Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackZeda
Do you have a clear understanding of what they mean by the 10 round limit? Does that mean new weapons and magazines can't have more than a 10 round capacity, or that actually carrying or shooting a weapon with more than 10 rounds would be illegal?
|
I don't see where any legislation has been introduced into either house that specifically addresses magazine capacity. All we have so far is Diane Feinstein's declared intent, wherein she proposes:
Quote:
|
Ban large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds
|
AFAIK, nobody has seen any specific bill (yet), so that actual language isn't available. IOW, we don't know what any such bill looks like, or how it will be modified in committee, or what the final voted bill says, or how it will be reconciled in Conference Committee with any House bill that might get submitted, modified, and passed.
In the Democrat-controlled Senate, Harry Reid (D-Nevada) said the following about Feinstein's proposal concepts:
Quote:
|
Let’s be realistic,” Reid recently told PBS’s “Nevada Week in Review.” “In the Senate, we’re going to do what we think can get through the House, and I’m not going to go through a bunch of gyrations just to say we’ve done something. If we’re really legislators, the purpose of it is to pass legislation. Is it something that can pass the Senate? Maybe. Is it something that can pass the House? I doubt it,”
|
It's not even certain that Senator Leahy (Chairman of Senate Judiciary Committee and "C"-rated by the NRA) will even let Feinstein's bill on the Committee floor for debate.
The one hooker in the deal relative to the Judiciary Committee is if Senator Feinstein gets the chairmanship. Reportedly, Senator Leahy wants the Chairmanship of the Senate Approprations Committee, now vacant after Senator Inouye's death. That would leave Judicary open for Feinstein, who is a very senior senator. THEN her bill might get a hearing before the committee, but given Harry Reid's position, it's not clear how much traction it will get, or whether he will let it on the floor for a vote if it does pass committee.
Even if it did get to the Senate floor, it's far from clear that it would pass. And even if it did pass, it's highly unlikely any companion bill would pass the House.
The problem with all of this is whether compromises might take place to get
something passed. IMHO, the focal point of any such compromise could be magazine capacities. Depending on many factors such a magazine capacity limit might or might not include a grandfather clause like the 1994 AWB had in it.
Wheels within wheels. Bottom line--we just don't know anything about magazine capacities yet and rampant speculation is way, way premature.