Likely first target of new gun-control push: High-capacity magazines
The White House is looking at various options, and the scope and details of the president’s approach aren’t clear. One possibility likely to be considered is a ban on high-capacity magazines, the devices attached to firearms that store large numbers of bullets and reload them rapidly.
A 1994 ban on assault weapons that expired in 2004 included a ban on ammunition magazines that held more than 10 rounds. Recent shootings, including the one Friday, have involved firearms with much more capacity, allowing a shooter to fire many more shots before having to reload, which could allow someone to intervene.
Assault weapons are a class of semiautomatic firearms, those that require a single pull of the trigger for each shot fired and then load the next round automatically. Under the 1994 law, there were 19 models of firearms and copies or duplicates of them that were banned, along with semiautomatic rifles that accepted detachable magazines and possessed at least two other characteristics, including a protruding pistol grip, flash suppressor or threaded barrel or a folding or telescoping stock.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Laws are made to put penalties on action, not to prevent action (as they almost always fail in that respect). For actions that are ends, the idea of penalties is silly. Of course, leftists hate the idea of penalizing people for their actions, generally, so you idiots have formed the ridiculous notion that laws prevent behavior, which they generally don’t. This goes hand-in-hand with your misunderstanding of police, who essentially arrest people after a crime rather than prevent or stop crime.
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on December 17, 2012 at 1:27 PM
The only thing that fool is doing is making himself look even more stupid.
wargamer6 on December 17, 2012 at 1:27 PM
But you think there exists the means and the will to disarm the American people?
Washington Nearsider on December 17, 2012 at 1:28 PM
And your one example of how laws are necessary to maintain order in a civilized nation, is the one thing libs are trying to DEcriminalize?
The Schaef on December 17, 2012 at 1:28 PM
The real problem is that gun control has left people unable to defend themselves. It is no accident that the vast majority of these horrible events occur in so called gun free zones.
NotCoach on December 17, 2012 at 1:28 PM
Thanks for proving my point.
mrsknightley on December 17, 2012 at 1:28 PM
And how many were killed before they got tackled that wouldn’t have if someone was there to shoot back?
So when someone with a 10 round magazine shoots up a “gun free zone” we’ll go to 3 round magazines?
gwelf on December 17, 2012 at 1:29 PM
This article doesn’t seem to keep people away from a gun show Sunday. I like some of the responses given.
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2012/12/16/connecticut-school-shooting-doesnt-deter-crowd-at-gun-show-in-montgomery-county/\
L
letget on December 17, 2012 at 1:29 PM
Agreed. I look forward to fairly substantial returns on the windowless $10 Magpuls after that:
http://slickdeals.net/f/5696776-Guns-Ammo-10-MAGPUL-PMAGS-FOR-99-99-FS-DEAD?
What, you don’t think the parts will just dissolve into dust, do you? There are millions of them in US already. This would do virtually nothing.
rogerb on December 17, 2012 at 1:29 PM
I’m not refuting what you said. I’m saying not everyone is inept as those two were in reloading. It literally takes a few seconds to drop an empty mag, insert a new one and pull the trigger.
Anyone practiced at all can do it with ease.
darwin on December 17, 2012 at 1:29 PM
Zip it Pol Pot.
jawkneemusic on December 17, 2012 at 1:29 PM
Who exactly are they expecting to intervene inside a classroom of first graders?
BohicaTwentyTwo on December 17, 2012 at 1:31 PM
A ban on ‘high-capacity liberal stupidity’ would hold far more benefits for society.
Pork-Chop on December 17, 2012 at 1:31 PM
Please phone ahead to 911 and let the dispatcher know you only want police to tackle any armed rapists or murderers that enter your apartment.
rogerb on December 17, 2012 at 1:31 PM
Laws aren’t great preventative measures for motivated (or evil or crazy) people. They’re great at dealing with things after the fact.
gwelf on December 17, 2012 at 1:31 PM
Lovely. Great idea.
Then mass murderers will double up on the number of firearms they carry to the massacre and be better prepared.
Tempt me to support it by including an immediate nationwide prohibition on gun-free zones with a mandate for schools to incorporate firearm availability and training for school employees tied to continuation of federal aid to schools and have a sunset provision of 5 years and we’ll see what works out.
Dusty on December 17, 2012 at 1:31 PM
nonsense. the nazis had no use for gun control more extensive than those already passed during the weimar republic.
sesquipedalian on December 17, 2012 at 1:31 PM
The same liberals who constantly remind us that not all Muslims are terrorists now want to persuade us that every gun owner is a criminal.
Washington Nearsider on December 17, 2012 at 1:32 PM
more nonsense.
come on, rodge, answer the question: was jarder loughner tackled while attempting to reload? could he have been tackled earlier had he not had so many goddamn bullets in one mag?
sesquipedalian on December 17, 2012 at 1:33 PM
you’re the only one embarrassing yourself. what i wrote is fact. they were tackled while reloading. care to refute it?
sesquipedalian on December 17, 2012 at 1:24 PM
How many rounds should a women wanting to protect herself from a violent man be allowed to have in her gun before she needs to reload (you know when her attacker will be able to tackle her).
gwelf on December 17, 2012 at 1:34 PM
So you’re saying Hitler didn’t disarm Jews?
darwin on December 17, 2012 at 1:35 PM
Sesq probably would think she’d deserve it. Kind of like how he thinks people who he “disagrees” with should have their face smashed in.
wargamer6 on December 17, 2012 at 1:35 PM
How many would have been saved if they didn’t have to wait for him to reload before fighting back?
How many shots does a woman get in defending herself against an attacker before she needs to reload?
gwelf on December 17, 2012 at 1:36 PM
You are now referring to the weapon that jammed, and he subsequently abandoned because it jammed, to support your absurdest position?
NotCoach on December 17, 2012 at 1:36 PM
Yep. And these same leftists fete the muzzies who have made attacking children a legitimate attack by “freedom fighters” and have reacted to muzzies using this tactic by giving them whole states to originate their murder and mayhem from and by making them the most frequent visitors at the White House, as I doubt Arafat’s 54 visits will be eclipsed by anyone.
Leftists love terrorists. They just hate the idea that people who might disagree with them could be armed, as per our Constitution (which they hate with all their might, of course).
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on December 17, 2012 at 1:36 PM
Zip it Joseph Goebbels.
jawkneemusic on December 17, 2012 at 1:37 PM
Woah … how did that get through?
Dusty on December 17, 2012 at 1:37 PM
On-topic since the Pseudoephedrine post was introduced:
ernesto, I figure the thread was abandoned but wanted to be sure you saw this.
You mentioned that you’re still just a child per Obamacare, but I really think it’s a matter of time until you’re secretly voting for (R)s.
rogerb on December 17, 2012 at 1:37 PM
Gatsu on December 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM
I just showed Ed and AP my Privileged Character Card.
Don’t leave home without it!
CurtZHP on December 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM
Hitler disarmed Jews.
darwin on December 17, 2012 at 1:26 PM
@sesquipedalian – You are wrong.
http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/article-nazilaw.pdf
Pork-Chop on December 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM
So if Lanza had been forced to reload after every ten shots, that would’ve saved some of the 6 year olds? I highly doubt that.
juliesa on December 17, 2012 at 1:40 PM
On Nov. 8, the New York Times reported from Berlin, “Berlin Police Head Announces ‘Disarming’ of Jews,” explaining:
The Berlin Police President, Count Wolf Heinrich von Helldorf, announced that as a result of a police activity in the last few weeks the entire Jewish population of Berlin had been “disarmed” with the confiscation of 2,569 hand weapons, 1,702 firearms and 20,000 rounds of ammunition. Any Jews still found in possession of weapons without valid licenses are threatened with the severest punishment.
The Völkische Beobachter (People’s Observer), Hitler’s newspaper, reported:
Following the conclusion of the preliminary investigation, the
Office of the Public Prosecutor I in Berlin has now filed charges
against nine Communists for severe breach of peace of the land,
attempted murder and offenses against the Firearms Law committed during the assault conducted in the night of December 28, 1932 on the National Socialist meeting room at Landwehrstrasse which severely injured three National Socialists.
An SA Oberführer warned about an ordinance issued by the provisional Bavarian Minister of the Interior:
The deadline set by § 4 of the Ordinance for the Surrender of Weapons will expire on March 31, 1933. I therefore request the immediate surrender of all arms from former army stores to the local stations of the Gendarmie.
Pursuant to § 3 of the ordinance, individuals may be permitted to keep a handgun together with proper ammunition for the protection of house and farm. Well-founded requests in this regard may be submitted to the local Gendarmerie stations by way of the mayor.
The units of the national revolution, SA, SS, and Stahlhelm, offer every German man with a good reputation the opportunity to join their ranks for the fight. Therefore, whoever does not belong to one of these named units and nevertheless keeps his weapon without authorization or even hides it, must be viewed as an enemy of the national government and will be held responsible without hesitation and with the utmost severity.
On March 28, the State Ministry of the Interior headed by Frick issued a secret directive to the government units, police, municipal commissars, and special commissioners of the highest SA leaders regarding the execution of the ordinance on the surrender of military weapons. It began: “Despite all of the measures taken so far, parts of the population opposed to the national government and the national movement behind it are still in possession of military weapons and military ammunition.”
A terse newspaper announcement about the above began: “We would like to point out one more time that all military weapons and ammunition in private possession have to be surrendered by March 31, 1933 . . . .”
It warned: “If we find military weapons or ammunition after 31 March 1933, we will be forced to proceed ruthlessly . . . .”
sharrukin on December 17, 2012 at 1:40 PM
Once again for the reading-challenged:
“So let’s not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country.” –Adolf Hitler
Kinda sounds like he had bigger plans than what pre-existing laws would allow.
Now why does that sound familiar?
/headscratch
mrsknightley on December 17, 2012 at 1:40 PM
I would agree that that has something to do with it. Still, I think there is some validity in the claim that if this guy had only a revolver the death toll would have smaller.
Mind you, if they had done something about his mental health issue there would be no death toll at all.
I’m just trying to figure this out.
DeathtotheSwiss on December 17, 2012 at 1:43 PM
LOL
Dusty on December 17, 2012 at 1:43 PM
Ready, fire, aim…
d1carter on December 17, 2012 at 1:43 PM
The stupidity if these anti-gun nuts is astounding. Higher capacity magazines have a greater chance of malfunctioning. These drums they’re so afraid of almost always jam. That’s the reason the military doesn’t use them. They’re not efficient. Also it takes less than 2 seconds to swap a magazine. This is all “feel good” fluff from the dumbest generation to have ever lived. These people don’t care about these children. Only how it makes them feel about them selves. That’s what is really frightening about mini tyrants like lostmotherland. If given the chance, that nut and nuts like it wouldn’t hesitate to place us in their gulag.
jawkneemusic on December 17, 2012 at 1:46 PM
And if large magazines were against the law, I’m sure he would have obeyed the law and used a smaller magazine instead of the big ones he already had in his possession.
The Rogue Tomato on December 17, 2012 at 1:46 PM
I notice the Trolls are out in full force, doubtless under orders. In true Alinsky fashion, they are trying to push a negative till it becomes a positive.
LOL.
Let’s get something out on the table right now.
If O-hole Executive orders the seizure of guns, it will spark a Rev.
While that may be fine with Liberals who think they are in the Majority (they are not) it may not turn out the way you want it to turn out.
Think about this before you go full retard on the 2nd. It was designed for just this eventuality.
Bulletchaser on December 17, 2012 at 1:46 PM
Lol. Ernesto, sesq and motherland ran away.
wargamer6 on December 17, 2012 at 1:47 PM
People forget that. The 2nd Amendment was designed specifically to give the people the power to overthrow – through violence – the government.
After all, violently overthrowing the government is what made America America.
Washington Nearsider on December 17, 2012 at 1:48 PM
I’ve been meaning to stock up on mags for awhile. Obviously, now’s the time, before prices go up.
juliesa on December 17, 2012 at 1:48 PM
Odd how they always show up and leave together.
Washington Nearsider on December 17, 2012 at 1:49 PM
And trust me, magazines have been added to millions of Christmas shopping lists. Good luck implementing such a ban.
michaelo on December 17, 2012 at 1:49 PM
I haven’t thought about it. I am now though.
darwin on December 17, 2012 at 1:50 PM
According to facebook, the guy was a professed communist. Seems like we should focus our efforts in stamping out liberalism.
The Count on December 17, 2012 at 1:50 PM
No kidding. The think only white Christian males own guns. Most of my Obama voter friends are gun owners themselves. One in particular loves Obama and he just bought a semi-auto AK47 to add to his collection.
jawkneemusic on December 17, 2012 at 1:51 PM
It does seem the nut jobs always turn out to be liberals.
darwin on December 17, 2012 at 1:51 PM
Pay attention…
Yesterday, libfreeordie posted a link from someone that had tweeted this:
Have you taken a look at what happened to the overall crime rate in the UK after gun bans went into effect? Gun crime increased by 89% between 1998 and 2009. In some parts of the country, the number of offences has increased more than five-fold. In eighteen police areas, gun crime at least doubled. The Metropolitan Police now has replaced some of the famously unarmed “Bobbies” with armed patrols on some streets and officers armed with “sub-machine guns” are engaged in routine policing for the first time.
From the BBC in 2001:
From The Telegraph in 2003:
Gun control laws have the perverse effect of increasing crime because they disarm law-abiding citizens, leaving them defenceless against lawbreakers, who aren’t going to be “controlled” by gun control laws.
Resist We Much on December 17, 2012 at 1:52 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »