New House bills related to firearms 2013

[ReconRat]

I think you're reading it wrong. I think it's supposed to stop people from interfering with other people's constitutional rights, and it's worded ambiguously.

Better wording would be:

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in order to to prevent the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same;

haha, not reading anything wrong. Might want to read the other USCs that were written at the same time as this one.

[Scruit]

haha, not reading anything wrong. Might want to read the other USCs that were written at the same time as this one.

Take that sentence out and all it to flow onto the next one. How does it read now?

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District (snip) because of his having so exercised (his rights);

What about the next section:

If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured; They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both;

Your reading of the first sentence (criminalizing the exercise of constitutional rights by two or more people at a time) doesn't make sense in the context of the rest of the text.

Edited January 22, 2013 by Scruit

[Scruit]

That law has been in force since June 25, 1948.

Edited January 23, 2013 by Scruit

[ReconRat]

The United States Department of Justice says about this statute:

Section 241 of Title 18

is the

civil rights conspiracy statute

. Section 241 makes it unlawful for two or more persons to agree together to injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same). Unlike most conspiracy statutes,

Section 241 does not require that one of the conspirators commit an overt act prior to the conspiracy becoming a crime

.

The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term or the death penalty,

depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any

.

http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/241fin.php

Jury Instructions for 18 U.S.C. Section 242.

Title 18, United States Code, Section 242 makes it a crime to deprive any person of his civil rights under color of law. For you to find the defendant guilty, the government must prove each of the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

First

, that [name of victim] was present in [name of state];

Second

, that the defendant deprived [name of victim] of a right secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States [the right infringed must be identified], or to different punishments, pains, or penalties on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color or race;

Third

, that the defendant acted under color of law; and

Fourth

, that the defendant acted willfully.

[Scruit]

The United States Department of Justice says about this statute:

Section 241 of Title 18

is the

civil rights conspiracy statute

. Section 241 makes it unlawful for two or more persons to agree together to injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same). Unlike most conspiracy statutes,

Section 241 does not require that one of the conspirators commit an overt act prior to the conspiracy becoming a crime

.

The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term or the death penalty,

depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any

.

http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/241fin.php

Jury Instructions for 18 U.S.C. Section 242.

Title 18, United States Code, Section 242 makes it a crime to deprive any person of his civil rights under color of law. For you to find the defendant guilty, the government must prove each of the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

First

, that [name of victim] was present in [name of state];

Second

, that the defendant deprived [name of victim] of a right secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States [the right infringed must be identified], or to different punishments, pains, or penalties on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color or race;

Third

, that the defendant acted under color of law; and

Fourth

, that the defendant acted willfully.

So what position are you arguing? I thought you were suggesting that s241 made it illegal to your constitutional rights in a group, like am open carry walk or pro-2a rally or something. If that's not what you're saying then I must have gotten the wrong end of the stick.

EDIT: You said: "This is a civil rights law against groups targeting people trying to exercise legal and constitutional rights."

I'm saying that s241 prohibits people from conspiring to deprive someone of their constitutional rights. It does not prohibit people from conspiring to exercise their constitutional rights.

[ReconRat]

So what position are you arguing? I thought you were suggesting that s241 made it illegal to your constitutional rights in a group, like am open carry walk or pro-2a rally or something. If that's not what you're saying then I must have gotten the wrong end of the stick.

EDIT: You said: "This is a civil rights law against groups targeting people trying to exercise legal and constitutional rights."

I'm saying that s241 prohibits people from conspiring to deprive someone of their constitutional rights. It does not prohibit people from conspiring to exercise their constitutional rights.

Dude, I'm not arguing anything. You are. I posted an interesting law.

Add to that, I have no idea what you are talking about.

[ReconRat]

H.R. 226: Support Assault Firearms Elimination and Reduction for our Streets Act

FULL TITLE

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a credit against tax for surrendering to authorities certain assault weapons.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr226

3% chance of getting past committee.

1% chance of being enacted.

EDIT: just saw you had it at the tail end of your first post. Guy at work pointed this out to me today. Frightening that someone would use the IRS for such things.

I had no idea. I hadn't read the text of that one yet. But I'm not surprised at something like that.

edit: I found at least one other one like that introduced. I'll make sure it's added.

Edited January 24, 2013 by ReconRat

[Scruit]

Dude, I'm not arguing anything. You are. I posted an interesting law.

Add to that, I have no idea what you are talking about.

I misread your post and thought you were saying the law criminalizes groups of people exercising their constitutional rights. Early Alzheimers.

[OsuMj]

I was confused for a while, because I'm pretty sure you both were "arguing" the same side....

[Scruit]

I was arguing with myself.

And losing.

[Scruit]

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/feinstein-details-new-senate-assault-weapons-ban

Didn't see any mention of NFA registration - but I did see this:

- Existing weapons affected by the ban will be subject to background checks if they're sold or transferred, Feinstein said.

Suggests that "pre-ban" rifles will still be legal for sale after the ban comes into effect.

Watch the price of these rifles go even higher now. As preban gun supplies will be limited, postban guns will be neutered, and real Americans will continue to demand the preban models. I think my AR and 922r SKS just doubled in value, again, with that annoucnement.

(Actually, I wonder if the SKS is on her hit-list)

So now the next shooting happens with a 10 round mag and they drop it to 5...

[cOoTeR]

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/feinstein-details-new-senate-assault-weapons-ban

Didn't see any mention of NFA registration - but I did see this:

Suggests that "pre-ban" rifles will still be legal for sale after the ban comes into effect.

Watch the price of these rifles go even higher now. As preban gun supplies will be limited, postban guns will be neutered, and real Americans will continue to demand the preban models. I think my AR and 922r SKS just doubled in value, again, with that annoucnement.

(Actually, I wonder if the SKS is on her hit-list)

So now the next shooting happens with a 10 round mag and they drop it to 5...

No next they will blame the trigger finger, in order to own a gun you will be required to remove any appendage that you can fire the weapon with.

[AWW$HEEET]

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/feinstein-details-new-senate-assault-weapons-ban

Didn't see any mention of NFA registration - but I did see this:

Suggests that "pre-ban" rifles will still be legal for sale after the ban comes into effect.

Watch the price of these rifles go even higher now. As preban gun supplies will be limited, postban guns will be neutered, and real Americans will continue to demand the preban models. I think my AR and 922r SKS just doubled in value, again, with that annoucnement.

(Actually, I wonder if the SKS is on her hit-list)

So now the next shooting happens with a 10 round mag and they drop it to 5...

my saiga 12 just went up too. along with 20 rounder. i could have a nice patio installed for the price of those two.

[Scruit]

They DID mention requiring safe storage for grandfathered guns...

[AWW$HEEET]

They DID mention requiring safe storage for grandfathered guns...

not sure why they don't allow a tax write off for purchase of new gun safes? i mean if they really cared, they would put that in writing.

same with gym memberships and workout equipment. if everyone is subsidizing this new healthcare system, why not help those who actually try to enable themselves to be healthy, and not a drain to the system. create a tax incentive.

[Casper]

FS: Ruger Mini-14 Tactical. Stock. Excellent condition. Includes two 20-round magazines and a hard case. $2999.99

[AWW$HEEET]

FS: Ruger Mini-14 Tactical. Stock. Excellent condition. Includes two 20-round magazines and a hard case. $2999.99

mine is the same. except i have 4- 20 rounders. ill make an even better deal at $2950

LOL

[Casper]

mine is the same. except i have 4- 20 rounders. ill make an even better deal at $2950

LOL

I'll throw in two 1/4lb jars of Tannerite. Boom.

Will take trade plus cash on your end for nice O/U 12ga.

[AWW$HEEET]

no, no. i have a mini 14, im saying ill offer mine forsale for $2950, with 4- 20 rd mags.

Fuck it, the first person to come to me and ben, you can have both mini 14s and all mags for an even $4800.

[Casper]

no, no. i have a mini 14, im saying ill offer mine forsale for $2950, with 4- 20 rd mags.

Fuck it, the first person to come to me and ben, you can have both mini 14s and all mags for an even $4800.

[Scruit]

If there is no registration then they will have to require post ban guns to be marked like they did in '94. Probably something like "Military/Police only 2013". Or they could be sneaky and use the same marking from '94 and effectively ban the guns made during the prior ban.

[Casper]

FS: Ruger Mini-14 Tactical. Stock. Excellent condition. Includes two 20-round magazines and a hard case. $2999.99

Bump.

[C-bus]

mine is the same. except i have 4- 20 rounders. ill make an even better deal at $2950

LOL

[ReconRat]

update jan24, 2013; Added new S54, S34, HR40 & HR404.

Feinstein bill available soon. Introduced in Senate Jan24.

edit: Added Feinstein AWB S150, but no text available yet.

Slightly less than average change of getting out of Senate committee.

Edited January 26, 2013 by ReconRat

[Scruit]

update jan24, 2013; Added new S54, S34, HR40 & HR404.

Feinstein bill available soon. Introduced in Senate Jan24.

I wanna see how they define bullet buttons. If you can get past the "detachable magazine" then the rest of the gun is legal.

I've seen an attempted bullet button ban that simply expanded the definition of a detachable magazine to include; "Any magazine that can removed by simply depressing a button or latch with a tool."

So, bullet buttons become "coin buttons" where a coin is used in a slot in the mag release button and you twist the button rather than "depress" it. Fixed. Again, requires a tool for removal and it's not simply a button you press with a tool.