Sideboob Gazette has the story.
House Democrats will introduce legislation to ban the production of high-capacity magazines on the first day of the next congressional session, the office of Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), one of the lawmakers sponsoring the bill, told The Huffington Post.
The Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act will mirror a failed bill introduced during the 112th Congress. Its authors hope that in the wake of the shooting deaths of 20 first grade students in Newtown, Conn., there will be heightened political urgency to act when it is reintroduced on Jan. 3.
There’s little chance that Boehner, assuming he remains the speaker, lets this thing out for a vote. If he’s toppled, his successor will be even less likely to allow it out for a vote.
While they’re banning things, they may as well ban duct tape. The Newtown killer reportedly* “jungle taped” two magazines together to give himself increased capacity and reduce the time it takes to swap magazines. Reduce magazine capacities down, and people will just find a way around that. Or buy older, larger magazines at pawn shops and off of ebay.
*Supposing the media got that right.
Never let a good crises go to waste, right Rahm? How’s that gun control working out for Chicago? I hear you hit 500 this year. Good job, ya idiot.
And if they can’t jam THIS one down our throats they will engineer ANOTHER school shooting (or a mall, or a church, or some other gathering of unarmed people) with a couple of hundred “innocents” (children have so much more emotional appeal) pulled off by another deranged individual (a ‘lone wolf’ with three or four helpers that ‘disappear’ as soon as the cops show up). Can’t let the public outrage about Newtown settle down too much. Gotta keep it at a high boil in order for us to BEG THEM to disarm us.
I post this on at The Truth About Guns on today’s magazine thread:
Let’s see, an M-1 Garand uses an 8 round stipper clip inserted into the rifle’s magazine. Rate of aimed fire: 20 rounds a minute. Max rate of fire: 40-50 rounds a minute. I guess it doesn’t make a diference.
I have emptied a seven round magazine out of my 1911 in about three seconds. Mag change in two seconds, repeat process. That works out to 84 rounds a mad minute although I doubt that I would hit anything.
I have no experience with a revolver and a speed loader but I bet I could still put out 20-30 rounds a minute if I carried enough
The time is long past for this country to put into place meaningful weapon control measures. Nobody outside of law enforcement and the military needs assault weapons or high capacity magazines. Wise-up people!
You don’t even know what an assault weapon is other than some vague notion of its being black and scary. I can actually get a real live fully automatic AK-47 in just the sweetest, warmest shade of red wood, thing looks positively warm and cuddly. What is “high” capacity? And what the f*ck makes you think you have the right to tell me what I need?
Let’s just say that magically nobody outside law enforcement and the military had assault weapons and large capacity magazines, why would law enforcement need assault weapons and large capacity magazines?
Isn’t this tid bit of info interesting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act#Miller_case
“The government’s argument was that the short barreled shotgun was not a military-type weapon and thus not a “militia” weapon protected by the Second Amendment, from federal infringement.”
DOH!!!
A tired and useless argument, befitting only a troll.
Need has nothing to do with rights. Did you “need” to make that speech? Did you really “need” to be protected from that police search? Or, more controversially, are most abortions “needed”?
The burden isn’t on those holding a Constitutional right to prove need, and you do not get to shift it without achieving supermajority in the Amendment process. And how did that last Amendment prohibiting something work out?
The word “need” appears in neither the Second Amendment nor anywhere in the Bill of Rights. Imagine if the government could regulate speech or the press on the basis of “need.”
If it’s banned in real life then I want depictions of the banned items banned from movies. I consider it offensive to say respectable Americans can’t have these things, but American (mainly liberal, natch) can make a profit off of glorifying them.
If you’re going to infringe the Bill of Rights, go whole hog.
We can call it the “Gregory rule”. If Americans can’t have it, media and Hollywood can’t have it, or depict it in any non-documentary form.
Funny how so many ‘conservatives’ defend a liberal precept of the First and Second Amendments—or the American constitution in totality. America and the constitution was founded on the definition of liberalism. The GOP was at one time referred to as the liberal political party.
In a world where nothing is certain, it’s comforting to know that there is one thing that is absolutely always true.
Every single thing that politicians do is wrong. Every time. Every politician.
Yet, strangely enough, they ALL seem to be investors extraordinaire. Everything they touch is gold, to their own pockets. It’s just an unfathomable mystery.
“While they’re banning things, they may as well ban duct tape. The Newtown killer reportedly* “jungle taped” two magazines together…”
Don’t give them ideas…