Michigan Sportsman Forum banner

1 - 2 of 2 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,446 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Title 27: Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms



PART 478—COMMERCE IN FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION
Subpart C—Administrative and Miscellaneous Provisions


§ 478.40a Transfer and possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices.


(a) Prohibition. No person shall transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

(b) Exceptions. The provisions of paragraph (a) of this section shall not apply

to:

(1) The possession or transfer of any large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994;

(2) The 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;

(3) The 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 licensee on-site for such purposes or off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized training or transportation of nuclear materials;

(4) 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 such retirement;

(5) The manufacture, transfer, or possession of any large capacity ammunition feeding device by a manufacturer or importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation in accordance with §478.153; or

(6) The manufacture, transfer, or possession of any large capacity ammunition feeding device by a manufacturer or importer for the purpose of exportation in accordance with the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778).

(c) Importation, manufacture, and dealing in large capacity ammunition feeding devices. Possession and transfer of large capacity ammunition feeding devices by persons who manufacture, import, or deal in such devices will be presumed to be lawful if such persons maintain evidence establishing that the devices are possessed and transferred for sale to purchasers specified in paragraph (b) of this section. Examples of acceptable evidence include the following:

(1) Contracts between persons who import or manufacture such devices and persons who deal in such devices stating that the devices may only be sold to law enforcement agencies or other purchasers specified in paragraph (b) of this section;

(2) Copies of purchase orders submitted to persons who manufacture, import, or deal in such devices by law enforcement agencies or other purchasers specified in paragraph (b) of this section;

(3) Copies of letters submitted to persons who manufacture, import, or deal in such devices by government agencies or other purchasers specified in paragraph (b) of this section expressing an interest in purchasing the devices;

(4) Letters from persons who deal in such devices to persons who import or manufacture such devices stating that sales will only be made to law enforcement agencies or other purchasers specified in paragraph (b) of this section; and

(5) Letters from law enforcement officers purchasing in accordance with paragraph (b)(2) of this section and §478.132.
(Paragraph (c) approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1140–0041)
[T.D. ATF–363, 60 FR 17452, Apr. 6, 1995, as amended by T.D. ATF–383, 61 FR 39321, July 29, 1996; ATF–11F, 73 FR 57240, Oct. 2, 2008]



http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=f5ad292d18b4b68ea796f8cccc397a73&rg n=div8&view=text&node=27:3.0.1.2.3.3.1.25&idno=27



All Bill Titles

Short: Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act as introduced.
Official: To prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes. as introduced.


Interests that support this bill:

Anti-GunsAnti-Guns (close)
Non-ProfitsNon-Profits (close)
Municipal & county government organizationsMunicipal & county government organizations (close)
Churches, clergy & religious organizationsChurches, clergy & religious organizations (close)
Top recipients for ALL supporting interest groups




NameAmount ReceivedVote On Passage
Rep. Todd Akin [R, MO-2]$9,200Rep. Reid Ribble [R, WI-8]$7,800Rep. Addison Wilson [R, SC-2]$6,800Rep. Niki Tsongas [D, MA-5]$6,550Rep. James Moran [D, VA-8]$6,500Rep. Nancy Pelosi [D, CA-8]$5,800Rep. Robert Aderholt [R, AL-4]$5,494Rep. Charles Rangel [D, NY-15]$5,400Rep. Louise Slaughter [D, NY-28]$5,000Rep. Corrine Brown [D, FL-3]$4,900Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand [D, NY]$33,100Sen. Charles Schumer [D, NY]$16,900Sen. Michael Bennet [D, CO]$14,450Sen. Patrick Toomey [R, PA]$13,150Sen. Patty Murray [D, WA]$10,650Sen. Richard Shelby [R, AL]$10,100Sen. Daniel Inouye [D, HI]$9,700Sen. Harry Reid [D, NV]$9,600Sen. Scott Brown [R, MA]$7,900Sen. Maria Cantwell [D, WA]$7,300

Specific Organizations Supporting H.R.308

Violence Policy Center
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence
States United to Prevent Gun Violence
Legal Community Against Violence
Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism
The U.S. Conference of Mayors
Citizens Crime Commission of New York City
United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and Society
Interests that oppose this bill:

Pro-GunsPro-Guns (close)
Top recipients for ALL opposing interest groups

NameAmount ReceivedRep. John Boehner [R, OH-8]$12,650Rep. Dan Burton [R, IN-5]$9,458Rep. John Fleming [R, LA-4]$9,200Rep. Addison Wilson [R, SC-2]$8,985Rep. Steven Chabot [R, OH-1]$8,350Rep. Mary Bono Mack [R, CA-45]$8,000Rep. Michael McCaul [R, TX-10]$7,700Rep. Marsha Blackburn [R, TN-7]$7,300Rep. Greg Walden [R, OR-2]$7,050Rep. Steve Stivers [R, OH-15]$6,900Sen. Scott Brown [R, MA]$72,996Sen. Daniel Coats [R, IN]$35,834Sen. Patrick Toomey [R, PA]$25,885Sen. Robert Portman [R, OH]$21,700Sen. John Thune [R, SD]$14,100Sen. John McCain [R, AZ]$10,300Sen. Jim DeMint [R, SC]$8,450Sen. Marco Rubio [R, FL]$7,485Sen. Al Franken [D, MN]$6,688Sen. Saxby Chambliss [R, GA]$6,514
Specific Organizations Opposing H.R.308

Gun Owners of America
National Rifle Association


http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h308/money


Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects Implementation Plan 2012-2018







====================





8. To improve the management of small arms and light weapons stockpiles, in
particular by implementing adequate standards and procedures for stockpile
safety and security, including the responsible disposal, preferably through
destruction, of surpluses;





=====================







19. To encourage States, who have not done so, to consider ratifying or acceding to related international legal instruments; and




20. To facilitate cooperation with civil society and academia in activities related to the prevention, combat and eradication of the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects.






======================







http://www.poa-iss.org/RevCon2/Documents/RevCon-DOC/ZERO/2012 06 06 PoA Implementation Plan_zero% 20draft.pdf







The UN Programme of Action on small arms and light weapons provides the framework for activities to counter the illicit trade in such arms.







http://www.poa-iss.org/RevCon2/






http://www.poa-iss.org/PoA/PoA.aspx




Arms Trade Treaty Conference

Press Statement Victoria Nuland Department Spokesperson, Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC

July 27, 2012

The United States supports the outcome today at the Arms Trade Treaty Conference. While the Conference ran out of time to reach consensus on a text, it will report its results and the draft text considered back to the UN General Assembly (UNGA). The United States supports a second round of negotiations, conducted on the basis of consensus, on the Treaty next year; we do not support a vote in the UNGA on the current text. The illicit trafficking of conventional arms is an important national security concern for the United States. While we sought to conclude this month’s negotiations with a Treaty, more time is a reasonable request for such a complex and critical issue. The current text reflects considerable positive progress, but it needs further review and refinement.

With that in mind, we will continue to work towards an Arms Trade Treaty that will contribute to international security, protect the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade, and meet the objectives and concerns that we have been articulating throughout the negotiation, including not infringing on the constitutional right of our citizens to bear arms. The United States took a principled stand throughout these negotiations that international trade in conventional arms is a legitimate enterprise that is and should remain regulated by the individual nations themselves, and we continue to believe that any Arms Trade Treaty should require states to develop their own national regulations and controls and strengthen the rule of law regarding arms sales.

We support an Arms Trade Treaty because we believe it will make a valuable contribution to global security by helping to stem illicit arms transfers, and we will continue to look for ways for the international community to work together to improve the international arms transfer regime so that weapons aren’t transferred to people who would abuse them.



http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/07/195622.htm






problem is, what are/can we do about it ?



if i thought this all just was about a country like Somalia, Africa, but then you have 49 headless bodies found south of McAllen, Texas. i saw what happened when the police lose control during hurricane Ike. they tell you to protect your own, "we lost control, use whatever force necessary". but how could you do that, if some multi-national organization comes in and dictates how many bullets you can have and shoot at any given, what kind of gun you can or cannot have. apocalyptic events can happen any day. fema comes in takes over phone towers too when they do, that happened after hurricane Ike. so, no power, no phone, and no gun, or a gun without ammo, and then they tell you your on your own. i don't think so.



every time i see a car bomb go off in Iraq, or anywhere else (a vehicle used to deliver munitions and death, same as a gun), and then listen to some of the arguments about ban on guns (whatever kind), i scratch my head. same as with airplanes, a supposedly, vehicle of transport, but yet used as a flying bomb against the twin towers, as we are all are aware of. i see no attempt to ban either. ban weapons and or magazines to 10 rounds, the next thing you have is a single shot pea shooter, without any ammo, because they banned that too. people kill people, and we will never change that. man can be a brutal beast. all we can do is try to protect your family and yourself, and when they take away our guns from us, we are screwed, whether or not your democrat or republican.


i disgust myself chimming in here. i apologize up front. but i have to say the nra and or republicans don't have a strangle hold on the right to bear arms.

seems if you want to believe in the right to bear arms these days, you have to belong to the nra, be pro-life, be anti-gay, believe in forced vagina ultrasounds, and be a racist bigot, all in one. that's simply not true.


seems if you are _American_ and you believe in this right to bear arms, it would be in everyone's best interest to unite.

once it starts, there will be no end until they have all your guns, and or down to where it’s a single shot pea shooter only.

then what do you have?

only the criminals will have auto’s and semi-auto’s with high capacity mags.
whether your are blue, red, or rainbow, and you believe in your right to protect your family with whatever the criminals have and will always have, then write your congressman or congresswoman, and just say NO !
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,446 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Gun grabbers wasted no time exploiting Friday’s shooting in Aurora, Colo., by calling for more restrictive firearm laws. Their liberal agenda is off target because, with U.S. gun ownership at its highest level ever, the public sees crime is way down. This blows a hole in the left’s argument, but it doesn’t stop it.

Despite the House being strongly pro-gun and the Senate marginally so, some Democratic senators want to seize the opportunity to peddle pet legislation. On Tuesday, Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg of New Jersey kicked off an effort to reinstate the expired ban on high-capacity magazines. His bill would prohibit the manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds — modern handguns generally hold between 12 and 17. It’s not clear what exactly Mr. Lautenberg would accomplish, unless the government also recalls the 300 million firearms already owned by Americans.

New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg went off the deep end on Monday when he told CNN that police officers across the country should “stand up collectively and say, ‘We’re going to go on strike’” until states pass more gun laws, such as bans on certain kinds of bullets. The billionaire businessman also demanded that presidential candidates soften their stance on gun rights.

President Obama is well aware of the political consequences of admitting his true feelings on guns in an election year. To avoid angering his liberal base, Mr. Obama let his spokesman respond on Sunday, off-camera on Air Force One on the way to Aurora. “The president is focused on doing the things that we can do that protect Second Amendment rights, which he thinks is important, but also to make it harder for individuals who should not, under existing law, have weapons to obtain them,” said White House Press Secretary Jay Carney.

Mitt Romney was not afraid to say it himself. “I still believe that the Second Amendment is the right course to preserve and defend and don’t believe that new laws are going to make a difference in this type of tragedy,” the Republican presidential candidate told Larry Kudlow on CNBC Monday.

The left also wants to outlaw the purchase of large quantities of ammunition over the Internet. Because James Holmes reportedly had thousands of rounds of ammo, they assume anyone with a similar “stockpile” must be up to no good. As any savvy shopper knows, buying in bulk online is convenient and saves money. Gun owners are no different.

What liberals are really after is not preventing the tragedies that can’t be stopped. Their goal is to create inconvenience so fewer law-abiding citizens turn to guns for protection. They want the public to look to government instead.

Sadly for the left, the unconstitutional speed bumps it has placed before the Second Amendment are being removed slowly. On Monday, U.S. District Judge Benson Everett Legg lifted a stay, which effectively will force Maryland to drop its policy of arbitrarily denying requests from upstanding citizens seeking concealed-carry permits. Respecting the right to keep and bear arms in this way is the right response.



Tuesday, July 24, 2012



http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/24/the-assault-on-weapons/








Title 27: Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms



PART 478—COMMERCE IN FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION
Subpart C—Administrative and Miscellaneous Provisions


§ 478.40a Transfer and possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices.


(a) Prohibition. No person shall transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

(b) Exceptions. The provisions of paragraph (a) of this section shall not apply

to:

(1) The possession or transfer of any large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994;

(2) The 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;

(3) The 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 licensee on-site for such purposes or off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized training or transportation of nuclear materials;

(4) 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 such retirement;

(5) The manufacture, transfer, or possession of any large capacity ammunition feeding device by a manufacturer or importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation in accordance with §478.153; or

(6) The manufacture, transfer, or possession of any large capacity ammunition feeding device by a manufacturer or importer for the purpose of exportation in accordance with the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778).

(c) Importation, manufacture, and dealing in large capacity ammunition feeding devices. Possession and transfer of large capacity ammunition feeding devices by persons who manufacture, import, or deal in such devices will be presumed to be lawful if such persons maintain evidence establishing that the devices are possessed and transferred for sale to purchasers specified in paragraph (b) of this section. Examples of acceptable evidence include the following:

(1) Contracts between persons who import or manufacture such devices and persons who deal in such devices stating that the devices may only be sold to law enforcement agencies or other purchasers specified in paragraph (b) of this section;

(2) Copies of purchase orders submitted to persons who manufacture, import, or deal in such devices by law enforcement agencies or other purchasers specified in paragraph (b) of this section;

(3) Copies of letters submitted to persons who manufacture, import, or deal in such devices by government agencies or other purchasers specified in paragraph (b) of this section expressing an interest in purchasing the devices;

(4) Letters from persons who deal in such devices to persons who import or manufacture such devices stating that sales will only be made to law enforcement agencies or other purchasers specified in paragraph (b) of this section; and

(5) Letters from law enforcement officers purchasing in accordance with paragraph (b)(2) of this section and §478.132.
(Paragraph (c) approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1140–0041)
[T.D. ATF–363, 60 FR 17452, Apr. 6, 1995, as amended by T.D. ATF–383, 61 FR 39321, July 29, 1996; ATF–11F, 73 FR 57240, Oct. 2, 2008]



http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=f5ad292d18b4b68ea796f8cccc397a73&rg n=div8&view=text&node=27:3.0.1.2.3.3.1.25&idno=27



All Bill Titles

Short: Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act as introduced.
Official: To prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes. as introduced.


Interests that support this bill:

Anti-GunsAnti-Guns (close)
Non-ProfitsNon-Profits (close)
Municipal & county government organizationsMunicipal & county government organizations (close)
Churches, clergy & religious organizationsChurches, clergy & religious organizations (close)
Top recipients for ALL supporting interest groups




NameAmount ReceivedVote On Passage
Rep. Todd Akin [R, MO-2]$9,200Rep. Reid Ribble [R, WI-8]$7,800Rep. Addison Wilson [R, SC-2]$6,800Rep. Niki Tsongas [D, MA-5]$6,550Rep. James Moran [D, VA-8]$6,500Rep. Nancy Pelosi [D, CA-8]$5,800Rep. Robert Aderholt [R, AL-4]$5,494Rep. Charles Rangel [D, NY-15]$5,400Rep. Louise Slaughter [D, NY-28]$5,000Rep. Corrine Brown [D, FL-3]$4,900Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand [D, NY]$33,100Sen. Charles Schumer [D, NY]$16,900Sen. Michael Bennet [D, CO]$14,450Sen. Patrick Toomey [R, PA]$13,150Sen. Patty Murray [D, WA]$10,650Sen. Richard Shelby [R, AL]$10,100Sen. Daniel Inouye [D, HI]$9,700Sen. Harry Reid [D, NV]$9,600Sen. Scott Brown [R, MA]$7,900Sen. Maria Cantwell [D, WA]$7,300

Specific Organizations Supporting H.R.308

Violence Policy Center
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence
States United to Prevent Gun Violence
Legal Community Against Violence
Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism
The U.S. Conference of Mayors
Citizens Crime Commission of New York City
United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and Society
Interests that oppose this bill:

Pro-GunsPro-Guns (close)
Top recipients for ALL opposing interest groups

NameAmount ReceivedRep. John Boehner [R, OH-8]$12,650Rep. Dan Burton [R, IN-5]$9,458Rep. John Fleming [R, LA-4]$9,200Rep. Addison Wilson [R, SC-2]$8,985Rep. Steven Chabot [R, OH-1]$8,350Rep. Mary Bono Mack [R, CA-45]$8,000Rep. Michael McCaul [R, TX-10]$7,700Rep. Marsha Blackburn [R, TN-7]$7,300Rep. Greg Walden [R, OR-2]$7,050Rep. Steve Stivers [R, OH-15]$6,900Sen. Scott Brown [R, MA]$72,996Sen. Daniel Coats [R, IN]$35,834Sen. Patrick Toomey [R, PA]$25,885Sen. Robert Portman [R, OH]$21,700Sen. John Thune [R, SD]$14,100Sen. John McCain [R, AZ]$10,300Sen. Jim DeMint [R, SC]$8,450Sen. Marco Rubio [R, FL]$7,485Sen. Al Franken [D, MN]$6,688Sen. Saxby Chambliss [R, GA]$6,514
Specific Organizations Opposing H.R.308

Gun Owners of America
National Rifle Association


http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h308/money


Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects Implementation Plan 2012-2018







====================





8. To improve the management of small arms and light weapons stockpiles, in
particular by implementing adequate standards and procedures for stockpile
safety and security, including the responsible disposal, preferably through
destruction, of surpluses;





=====================







19. To encourage States, who have not done so, to consider ratifying or acceding to related international legal instruments; and




20. To facilitate cooperation with civil society and academia in activities related to the prevention, combat and eradication of the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects.






======================







http://www.poa-iss.org/RevCon2/Documents/RevCon-DOC/ZERO/2012 06 06 PoA Implementation Plan_zero% 20draft.pdf







The UN Programme of Action on small arms and light weapons provides the framework for activities to counter the illicit trade in such arms.







http://www.poa-iss.org/RevCon2/






http://www.poa-iss.org/PoA/PoA.aspx




Arms Trade Treaty Conference

Press Statement Victoria Nuland Department Spokesperson, Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC

July 27, 2012

The United States supports the outcome today at the Arms Trade Treaty Conference. While the Conference ran out of time to reach consensus on a text, it will report its results and the draft text considered back to the UN General Assembly (UNGA). The United States supports a second round of negotiations, conducted on the basis of consensus, on the Treaty next year; we do not support a vote in the UNGA on the current text. The illicit trafficking of conventional arms is an important national security concern for the United States. While we sought to conclude this month’s negotiations with a Treaty, more time is a reasonable request for such a complex and critical issue. The current text reflects considerable positive progress, but it needs further review and refinement.

With that in mind, we will continue to work towards an Arms Trade Treaty that will contribute to international security, protect the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade, and meet the objectives and concerns that we have been articulating throughout the negotiation, including not infringing on the constitutional right of our citizens to bear arms. The United States took a principled stand throughout these negotiations that international trade in conventional arms is a legitimate enterprise that is and should remain regulated by the individual nations themselves, and we continue to believe that any Arms Trade Treaty should require states to develop their own national regulations and controls and strengthen the rule of law regarding arms sales.

We support an Arms Trade Treaty because we believe it will make a valuable contribution to global security by helping to stem illicit arms transfers, and we will continue to look for ways for the international community to work together to improve the international arms transfer regime so that weapons aren’t transferred to people who would abuse them.



http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/07/195622.htm






problem is, what are/can we do about it ?



if i thought this all just was about a country like Somalia, Africa, but then you have 49 headless bodies found south of McAllen, Texas. i saw what happened when the police lose control during hurricane Ike. they tell you to protect your own, "we lost control, use whatever force necessary". but how could you do that, if some multi-national organization comes in and dictates how many bullets you can have and shoot at any given, what kind of gun you can or cannot have. apocalyptic events can happen any day. fema comes in takes over phone towers too when they do, that happened after hurricane Ike. so, no power, no phone, and no gun, or a gun without ammo, and then they tell you your on your own. i don't think so.



every time i see a car bomb go off in Iraq, or anywhere else (a vehicle used to deliver munitions and death, same as a gun), and then listen to some of the arguments about ban on guns (whatever kind), i scratch my head. same as with airplanes, a supposedly, vehicle of transport, but yet used as a flying bomb against the twin towers, as we are all are aware of. i see no attempt to ban either. ban weapons and or magazines to 10 rounds, the next thing you have is a single shot pea shooter, without any ammo, because they banned that too. people kill people, and we will never change that. man can be a brutal beast. all we can do is try to protect your family and yourself, and when they take away our guns from us, we are screwed, whether or not your democrat or republican.


i disgust myself chimming in here. i apologize up front. but i have to say the nra and or republicans don't have a strangle hold on the right to bear arms.

seems if you want to believe in the right to bear arms these days, you have to belong to the nra, be pro-life, be anti-gay, believe in forced vagina ultrasounds, and be a racist bigot, all in one. that's simply not true.


seems if you are _American_ and you believe in this right to bear arms, it would be in everyone's best interest to unite.

once it starts, there will be no end until they have all your guns, and or down to where it’s a single shot pea shooter only.

then what do you have?

only the criminals will have auto’s and semi-auto’s with high capacity mags.
whether your are blue, red, or rainbow, and you believe in your right to protect your family with whatever the criminals have and will always have, then write your congressman or congresswoman, and just say NO !
 
1 - 2 of 2 Posts
Top