HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Dems introduce high-capac...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 08:08 PM

Dems introduce high-capacity magazine ban in the House

Source: Salon

Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., introduced a ban on high-capacity magazines in the House earlier today, the first day of the new session of Congress.

According to the AP, DeGette introduced the bill with Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., whose husband was killed in a 1993 mass shooting on the Long Island Rail Road in New York. From the AP:

"(DeGette)‘s district includes the site of the 1999 massacre at Columbine High School. It is also adjacent to last year’s Aurora movie theater shooting site. In both of those attacks, the shooters’ rifles were modified with high-capacity magazines. Those devices allow attackers to fire dozens of bullets without pausing to reload."

Though it’s still unclear whether a ban can pass the Republican-controlled House, there were some promising signs from at least one Republican earlier today.

Read more: http://www.salon.com/2013/01/03/dems_introduce_high_capacity_magazine_ban_in_the_house/

49 replies, 6227 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 49 replies Author Time Post
Reply Dems introduce high-capacity magazine ban in the House (Original post)
Redfairen Jan 2013 OP
fascisthunter Jan 2013 #1
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #2
Ptah Jan 2013 #3
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #6
Lordquinton Jan 2013 #7
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #8
Kaleva Jan 2013 #18
rrneck Jan 2013 #26
Lordquinton Jan 2013 #28
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #30
Lordquinton Jan 2013 #46
Paladin Jan 2013 #38
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #42
pasto76 Jan 2013 #13
ProgressoDem Jan 2013 #15
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #21
rrneck Jan 2013 #27
ProgressoDem Jan 2013 #43
frylock Jan 2013 #16
Kingofalldems Jan 2013 #4
onehandle Jan 2013 #5
Glaug-Eldare Jan 2013 #14
snooper2 Jan 2013 #37
L0oniX Jan 2013 #40
PavePusher Jan 2013 #47
former_con Jan 2013 #9
WHEN CRABS ROAR Jan 2013 #10
SunSeeker Jan 2013 #11
ReRe Jan 2013 #12
Kaleva Jan 2013 #17
quadrature Jan 2013 #19
happyslug Jan 2013 #20
Kaleva Jan 2013 #22
sofa king Jan 2013 #25
triplepoint Jan 2013 #23
Kaleva Jan 2013 #24
triplepoint Jan 2013 #29
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #32
Kaleva Jan 2013 #36
Duckhunter935 Jan 2013 #33
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #31
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #41
sir pball Jan 2013 #44
triplepoint Jan 2013 #48
sir pball Jan 2013 #49
jmowreader Jan 2013 #34
hack89 Jan 2013 #35
Kaleva Jan 2013 #39
sir pball Jan 2013 #45

Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 08:34 PM

1. a step in the best direction

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 08:46 PM

2. Reloading doesn't seem to take this guy very long.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 08:48 PM

3. Loughner fumbled the reload and was tackled.

If he only had 5 shots instead of 30 . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ptah (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 09:06 PM

6. No, his magazine jammed.

His mag held 33 rounds. Plus one in the chamber is 34 rounds. The FBI said that he fired 31 rounds. He still had three. Among gunners it is well known that extreme hi-capacity magazines are prone to failure-to-feed malfunctions. The follower spring is not able to maintain pressure on the ammunition over its range of travel. His mag jammed and he was trying to clear the jam which gave others the chance to jump him.

The Batman movie killer's super sized mag also jammed.

The Luby's killer, and the VT killer used standard magazines and reloaded, with no jams.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 09:25 PM

7. Lots of practice

under ideal conditions, stress, adrenaline and other factors make it harder to accomplish such a feat. reading other responses, it seems like people want higher capacity magazines because they are more prone to jamming. if they had to reload 5 times before firing 30 rounds, there are a lot more opportunies for something to go wrong, and they can't carry as many rounds on them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lordquinton (Reply #7)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 09:37 PM

8. Practice creates muscle memory.

That kind of practice is easy to do and in a couple of days you can work up a decent speed. You won't be able to compete with the guy in the video, but you can get the time to under one second. Even without practice it doesn't take more than three seconds. Carrying spare loaded mags isn't a big problem. The VT killer reloaded 17 times. The Ft. Hood killer reloaded several times. So did the Luby's killer.

Personally, I don't have any extended mags. I do have a pistol whose magazine takes 12 rounds, and I am going to buy a GLOCK 21 (.45 caliber) which uses a 12 round mag. I tried one of those magazines that stick out the bottom of the pistol and I didn't like it. The weight of the extra ammo changed the balance of the gun thereby changing the feel of the gun in the hand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #8)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 11:14 PM

18. As carrying spare mags isn't a problem, there shouldn't be any arguement against this bill

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #18)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:00 AM

26. Except

that it will expend political capital and and energize the Republican base for a feel good law that won't work, thus making fools out of the legislators that support it. It's hard to get reelected when you do stuff like that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #8)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:05 AM

28. Some of them did reload several times

some didn't, if the ones that had larger mags didn't have access to them, then those killings wouldn't have happened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lordquinton (Reply #28)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 06:52 AM

30. So you imagine that if larger mags were banned...

...then killers would not buy multiple smaller mags instead? And then they would be shooting with more reliable mags. With just a little practice and they could be doing reloads in less than two seconds. Your plan forces the killer to buy more reliable equipment. Wouldn't it be better if he used stuff that was less reliable?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #30)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 06:16 PM

46. The killer didn't buy equipement

he stole it, as did a couple others. And yes, I would like the stuff that is out there to be more reliable for everyone, and for people who are into that sort of thing to have to put thought into it, and maybe "training to reload really fast" should be a warning sign to look for. More reloads means more chances for something to go wrong. You're arguing with a hypothetical anyways, what it it doesn't jam at all? this is something that we could go rounds on all day, so we have to pair it down to what is safest for everyone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #8)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 11:00 AM

38. That's Nice. Please Stay The Fuck Out Of My Neighborhood. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Paladin (Reply #38)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:43 PM

42. You already have other people with CHLs in your neighborhood.

You live in the capital city of Texas, and there are over 525K CHLers as of 12/31/2011. Every time that you are out and obout in the general public you probably pass by someone with a legally concealed handgun. Travis County, where you claim to live, has over 4K CHLers. Don't go to San Antonio, they have over 22K.

You never know when you may be walking past one of us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 10:28 PM

13. there is a big flaw in this argument, from the gun nut side

if maniacs had to use smaller magazines, then the "good guys" with guns will have more chances to 'stop' him....and of course, the 'pro gun' side right now is all concerned with actually stopping bad guys with guns.


Right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 10:49 PM

15. But that guy isn't all potential shooters.

The body coult will be less, on the whole, if we get rid of high-capacity magazines.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressoDem (Reply #15)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 11:47 PM

21. Even a poorly trained person can do a swap in three seconds. N/T

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #21)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:01 AM

27. I haven't been to the range in years and I can swap 1911 mags in under two. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #21)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 03:51 PM

43. Well then great, let's get rid of the high capacity clips because it doesn't make a difference.

Of course, it does make a difference, otherwise we wouldn't have high capacity clips. Lower capacity clips means more opportunities to get away. Seconds can make a difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 10:53 PM

16. he's not under much duress either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 08:53 PM

4. Look out, here they come...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 08:59 PM

5. Good. Fuck nose-picking gun fucks. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #5)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 10:29 PM

14. AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message
At Thu Jan 3, 2013, 09:06 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Good. Fuck nose-picking gun fucks. nt
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=355867

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

This is extremely uncivil!

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Jan 3, 2013, 09:16 PM, and the Jury voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: It's not civil. It's oddly worded as well. Ultimately, the poster is exclusively telling people to fuck who are already categorized as "fucks" Furthermore, the poster isn't referring to all "fucks," but only those who pick their nose.

That's a pretty small subset of people. While I realize that this is not a reason or justification to treat them differently, telling fucks to fuck is sort of like telling fliers to fly, eaters to eat, or thinkers to think--except with expletives.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Is that the offensive part, that gun owners pick their noses?
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: Oh, onehandle, couldn't you have phrased that differently?
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: It's not personally directed at anyone.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: this is a rude, unnecessary post
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: The DU is by far in favor of gun control. JFK, MLK, RFK, John Lennon,

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #5)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 10:44 AM

37. nose-picking? Really?

that's the best you could come up with on a Friday of all days? LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #5)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 12:03 PM

40. If it's good enough for Obama it should be good enough for you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #5)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 06:21 PM

47. And pick nose-fucking grabber/banner fucks. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 09:52 PM

9. Step in the correct direction...

I know it may be an uphill battle but if people on this side of the issue won't stick to their principles and make some serious demands for change than of course nothing will change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 09:53 PM

10. Lets see if it comes to a vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 10:10 PM

11. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 10:18 PM

12. K&R

Let's go. Get the show on the road. Ban those loaded magazines now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 11:05 PM

17. Anyone have info on the actual bill such as the number?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 11:24 PM

19. 10 shot limit, will encourage shooters to 'up caliber'

why shoot a 9mm 10 shot mag when
a 45 ACP 10 shot mag is also available.

why shoot .223 when a .30 cal is
just a barrel-and-mag change away?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 11:27 PM

20. Another bill proposed to show they are for Gun Control, knowing it will never see the light of day

Congress persons due this all the time, introduce a bill, knowing it was never get out of committee, but they can then go back home and tell people they "tried" to get the bill passed. It is political show and tell, the key is getting enough co-sponsors so it can at least get out of Committee. That takes work, and just introducing a bill is NOT the same as getting it through the House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to happyslug (Reply #20)

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 11:55 PM

22. Well, as soon as I get the bill number, I'll be calling and writing my rep asking him to co-sponser

Here is a copy of an earlier e-mail I sent to him which I posted in GC/RKBA:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117293954

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to happyslug (Reply #20)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 12:55 AM

25. It will keep magazine sales record-high, though.

So, you know, it won't actually do anything except deliver more of the devices into the hands of the very people who shouldn't have them, sooner.

But someone is getting rich off of it in the meantime, so I guess we shouldn't complain.

Sometimes, to take a step in the right direction, you have to frighten and arm a couple hundred thousand lunatics while delivering record profits to your opponents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 12:14 AM

23. Sphincter-GunNuts Never Got the Memo...

 

Last edited Tue Jan 8, 2013, 10:03 PM - Edit history (8)


.
.

.
.

.
.
.

.
.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.
.
and if you REALLY are STILL "interested..."

http://seattle.craigslist.org/see/spo/3520579883.html
.
.
.
And just so you know, gun nut gear is not allowed to be sold on craigslist:
http://www.craigslist.org/about/prohibited.items
.
I'm amazed that this stuff is allowed to be sold on the Internet at ANY website! Have already alerted ATF and hopefully, they'll locate the seller and deal with him. And of course, hopefully, I've saved lots of lives by turning this guy in. I start every day by flagging firearm and ammunition ads on Craigslist. It's my first good deed of the day!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triplepoint (Reply #23)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 12:22 AM

24. As far as I know, those are legal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #24)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:15 AM

29. A GUN NUT Sphincter Says What?

 

Last edited Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:06 AM - Edit history (5)

What's that YOU say?
.
.
.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triplepoint (Reply #29)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 07:09 AM

32. Kaleva is anti-gun. See his post #20.

He supports banning such magazines. He is just better informed than you of what isn't illegal. If there is no law against it, then it is legal. It is up to you to find a law outlawing such mags.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #32)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 10:40 AM

36. I did get a good laugh when I read that post!

I'm just another just another gun nut troll!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triplepoint (Reply #29)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 07:09 AM

33. legal

and I would never use one as they are too heavy and jam. but they look scary. I have no problem banning them but I doubt it will do much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triplepoint (Reply #23)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 07:04 AM

31. Not illegal. ATF can't do anything.

He is selling the magazine, not the gun. Such magazines are unreliable as they are prone to jam. There is a reason why the military doesn't use them. They are junk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triplepoint (Reply #23)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:17 PM

41. Turns good ammo into noise with few hits on target center.

Last edited Fri Jan 4, 2013, 01:50 PM - Edit history (2)

Video #2: At that distance all the shots should hit in one large ragged hole. Instead they are scattered all over the paper, few in the bull, and some that completely missed the paper. Slower speed, better aim, is far more deadly.

Video #5: They don't show how he did, but his technique was good, and he had an optical sight, nicknamed a "red dot" sight. His shots probably chewed a single hole in the target. Not as fast, but far more deadly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triplepoint (Reply #23)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 05:16 PM

44. Legal and completely useless

Heavy, unreliable, and most importantly ripping off 100 rounds at a rapid pace through any gun is going to eliminate any accuracy at all as well as degrading if not severely damaging the barrel, all from the heat buildup...there's a reason "true" machine guns have quick-change barrels. Yes, I could fit my rifle with one given a dremel and two minutes' work, but 100 loaded rounds of 308 weigh...lots, and I don't want to burn out a precision German target barrel any sooner than need be.

edit - the ATF isn't going to "deal with" this guy, he's not doing anything illegal whatsoever. Alerting CL is fine, since it's a violation of their TOS, but please don't waste the ATF's resources with frivolous, unnecessary claims.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #44)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 09:00 PM

48. A GUN NUT Sphincter Says What?

 

Last edited Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:03 AM - Edit history (3)

What's that you say?
.
.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to triplepoint (Reply #48)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 10:10 PM

49. What job do you think they should do exactly?

I'm genuinely interested...what do you feel the ATF should do in this case? The product in question, the firearm it is attached to, and the transaction offered are LEGAL - not unlawful in any way. The ATF can do NOTHING, your repeated alerting of them regardless. Just because you're horrified that this product exists doesn't mean you can summon a gov't entity to do your wishes. Mind you, I wouldn't ever associate with this chump; I'm also not worried about his poor self being persecuted (since, again, he is not doing anything illegal).

I do think you mean well in your own way; my worry is the ATF tiplines being overwhelmed with misinformed "reporting" in the current climate drowning out legitimate concerns of yahoos with illegal homebrew silencers, machine guns, bombs, annd genuinely illegal crap that needs enforcement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 07:23 AM

34. It takes a couple hours practice to learn to change mags quickly

I haven't had a full magazine since 1993 but I can still reload in less than five seconds.

Remember back when Michael Bloomberg banned big sodas, and we all decided the way to get around it was buying two smaller ones? Same deal here - if you can't get a 50 round mag you'll just take two 30s.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 08:16 AM

35. Doesn't ban possession as far as I can see. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 11:26 AM

39. The bill appears to be a refiling of H.R. 308 "The High Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 05:57 PM

45. Not that I think it'll pass, but no real skin off my nose

My precision rifle has available up to 30 round magazines; I do own several standard-size 20 round ones (.308 is larger so the "normal" mag size is smaller) but I never fire more than 5 rounds in a string, and have several 5 round mags for hunting. When I carry, I have a 1911 that takes 8 rounds. A limit of 10 wouldn't interfere with any of my shooting activities in any way. It's a compromise I'm willing to make, along with others...but I do worry that passing this might embolden control advocates to try for measures I wouldn't support.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread