Posted on 03/02/2004 9:05:08 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed
The vote was:
52 -Aye in favor of extending the ban 47 -Nay opposed to the ban.
Same old same old from the tinfoil hat brigade.
Or win if the AWB is signed into law. That woulld demoralize enough of the republican Base that many might not show up. It would piss me off royally.
However tomorrow I am going t call Tom Delay's office and ask where I should give whatever money I can afford to give. Others should do the same instead of harping. The fat lady has not sung yet.
" Karl said the AWB ain't getting out of the House."
You trust Karl Rove?
OK; go right ahead.
Me thinks Karl Rove speak with forked tounge, kimosabbai.
Ugh.
UJ
From thomas - congressional record(temp files used soo I can't link) Page S1634-1635
AMENDMENT NO. 2619
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I understand we have a half an hour; is that correct?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
Mr. KENNEDY. I yield myself 15 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator wish to send the amendment to the desk?
Mr. KENNEDY. I believe the amendment is at the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. KENNEDY] proposes an amendment numbered 2619.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To expand the definition of armor piercing ammunition and to require the Attorney General to promulgate standards for the uniform testing of projectiles against body armor)
On page 11, after line 19, add the following:
SEC. 5. ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.
(a) EXPANSION OF DEFINITION OF ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.--Section 921(a)(17)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(2) in clause (ii), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(iii) a projectile that may be used in a handgun and that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be capable of penetrating body armor; or
`(iv) a projectile for a centerfire rifle, designed or marketed as having armor piercing capability, that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be more likely to penetrate body armor than standard ammunition of the same caliber.''.
(b) DETERMINATION OF THE CAPABILITY OF PROJECTILES TO PENETRATE BODY ARMOR.--Section 926 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(d)(1) Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Attorney General shall promulgate standards for the uniform testing of projectiles against Body Armor Exemplar.
``(2) The standards promulgated pursuant to paragraph (1) shall take into account, among other factors, variations in performance that are related to the length of the barrel of the handgun or centerfire rifle from which the projectile is fired and the amount and kind of powder used to propel the projectile.
``(3) As used in paragraph (1), the term `Body Armor Exemplar' means body armor that the Attorney General determines meets minimum standards for the protection of law enforcement officers.''.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I mentioned that there had been a homicide in Massachusetts recently, over 18 months. It was juvenile homicide. I ask that the Record be so corrected.
As we all know too well, the debate about gun violence has often been aggressive and polarizing with anti-gun violence advocates on one side of the debate, pro-gun advocates on the other. There are deep divisions in the country on the issue of gun safety, and the current debate on the gun immunity bill has thus far only served to highlight those divisions.
I believe, however, that there are still some principles on which we can all agree. One principle is that we should do everything we can to protect the lives and safety of police officers who are working to protect our streets, schools, and communities.
The amendment I am offering today is intended to close the existing loopholes in the Federal law that bans cop-killer bullets. Police officers depend on body armor for their lives. Body armor has saved thousands of police officers from death or serious injury by firearm assault. Most police officers who serve large jurisdictions wear armor at all times when on duty. Nevertheless, even with body armor, too many police officers remain vulnerable to gun violence.
According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, every year between 50 and 80 police officers are feloniously killed in the line of duty. In 2002, firearms were used in 51 of the 56 murders of police officers. In those shootings, 34 of the officers were wearing body armor at the time of their deaths. From 1992 to 2002, at least 20 police officers were killed after bullets penetrated their armor vests and entered their upper torso.
Some gun organizations have argued that cop-killer bullets are a myth. The families of these slain police officers know better. In fact, we know that armor-piercing ammunition is not a myth because it is openly and notoriously marketed and sold by gun dealers.
I direct my colleagues' attention to the Web site of Hi-Vel, Incorporated, a self-described exotic products distributor and manufacturer in Delta, UT. You can access its online catalog on the Internet right now. Hi-Vel's catalog lists an entry for armor-piercing ammunition. On that page you will find a listing for armor-piercing bullets that can penetrate metal objects. The bullets are available in packages of 10 for $9.95 each. Hi-Vel carries armor-piercing bullets for both the .223 caliber rifles such as the Bushmaster sniper rifle used in the Washington area attacks in October 2002, and the 7.62 caliber assault weapons. Over the past 10 years, these two caliber weapons were responsible for the deaths of 14 of the 20 law enforcement officers killed by ammunition that penetrated body armor.
In a recent report, the ATF identified three, .223 and the 7.62 caliber rifles, as the ones most frequently encountered by police officers. These high-capacity rifles, the ATF wrote, pose an enhanced threat to law enforcement, in part because of their ability to expel particles at velocities that are capable of penetrating the type of soft body armor typically worn by law enforcement officers.
Another rifle caliber, the 30.30 caliber, was responsible for penetrating three officers' armor and killing them in 1993, 1996, and 2002. This ammunition is also capable of puncturing light-armored vehicles, ballistic or armored
glass, armored limousines, even a 600-pound safe with 600 pounds of safe armor plating.
It is outrageous and unconscionable that such ammunition continues to be sold in the United States of America. Armor-piercing ammunition for rifles and assault weapons is virtually unregulated in the United States. A Federal license is not required to sell such ammunition unless firearms are sold as well. Anyone over the age of 18 may purchase this ammunition without a background check. There is no Federal minimum age of possession. Purchases may be made over the counter, by mail order, by fax, by Internet, and there is
[Page: S1635] GPO's PDF
no Federal requirement that dealers retain sales records.
In 1999, investigators for the General Accounting Office went undercover to assess the availability of .50 caliber armor-piercing ammunition. Purchasing cop-killer bullets, it turned out, is only slightly more difficult than buying a lottery ticket or a gallon of milk. Dealers in Delaware, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia informed the investigators that the purchase of these kinds of ammunition is subject to no Federal, State, or local restrictions. Dealers in Alaska, Nebraska, and Oregon who advertised over the Internet told an undercover agent that he could buy the ammunition in a matter of minutes, even after he said he wanted the bullets shipped to Washington, DC, and needed them to pierce an armored limousine or theoretically take down a helicopter. Talk about homeland security.
In a single year, over 100,000 rounds of military surplus armor-piercing ammunition were sold to civilians in the United States. In addition, the gun manufacturer, Smith & Wesson, recently introduced a powerful new revolver, the .500 magnum, 4 1/2 pounds, 15 inches long, that clearly has the capability of piercing body armor using ammunition allowed under the current law.
The publication, Gun Week, reviewed the new weapon with enthusiasm: ``Behold the magic, feel the power,'' it wrote.
Many of our leaders will buy the Smith & Wesson .500 Magnum for the same reason that Edmund Hillary climbed Mt. Everest: Because it is there.
Current Federal law bans certain armor-piercing ammunition for handguns. It establishes a content-based standard. It covers ammunition that is, first of all, constructed from tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium, copper, or depleted uranium or, secondly, larger than .22 caliber with a jacket that weighs no more than 25 percent of the total weight of the bullet.
However, there are no restrictions on ammunition that may be manufactured from other materials but can still penetrate body armor. Even more important, there are no restrictions on armor-piercing ammunition used in rifles and assault weapons. Armor-piercing ammunition has no purpose other than penetrating bulletproof vests. It is of no use for hunting or self-defense. Such armor-piercing ammunition has no place in our society--none.
Armor-piercing bullets that sidestep the Federal ban, such as that advertised on Hi-Vel's Web site, put the lives of American citizens and those sworn to defend American citizens in jeopardy every single day. We know the terrorists are now exploiting the weaknesses and loopholes in our gun laws. The terrorists training manual discovered by American soldiers in Afghanistan in 2001 advised al-Qaida operatives to buy assault weapons in the United States and use them against us.
Terrorists are bent on exploiting weaknesses in our gun laws. Just think of what a terrorist could do with a sniper rifle and only a moderate supply of armor-piercing ammunition.
My amendment amends the Federal ban on cop-killer bullets to include a performance standard and extends the ban on centerfire rifles, which include the sniper rifles and assault weapons responsible for the deaths of 17 police officers whose body armor was penetrated by this ammunition.
My amendment will not apply to ammunition that is now routinely used in hunting rifles or other centerfire rifles. To the contrary, it only covers ammunition that is designed or marketed as having armor-piercing capability. That is it--designed or marketed as having armor-piercing capability, such as armor-piercing ammunition that is now advertised on the Hi-Vel Web site.
Bullets that are designed or marketed to be armor piercing have no place in our society. Ducks, deer, and other wildlife do not wear body armor. Police officers do. We should not let another day pass without plugging the loopholes in the Federal law that bans cop-killer bullets.
This is an issue on which mainstream gun owners and gun safety advocates can agree. I urge my colleagues to vote in support of this amendment.
I reserve the remainder of my time.
I don't buy the "Vote for Bush and keep the Democrats from ruining our country" bullshit. The Republicans are doing a fine job of aiding and abetting the Dems, as witnessed by their votes on this bill.
Remember, Bush even said he's sign the bill if it landed on his desk. Looks like his party's sending it that way.
Are we "Giving the gun grabbers more victories" by not voting? The way I see it, we are only encouraging more of the same atrocities by the Republicans and the President if we reward them with our votes. Most people will simply not vote if Bush signs the ban, but I'll do one better:
I'll vote for Kerry. He won't get anything done with a Republican majority in Congress. Gridlock's really not a bad thing.
Hear, hear!
I expect that in either event, the most useful weapons that will do the yeoman's share of work under such conditions will be the 12-gauge shotgun and the cutdown .22 semiauto rifle.
But those using such equipment will very quickly be replacing those weapons with those they recover from enemy dead, or will have no further worry for the woes of this world.
Nevertheless, the incrementalism creeping toward those shotguns and rifles needs to be halted now.
And if that were not reason enough, remember that there are thousands of veterans of military service who might also fing common purpose alongside you, but who have no particular skill with either your boltgun or Mossberg, having been trained on the M16/M16A1/M16A2/M4 since 1967. I don't partricularly intend to so use my own AR15 variant, but in such circumstances figure I'd run into a deserving pal right soon enough.
Pretty much:
Senate Approves Feinstein-Warner-Schumer
Extension of Assault Weapons Ban
March 2, 2004
pdf version
|
Washington, DC – The U.S. Senate today approved extending the ban on military-style assault weapons, sponsored by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). The bipartisan legislation, also sponsored by Senators John W. Warner (R-VA) and Charles Schumer (D-NY) would extend the current ban on the manufacture and importation of 19 types of assault weapons (and many other by characteristic) by an additional 10 years. The ban will expire on September 13, 2004 unless Congress approves the new legislation and it is signed into law by President Bush. “This is a tremendous day,” Senator Feinstein said . “It was an uphill battle, but it was a battle worth fighting. The NRA went all out to repeal this legislation, and we won. I feel exactly like I did in 1993. Once in a while, when you have something in which you deeply believe, and that something is made into law and sustained, it is so elating and so important. I deeply believe that assault weapons don't belong on the streets of our communities. The bill we drafted banned the manufacture and sale of assault weapons. It also banned the manufacture of the big clips, drums or strips, which make them so dangerous. The aim was to dry up the supply of these weapons over time -- and the ban has worked. It has reduced the proportion of banned weapons used in crime by two-thirds. In the past few days, we've heard horror stories about the gun industry planning to put bayonet mounts and grenade launchers and flash suppressers back on the market again. This would have been terrible. I want to thank all the Senators that voted for this amendment and all the cosponsors that helped secure victory. It would not have happened if we had not acted as a team. I want to particularly thank Senator Warner. Senator Warner voted against the ban 10 years ago, but had the good judgment to see that the ban has worked, that law enforcement supports it, and to understand what would happen if this ban were repealed. I also want to thank Senator Schumer. Senator Schumer was on the Judiciary Committee in the House when this came up in 1993. I asked him if he would take the bill that I had introduced and try to shepherd it through the House. He did that, which was no small accomplishment. Now, the key is to keep the extension of the ban in the gun immunity bill. We should not go to conference on this bill, until there is a commitment that the assault weapons legislation will be part of a final gun immunity bill. We have a commitment from Minority Leader, Senator Daschle, to assure that that's the case. The issue is now clearly joined, and I believe the overwhelming number of the American people want this assault weapons legislation continued for another ten years. At the end of the road, I hope that we will have achieved that.” Extension of the assault weapons ban enjoys broad support: • President Bush supports the extension of the ban : In April 2003, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said of the assault weapons ban, "The president supports the current law, and he supports reauthorization of the current law." • Extension of the ban is widely supported by gun owning and non-gun owning voters. According to an October poll (sample size – 800) conducted for Americans for Gun Safety by Mark Penn, voters support renewing the ban by a margin of 77-21% (66-32% among voters who own guns). Law enforcement organizations support the extension: • Fraternal Order of Police The ban also has broad support in the community: • National League of Cities Legislation to reauthorize the assault weapons ban is cosponsored by Senators Mike DeWine (R-OH), Lincoln Chafee (R-RI), Carl Levin (D-MI), Christopher Dodd (D-CT), James Jeffords (I-VT), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Jack Reed (D-RI), Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Barbara Mikulski (D-MD). ### |
Yeah, Feingold is pro-gun. >/sarcasm!>
Get real. There is absolutely no chance he would have voted Nay had his vote mattered. Feingold is up for reelection this November, and he thinks that enough Wisconsin voters will be stupid enough to believe this vote was sincere. This vote was just a way to pacify any nitwits who could be fooled by this single vote despite an anti-2nd amendment career.
Such a vote is not at all a bad strategy, with two provisos:
One: It has to be across the board: All parties, all offices, from President to dogcatcher. If that party has betrayed us in the past,
no votes for their incumbents. It becomes a one-term game. And those wanting to play next go-around need to find a better opening ante.
Two: They have to know that this is the grounding policy for many, maybe most of their voting constituents. And when local councilmen or mayors realise that a betrayal position by a governor or congressman can cost them their jobs too, guess who's going to be applying pressure on our behalf.
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.