In one report (the Denver Post), the story stops there. Moreover, the headlines in both stories are about the invitation and the governor's inability to make the tour with Gardner.

However, in the other report on this tour put out by KDVR Fox 31 Denver, there was this little tidbit about HB 1224, the Colorado magazine ban bill, and the governor's position on it.

Hickenlooper told reporters last week that he supports the high-capacity magazine ban; but, during a panel discussion about gun restrictions Tuesday night, the governor appeared to waffle on the matter.

“We haven’t taken a position on that bill yet,” Hickenlooper said. “But I from time to time have said contradictory things on it.

“It’s a tough issue: I mean, how many lives do you save, and how real is the inconvenience to the people who want to have a larger capacity magazine and feel it’s essential for defending their house?”

Hickenlooper’s former legislative lobbyist, R.D. Sewald, who left the administration last year to start his own private lobbying firm, now represents Magpul.

In terms of whether or not a magazine ban is enacted in Colorado or not, forget the news about the tour. That is just publicity seeking by a politician. The important stuff is the relationship between Gov. Hickenlooper and Sewald, the fact that Sewald now represents Magpul, and whether or not Sewald can convince either Hickenlooper or enough Democrat State Senators to can HB 1224. That's the real story.

Lautenberg Introduces Mag Ban To Senate

Today is the first day that Senators can introduce bills and Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) has wasted no time. I am presuming that Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) likewise has introduced her new "assault weapon" (sic) ban. The Library of Congress' Thomas page has not been updated to reflect any bills introduced into the Senate.

While the exact wording of Lautenberg's bill is not absolutely know, I am presuming that it will be identical to that of Rep. Carolyn McCarthy's HR 138.

In the release below I find a couple of things interesting. First, Lautenberg implies that former President George W. Bush is in support of his bill. Second, that Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) is a co-sponsor of the bill. Franken has been a little wishy-washy in the last few weeks on guns as he looks to the 2014 election cycle.

From Lautenberg's press release:

WASHINGTON, DC—On the first day for bills to be introduced in the 113th Congress, U.S. Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) today introduced his bill to ban high-capacity ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds. The proposal—which Lautenberg first introduced in January 2011—is a major component of the gun safety plan President Obama announced last week.

“The latest tragedy in Newtown was a wake up call for our nation, and now we must now turn our grief into action to reduce further tragedies. It is clearer than ever that there is no place in our communities for military-style supersized magazines like those used inside Sandy Hook Elementary School, in Aurora, and in Tucson, and I will keep working to reinstate the ban on them,” said Senator Lautenberg. “President Obama's bold plan to address gun violence included my common-sense proposal to ban high-capacity magazines holding more than 10 rounds, and we will get to work in Congress to pass this bill and other reasonable reforms that protect children and families. This is the kind of sensible reform that has the support of Democrats and Republicans, hunters and responsible gun owners, and it is time for Congress to listen to the American people and put this ban back in place.”

A companion bill has been introduced in the House of Representatives by Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy and has the support of 48 cosponsors.

“Senator Lautenberg and I have reintroduced the bill to ban high-capacity ammunition magazines because they're the common thread in every major mass shooting in recent history and taking them off the market can have a major impact on saving lives in America. The horrific murders in Newtown have shown how our nation's lax attitude towards gun violence has gone too far and we must take action to save lives,” said Rep. McCarthy

Senator Lautenberg's “Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act” would prohibit the manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that have a capacity of, or could be readily converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition. From 1994 to 2004, these high-capacity ammunition magazines were illegal as part of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004. Since that time, high-capacity clips (holding more than 10 rounds at a time) have been legal to manufacture and sell under federal law.

Senator Lautenberg first introduced his bill after a high-capacity ammunition magazine was used to carry out the shooting spree in Tucson, allowing the shooter to fire off 31 bullets in just 15 seconds. The shooter was subdued when he stopped to reload. In addition to the Tucson tragedy, high-capacity magazines were used in mass shootings at Virginia Tech, Fort Hood, Aurora, Oak Creek, and Newtown.

The bill is co-sponsored by Senators Charles E. Schumer (D-NY), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Tom Carper (D-DE), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Jack Reed (D-RI), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Chris Coons (D-DE), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Carl Levin (D-MI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Al Franken (D-MN), Chris Murphy (D-CT), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY).

Former President George W. Bush and former Vice President Dick Cheney have expressed support for reinstating the ban on high-capacity magazines in the past, and polls show that 65 percent of Americans support such a ban.

UPDATE: Lautenberg's bill is S.33. It currently has 16 co-sponsors as mentioned above in his press release.

HR 138: Large Capacity Feeding Device Act

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy introduced HR 138 - the Large Capacity Feeding Device Act - as expected on January 3rd. It is a word-for-word repeat of her HR 308 introduced in the 112th Congress. It is a straight up magazine ban of all magazines with a greater than 10 round capacity or the ability to be converted or adapted to that size. Unlike the Clinton-era assault weapon (sic) ban, this bill will not allow you to transfer a pre-ban magazine. Of course, all governmental agencies and current or retired law enforcement officers are exempted from it.

The text of the bill is below:

HR 138 IH
113th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 138 To prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 3, 2013

Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York (for herself and Ms. DEGETTE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

---

A BILL To prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes.

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 `Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act'.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON TRANSFER OR POSSESSION OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES.

(a) Definition- Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after paragraph (29) the following:

`(30) The term `large capacity ammunition feeding device'--

`(A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; but

`(B) does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.'.

(b) Prohibitions- Section 922 of such title is amended by inserting after subsection (u) the following:

`(v)(1)(A)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), it shall be unlawful for a person to transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

`(ii) Clause (i) shall not apply to the possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed within the United States on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection.

`(B) It shall be unlawful for any person to import or bring into the United States a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

`(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--

`(A) a 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) a transfer to a licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining an on-site physical protection system and security organization required by Federal law, or possession by an employee or contractor of such a licensee on-site 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 ammunition, of a large capacity ammunition feeding device transferred to the individual by the agency upon that retirement; or

`(D) a manufacture, transfer, or possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney General.'.

(c) Penalties- Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(8) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(v) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.'.

(d) Identification Markings- Section 923(i) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following: `A large capacity ammunition feeding device manufactured after the date of the enactment of this sentence shall be identified by a serial number that clearly shows that the device was manufactured after such date of enactment, and such other identification as the Attorney General may by regulation prescribe.'.

This bill has 39 co-sponsors as of today and I'm sure more anti-gun representatives will be flocking to sign on after Obama's unveiling of his proposals tomorrow. The co-sponsors, all Democrats, include:

Rep Brady, Robert A. [PA-1]
Rep Capuano, Michael E. [MA-7]
Rep Castor, Kathy [FL-14]
Rep Cicilline, David N. [RI-1]
Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-13]
Rep Courtney, Joe [CT-2]
Rep Cummings, Elijah E. [MD-7]
Rep DeGette, Diana [CO-1]
Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [CT-3]
Rep Deutch, Theodore E. [FL-21]
Rep Ellison, Keith [MN-5]
Rep Eshoo, Anna G. [CA-18]
Rep Frankel, Lois [FL-22]
Rep Fudge, Marcia L. [OH-11]
Rep Higgins, Brian [NY-26]
Rep Himes, James A. [CT-4]
Rep Huffman, Jared [CA-2]
Rep Israel, Steve [NY-3]
Rep Kaptur, Marcy [OH-9]
Rep Larson, John B. [CT-1]
Rep Levin, Sander M. [MI-9]
Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. [NY-12]
Rep Matsui, Doris O. [CA-6]
Rep McCollum, Betty [MN-4]
Rep Miller, George [CA-11]
Rep Moore, Gwen [WI-4]
Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8]
Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [DC]
Rep Perlmutter, Ed [CO-7]
Rep Quigley, Mike [IL-5]
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9]
Rep Schiff, Adam B. [CA-28]
Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-30]
Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [NY-25]
Rep Speier, Jackie [CA-14]
Rep Tierney, John F. [MA-6]
Rep Tsongas, Niki [MA-3]
Rep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8]
Rep Yarmuth, John A. [KY-3]

Gun Banners Move To The Illinois House

The Illinois State Rifle Association issued an alert late last night concerning the moves by gun prohibitionists in the Illinois State House.

Rep. Eddie Acevedo has introduced an amendment that duplicates much of what was introduced earlier in the State Senate. It does have a twist in that it authorizes a contract with a non-public third party to create and administer a "registration eligibility verification system". It is described as an "emergency contract". I'm sure some friend of Rep. Acevedo or one of his Chicago cronies will benefit handsomely under this contract.

The ISRA Alert:

LATE BREAKING ALERT – NEXT VOTE ON SEMI AUTO BAN WILL TAKE PLACE SUNDAY YOUR IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED

After getting nowhere in the Senate, the gun controllers have taken their campaign to destroy your rights to the Illinois House. Earlier today, Amendment #1 to SB2899 was introduced in the Illinois House of Representatives. Sponsored by rabidly anti-gun Rep. Eddie Acevedo, the amendment would do two things to you:

1. It would pick your pocket to pay for the confiscation and destruction of your own guns.

2. It would ban more than 50% of the rifles and more than 80% of handguns owned by Illinois citizens.

THIS BILL WILL BE VOTED ON BY THE HOUSE JUDICIARY 1 COMMITTEE ON SUNDAY AFTERNOON – YOU MUST ACT NOW!

To help save your guns, please contact the following Representatives and politely tell them that you are a law-abiding firearm owner and that you do not support SB2899 and that you expect them to vote the amendment down.

1. Rep. Elaine Nekritz,. (217) 558-1004 and (847) 257-0450

2. Rep. John Bradley, (217) 782-1051 and (618) 997-9697

3. Rep. Jill Tracy, (217) 782-8096 and (217) 223-0833

4. Rep. Michael Connelly, (217) 782-8028 and (630) 579-4848

5. Rep. Dwight Kay, (217) 782-8018 and (618) 307-9200

6. Rep. Lou Lang, (217) 782-1252 and (847) 673-1131

7. Rep. Sid Mathias, (217) 782-1664 and (847) 222-0061

8. Rep. André M. Thapedi, (217) 782-1702 and (773) 873-4444

9. Rep. Arthur Turner, (217) 782-8116 and (773) 277-4700

10. Rep. Ann Williams, (217) 782-2458 and (773) 880-9082

11. Rep. Michael Zalewski, (217) 782-5280 and (708) 442-6500

REMEMBER – THE AMENDMENT TO SB2899 WILL BE VOTED ON IN COMMITTEE SUNDAY AFTERNOON – START CALLING THESE REPRESENTATIVES BEGINNING SATURDAY AND CONTINUE CALLING THRU SUNDAY

Carolyn McCarthy On Her Magazine Ban Bill

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) and Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO) will be introducing a bill today that will mandate reduced-capacity magazines and will ban sale and transfer of standard-capacity magazines. Checking the Library of Congress service Thomas, no bills are listed as having been introduced but I think there is probably some lag in the system.

This move by McCarthy and DeGette was fully expected. Sebastian feels that the magazine ban will be harder to fight than any AWB due to many on the center-right who feel it is reasonable. He makes a number of good points especially that the criminal class will have no trouble in obtaining magazines.

Massad Ayoob discusses why good people need standard capacity magazines in his blog in Backwoods Home Magazine. He concludes:

The reasoning is strikingly clear. The cops are the experts on the current criminal trends. If they have determined that a “high capacity” semiautomatic pistol and a .223 semiautomatic rifle with 30-round magazines are the best firearms for them to use to protect people like me and my family, they are obviously the best things for us to use to protect ourselves and our families .

In her statement below, McCarthy makes the semi-erroneous claim that standard capacity magazines are not allowed for hunting. Magazine restrictions as well as restrictions on semi-automatic rifles for hunting exist in some locations and not in others. We need to get away from arguing sporting purpose with regard to magazine-fed rifles and pistols. In my opinion, self-defense of self and family is paramount and Mas makes a very cogent case for why we need standard capacity magazines in his blog post.

McCarthy's release on the bill:

WASHINGTON, DC (Jan. 3, 2013) -- Reps. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY4) and Diana DeGette (D-CO1) are reintroducing legislation today to ban the high-capacity ammunition magazines that have enabled high numbers of casualties in almost every recent mass shooting in American history.

“These assault magazines help put the ‘mass’ in ‘mass shooting’ and anything we can do to stop their proliferation will save lives in America,” Rep. McCarthy said. “These devices are used to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time possible and we owe it to innocent Americans everywhere to keep them out of the hands of dangerous people. We don’t even allow hunters to use them – something’s deeply wrong if we’re protecting game more than we’re protecting innocent human beings.”
“Since I came to Congress, I have been working to protect our children and our families from senseless gun violence,” Rep. DeGette said. “Recent tragedies have only heightened the need, and that is why Rep. McCarthy and I are reintroducing our bill to ban high-capacity assault magazines. While there is no single answer to stopping these massacres, this bill is a step that will go a long way toward making our country safe.”

The High Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act, as the bill is formally known, bans the sale or transfer of ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds. Such a standard was federal law between 1994 and 2004, when the assault weapons ban was in effect, and it is state law in many parts of the United States. Magazines are available today in capacities of up to 100 and even more. Law enforcement officials and analysts have cited the direct role that magazine capacity plays in ensuring the high numbers of casualties in mass shootings. Often, as in the cases of Tucson, Arizona and the Long Island Railroad, the carnage ends when the shooters run out of bullets and stop to reload, at which point they are stopped by bystanders.

Unfortunately, the devices are still easily available to the public and have been used in every mass shooting in recent history, such as: Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut; a shopping mall in Oregon; a temple in Wisconsin; a movie theater in Colorado; a Congressional event in Arizona; at schools like Columbine High School and Virginia Tech University; at a law office in California; and on a commuter rail car in New York. They were even acquired from the United States by mail order and used in the Norway shooting of 2011, where 69 people were shot to death.

In many cases, mass shooters intending to act don’t have access to a black market, but acquire whatever they can easily and legally, making a ban on high-capacity magazines a major obstacle for future mass murderers to carry out their plans.

The legislation had 138 House co-sponsors in the 112th Congress, under the number H.R. 308. One hundred and eleven House members signed on after its introduction after the shooting in Tucson, Arizona; two more signed on after the shooting in Aurora, Colorado; then 25 more signed on after last month’s shooting in Newtown, Connecticut.

Rep. McCarthy, a lifelong nurse, strode into a life of activism to reduce gun violence after her husband was murdered and son critically wounded in the 1993 mass shooting on the Long Island Railroad in New York. Her activism led her to Washington first to lobby members of Congress as an advocate for victims, and then as a member herself after running against her own congressman who voted against the assault weapons ban.

Rep. DeGette has been an outspoken supporter of measures to reduce gun violence and played a critical role in rounding up support for new cosponsors for the ban on high-capacity magazines after the most recent tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. Her district includes Columbine High School and is adjacent to that which includes Aurora, Colorado. She is now, with Rep. McCarthy, the original co-sponsor of the legislation, which will receive a bill number shortly.

The bill to ban high-capacity magazines was carried in the Senate in the 112th Congress by Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey. Sen. Lautenberg has helped lead the fight for safer gun policy for much of his decades-long career, writing the law to keep guns out of the hands of domestic violence offenders and co-sponsoring the original Brady Law to establish background checks for handgun purchases, among other efforts.

High Capacity, Standard Capacity, Or Reduced Capacity

I had a thought provoking comment left the other day by a John Ryan that bears repeating. It was in regard to an infographic I had posted by the American Preppers Network that discussed "high capacity" magazines.

We have to be better at getting the right terms out there. Especially getting them to the talking heads on our side ( they are making lots of mistakes). Otherwise hyperbole wins the day. “Standard capacity” is the winning term. They are proposing “reduced capacity”. “Reduced capacity magazines” diminish a persons ability to defend themselves. 10 is a random # made up out of thin air.

If we meet them on the terms they set, talking about “ high caps don’t save that much time” we lose because nobody ( other that shooters) wants to follow that. We, as proponents for the preservation of the 2nd, have to make sure our arguments are not just convincing to us, but to lay people as well.

“Standard capacity” is what a pistol was designed for. It’s what a rifle was designed for. Artificially limiting that capacity harms a persons right to self defense as codified in Heller. Spread this rationale around.

The Browning Hi-Power was one of the first pistols to use a double-stack magazine. The magazine size was 13 rounds. That was the size of magazine that the pistol was designed to use. Likewise, the ubiquitous Glock 17 was designed to use a magazine containing 17 rounds. Hence, I presume the name.

I think Mr. Ryan is absolutely correct. We have to take charge of the discussion and to do that we need to be more precise in our language. We cannot let the media or the gun prohibitionists continue to dominate the discussion with the emotionally laden term of "high capacity". There are good, solid reasons one needs standard capacity magazines in the non-military, non-law enforcement world and we should be making them daily.

Infographic On Standard Capacity Magazines

I came across this infographic on Facebook this morning. It is from the American Preppers Network. It examines how long it would take to get off 100 shots with various sizes of magazines assuming 3 seconds per change and 1 second per shot. Of course, both changes and aimed shots could be made in less time with practice but it is a starting point.

Use this link to view the videos mentioned in the infographic.

Never Letting A Tragedy Go To Waste

The gun prohibitionists never let a tragedy go to waste. A gaggle of Democrat Senators led by Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) have proposed an amendment to S. 3414, the Cybersecurity Act of 2012, that would ban all magazines, stripper clips, drums, and belts that would hold more than 10 rounds. They do carve out an exception for .22 LR.

This is similar to the bill that Rep. Carolyn McCarthy proposed following the shooting in Tucson in 2011. Like her bill, while you could possess a pre-ban mag, it doesn't allow you to sell or transfer it.

Sen. Schumer defended the amendment on the floor of the Senate yesterday. The Hill has video of it here. He said in part,

“Maybe we could come together on guns if each side gave some,” Schumer said.

He suggested that Democrats make it clear that their goal is not to repeal the Second Amendment.

“The basic complaint is that the Chuck Schumers of the world want to take away your guns,” Schumer said of the argument made by gun lobbies. “I think it would be smart for those of us who want rational gun control to make it know that that’s not true at all.”

Schumer also pointed out that it would be reasonable for the right to recognize that background checks on those buying guns is necessary — as called for in the Brady law. He also said average Americans don’t need an assault weapon to go hunting or protect themselves.

“We can debate where to draw the line of reasonableness, but we might be able to come to an agreement in the middle,” Schumer said. “Maybe, maybe, maybe we can pass some laws that might, might, might stop some of the unnecessary casualties … maybe there’s a way we can some together and try to break through the log jam and make sure the country is a better place.”

The only problem when gun prohibitionists like Schumer and others of his ilk say "reasonableness", "rational", and "common sense" is that they expect those of us who favor gun rights to give up something so that we don't lose even more stuff. I never see them proposing the end to any of the 20,000 plus bills that are already on the books.

As Sebastian said last night, it is good that this fight is now out in the open. Moreover, now that it is, we need to counter it.

The full text of Senate Amendment 2575 is below:

SA 2575. Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. REED, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Mr. SCHUMER, and Mrs. FEINSTEIN) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3414, to enhance the security and resiliency of the cyber and communications infrastructure of the United States; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following

SEC. __. PROHIBITION ON TRANSFER OR POSSESSION OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES.

(a) Definition.--Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after paragraph (29) the following:

``(30) The term `large capacity ammunition feeding device'--

``(A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; but

``(B) does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.''.

(b) Prohibitions.--Section 922 of such title is amended by inserting after subsection (u) the following:

``(v)(1)(A)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), it shall be unlawful for a person to transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

``(ii) Clause (i) shall not apply to the possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed within the United States on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection.

``(B) It shall be unlawful for any person to import or bring into the United States a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

``(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--

``(A) a 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) a transfer to a licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining an on-site physical protection system and security organization required by Federal law, or possession by an employee or contractor of such a licensee on-site 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 ammunition, of a large capacity ammunition feeding device transferred to the individual by the agency upon that retirement; or

``(D) a manufacture, transfer, or possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney General.''.

(c) Penalties.--Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

``(8) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(v) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.''.

(d) Identification Markings.--Section 923(i) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following: ``A large capacity ammunition feeding device manufactured after the date of the enactment of this sentence shall be identified by a serial number that clearly shows that the device was manufactured after such date of enactment, and such other identification as the Attorney General may by regulation prescribe.''.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

A Study in Willful Ignorance

The Connecticut General Assembly is considering SB 1094, An Act Banning Large Capacity Ammunition Magazines. This bill would not only ban any magazine with a capacity greater than 10 rounds but would give owners of these magazines 90 days within which they must turn them in to the police. Failure to do so would be a felony. There would be no grandfathering of magazines that were possessed prior to the enactment of the bill. As usual in these bans, the ban would only apply to the general public and not to law enforcement officers.

The Joint Judiciary Committee of the General Assembly held hearings yesterday on SB 1094. As reported in the Hartford Courant, the hearings drew a great number of people both for and against the bill. Unlike in the old Bill Ruger days, the current President of Ruger Firearms, Michael Fifer came out strongly against the bill. James Debney, President of the Firearms Division of Smith and Wesson, reminded the legislature of the number of jobs that could be lost if the bill passed. He made special note that the state had a number of magazine manufacturers including C Products and MecGar.

However, it is the testimony in support of the bill which contains the wild statements, willful ignorance, and hyperbole. As I noted earlier, SB 1094 does not apply to law enforcement who would continue to have standard capacity magazines.

From Bridgeport Police Chief Joseph Gaudett:

Just as you correctly realized there is NO REASON for the general public to possess Assault Weapons, that same basic logic must be applied to the large capacity magazines.

There is no reason whatsoever that hunters or sportsmen or collectors or the public at large should have large capacity magazines. Their purpose is singular and deadly, and makes no sense at all for general public use.

From State Senator Gary LeBeau, Deputy President Pro Tempore of the Senate:

High capacity magazines are designed to enable shooting mass numbers of people quickly and efficiently without reloading. They have been used in numerous mass shootings, including Tucson, Virginia Tech, Fort Hood, Columbine and last summer, Manchester, Connecticut. These high capacity magazines are simply not useful for hunting or self-defense

And from the mayors of Bridgeport (Bill Finch), Hartford (Pedro Segarra), and New Haven (John DeStefano) comes this screed. I should note that all three are members of Mayor Bloomberg's Illegal Mayors group.

Large capacity ammunition magazines are designed to enable shooting mass numbers of people quickly and efficiently without reloading.

As our work is not done, we must continue our efforts to keep these high-capacity magazines out of the hands of the general public.

The two phrases that come up continually in their testimony are "general public" and "enable shooting mass numbers of people". When they say "general public", it tells me the political class - and I add the police chief in this category - does not trust the people of their state. A political class that has so little respect for the people needs to be replaced.

The "enable shooting mass numbers of people" is just hyperbole and willful ignorance. It is right up there with saying a standard capacity magazine is not needed for self-defense because the only reason you need more is that you can't shoot straight. If that was the case, then why do trained law enforcement officers need standard capacity magazines? Presumably they are trained and must pass marksmanship qualifications on a regular basis.

Shocking Undercover Video Of A.......Legal Purchase

New York State Senator Eric Adams (D-Brooklyn)wanted to show how easy it was to buy "high-capacity gun clips" in New York State. He visited two gun stores in the Albany area where they were sold. However, these were pre-ban AK-47 magazines which are legal to sell in New York State. So, in his "undercover" investigation, he buys a legal product and based upon this he is proposing to ban all standard capacity magazines.

Somehow his logic just fails me.

Adams has introduced S. 3573-2011 for the purposes of making "all large capacity ammunition feeding devices, regardless of date of manufacture, subject to the provisions of the penal law." In other words, outlawing any magazines with a capacity of greater than 10. This is not the only gun control measure he has introduced this session of the New York State Senate. He has also introduced a bill requiring everyone outside of New York City to register their firearms on an annual basis with their respective county clerks.




Cam Edwards does a fine job of deconstructing Senator Adams and his shocking undercover video.

New HR 308 Co-Sponsors

HR 308, Carolyn McCarthy's bill to ban standard capacity magazines and other loading devices, has 15 new co-sponsors which brings the total to 80. I still don't see any Republicans as co-sponsors of this bill or of Sen. Frank Lautenberg's companion bill, S. 32.

Last week, this bill was sent by the House Judiciary Committee to their Subcomittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security which is chaired by Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) who is A-rated by the NRA on gun issues. Two-thirds of the Democrat minority of this subcommittee are listed as co-sponsors of HR 308.

The new co-sponsors are:

Rep Towns, Edolphus [NY-10] - 2/10/2011
Rep Engel, Eliot L. [NY-17] - 2/10/2011
Rep Crowley, Joseph [NY-7] - 2/10/2011
Rep Roybal-Allard, Lucille [CA-34] - 2/10/2011
Rep Capuano, Michael E. [MA-8] - 2/10/2011
Rep Napolitano, Grace F. [CA-38] - 2/10/2011
Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-9] - 2/10/2011
Rep Scott, Robert C. "Bobby" [VA-3] - 2/10/2011
Rep Tonko, Paul [NY-21] - 2/10/2011
Rep Payne, Donald M. [NJ-10] - 2/10/2011
Rep Olver, John W. [MA-1] - 2/10/2011
Rep Fattah, Chaka [PA-2] - 2/10/2011
Rep Sutton, Betty [OH-13] - 2/10/2011
Rep Tsongas, Niki [MA-5] - 2/10/2011
Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] - 2/10/2011

UPDATE: Four more fellow travelers have been added to McCarthy's list of co-sponsors.

Rep Price, David E. [NC-4] - 2/15/2011
Rep Fudge, Marcia L. [OH-11] - 2/15/2011
Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] - 2/15/2011
Rep Garamendi, John [CA-10] - 2/15/2011

Lisa Price, the wife of Rep. David Price, is the co-founder and long-time head of North Carolinians Against Gun Violence. Rep. Price is also a co-sponsor of McCarthy's "gun show loophole" bill.

One name missing from this list is Rep. Nancy Pelosi. I doubt she has changed her stripes but it is interesting nonetheless.

UPDATE II:  Another four Democrats have signed on to HR 308 as of yesterday.

Rep Johnson, Eddie Bernice [TX-30] - 2/17/2011
Rep Capps, Lois [CA-23] - 2/17/2011
Rep Richardson, Laura [CA-37] - 2/17/2011
Rep Cummings, Elijah E. [MD-7] - 2/17/2011

UPDATE III: You can add two more Democrats to the list of co-sponsors of HR 308.

Rep Schwartz, Allyson Y. [PA-13] - 2/18/2011
Rep Schiff, Adam B. [CA-29] - 2/18/2011

Schiff lists himself as a Blue Dog Democrat but this doesn't look like what I'd expect a Blue Dog to do. Maybe he is really a Purple Dog just like Rep. Jane Harman who is also listed as Blue Dog. Harman was on the original list of co-sponsors of this bill.

The Gunny Won't Like This

If you saw the movie Full Metal Jacket, you know that R. Lee Ermey played drill instructor GySgt Hartman and that Vincent D'Onofrio played Pvt. Pyle. Unlike Mr. D'Onofrio, R. Lee Ermey actually served in the Marine Corps and was a real-life drill instructor. The Gunny is also pro-gun rights.

The Citizens Crime Commission of New York City bills itself as "an independent nonprofit organization working to make criminal justice and public safety policies and practices more effective through innovation, research, and education." It is also self-described as non-partisan.

To which I say bullshit.

Richard M. Aborn who appears at the end of this little lesson in propaganda is not just some civic minded do-gooder. Read what an organization for whom served as President from 1992 until 1996 says about him:

Mr. Aborn was President of Handgun Control, Inc and the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence from 1992 to 1996.

Richard was one of the principal strategists behind the passage of the landmark Brady Bill and the federal assault weapons and large capacity clips ban. He has testified on Capitol Hill and in numerous state and local legislatures and worked closely with the White House, the Justice Department and the Treasury Department. As one of the chief spokespersons for Handgun Control, Mr. Aborn appeared on numerous national and local television and radio shows.

Currently, Richard is a partner of Constantine Cannon and has over two decades of experience in litigation, public and government affairs, program analysis, management, issue advocacy, and social sector enterprises.

That organization is, of course, the Brady Campaign which was formerly know as Handgun Control, Inc. and the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence. Mr. Aborn is also on the Board of Directors of New Yorkers Against Gun Violence which is actively promoting the video above.

Mr. D'Onofrio is just another actor who has willingly let himself be used by an anti-gun organization.