High Cap Mag Ban Amendment Added to Cybersecurity Bill

[Laxguy59]

I know that you guys are sending email but please CALL. A full email box is one thing but being inundated with phone calls paints a very different picture.

This, a computer actually reads and sorts your email and no one cares for letters. When the chief of staff hears the office phones blaring they get thinking about publishing statements and championing the fight for/against the bill.

 

[User170512]

Wonder if we'd be required by law to get all our mags serialed and marked if something like this were to go through.

-------------------------------

Called the Isakson and Chambliss offices and bought some more 30 rd. AR mags.
Not necessarily in that order.
Grrrrrrrr....

 

[tywest]

sent mine, calls going monday

 

[mountainpass]

Wonder if we'd be required by law to get all our mags serialed and marked if something like this were to go through.

You taking yours in?

 

[Badger]

You taking yours in?

My dog ate them.

 

[mountainpass]

My dog ate them.

How did they know you had any?

 

[dakota port]

i still wonder what this has do with cybersecurity

they try to sneak these things in bills that have little to do with firearms figuring the people will miss it

 

[Badger]

i still wonder what this has do with cybersecurity

Not a thing, that's how they try to sneak crap in or pressure opponents to vote by saying if they don't it will look like they are against the Cyber bill to protect our national security.
Cheap political tricks. You know.."you have to pass it to find out what's in it"

 

[mountainpass]

i still wonder what this has do with cybersecurity

they try to sneak these things in bills that have little to do with firearms figuring the people will miss it

Like Badger said.....The reason National Parks are Ok for carry now is the Republicans added that amendment to the Credit Card Act. It's a poison pill if you will.

 

[RamRoddoc]

Best chance they have to make it happen.

Contact your reps asap! Wait and see what happens and you may be displeased with the results.

My mail went out to our Senators and that douchebag at the house that is my (sorry pos) Rep. David Scott, Democrat Georgia District 13

Honorable (NAME),

It has come to my attention a few representatives from New Jersey, New York, Rode Island and California have attached a rider (S.A. 2575) to the cyber-security bill in order to secure our safety through the reduction of the number of rounds per magazine. Schummer goes as far to say “average Americans don’t need an assault weapon to go hunting or protect themselves.” He uses the word “assault” to mean any firearm capable of carrying more than ten rounds.

The 2nd amendment was never intended for self-defense or hunting Americans. It was emplaced as a last resort for the people’s last response to Government tyranny. Most defensive pistols and rifles carry more than 10 rounds. I have yet to hear an average American involved in a defensive shooting complain about having too many bullets.

These few vocal representatives are naively attempting to attach a ban reducing and limiting “normal” capacity magazines to 10 rounds in a move described as for our own good (Democratic Sens. Frank Lautenberg (N.J.), Barbara Boxer (Calif.), Jack Reed (R.I.), Bob Menendez (N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Schumer and Dianne Feinstein (Calif.). S.A. 2575). This is in response to the Aurora, CO. shootings.

If these well-meaning anti-gun activist really had our safety in mind and didn’t want to “regulate” everything that they fear, they might address the fact that it was against the law to carry a firearm legally in the theater where the shootings took place. Our perhaps address the city law that in direct conflict with state law made it illegal for an honest citizen to use their state concealed weapons permit within its borders.

Their answer; ban, ban, ban! Really?

I’m sorry but these clowns really need a strong dose of reality. I hope you will be there to administer that bitter medicine by refusing to even consider any bill that even yet further restricts honest citizen’s 2nd amendment rights. In fact, if you could introduce legislation that might have enabled victims of the Aurora shooting to better defend themselves other than strong words or fleeing from evil and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it, then that might actually be an EFFECTIVE response. It would at least give them the legal choice to consider a defensive carry weapon rather than becoming a group of unarmed victims!

If you don’t help them with a reality check then perhaps the voting public will but then they are a reflection of the state that elected them as you are ours. Thank God for Georgia and like-minded states (nearly all-save four). I request your support in securing our rights and freedoms from further infringement.

When people realize that their own government is jeopardizing their safety by useless weapon laws and in turn start litigation over being denied the fundamental right of defending themselves then perhaps some real effective forward progress can be made in those places where it is still tolerated. Or we can try to become more like the states represented in this infringement bill with their stellar record of public safety through the use and employment of convoluted gun control laws that do not serve the public well.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes."


Thank you.

XXXXX XXXXXX (Average American)
Stockbridge, GA.