Sente’s Ban on High Capacity Gun Ammo Moves to House Floor (Illinios)

[jpak]

http://triblocal.com/lincolnshire/community/stories/2011/03/sente’s-ban-on-high-capacity-gun-ammo-moves-to-house-floor/

A significant piece of legislation to reduce gun violence in Illinois has been voted out of the House Judiciary 1-Civil Law Committee and advances to the full House of Representatives for consideration. This legislation will prohibit ownership and manufacturing of high capacity gun magazines for civilian use.

“I sponsored this legislation because detachable high capacity magazines increase the lethality of guns. The common denominator among the plethora of mass shootings spanning the news over the past 5-10 years such as Tucson, AZ, NIU, Virginia Tech, Fort Hood, TX and Columbine High School in Colorado is the use of high capacity ammunition magazines. High capacity magazines reduce the odds of an individuals’ survival and for this reason I believe they should be banned.”

House Bill 1871 will make it illegal to manufacture, deliver, sell, purchase or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device, also known as gun magazines, in the state of Illinois unless it is for the authorized use of government agencies like the military or police departments. A large capacity ammunition feeding device is defined as a detachable magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device with the capacity to be easily restored or converted to take more than 10 rounds of ammunition. Anyone who violates this law will receive a Class A misdemeanor for the first violation, a Class 4 felony for the second violation, a Class 3 felony for the third or subsequent violation, or for possession or delivery of more than 1 device simultaneously. Gun collectors who currently possess high capacity magazines will not be penalized.

<more>

[rl6214]

1. Ya know it might just pass in IL but I wouldn't count on it

Just a little white lie in this piece though.

Va Tech, Cho the shooter used 17 ten round mags, reloading 17 times to fire 170 rounds and killing 32 people.

[Glassunion]

2. So... Would the state have to buy all of the magazines they ban?

That would be expensive.

[rl6214]

3. Gun collectors who currently possess high capacity magazines will not be penalized.

Boy I could make a small fortune if I take my "hi Cap mags" up there and see what the open market will bring. I think this may just be an economic stimulus program.

[Glassunion]

12. What is the state's definition of a "collector"?

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DissedByBush]

4. Logical disconnect with Columbine

Harris had a pump-action shotgun and a Hi-Point 9 mm rifle

He had thirteen 10-round magazines, and fired 96 times.

He fired 25 times with the shotgun (reloaded one shell at a time).

Klebold had a Tec-9 9mm pistol.

He had three very high-capacity magazines, 52, 32 and 28, and fired 55 times.

Obviously, low-capacity magazines of the size that would be allowed by this law resulted in a far more deadly situation than the high-capacity magazines it seeks to ban.

[spin]

6. Which proves that banning "hi-cap" magazines will accomplish nothing. (n/t)

[spin]

5. Another useless "feel good" law by pandering politicians ...

who either have little knowledge of firearms or who believe that their constituency lacks firearm knowledge.

The simple fact is that a magazine can be swapped in two seconds or less. A shooter can also carry multiple firearms and not have to reload frequently.

To some people all problems can be solved by banning something. If alcohol is bad just ban it. If drugs are bad just ban them. If semiautomatic rifles are bad, call them assault weapons and ban them.

Simple minds. Simple solutions.

It's a shame the real world is far too complex for simple solutions to work.

[Hoyt]

14. If it sends message to gun obsessed to stop seeking more and more massacre power, it'll be worth it.

To me it's a long-term effort to change people obsession with killing power. If one is really interested in self-protection, a six shooter is plenty for 99.9963466% of situations anyone is likely to encounter.

[spin]

18. I use handguns for self defense ...

as I believe they have several advantages over semi-auto pistols. A wheel gun is simpler to use and more reliable than a semi-auto. There are no safeties to forget in an emergency and revolvers are far less ammunition sensitive than a semi-auto as therefore less prone to jam or malfunction.

However, I have spent a lot of time learning to be proficient at double action shooting. Most shooters on the range are more comfortable using the single action style of shooting a modern revolver (cock the hammer and pull the trigger} than the double action style (just pull the trigger). The double action trigger pull is longer and heavier than the single action. Double action shooting is faster and accurate but most shooters believe single action is easier and allows for more precise shooting.

But revolvers have significant drawbacks. One of the big differences is that reloading a pistol can be accomplished mush faster than reloading a revolver and often a semi-auto holds more rounds than a revolver. Handguns are not especially powerful or lethal weapons and it may require multiple hits to stop a determined attacker. An individual may be a great target shooter but be a rotten shooter in a real life encounter, he may need more rounds to score a hit that stops an attack. It's almost impossible to duplicate the stress that a real life encounter creates on a target range. Also, because of the size of a cylinder on a revolver it's harder to conceal than a much flatter semi-auto pistol.

Over the last twenty years the reliability of semi-auto pistols has increased dramatically. I used to see such weapons frequently jam on the range and recently the malfunction rate has dropped. At one time a good semi-auto pistol would only malfunction one time in 100 rounds. I owned a Beretta .40 cal that only had 3 malfunctions in 3 or 4 thousand rounds. Two were caused by defective ammo and one was a sheer fluke.

I carry small five shot revolvers because I'm confident with them and I really have little or no reason to ever expect to encounter a problem where self defense is necessary. In a different place and a different situation, I would probably chose to carry a semi-auto pistol with a higher capacity. My favorite carry weapon is a .38 S&W Model 642 Airweight.



This weapon is very light and easy to carry. On the way out the door I grab it and its pocket holster and drop them into my pants along with a speed loader. Before I bought this weapon I rarely carried when I was just going to the store because of the time and hassle of using a belt or shoulder holster and clothing necessary to conceal the larger firearms I owned for self defense at the time. I live in Florida where the heat makes concealed carry more challenging. You look out of place with a just light jacket to cover your weapon when the temperature is above 90 degrees.

In the winter I sometimes carry a S&W Model 60 .357 magnum with a 3" barrel in a belt holster under a jacket.



Still I like the option to be able to carry a semi-auto pistol if I ever feel that I might need one. I'm not worried about what you describe as "killing power" as my object is not to kill the attacker but to stop his attack. In most cases five shots is enough but there are times when people are attacked by more than one person or when even five solid hits will not stop the attack. Police rarely carry revolvers because they work in a dangerous environment and the additional capacity and the ability to reload faster with a semi-auto may save their lives. Licensed civilians also deserve the right to be able to carry a weapon that feel is appropriate to their situation and one they have confidence in.

[Hoyt]

19. I can dig that. Unfortunately too many carriers are into Hi-cap mags and such.

While I'm not much on public carrying, a five/six shooter is plenty if someone is really only interested in self-defense.

[spin]

21. How do you define Hi-cap? ...

Hi-cap to me is an extended magazine that holds more rounds than the standard magazine the firearm comes with. For example, I would call a 10 round magazine in many pistols a Limited capacity magazine.

[Hoyt]

22. If citizen is walking around in public with more than 10 rounds -- that's clearly excessive IMO.

If folks want to caress a 500 cap mag at home, it's OK with me until they start thinking about shooting their neighbors for food in the event of a disaster or something.

[derby378]

24. What's so bad about 11 rounds?

Many pistols in America have held 11 rounds for the past century. Why get bent out of shape about them now?

[spin]

25. I would argue that a lot depends on the caliber ...

and the individual.

Sure, I carry a five shot snub nosed revolver and one speed loader and in my current circumstances I feel adequately prepared.

Many police departments use a Glock 22 in 40 caliber with a 15 round magazine and some departments use a Glock 17 in 9x19mm Parabellum with a standard magazine holding 17 rounds.

The police carry a handgun for defensive use. A SWAT team carries far more powerful weapons when they plan a raid or are called to resolve a dangerous situation.



Why shouldn't a licensed civilian be able to carry a pistol with the same capacity as a regular police officer if he chooses? Statistically five rounds should be enough but sometimes it might be necessary to have more firepower.

A very dangerous criminal or seriously insane person can easily kill many people with a five shot snub nosed revolver like I carry. A rational individual could carry a firearm with an extended 30 round magazine from the time he was 21 until he died and never hurt a flea. It's not the capacity of the firearm or the type of the firearm, it's the intent of the handler.

You, yourself, say "If folks want to caress a 500 cap mag at home, it's OK with me until they start thinking about shooting their neighbors for food in the event of a disaster or something." Many people in our nation legally own fully automatic weapons some which are equipped with belt fed ammunition and use them in a responsible manner. Obviously the requirements to own such weapons are stricter than to own a pistol with a magazine that holds more than ten rounds. Perhaps the secret to reduce gun violence is to improve our background check system as Obama has suggested. It might also be a good idea to enforce existing law and punish those who traffic in illegal firearms by being a straw purchaser or a dealer on the street of some urban environment. In my opinion, they should be held criminally responsible for their actions and charged as an accessory to any crime that the firearms they traffic in cause. Maybe we could work on a way to allow the NICS background check to be used voluntarily or compulsory for all private sales. Such laws might well work far better than "feel good" laws such as a ban on magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds.

It's not the weapon or the capacity that counts it's the mindset of the owner. A criminal or a person with a serious mental problem may misuse a firearm while an honest citizen will be responsible with whatever firearm he owns despite the capacity. A hi-cap magazine doesn't cause a person to commit crime nor does it make it any easier. Massacres have occurred with ten round magazines.

The basic problem with many who oppose firearms is that they feel the way to correct the problem of firearm violence is simply to ban something. Such "feel good" laws accomplish little.

I hope that in the future those who oppose firearms and those who support RKBA can sit down and compromise. We can together make a difference. Both sides have to find common ground. In my opinion, those who hope to get rid of firearms by the incremental steps of banning items have to realize that firearms are a fact of life in this particular nation. Those who support RKBA have to realize that the NICS background check has proven fairly successful and a way can be found to require it for private purchases without requiring registration. Both have to realize that effective enforcement of existing laws is essential and that pandering to criminals often leads to tragedy.

But the solution to the problem is far deeper and more expensive. We are fighting a failed war on drugs which has no chance of every succeeding because many federal and local police departments benefit and gain power from the funding. We are failing to educate our youth to be prepared to work in the many career fields which provide a income that they can live on and we also outsource such jobs to foreign nations who allow multinational corporations to make obscene profits by exploiting workers.

edited because I am using a new computer and a smaller keyboard.

[timo]

55. 3 of the swat guys in your pic

have NO magazine in their weapons?????

[spin]

57. Good catch. I didn't notice that. I wonder why...

At least none have their finger on the trigger of their weapon.

[timo]

60. not sure

where did the pic come from? they also have mismatched optics,those guys usually run all the same, some are running what loooks like aimpoints and the others have eotechs possibly 2 different models of eotechs,

[spin]

62. It's a common image used on a number of sites to show a SWAT team ...

I picked it up from a image search on Google, the site was http://www.baumbach.org/b2evolution/blogs/index.php/2010/01/24/dmn_opinion_allows_collin_da_to_fund_wea

[GreenStormCloud]

65. All of their rifles have orange tips. Isn't that supposed to mean a toy gun? N/T

[PavePusher]

74. It's most likely a training scenario....

and they are using weapons specifically intended for that purpose, possibly even non-firing or blanks-only training weapons.

[GreenStormCloud]

80. Maybe airsoft guns? N/T

[YllwFvr]

30. how would a citizen need less ammo than a LEO?

i cant see the connection. Besides, would off duty LEOs be good to carry more than 10 round mags since they are just civilians too?

[lawodevolution]

33. I can carry a 75 round magazine for my AK with me, or keep it in my house

and there is nothing that you can do about it other than complain. I and my fellow texans will continue to own, buy and carry high cap magazines and I will pass them down to my children and they will pass them down to their children. ;)

I think the mini-hitler authoritarian wannabes need a little taste of reality now and then.

[Hoyt]

37. Hopefully the second generation will call your way "barbarian."

A good reason to start tightening regulations now.

[spin]

58. In reality probably very few people carry larger than standard magazines ...

in many states the firearm has to be concealed and an extended magazine is difficult to conceal, plus the more rounds you have in a magazine - the heavier the weapon. The heavier the weapon the more uncomfortable it is to carry.

Extended magazines are most often used by shooter who hate to practice swapping magazines and reloading them. I'm different. I only load five rounds in a magazine at the range so I have to practice swapping magazines.

[right2bfree]

78. Exactly. America is the laughing stock of the world with all these guns loose on the streets. nt

[Marengo]

47. What kind of training and/or experience to you have to determine10 rounds...

is excessive?

[Hoyt]

66. What experience do you have to feel a hi-cap mag is needed in public?

By golly, if you can't handle a mugger in a park with 10 shots you ought not carry because you are a public danger. I suggest you leave em at home.

[Marengo]

81. You didn't answer the question. Why not?

By not answering directly, may I safely assume you have NO training or experience which may offer any credibility to your statement in post #22?

Anyway, let's try again, shall we?

"By golly, if you can't handle a mugger in a park with 10 shots you ought not carry because you are a public danger"

Please indicate the training and/or experience you have which may lend authority to this statement.

[AtheistCrusader]

96. So you consider the police a public danger then?

"By golly, if you can't handle a mugger in a park with 10 shots you ought not carry because you are a public danger."

Most of them carry 15+1 in the gun.

This is NORMAL, not EXCESSIVE.

[AtheistCrusader]

88. I carry 15+1 in the gun, 30 more on spare mags on the left. No caressing involved.

Two reloads isn't unreasonable. The weight of the spare mags offsets the weight of the gun.

[oneshooter]

29. How about 8 in a 45acp auto? Too many? n/t

[Hoyt]

38. Somewhat more "sane," but why do you even need that?

[oneshooter]

44. How much combat time do you have? How many firefights were you involved in?

What experience go you have in protecting your life? And "running away, screaming like a little girl" doesn't count. If you have never experienced it then you have no credence telling those that have what it takes to protect themselves and their families.

8 in the pistol and 2 more 7 rounders on the belt is my common carry.

I really don't give a tinkers damn what you believe is "enough" as you know nothing about what you speak of.


Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Hoyt]

48. I've taken care of myself in some serious situations -- And I didn't need a friggin gun to do it.

Maybe you ought to learn how to handle things without one yourself.

As to "combat time" -- totally irrelevant in this country. You don't protect yourself here like it's a combat situation. That kind of thinking is why guns in public are a concern. Those that carry them often don't have proper training. The fact you'd even ask the question is indicative of your being unprepared to handle situations outside of a combat zone.

[oneshooter]

51. So you have never been shot at?

"As to "combat time" -- totally irrelevant in this country. You don't protect yourself here like it's a combat situation."

The only way to protect yourself against a mugger, rapist, ot attacker IS like it is a combat situation. You either win, or suffer the consequences. That could include you being crippled or dead.

Serious situations? Ya you "ran away screaming like a little girl".

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Hoyt]

68. Paranoid folks shouldn't be carrying.

A mugger or robber where other innocent people are, is not a combat situation. I'd suggest you learn how to subdue folks rather than just shoot them.

Running away doesn't work when some arse pulls a gun on you or tries to reach for one.

[timo]

56. well c'mon down here

to south Tx, on the borderthe one that ol' Janet says is "safer" than ever, where armed home invasions and burglaries are on the rise, where crews of armed smugglers, drugs and human are waltzing thru mine and my neighbors farm!! you'd shit and fall back into it when the moment of truth is at hand!!

[Hoyt]

69. You'd surprised what I'd do. Don't have a big problem with guns in home, it's public that's bad.

[timo]

73. oh really

so in the wide open of farm land at night when your irrigating and your approached by smugglers who think your truck lights are their lift into town does that count as home or public? mind you in reality it is private property and they are tresspassing amongst other crimes they are committing....your "big" problems are bull shit down here...like janet you dont know shit from shinola!!

[Hoyt]

75. Well, if it is that bad, rather than buy a gun to kill people -- I'd friggin move.

That simple. I have no desire to kill someone just so I don't have to leave what I know. No piece of land is worth that. But, a farm, I would consider home as far as carrying a gun. If you go into town and are still carrying, and most other people aren't, you've probably got a problem and are a problem.

[timo]

79. I have no desire

to kill anybody either, but I damn sure wont "just move" because the federal and state government refuse to do their jobs!!!

[GreenStormCloud]

83. Gun and a CCW is much cheaper than moving. N/T

[Hoyt]

87. How liberal of you to do a cost-benefit analysis and discount killing someone.

That attitude is another reason we need to restrict guns in public. Lots of gunners have little regard for life, other than their own. When you or your buddies ask for proof, reread your post.

[AtheistCrusader]

89. Firearms may only be used defensively in situations where there is imminent danger to human life.

Being a tool-using mammal, I will use the best tool available to me to prevent harm to human life.

If that means shooting the aggressor, so be it. He or she escalated the situation to that point to begin with.

[rl6214]

93. "you've probably got a problem and are a problem"

Again, your opinion and we all know what opinions are like.

You want your opinion to mean something, get elected and make the laws otherwise you and your opinions are irrelevant.

[rl6214]

92. You can keep saying that as much as you'd like

Doesn't make it true. If you want to rely on your mad ninja skills, the rest of us would like something a little more substantial and it's not up to you to decide what is ok for the public and what isn't.

[GreenStormCloud]

72. So what do you do if...

You are at a walk-up ATM at night and you see that you have been targeted by a likely mugger? Now what? BTW - I am a senior citizen with a slight disability, I can't run, and am too old to try to fight some young male. Do you advise pre-emptive surrender and begging?

[oneshooter]

84. I believe that he would "Run away, screaming like a little girl?.? n/t

[rl6214]

35. How does one carry with hi cap mags?

When I carry, it is either a 9mm/ten rd mag or a .40 cal/13 rd mag. I own a 9mm with a 15rd mag but it is a little larger frame and is a little heavier so I generaly don't like to carry it.

To according to you, none of my guns are appropriate to be carried?

[Hoyt]

49. Not so much the guns -- it's the act of carrying in public that is inappropriate.

When you get ready to walk out the door, how many guns do you have to consider before picking one to tuck in your waistband or wherever. Simplify your life, try leaving them at home.

[PavePusher]

52. Ah, more insinuation from you.

Yawn.....

[oneshooter]

54. Only one, my constant carry weapon is a SIG 220/45acp. n/t

[timo]

61. maybe you have nothing worth protecting

but I worked damn hard for what I have as did my neighbors, and I am well within my rights as a property owner to do so.

[oneshooter]

63. His idea of self defence is..........

"running away and screaming like a little girl".

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[timo]

64. ohhhh he's one of those from

the dale carnegie course of tactical pleading

[oneshooter]

67. I believe that he is an instructor. n/t

[GreenStormCloud]

71. Easy, always carry the same ones. N/T

[AtheistCrusader]

90. Depends on the season really. Clothing sets limits on some carry options.

[rl6214]

94. Not up to you to decide what is appropriate and what isn't

If it is your decision to be a target and eventually a victim, because eventually you will be a victim, then that's up to you.

[PavePusher]

7. Unrecc'd for the lies and falsehoods in the article. n/t

[lawodevolution]

34. thank you. This is what they run on. Lies and deception.

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[krispos42]

8. So when will Springfield Armory leave that state?

Or will they just be selling 10-round magazines with their XDs from now on?

[rl6214]

9. I love my Springfield XD45

with its 13 round magazine. Guess it's a good thing I got a couple of extra mags, they'll become much more valuable and collectible.

[krispos42]

10. I shot one once

the 9mm original.

Damn thing felt like an extension of my hand! I'm an armchair gun nut, but man, that gun felt good!

[DonP]

15. We have already lost several manufacturers

I think Les Baer has either already moved or is planning a move across the river to Iowa and a couple of others have as well. By moving to Iowa or even Southwest Wisconsin they can keep most of their very skilled workforce.

Springfield Armory is a pretty big operation and will most likely put off any move until the handwriting is on the wall.

In the general Quad Cities area and North of Chicago we have quite a few manufacturers that will be affected. We go through this every year with Daley's meat puppets introducing bills that the downstate Dems vote down.

<sarcasm on> But no big deal, fuck all those skilled machinist jobs and other employees that are leaving and all that business and income tax revenue. The population will be safer and better off without those evil guns being manufactured in Illinois.

[benEzra]

11. Didn't Abraham Lincoln own a Henry carbine

with one of those eeeee-villll over-10-round magazines?

[DonP]

17. Lincoln would be arrested in Cook County

Even tube magazines (like my Marlin Model 60) are considered assault rifles since the older ones hold 15 to 17 rounds of 22 LR.

Lincoln would be cuffed and dragged off to the Cook County slammer. But I'm guessing he'd be smart enough to plead the gun charges out, like the smarmy lawyers for the gang members do.

But the TV report, watching Lincoln being cuffed, doing a perp walk in the stovepipe hat into the Squadrol, then Daley holding a press conference with the Henry rifle on the table in front of him denouncing these "Tools of mass murder" would be great TV and probably an Emmy for the reporter.

[ileus]

13. why stop short? why not ban all guns?

[hack89]

16. That pesky Constitution keeps getting in the way? nt

[Hoyt]

20. Yea, all these gun owners are in a "well, regulated militia" -- or think they are.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hack89]

27. I stand with my President on the issue

saying the same thing over and over and over again does not make it true.

[X_Digger]

32. You need to send a letter to Obama. He thinks it's an individual right, too.

Need I remind you, again?

[Hoyt]

39. Yea remind me again -- wasn't the maximum age 45 years old. All you guys 46+ turn em in.

That'll be a good start. Then regulate the heck out of packing in public, so that most of those obsessed with guns/toting just give up or decide if they can only carry a limited load, small bore, etc., it won't make them feel whole.

[X_Digger]

43. Your position is in the minority and getting smaller..

[AtheistCrusader]

91. Age discrimination advocate huh? Oh well, not everyone can be a progressive.

[rl6214]

95. Still don't know what "well regulated militia" means?

Packing and toting in the same post?

Ho hum

[rl6214]

36. All this time and you are still ignorant about what

"well regulated militia" means.

[Hoyt]

41. I know exactly what it means, and you ain't in one.

[rl6214]

85. And you know that how?

Do you know me?

In today's English, the term "well regulated" probably implies heavy and intense government regulation. However, that conclusion is erroneous.

The words "well regulated" had a far different meaning at the time the Second Amendment was drafted. In the context of the Constitution's provisions for Congressional power over certain aspects of the militia, and in the context of the Framers' definition of "militia," government regulation was not the intended meaning. Rather, the term meant only what it says, that the necessary militia be well regulated, but not by the national government.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/gun01.htm

[GreenStormCloud]

53. That horse is dead. Beating it more won't make it get up and carry you. N/T

[hack89]

26. I stand with my President on the issue

saying the same thing over and over and over again does not make it true.

[rrneck]

28. dupe

[spin]

31. Are you personally willing to confiscate those that are not turned in?

The Brady Campaign has been predicting blood in the streets every time "shall issue" was considered in a state. It never happened.

I will predict that any attempt to ban and confiscate all firearms would indeed lead to blood in the streets. Lots of blood.

The local cops in my area would probably be unwilling to enforce a confiscation as they believe in the Second Amendment and have gun collections of their own. The National Guard would also be unwilling. The army would have to do the job and there's an excellent chance that they also would refuse as they would have to fight their own fellow citizens and violate the Constitution that they swore to defend. The military which is largely conservative would probably overthrow the government solving the problem of banning firearms.

Assuming the army went along, whatever party proposed such an idea and was responsible for passing it would be political history after the following election.

There are 300 million firearms in this nation and 40 million gun owners. Your idea might work in New York City or Chicago but don't even consider it in the "fly over" areas of the country.

To back up what I say check out this Gallup Poll from January 2011.

***snip***

Gallup trends on gun control show that Americans have grown less supportive of strengthening gun laws in the United States over the last two decades, notwithstanding a number of tragic gun attacks during that period.

The percentage in favor of making the laws governing the sale of firearms "more strict" fell from 78% in 1990 to 62% in 1995, and 51% in 2007. In the most recent reading, Gallup in 2010 found 44% in favor of stricter laws. In fact, in 2009 and again last year, the slight majority said gun laws should either remain the same or be made less strict.



The downward trend in support for stricter gun control stalled briefly in 1999 after the Columbine High School massacre; however, the slight increase in support for stricter gun laws seen at that time (to 66%) proved temporary. The general downward trend in support for stricter gun laws has continued even though several high-profile civilian gun crimes, including the 2002 Washington, D.C.,-area sniper attacks, a 2005 shooting at an Indian reservation in Minnesota, a 2007 shooting at a Nebraska shopping mall, the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007, and shooting rampages in 2009 in Alabama and at a Binghamton, N.Y., citizenship center, have occurred over the past decade.

The same pattern is seen with respect to banning average Americans from owning handguns. Support for that proposal has fallen by one-third over the past two decades.emphasis added


http://www.gallup.com/poll/145526/gallup-review-public-opinion-context-tucson-shootings.aspx

[Union Scribe]

42. I had to click on the story to confirm that baffling headline

"high capacity gun ammo"

WTF? It's like the editor just threw gun-related words together at random.

[Callisto32]

45. Par for the course.

It makes at LEAST as much sense as "the shoulder thing that goes up."

[Atypical Liberal]

46. In other words, they work.

"“I sponsored this legislation because detachable high capacity magazines increase the lethality of guns. The common denominator among the plethora of mass shootings spanning the news over the past 5-10 years such as Tucson, AZ, NIU, Virginia Tech, Fort Hood, TX and Columbine High School in Colorado is the use of high capacity ammunition magazines. High capacity magazines reduce the odds of an individuals’ survival and for this reason I believe they should be banned.”"

In other words, by the bill sponsor's own words, they work! If they are good enough for police and soldiers, then they are just as good for civilians. I'm not going to allow the actions of criminals to be used as an excuse to remove this highly effective tool from law-abiding people.

Any time you have a ban like this the basic intent is to remove the capability for 100% of the people to have access to the tool when less than 2% of the people are the problem. That is just wrong.

[Remmah2]

50. "High Capacity Gun Ammo"???????

Newspaper editing fail.

[Tejas]

76. aka "Heat-seeking bullets",

[AtheistCrusader]

97. Flechettes!

Must be legislation about 12 gauge shells.

[GreenStormCloud]

70. I want to buy a Kel-Tec PMR 30.

It is a .22 Magnum pistol with a flush-fit 30 round magazine as standard. I don't "need" it, I just WANT it. Fortunately, America doesn't have a Dept of Needs and jpak isn't the Needs Czar. I will post when I get it in a few months. Other things, like my wife's college tuition, have financial priority. She is 65 and taking refresher courses to bring her degree back up to date. When college carry passes she will be one of those armed students that jpak is so scared of. Here is a picture of the pistol:

[right2bfree]

77. Thankfully this will not be the last state to ban these magazines either. nt

[Blown330]

82. This bill won't make it into law...

...and there are whole lot of states where common sense keeps bills like these from seeing the light of day in the first place.

[rl6214]

86. I think you'll be waiting a long time for that to happen

Maybe when the NFSA passes.:rofl:

Still waiting for you to tell us what exactly that is.