Riders
Two riders were attached to the senate version of the Protection of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act. The first requires all handguns be sold with trigger locks, which is kind of pointless since just about every handgun you buy these days comes with one. The second is a bit more troubling:
The second anti-gun provision — offered as a compromise by Sen. Craig — strengthens the “armor-piercing bullet” restrictions of federal law. At its core, the Craig language does two things:
* It gives impetus to adopting a “penetration standard” for armor piercing bullets by commissioning a Justice Department study of the issue. If a “penetration standard” were adopted, a gun-adverse administration could use it to ban virtually any ammunition.
* It establishes a fifteen year MANDATORY MINIMUM PRISON SENTENCE for anyone who carries a single armor piercing bullet during the commission of a “crime of violence” — or who “possesses” such a bullet “in furtherance of… such crime…”
This legislation scares me because of the potential for abusing the penetration standard.
The NRA still supports the bill in total.
September 22nd, 2005 at 10:23 am
Reading the link, I think you mean this is a state level law. I was scratching my head because I thought Preesident Bush signed that already.
September 22nd, 2005 at 10:28 am
No, it’s at the federal level. Has Bush signed it? He may have and I missed it. Thomas says it’s till in the House as does the NRA.
September 22nd, 2005 at 10:32 am
I always told my dad that if they are serious about getting the guns out of our hands they will go after the ammunition….
September 22nd, 2005 at 10:57 am
SA1645 does 3 things, as you said. It increases penalties, it calls for a study and it restates existing law. Given that the Attorney General does not currently have the power to decleare ammunitition as ‘armor piercing’ the study has no real effect. I would prefer a cleaner bill, but this bill does not impact our rights. As a matter of fact, a well written study could point out the confusion that Kennedy tries to create by mixing ‘armor piercing ammo’ with ‘body armor’.
September 22nd, 2005 at 10:59 am
The bill was passed by the Senate right before the August break. They may still have to reconcile it between the House and Senate version though.
September 22nd, 2005 at 11:04 am
Text of the bill:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:s.00397:
September 22nd, 2005 at 12:59 pm
OK, the NRA was already taking credit for the “Protection of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act”, so I had just assumed that it was passed. No fat lady.
Although I support the basic premise here, our pro-RKBA president and congress so far have failed completely to restore even a shred of an individuals’ gun rights. What’s up with that? The best we can get is “no sue for gun makers”? I see the trickle down effect but still.
All those A’s and B’s the NRA gave out, killing the bad amendment should not be a problem. Unless the scale is curved.
September 22nd, 2005 at 2:16 pm
I trust neither the Repubs or the dems, (and I’m damn sceptical of the NRA), on this. Looks like poison pills to me. Either provision could be used by president Hillary to further erode and bind God-Given rights.
How about an attachment that abolishes the DEA, the ATFU, and repeals the 1968 and 34 gun acts?