Posted on 07/29/2012 3:38:40 PM PDT by jazusamo
Two Democratic lawmakers on Monday will announce new legislation to regulate the online and mail-order sale of ammunition.
Sen. Frank Lautenberg (N.J.) and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (N.Y.) said the new law would make the sale of ammunition “safer for law-abiding Americans who are sick and tired of the ease with which criminals can now anonymously stockpile for mass murder,” in a statement released Saturday.
The lawmakers cite the recent movie massacre in Aurora, Colo. for spurring their bill.
“The shooter who killed 12 and injured 58 in an Aurora, Colorado movie theater this month had purchased over 6,000 rounds of ammunition anonymously on the Internet shortly before going on his killing spree, according to law enforcement officials,” the statement reads. “The shooter used a civilian version of the military’s M-16 rifle with a 100-round drum magazine, a shotgun and two .40-caliber semi-automatic handguns commonly used by police officers.”
Lautenberg and McCarthy, who will unveil their new proposal at New York’s City Hall say they intend to “make it harder for criminals to anonymously stockpile ammunition through the Internet.”
Lautenberg and McCarthy are two high profile advocates of gun control legislation, but they face an uphill struggle in Congress.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said last week that he does not intend to bring gun control legislation to the floor and President Obama has been reluctant to press lawmakers to act on the issue in an election year.
Democratic senators though have offered an amendment to the cybersecurity bill that would limit the purchase of high capacity magazines by some consumers. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) defended it last Thursday as a “reasonable” gun control measure.
The amendment is identical to a separate bill proposed in January 2011 by Lautenberg also banning the sale of high capacity ammunition magazines.
After the shootings in Colorado, the New Jersey senator urged lawmakers to reconsider his bill.
“We need to start today on efforts to prevent the next attack,” he said in a statement. “We should begin by passing my legislation to ban the sale of high-capacity gun magazines. No sportsman needs 100 rounds to shoot a duck, but allowing high-capacity magazines in the hands of killers like James Holmes and Jared Loughner puts law enforcement at a disadvantage and innocent lives at risk.”
Loughner, the gunman charged in the shooting of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (R-Ariz.) and Holmes, who is the lone suspect in the Aurora theater shootings are both believed to have used high-capacity magazines.
Absolutely! Nothing online is annonymous.
>> “None of the past massacres involved thousands of rounds” <<
.
True, all they required is an UNARMED PUBLIC!
I wonder if there is any way for the author to find out for sure and then get back with us.
Was the Shooter “carrying” six thousand rounds of Ammunition when he committed the crime?
Now the ammunition is the problem? I thought 12 people died, not 6,000.
Only Communists, Dictators, Fascists and Nazis kill that many people at one time. Which is precisely why the Second Amendment exists.
He could have done the job with a machete!
Nobody in that theater was armed; who would have stopped him?
Were the Founding Fathers Sportsmen? Were the members of the Continental Army Sportsmen? Does the word Sportsmen appear in the text of the Second Amendment?
Maybe it was listed right after the word “hunters”, another word I must of missed.
Who cares of he had 600,000 rounds?
Was he carrying it around in his pocket?
I guess it was a good thing they weren't screening Inglorious Bastards.
Criminals will have NO PROBLEM getting ammo - because organized crime will provide it - - giving organized crime one more income stream.
Which makes criminals and crime families more powerful...
If you don’t hate liberals, you’re not paying attention.
These idiots think nothing of 25 ga of gasoline, but bullets scare them.
The amount of ammo this guy actually used could have been bought at any Walmart any day of the week.
“make it harder for criminals to anonymously stockpile ammunition through the Internet.” “
What’s anonymous about it? It has to be paid for by someone, and delivered to someone. That’s hardly anonymous.
Of course this bill will fail, the only question is the political one.
Should Boehner put it up for a vote or not- get the Congress on the record?
Would putting it to a vote just give Democrats in the House a chance to get some 2nd Amendment bonafides by castinga “nay” vote and thus help them in the upcoming election?
The fact this gets reported is BS. These people don’t have the authority to even discuss this.
they never miss an opportunity to ratchet up regulations tighter and tighter like a noose around our necks
We will see what Mitt says.
Facts? Don’t confuse the lib-dem idiots with facts. Facts are stubborn things.
Stick a rider on it ending taxpayer paid security for government officials.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.