20
   

Gun Control: Bill to Ban Clips Over 10 Rounds

 
 
oralloy
 
Reply Mon 10 Jan, 2011 06:29 pm
McCarthy, Lautenberg Planning to Introduce Gun-Control Legislation
House bill to ban high-capacity magazine clips expected this week.

by Sara Sorcher
Monday, January 10, 2011 | 3:56 p.m.

In the wake of the deadly shooting rampage that targeted Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed six others, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., and Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., plan to introduce legislation to limit high-capacity clips that allow shooters to fire a large number of rounds without reloading.

McCarthy is one of the most outspoken advocates for gun control in Congress, having run for office after her husband was killed and her son seriously injured in a 1993 Long Island shooting. The man who killed her husband -- like the gunman in the attack on Giffords -- used a high-capacity clip.

There had been a moratorium on these clips under the federal assault-weapons ban that expired in 2004. “We're looking at how we’re going to tweak this to make sure we can try and get this banned again,” she told National Journal, “so what happened in Arizona ... the amount of bullets he was able to get off in seconds, can’t happen again.”

"It’s certainly personal again for me," McCarthy added. She said she will try to introduce the legislation in the House on Wednesday.

Lautenberg said he is working with McCarthy's office and will introduce legislation to prohibit the manufacture and sale of high-capacity clips in the Senate when it returns in two weeks.

The suspect in the Arizona shootings, Jared Loughner, reportedly used a high-capacity, 33-round magazine clip in his Glock 19 pistol, allowing him to fire up to 33 bullets without manually reloading.

"Given that bystanders apprehended him as he attempted to change clips, if Loughner did not have access to the high-capacity magazine that he used, it may have prevented some of the other deaths and injuries that occurred," Lautenberg said in a statement.

"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 added.

McCarthy is hopeful that gun-control regulations now will garner more attention in Congress.

"We’re not dealing with a gun, we’re dealing with a piece of equipment that goes with a gun," she said. "With the constitutional Supreme Court, everyone has a right to own a gun. Municipalities and certainly governments can have language that can protect their citizens, and large-capacity clips [are appropriate] certainly for the military and certainly for police officers.

"But for the average citizen, I do not believe they should be able to have large-capacity clips,” McCarthy added.

LINK
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 20 • Views: 23,902 • Replies: 384

 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 06:14 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

McCarthy, Lautenberg Planning to Introduce Gun-Control Legislation
House bill to ban high-capacity magazine clips expected this week.

by Sara Sorcher
Monday, January 10, 2011 | 3:56 p.m.

In the wake of the deadly shooting rampage that targeted Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed six others, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., and Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., plan to introduce legislation to limit high-capacity clips that allow shooters to fire a large number of rounds without reloading.

McCarthy is one of the most outspoken advocates for gun control in Congress, having run for office after her husband was killed and her son seriously injured in a 1993 Long Island shooting. The man who killed her husband -- like the gunman in the attack on Giffords -- used a high-capacity clip.

There had been a moratorium on these clips under the federal assault-weapons ban that expired in 2004. “We're looking at how we’re going to tweak this to make sure we can try and get this banned again,” she told National Journal, “so what happened in Arizona ... the amount of bullets he was able to get off in seconds, can’t happen again.”

"It’s certainly personal again for me," McCarthy added. She said she will try to introduce the legislation in the House on Wednesday.

Lautenberg said he is working with McCarthy's office and will introduce legislation to prohibit the manufacture and sale of high-capacity clips in the Senate when it returns in two weeks.

The suspect in the Arizona shootings, Jared Loughner, reportedly used a high-capacity, 33-round magazine clip in his Glock 19 pistol, allowing him to fire up to 33 bullets without manually reloading.

"Given that bystanders apprehended him as he attempted to change clips, if Loughner did not have access to the high-capacity magazine that he used, it may have prevented some of the other deaths and injuries that occurred," Lautenberg said in a statement.

"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 added.

McCarthy is hopeful that gun-control regulations now will garner more attention in Congress.

"We’re not dealing with a gun, we’re dealing with a piece of equipment that goes with a gun," she said. "With the constitutional Supreme Court, everyone has a right to own a gun. Municipalities and certainly governments can have language that can protect their citizens, and large-capacity clips [are appropriate] certainly for the military and certainly for police officers.

"But for the average citizen, I do not believe they should be able to have large-capacity clips,” McCarthy added.

LINK
I met her once at a speech she gave.
I told her that I wished that I were able to reach back
thru time and space and put a loaded gun into her husband's hand,
when he needed it, on the LIRR. She did NOT like that.
Her head snapped abruptly to her left,
when she heard that.





David
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 07:06 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., and Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., plan to introduce legislation to limit high-capacity clips that allow shooters to fire a large number of rounds without reloading.

"But for the average citizen, I do not believe they should be able to have large-capacity clips,” McCarthy added.


Screw her and Lautenberg.


engineer
 
  3  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 07:07 am
@oralloy,
What is your opinion of the proposal as a gun enthusiast?
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 07:18 am
There will always be screwballs who use guns for criminal acts. That is not a reason to overturn one of the main tenets of the Constitution, the right for a citizen to bear arms.

What's next? Will we all be eating with plastic knives? Sounds silly, but the concept is the same.
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 07:18 am

MY opinion is that government has no jurisdiction
of civilian possession of weapons; that includes magazines.

That is what the Founders intended.
Remember: sovereignty is not in government.
That was thrown out with the King of England.
Sovereignty is in the citizen.
He is supposed to be able to overthrow government.
This Republic was founded upon that principle
by Founders who had just DONE that for real and knew it up close n personal.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 07:25 am
@Phoenix32890,
Phoenix32890 wrote:
There will always be screwballs who use guns for criminal acts. That is not a reason to overturn one of the main tenets of the Constitution, the right for a citizen to bear arms.

What's next? Will we all be eating with plastic knives?
Sounds silly, but the concept is the same.
According to the NY Times, the Moslems killed the flight crews on 9/11/1,
using little white plastic knives and karate (studied in American classes).

In England, there is a movement for knife control, even in their houses.





David
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  4  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 09:36 am
@Phoenix32890,
Phoenix32890 wrote:

There will always be screwballs who use guns for criminal acts. That is not a reason to overturn one of the main tenets of the Constitution, the right for a citizen to bear arms.

The framers of the second amendment had single-shot firearms. The notion of a 30-round clip was completely unknown to them. Since the framers had single-shot weapons in mind when they drafted the amendment, I'm sure you'd have no problem limiting weapons to a single-round clip.

Phoenix32890 wrote:
What's next? Will we all be eating with plastic knives? Sounds silly, but the concept is the same.

Yes, that's exactly the same concept.
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 09:50 am
@joefromchicago,
joefromchicago wrote:


The framers of the second amendment had single-shot firearms. The notion of a 30-round clip was completely unknown to them. Since the framers had single-shot weapons in mind when they drafted the amendment, I'm sure you'd have no problem limiting weapons to a single-round clip.


That's just silly... the framers were big thinkers and I bet they had thought about firearms that did not require
reloading after every single shot... they did have multi-shot firearms in mind when they drafted the amendment.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 10:00 am
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., and Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. are attempting to pass the buck and ignoring their responsibilities & obligations. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., and Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. need to admit that we are a country at war... talk about improved security and utilize profiling techniques to red flag people like the shooter BEFORE they take action.
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 10:11 am
Quote:
That's just silly... the framers were big thinkers and I bet they had thought about firearms that did not require
reloading after every single shot... they did have multi-shot firearms in mind when they drafted the amendment.


If they'd thought about it, either Sam Adams or Ben Franklin would have had their local foundry gin a few of those puppies up. Don't you think?
==
Here's the truth: It takes five or six rounds for Sarah Palin to bring down a four legged beast, she'd need at least double that to kill me.

Smaller target.
Joe(Not by much, but still... .)Nation
Joe Nation
 
  6  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 10:14 am
@OmSigDAVID,
What a remarkably rude thing to say to a widow.

Joe(incalculable social density)Nation
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 10:18 am
@Joe Nation,
Don't you think they had more important issues to tackle at that time in US history?

Focusing their attention on creating a multi-shot firearm at that time would have been the equivalent
of Obama's democrats ignoring the all important US economy and focusing on Obamacare. STUPID.
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  2  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 10:19 am
@Joe Nation,
But not surprising considering who we are posting about.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 10:20 am
@Joe Nation,
Joe Nation wrote:
What a remarkably rude thing to say to a widow.

Joe(incalculable social density)Nation
How is it "rude" Joe??
What is your reasoning ?





David
OmSigDAVID
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 10:29 am
@joefromchicago,
Phoenix32890 wrote:

There will always be screwballs who use guns for criminal acts. That is not a reason to overturn one of the main tenets of the Constitution, the right for a citizen to bear arms.
joefromchicago wrote:
The framers of the second amendment had single-shot firearms. The notion of a 30-round clip was completely unknown to them. Since the framers had single-shot weapons in mind when they drafted the amendment, I'm sure you'd have no problem limiting weapons to a single-round clip.
No. The USSC addressed this concept explicitly in HELLER.
The analogy that it rendered was First Amendment protection
to electric printing presses and to free speech on TV.
Quod Est Demonstratum





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 10:48 am

I 'm looking forward to Joe Nation
telling me HOW I was rude; curious.





David
CoastalRat
 
  5  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 10:51 am
This is where many of my fellow conservatives and I diverge on our views on firearms. I have no problem with limiting clips to 10 rounds. I don't see how this infringes on anyone's right to own a firearm or to use it to defend one's person or family. If it takes me more than 10 rounds to hit an intruder, then maybe I shouldn't have had the gun in the first place.

Of course, I also realize that had the killer in Arizona wanted a high death count, limiting him to a 10 round clip would have done little good. He could easily have carried several weapons. And popping in a new clip would not take all that long either.

Now if one or two others in the crowd had been carrying, then maybe he would never have gotten off so many rounds before someone pulled out their own weapon and popped him and saved us the expense of a trial. But I guess that is an argument for another thread.
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 10:51 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:


I 'm looking forward to Joe Nation
telling me HOW I was rude; curious.





David


Joe is a single shot minute man... it takes him a few hours to reload.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2011 10:52 am
@CoastalRat,
Go for it, none of my firearms utilize 'clips'.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Gun Control: Bill to Ban Clips Over 10 Rounds
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/22/2019 at 09:07:29