PDA

View Full Version : High Cap Mag Ban already in the works!




jth_ttu
01-10-2011, 11:04 PM
Don't Let a good crisis go to waste!

McCarthy, Lautenberg seek to ban high-capacity ammo magazines(Updated at 3:45 p.m. Eastern to add comment from Lautenberg's and McCarthy's offices.)

By Michael Isikoff
NBC News National Investigative Correspondent

Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., with the backing of gun control groups, are drafting a bill that would ban the sale of high-capacity magazines such as the one that was used allegedly Saturday by Jared Lee Loughner, the man accused of murdering federal Judge John Roll and trying to assassinate Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., according to two gun control activists working with McCarthy's staff.

Gun control proponents are hoping to move rapidly on the measure in the wake of reports that Loughner's access to high-capacity, 33-round magazines substantially increased the lethality of his attack, the activists said. An Arizona law enforcement official confirmed to NBC News on Monday that Loughner had actually gotten off at least 31 shots during the Saturday shooting, not the 20 that were first reported. He was emptying his first high-capacity magazine and was trying to reload with another high-capacity magazine (with another 30 rounds) when he was wrestled to the ground, the official said.

"In the wake of these kind of incidents, the trick is to move quickly," said Kristen Rand, legislative director of the Violence Policy Center, one of the gun control groups working with McCarthy's office.

McCarthy, one of the House's strongest gun control proponents, whose husband was killed in a mass shooting on the Long Island Railroad in 1993, confirmed Sunday that she was drafting a new bill in the aftermath of Tuscon .an aide said her office was consulting with other members, including House Speaker John Boehner's office, and that she hoped to have draft language as early as this week. A Lautenberg aide said Lautenberg was working on a similar version in the Senate.

"The only reason to have 33 bullets loaded in a handgun is to kill a lot of people very quickly. These high-capacity clips simply should not be on the market," Lautenberg said. "Before 2004, these ammunition clips were banned, and they must be banned again. When the Senate returns to Washington, I will introduce legislation to prohibit this type of high-capacity clip."

http://openchannel.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/01/10/5805421-mccarthy-lautenberg-seek-to-ban-high-capacity-ammo-magazines

buck000
01-11-2011, 08:20 AM
Heard this this morning on NPR:

http://www.npr.org/2011/01/11/132826365/Rep-McCarthy-To-Propose-Ban-On-High-Capacity-Ammo

Interesting, "high-capacity ammo."

Ms. McCarthy is passionate on the subject, yet mentions "clip" vs. "magazine".

A high-capacity Glock magazine is now a component of a Weapon of Mass Destruction.

"But ["large-capacity clips"] will be available to our military...and will be available to our police officers."

The bill is being drawn in response to the Tucson shooting, but this is not a politicization of that. Right.

sluggo
01-11-2011, 08:49 AM
More "mental health gun control" measures will be sure to follow, as well.

PeacePlan
01-11-2011, 08:53 AM
Yes I could see this coming as they are hyping this big time. I expect a Gibbons bill soon much like the Brady bill.

Some more freedom and liberty soon to be lost.

Travlyr
01-11-2011, 09:55 AM
The only reason they think they can get away with this is because they have unlimited money.


It is time to shred their credit card!!


Ron Paul : I Won´t Vote To Raise The National Debt! (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?275314-Ron-Paul-I-Won%B4t-Vote-To-Raise-The-National-Debt!)

Onward and Forward!!

pcosmar
01-11-2011, 10:33 AM
More "mental health gun control" measures will be sure to follow, as well.

Expect that.
And don't believe that it has not been planed and the legislation already written.

McCarthy, Lautenberg
Expect the list of usual suspects to grow too.

chudrockz
01-11-2011, 11:43 AM
Are those clips intended to, for instance, fasten your Glocks securely to the refridgerator, along with pictures of your neices and nephews?

Sigh.

chudrockz
01-11-2011, 11:45 AM
Upon further reflection, we probably shouldn't correct the boneheads who want to ban those "clips". They'll pass the bill, and Barack OBonhead will sign it, and I'll still be able to legally purchase all the high capacity *magazines* I want.

TonySutton
01-11-2011, 11:48 AM
I will fight this on principle because they have no authority to ban high cap mags but a well trained shooter can change mags and continue firing with little pause.

buck000
01-11-2011, 12:44 PM
I will fight this on principle because they have no authority to ban high cap mags but a well trained shooter can change mags and continue firing with little pause.

Maybe we should ban magazine releases as a component of a weapon of Mass Destruction.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAFxgQmxbGI

Kelly.
01-11-2011, 12:50 PM
Heard this this morning on NPR:

http://www.npr.org/2011/01/11/132826365/Rep-McCarthy-To-Propose-Ban-On-High-Capacity-Ammo


A high-capacity Glock magazine is now a component of a Weapon of Mass Destruction.


i was cussing out my radio this morning after i heard the "WMD" reference.

complete BS.

Travlyr
01-11-2011, 02:08 PM
Maybe we should ban magazine releases as a component of a weapon of Mass Destruction.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAFxgQmxbGI

Nice video!

Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y go home and stay there. You are not smart enough to be in charge. Go HOME!

pcosmar
01-11-2011, 02:23 PM
Magazines, Pffttt


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsLx5ISBXw4

I knew a man in my youth that killed a charging bear, with a DB12 ga. And Bird shot.
He reloaded 3 times as the bear charged him.

He was not hunting bear. He was hunting ducks.
I saw the bear.

Dr.3D
01-11-2011, 05:52 PM
So if they ban those "clips", what would keep everybody from just buying high capacity magazines? I understand, the use of clips, pretty much ended after WWII.

Kotin
01-11-2011, 05:54 PM
Good thing I have a comfortable amount of high cap mags already..

oyarde
01-11-2011, 06:14 PM
Good thing I have a comfortable amount of high cap mags already..

The barter / resale value on them probably went up today .

buck000
01-11-2011, 11:24 PM
Out of deference to a colleague at work, I switched on Rachel Maddow to try and listen to her viewpoint. She was screeching about how it was "the least we could do" and "who would possibly oppose the idea" of banning at least high-capacity magazines.

I couldn't take it. I switched away....

nocompromises
01-12-2011, 01:55 AM
What is the chances of the Democrats having enough votes to get such a ban enacted? Do we have to worry about the Republicans going along with them?

Promontorium
01-12-2011, 05:22 AM
People have been waiting since Obama was elected for a big Federal gun control law. To answer the question of likelihood of this passing, I think a good example is the 1994 "Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act" which is probably the biggest gun control act to be enacted in American history. It included the 10 year "Assault Weapon Ban" which stopped existing in 2004, though it seems America hasn't caught wise to that yet.

The vote in the House of Representatives was not counted, however it was in the Senate:

YEA: 51 Democratics, 44 Republicans
Nay: 2 Democratics, 2 Republicans

Jesus f-ing Christ.

And you know who wrote the bill? None other than our VP, Joe Biden. They used current gun related tragedies to play on people's emotions to get this passed, and both parties gobbled it up. The Repubs only asked for some concessions and then ridiculously overwhelmingly supported it. I took a look at the list of Senators, and saw some I recognize still in the game today, I did a quick count and I think around 25% of the Senate today was in office then. I heard today Barbara Boxer was on board for this high cap mag ban (it's already limited to 10 in California, though I've found no human in the universe who can decipher if this ban applies to .22 cal).


Unless things have changed, unless people are more pro gun now then 18 years ago, this might just fly through with resounding "bi-partisanship".


http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1993-384

MRK
01-12-2011, 05:22 AM
What happens when a shooter brings two Glock 19s and has 34 loaded bullets instead of 33 like he would have had pre-clip ban?

Will there be legislation to ban all pistols from being within 5 feet of each other?

chudrockz
01-12-2011, 06:23 AM
I've been a Glock owner for something like twelve years now, and have never even considered purchasing high cap magazines for it. Until now.

Toureg89
01-12-2011, 10:58 AM
i dont think i own any hi cap mags outside of AR15 mags. all my 1911 mags are 7 rounders.

Promontorium
01-12-2011, 10:18 PM
Hey , I know guys, let's all leave this to the wind, cause we couldn't possibly take 'preemptive' action, and we can all go to the GOA thread and bitch and moan about nothing.

Icymudpuppy
01-13-2011, 12:40 PM
I only need a single shot rifle.

pcosmar
01-13-2011, 12:58 PM
I only need a single shot rifle.

I only need a trip wire.
;)

RedLightning
01-13-2011, 01:44 PM
So, what are they calling "high capacity clips" the 17 or so round magazine they come with or the 32 rounders? Hope it doesn't go anywhere.

fisharmor
01-13-2011, 03:59 PM
What is the chances of the Democrats having enough votes to get such a ban enacted? Do we have to worry about the Republicans going along with them?

When this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSGySNLyACE
is the type of people who sit on the board of the NRA, anything is possible.
I can totally see Republicans saying "but the Democrats agreed to cut a WHOLE BILLION DOLLARS of spending if we reenact the ban!" and then voting for it 434-1.

youngbuck
01-13-2011, 04:23 PM
So, what are they calling "high capacity clips" the 17 or so round magazine they come with or the 32 rounders? Hope it doesn't go anywhere.

During the 1994 'Assault Weapons Ban', they classified any magazine over 10-rounds to be "high capacity."

oyarde
01-13-2011, 04:40 PM
i dont think i own any hi cap mags outside of AR15 mags. all my 1911 mags are 7 rounders.

I always used the 10 .

oyarde
01-13-2011, 04:41 PM
During the 1994 'Assault Weapons Ban', they classified any magazine over 10-rounds to be "high capacity."

I think so .

Icymudpuppy
01-13-2011, 04:50 PM
I only need a trip wire.
;)

+rep :D

Toureg89
01-13-2011, 05:17 PM
Hey , I know guys, let's all leave this to the wind, cause we couldn't possibly take 'preemptive' action, and we can all go to the GOA thread and bitch and moan about nothing.
perhaps some of us don't see this as having a likely chance to pass.

Pericles
01-13-2011, 09:13 PM
Last time they did that back in 1994, there were some unintended consequences. Adventure line, the main military contractor for M16 magazines went out of business. The military draw down and no civilian sales killed the company.

oyarde
01-13-2011, 09:21 PM
Last time they did that back in 1994, there were some unintended consequences. Adventure line, the main military contractor for M16 magazines went out of business. The military draw down and no civilian sales killed the company.

I remember that .

Promontorium
01-14-2011, 02:09 AM
perhaps some of us don't see this as having a likely chance to pass.

Ja? So desu ka ? Honto desu ne? Verdad? Porque no dices unos veces? Like why exactly you think this is unlikely.

Thane Eichenauer
01-14-2011, 02:25 AM
I wonder what constitutional authorization will be referenced?

muzzled dogg
01-14-2011, 06:06 AM
welcome to massachusetts

Toureg89
01-14-2011, 11:05 AM
Ja? So desu ka ? Honto desu ne? Verdad? Porque no dices unos veces? Like why exactly you think this is unlikely.

i don't know half of what you said.

and i don't think anything will pass because i just don't see the (D)'s in congress have the power or the clout to pass this.

pcosmar
01-14-2011, 11:13 AM
I wonder what constitutional authorization will be referenced?

Welfare Clause. Commerce Clause.

and the Power Grab Claws.

pcosmar
01-14-2011, 11:15 AM
i don't know half of what you said.

and i don't think anything will pass because i just don't see the (D)'s in congress have the power or the clout to pass this.

What about the "Rs". ?
You don't believe that bullshit about support for the 2nd amendment that never results in the GCA being repealed.
Do you?

Toureg89
01-14-2011, 12:24 PM
What about the "Rs". ?
You don't believe that bullshit about support for the 2nd amendment that never results in the GCA being repealed.
Do you?
most republicans might be horrible statists or war mongering neocons, but most of them are a tad bit better than democrats on 2A issues.

this is one of those things where i don't see them sacrificing all that much.

and i just dont see hi-cap mags being that big of a concern for the left. i think the news left is way more radical than the public left, and the news left cares more about this issue, and is blowing the fans a way lot more, than will be experienced when left politicizations try to get anti hi cap laws passed.

of all the lefties i know, none of them have made any connection between hi cap mags and mass shootings.

Pericles
01-14-2011, 12:57 PM
What about the "Rs". ?
You don't believe that bullshit about support for the 2nd amendment that never results in the GCA being repealed.
Do you?

Yeah, if there was real support for the 2A, the CGA, NFA and that crap would be gone, M16s would cost less than $1000, and the Army would give you a M16 when you left active duty so you could carry on with your militia service.

pcosmar
01-14-2011, 01:42 PM
Yeah, if there was real support for the 2A, the CGA, NFA and that crap would be gone, M16s would cost less than $1000, and the Army would give you a M16 when you left active duty so you could carry on with your militia service.

I agree, except that ownership of a Battle Rifle should be a requirement to enter service.

fisharmor
01-14-2011, 02:49 PM
most republicans might be horrible statists or war mongering neocons, but most of them are a tad bit better than democrats on 2A issues.

this is one of those things where i don't see them sacrificing all that much.

And that is how we got to where we are.
National gun activists could learn a lot from the Virginia Citizens Defense League.

VCDL rejects the approach of focusing on a defensive battle until “the time is right”. Even if you win 95% of the defensive battles, you lose 5%. Over time, this defensive war of attrition slowly whittles away our Rights until we have none.

The time isn’t going to magically become right to introduce pro-gun legislation. Instead, WE have to make the time right. And we do that by constantly pushing a pro-gun agenda – getting pro-gun legislation before the General Assembly, getting voters to contact their legislators, and hounding any locality that violates the law.

Even if we win only 5% of our pro-gun agenda each year, we are advancing our Rights each and every year, instead of losing them bit-by-bit.

That is the approach that wins.
In Virginia, we make gains every year. We have fewer suppressed gun freedoms here than in most states.
And we are spitting distance from a lot of the worst states in the Union.

The other side understands this perfectly. It is why they write these bills every season. If even one of them sticks, then that puts them that much closer to a total ban.
5% victories a year for the anti-gun crowd puts us totally without guns within most of our lifetimes.

They don't need to win this battle. They only need to win one every once in a while.

Can anyone tell me some pro-gun bills that anyone has introduced?
How can we be pursuing this strategy when nobody is putting pro-gun bills in?
Like Pete said: the notion that they're pro-gun is patent bullshit. They're not only not repealing GCA... they're not even trying.

Toureg89
01-14-2011, 04:35 PM
And that is how we got to where we are.
National gun activists could learn a lot from the Virginia Citizens Defense League
we got here because i believe republicans won't budge on the hicap issue/democrats won't push the hi cap issue?

or because Republicans are horrible for protecting the second amendment?

i whole heartedly agree the Republicans are horrible at protecting the second amendment, but doesnt change the perception at hand that i have, that i really don't fear them compromising on this issue, or that they will even have a chance to compromise, because, as i said, i really don't see democrats trying to push this.