subsonic
.44 mag
One would hope this will not get any further on the house floor and would be unlikely to be enacted in Texas.
Not only would this do basically nothing except hinder young gun buyers, it has the odd feature of applying only to semiautomatic calibers greater than .22 with detachable magazines, but NO reference to centerfire versus rimfire. So an AR with a .203 Ruger upper is good to go to sell to an 18-year-old. Arguably under the rule of lenity a standard .223/5.56 upper would be good fine too, since .223 is often considered a .22 caliber and it rounds to .22 to the second decimal, I can’t see making a crime out out of .003 when the law says “greater than .22” and it is still less than .23, and they had every opportunity to write it to straightforwardly apply to .223.
either way, since an upper still isn’t a firearm an 18-year-old could still buya rifle in .22LR or .203 Ruger and then buy an unregulated .223 upper. (Under 21 can’t buy an incomplete lower under current federal law, same as pistols.)
Not only would this do basically nothing except hinder young gun buyers, it has the odd feature of applying only to semiautomatic calibers greater than .22 with detachable magazines, but NO reference to centerfire versus rimfire. So an AR with a .203 Ruger upper is good to go to sell to an 18-year-old. Arguably under the rule of lenity a standard .223/5.56 upper would be good fine too, since .223 is often considered a .22 caliber and it rounds to .22 to the second decimal, I can’t see making a crime out out of .003 when the law says “greater than .22” and it is still less than .23, and they had every opportunity to write it to straightforwardly apply to .223.
either way, since an upper still isn’t a firearm an 18-year-old could still buya rifle in .22LR or .203 Ruger and then buy an unregulated .223 upper. (Under 21 can’t buy an incomplete lower under current federal law, same as pistols.)