proposed federal high cap. mag ban

Without a 33 round magazine, this guy probably wouldn't have shot as many people.

Click to expand...

On the flip side of the coin - a 33 round magazine is pretty heavy. It's also pretty long. The weight & length may have made it unwieldy to handle under stress by an untrained person. The shooter may have been fumbling with the magazine, which made him vulnerable and created the opportunity for him to be physically subdued.

Had he been using standard capacity 15 round magazines he may have been able to reload his Glock 19 multiple times more quickly.

The woman who grabbed his 33 round magazine during the struggle to subdue him might not have been able to grab hold of it had he been using standard capacity magazines.

they dont even try and hide the fact that they know the must use fear to their advantage.

Click to expand...

The fear is comming from the elected officials. If this were a gang shoot out or another school shooting they would be saying what a horrible tradgedy then it would fade away and politicians would go back to what they were doing. If its politicians getting shot, then they feel directly threatened and start making anti gun laws. How do you think we got the Gun Control Act of 68 and the Brady Bill?

This is why I think the guy from Arizona who brought his AR15 to an Obama political event just to make a pro gun statement is an idiot. He did more damage than good and gave the anti gun people a "its only a matter of time before something happens" gun ban argument. When politicians feel threatened by people with guns they make anti gun laws.

Just an observation from an Arizonian.......


For the most part..... the media here isnt demonizing the gun. The word 'Glock' has barely been mentioned. And hardly mention of the 30+ round mag either.

Theyve done a fairly good job at keeping the focus of the blame right where it should be.

As some one else said, he could have killed as many people with a car. Maybe would have got away too.

The proposed law could have just as well been :
tax CREDIT for purchase of one gun/taxpayer

national reciprocity and

no fees for CCWs.

I bought 4 mags today as well. 2 17 rounders and 2 33 rounders. All the news story did for me was make me remember that I needed more mags. Why do I need the 33 rounds? Well because it is my right and I like them, I don't have to justify it. One a side note. I love how politicians always refer to as citizens, like it's a bad thing. "We can't allow citizens to have high capacity magazines". Who the hell are you? Oh that's right your a part of the "ruling class" and you will decide what I can and cannot play with. I swear to God the favorite word of the left has got to be "ban". They love to say it. Ban this and ban that. Just leave me alone already and thanks for reminding me to get more mags.

Now we will have another panic buying situation. Quite frankly some of the comments from both side of this event is a bit over the top.

The blame rests on one severely disturbed individual.

do these people honestly have no shame

Click to expand...

No.
The real question is, who would these laws stop from purchasing these magazines? Law abiding citizens, and no one else.

Well we're going off the deep end again.

an aide said her office was consulting with other members, including House Speaker John Boehner's office

Click to expand...

If Boehner's got any common sense, that conversation better have gone like this:
McCarthy: I wanted to talk to you about my new gun ban, you know you can't let a good crisis go to waste!
Boehner: Get lost.

I honestly can't believe the people who think that because of one obviously mentally disturbed nut out of 300 million Americans we now need some sort of needs test when it comes to the magazine capacity of my weapons. I own 33 round magazines for my Glock. I take them to the range, they are handy because I can load them before I go and don't have to reload so much. I bought them in case I need them, and its nobody's darn business whether or not I meet their definition of need. Not to get off topic if you are going to talk about requiring a needs test, does anyone need any of the following:
A car that is capable of speeds greater than 70 mph. (why do you need a car that can travel faster than the legal limit?)
An semi-auto firearm (why do you need a bullet spitting death machine when a good double barrel shotgun is adequate for self defense in your home?)
A radar detector (why do you need to avoid police radar?)
A classic carbureted vehicle (what gives you the right to pollute our air?)
Incandescent light bulbs, or other energy inefficient devices (why do you need to waste our energy?)

Who do you want to be the one determining what you need? I don't need the government telling me what I need. I'll do that for myself, thank you.

The point is, the fellow who committed this crime is an extreme aberration of the societal norm. It does not make sense to take away the rights and freedoms of hundreds of millions of law abiding citizens because one person abused his freedom. Punish him, not us! The two greatest losses of civilian life in modern America were not carried out with a single gun, the Oklahoma City bombing and the 9/11 attacks were both carried out with everyday items (boxcutters and fertilizer).

I apologize for the rant, but it boils my blood to see normally rational people to are ready to give up their rights and mine as well so that they can feel that they are reaching across the isle and meeting in the middle with people who want nothing more than to politicize this tragedy for their own political gain.

I said in another tread that it was hard to explain a 30 rd mag to someone that's anti gun.

The founders disagreed on many things, but agreed on onething, that was compromise. I think both sides could learn from them.

Without a 33 round magazine, this guy probably wouldn't have shot as many people.

Click to expand...

The Virginia Tech shooter used ordinary 15-rounders, and murdered over five times as many people. He planned his reloads ahead; this guy apparently didn't think much about the reloading process because the large magazine made him overconfident. That cuts both ways.

The thing is, McCarthy isn't after just 30-round handgun magazines. She is after all rifle and pistol magazines over 10 rounds and all shotguns over 5, plus all AR-15's, civilian AK's, M1A's, mini-14's, Kel-Tec carbines, FN's, etc. etc. etc. Her current exploitation of this tragedy is just a convenient means to the same end she always pursues, year after year.

The founders didn't compromise with King George.

The founders didn't compromise with King George.

Click to expand...

A- freakin- MEN

The statement that "gun control has no national support and won't happen" is nonsense.

Click to expand...

And that exact statement was made when the Dems took control of Congress in '06. It was made when they took the presidency in '08. And it's being made today. It was wrong then and it's wrong now.
But that won't prevent the NRA and GOA from blasting it to all their members to goose contributions.

Let's just make everything single shot, that way gun crime would cease to exist.

Click to expand...

That will just lead to some Anti 2Aer going "We need to ban those high powered, tactical, assault, teflon coated, armor piercing, SNIPER bullets. They can go through multiple people in one shot!"

Not going to happen, the NRA has our back.

US Constitution said:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Click to expand...

That is all the justification I need to buy 33 RD GLOCK Magazines. (not that I have any ... I find them difficult to conceal in my G27... )

Either way Gun Control has everything to do with CONTROL and nothing to do with any measure that would actually stop any determined criminal. The leftist elites think that the state should dictate everything you do, say or own ... and that you are too stupid to own a 33 rd magazine because everyone that owns one is obviously a letent criminal and needs to be controlled premptively "for thier own good" unless they are an agent of the state.

Lets face it - in a free society there will always be those who abuse those very freedoms we cherish to do violence or commit fraud against thier fellow man. There will also always be those that seek to deprive us of our liberty in the name of "security." We should be prepared to deal with both - Be prepared.

Not going to happen, the NRA has our back.

Click to expand...

They didn't have our backs when 1986 rolled around.

how about we access and pick out the nut job before he goes off and does all this? no red flags went off anywhere in his entire life as a nut job? my bet would be yes several did and everyone just blows them off.

Click to expand...

Red flags did go off in this case at his college, his classmates, and the sheriff's department. None were followed up on however. I believe it is a very serious thing to "adjudicate someone mentally defective". I dread the changes that might occur in this area.

The thing is, McCarthy isn't after just 30-round handgun magazines. She is after all rifle and pistol magazines over 10 rounds and all shotguns over 5, plus all AR-15's, civilian AK's, M1A's, mini-14's, Kel-Tec carbines, FN's, etc. etc. etc. Her current exploitation of this tragedy is just a convenient means to the same end she always pursues, year after year.

Click to expand...

This is correct. They want the old 10-round mag limit back.

One can debate the practicality of the 33 round Glock Mag. I honestly have no use for it. But in a regular semi-automatic handgun, I certainly would classify it as a "high capacity magazine". But I would not legislate a limit as criminals do not pay any attention to such laws.

Here is a link to a somewhat interesting article in the Washington Post. It is clearly tilted toward more controls as being the "right choice" but is fairly well written. The title is: What will change as a result of Tucson tragedy? Experience suggests, not much
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../10/AR2011011004211.html?wpisrc=nl_pmpolitics

They didn't have our backs when 1986 rolled around.

Click to expand...

Yeah well times are different, this is a minority bill that's going to burn out in a couple of weeks.

If an individual in the military is allowed to possess it, an individual needs to be allowed to possess it.

actually, we really aren't allowed to have any more cool stuff than a private citizen. just fyi. in fact, gun regs are even more strict with us. if you live on post, it must be registered with the provost marshall.