Gun Hub Forums banner

1 - 20 of 109 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
One can only wonder how the the news media will use the high capacity magazine used in the Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., shooting, to advance the some new version of the "Assault Weapon Ban". Seems the gun used in this shooting was a Glock 19 with an extended capacity magazine that could hold 33 rounds of 9mm ammo. The gun was legally purchased and the magazine is perfectly legal to own. I see that Paul Helmke of the "Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence" and various other politicians are already using this incident to renew the push for some new form of gun control, magazine capacity being high on the list, and for the more ambitious, the goal is aimed a handguns in general.

I had a discussion last night with some folks, some who are decidedly in the gun control camp, about this shooting. The discussion got around to the actual numbers of guns, legally or illegally obtained, that are actually used in any crimes. In passing, I wish there was good reliable data, as in data from what both sides would agree was a non-biased source, on the number of guns used in self defense or in stopping attempted crimes. Regardless, in the face of solid published crime data we are all aware of, in the face of this evidence, most of the gun control folks simply retreat into an emotional argument...and anger if pressed to provide supporting evidence for the effectiveness of gun control.

If there is any saving grace in all this, it is that with the current Republican numbers in the House and Senate, hopefully, sound minds will prevail against any new legislation attempts that will surely follow. We share see...
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,170 Posts
I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see a ban--by law, ATF regulation, or presidential fiat--on "extended" handgun mags. I think we'll be lucky if it doesn't reinstate the old 10-round limit, or even lower, on handgun mags extended or not.

To be honest, even I have a hard time justifying a 20 or 30 round handgun magazine for any sort of legitimate use, other than fun. :ehsmile:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
So far I have heard very little in the media concerning guns and nothing concerning a reintroduction of an AWB. Some news accounts pount out Gabrielle Giffords herself was pro second amendment, a "bluedog" democrat.
Most pundits seem to be remarking more about the heightened "intensity of discourse." The panel on Fox News Channel's "Fox News Sunday" with Brett Baier subbing for Chris Wallace seemed more interested in this than gun control, although Rand Paul, who was interviewed at the beginning was asked about the possibility of advanced gun control and said he didn't believe it would happen.
This is the first I heard it was a Glock 19, used with the 33 round extended magazine. A bit disconcerting to me in a way; I happen to own that particular Glock ... and I did buy one of those magazines for it even though they're not really all that practical.
The individual who perpetrated this vicious, unforgivable act (I deeply condemn this act especially for the death of a 9 year old girl. I hate that. I hate it) seems driven by a blazingly irrational, incoherent philosophy, and is associated with an extremist, antisemitic anti-immigrant organization. His reading materials include The Communist Manifesto as well as Hitler's Mein Kampf. While reading these books may indicate nothing more than a desire to understand history and politics in most people, I believe in this character's case it probably actually will be shown that these books were driving forces behind his ideology. A sick, paranoid psychotic character ....
As for whether this will drive further gun control, I would guess that the antigun contingent will beat their drums, but nothing really will happen. We'll have to wait and see to really know, of course.
My prayers go out to Rep. Gifford, her family, and the families of the other victims as well as the victims themselves.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
to all,

frankly, i HOPE that the LIBs, the "progressives", "the anti-gun forces" & "gun control groups" WILL try to re-institute an "AWB", an extended magazine ban or ANY other sort of ban by executive order, regulation and/or public law, as that will FINISH the DIMocRATS party once & for all time. = truthfully, i know of nobody in my circle of aquaintances (including our local "rank & file" Democrats), who actually wants more "government control" on ANY subject.

IF they are STUPID enough to try that stunt, we TEA PARTIERS will ram it down their collective throats in 2012. - FACT!

yours, sw
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
While I personally do not have a "need" for a high capacity magazine, as Snake45 has suggested...having said that, one needs to then define what "high capacity" is, and more importantly, exactly why someone should not have access to anything beyond whatever has been defined as "too high a capacity". The implication, or assumption here is that wanting access to, owning or using said "high capacity magazine" require that someone has has determined it is unnecessary, or presupposes the intent is for evil. Now, while I personally have no need for, say a 120 round drum magazine for an AR-15, or a 50 BMG, I can think of not rational reason to regulated who may or may not own one.

That the core of the present issues is the assumption that someone, somehow believes they know the intent of the population and what is best for them. The same assumptions can be used, and have been used to regulate what calibers and projectiles the law abiding citizens of this country can and cannot own...the emphases here on "law abiding citizens". Fear is at the core of the matter for some for this...and you can sometimes educate those folks. There is however a more malicious element in some of this, the goal ultimately being one of control. It is my hope and prayer that the latter faction never grains sufficient number to actually prevail...

Now so far as those in fear, the task here is educating the thinking folks among them, who on the one hand, have a legitimate fear of guns in the context of where they live or what they have seen and experienced. All that many of the folks have been exposed to are examples of a gun used in malice. We all need to do our best, one on one, to get them past those fears. Though not necessarily in this order, that includes getting them to understand the history of this country, and other countries, which is why the the founders of this country insisted on the 2nd Amendment...getting them to understanding that in addition to the 2nd Amendment reasons for gun ownership, that guns afford them a means for self protection for those who would otherwise do them harm...and beyond that are the recreational uses for guns that go beyond just hunting. We have a formidable task ahead of us doing that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,714 Posts
When I first heard of this this morning I automatically assumed Roll was the main target and Giffords was collateral damage. Roll was probably the least popular person in Arizona prior to this due to his stance both in Court and, in public, in regards to Illegal Aliens and Amnesty for them..

Now, it seems that he was hot because Gifford wouldn't bite on his 'New Currency' thing.

Either way, it's a terrible thing to have happen. Only good thing I see about it all is that the kid was supposedly a flaming Liberal! Of course, nobody seems to have mentioned that part in the news much.

Typical response from the Brady-Bunch. Some comedic shows just never seem to die a peaceful death.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
423 Posts
Snake45 said:
To be honest, even I have a hard time justifying a 20 or 30 round handgun magazine for any sort of legitimate use, other than fun. :ehsmile:
Snake, you're one of my favorite people on this forum, but I was shocked when I saw this. "Fun" is just as legitimate a reason to own anything as hunting, protection, or anything else. Heck, the reason I have half of the guns that I own are because they're fun. Once fun stops being a legitimate reason for owning firearms or related paraphernalia, we as gun owners are SOL.

We shouldn't need to justify owning the things that we have*.

*Except occasionally to our respective wives, but we still shouldn't have to.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,170 Posts
Maggot said:
Snake45 said:
To be honest, even I have a hard time justifying a 20 or 30 round handgun magazine for any sort of legitimate use, other than fun. :ehsmile:
Snake, you're one of my favorite people on this forum, but I was shocked when I saw this. "Fun" is just as legitimate a reason to own anything as hunting, protection, or anything else. Heck, the reason I have half of the guns that I own are because they're fun. Once fun stops being a legitimate reason for owning firearms or related paraphernalia, we as gun owners are SOL.

We shouldn't need to justify owning the things that we have*.
Agree with you completely re fun. It's why I own most of the guns I do--far more than I "need," loathe as I am to admit that.

I'd have a hard time looking one of those 18 or 19 people who were shot yesterday, or the families of the dead, in the eye and explaining why my "fun" protects the right of some murderous insane idiot to own a device that allows him to do such a thing to so many people in so short a time. I can explain my handguns, my ARs, my "sniper rifles." I could even explain full-autos and suppressors. I cannot explain the legitimate use of an extended, 32-round handgun magazine. If you can, have at it. Personally, I'd find it easier to make a case for being allowed to own a bazooka than an extended 32-round handgun mag.

Furthermore, try to follow me here, any legislator who tries to explain such a thing and why he votes against banning it is going to be CRUCIFIED in the media and targeted for destruction in the next election.

I'm trying to be realistic here. I'm not myself advocating banning these mags, I'm telling you that this time, we're going to be LUCKY if we get by with extended hi-cap pistol mags being ALL that's banned, as some kind of sacrificial "compromise" legislation. Get used to the idea. If you want any of those things, get them NOW, while you still can.

I fear we're in for a bumpy ride ahead. :ehsmile:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,055 Posts
I'd have a hard time looking one of those 18 or 19 people who were shot yesterday, or the families of the dead, in the eye and explaining why my "fun" protects the right of some murderous insane idiot to own a device that allows him to do such a thing to so many people in so short a time.
How many rounds does your AR hold?

While it was surely a tragedy would it have been any less so if he had a standard 15 round magazine and did a reload?

The gun or magazine are not responsible for the tragedy and this board should focus on that...
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,170 Posts
Charlie Petty said:
How many rounds does your AR hold?
30. But it's not concealable. I wouldn't have been able to get it into that crowd undetected, and if I did, it would have been much easier for one of those people at contact distance to deflect it or even wrestle it away from me. (Notice I have not previously said anything about rifle mags, just extended handgun mags, which can't even be used for concealed self-protection.)

While it was surely a tragedy would it have been any less so if he had a standard 15 round magazine and did a reload?
At least three fewer people would have been shot before a good opportunity to jump him occurred.

The gun or magazine are not responsible for the tragedy and this board should focus on that...
Agree with you completely. The shooting was the insane lunatic's entire fault, not the gun, the ammo, or the magazine. But the members of this board will not be writing any new laws, or having to vote on them, or explain those votes to "reasonable people." We're going to be in a fight here. What is some congressman going to say when someone asks him, "Why does anyone need a 33-round extended handgun magazine?"

I think it was Jeff Cooper who once said something along the lines of, "We live in a free society, so the only necessary answer to the question of 'why' anything is 'why not?' The burden of proof should be on the one who would prevent you." I fear that THIS time, the ones who would prevent us from owning hi-cap extended handgun mags will have a pretty good case to make, and we don't really have much of a case to make in rebuttal. "Fun" isn't going to carry much weight in the public arena.

Again, I am NOT advocating any such ban, just trying to get you ready for what's coming. If you can think of a case to make for extended hi-cap handgun mags, let's get it ready, because we're going to need it. :ehsmile:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
Snake45 said:
Charlie Petty said:
How many rounds does your AR hold?
30. But it's not concealable. I wouldn't have been able to get it into that crowd undetected, and if I did, it would have been much easier for one of those people at contact distance to deflect it or even wrestle it away from me. (Notice I have not previously said anything about rifle mags, just extended handgun mags, which can't even be used for concealed self-protection.).....
True yes, OTOH with an AR why bother to get that close? Why not find a "sniper's perch" high and with some distance, since you'd be using a rifle? The only reason to use a handgun anyway is as a close quarters weapon.
I'm NOT trying to advocate anything, I'm just pointing out a difference in strategy a rifle would offer. If Oswald had used a handgun he certainly wouldn't have shot Kennedy from an upper floor of the book depository; in fact presidential assassins who have used handguns have gone in close.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,170 Posts
Tommy, the "average American" isn't particularly worried about being assassinated by some sniper in a carefully-laid hide. He or she CAN easily imagine some insane lunatic, punk or gangbanger whipping out a 33-shot Glock from under his big "hoodie" at the Walmart or the county fair or the mall or the high school football game and shooting up a dozen people in seconds. :ehsmile:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
True.
Guess my problem is I don't think of the Arizona tragedy as anything near "average."
The creep who did this is too irrational (IMHO) to try to place in any kind of deliberate, well thought out conspiracy. Even Lee Oswald had more going on for him in the noggin than this whacko -- and that isn't saying much.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
423 Posts
I understand what you're saying Snake. But going with the AR point, what about AR pistols? (which in general I consider an abomination) They use the same mags, so if a ban on high-cap pistol mags is rolled out, we could be in real danger of loosing those. The reason I'm using this particular example is that the 32 round mag from Glock is designed for use in the G-18 machine pistol, not the model 19 that the killer used. Since all Glock mags in the same caliber work with smaller models, it works just fine. So the rationale that could be used is that if a magazine can be accepted in a pistol, it would be banned. At that point we could be forced to say by-by to most AR mags under the same rationale.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
Whenever there are incidents like the Arizona shootings, my first thoughts are always of the politcal fall out re gun ownership, not the pain and suffering of the victims and their families. I have been so conditioned by the media to expect it that I seem to have hard wired that mental response.

When I first heard of this insanely violent attack, I keyed in on the 'high capacity magazine", a phrase used in about every report I read or saw on the tube. "Okay," I thought. "That's the angle they are going to take."

Then, like Tommy, I heard and read about the "intensity of discourse" being bandied about, and I became even more concerned, because that line of reasoning could have much more far reaching consequenses.

Snake, I'm like you...I personally have no use for submachine gun style magazines for my handguns. But I can't think of a logical reason to ban them.

I don't know if this tragedy will lead to silly anti-gun legislation - I hope not - but I think the media trying to convince the general population (and politicians) to severly limit our political free speech is even scarier than the return of the AWB.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,498 Posts
Gun control is just another example of Congress failing to do it's job, while expanding mindlessly into areas it does not belong.

We need to control congress, not guns.

Eliminate the 17th Amendment and have the States appoint and pay and support their senators.

Increase the size of the house to 1776 members, I love symbols, getting back to a sane rep/constituent ratio, making individual Congresscretins a lesser target and limiting terms to ONE.

Kick Ban law. Any elected official MUST be completely out of office for TWICE as long as they have served, before they can be elected or appointed to any other office. This should include employment by any entity directly or indirectly who does business with the Government at any level.

Ban all "former" congress / senators from entering the halls of congress if employed by any company directly or indirectly taking money from the Government.

Require a video of any interaction between lobbyists and representatives, senators or their staffs be posted to the congressional website within 24 hours, failure requires instant dismissal of the representative or senator.

This just makes individual elected officials relatively unimportant targets.

Geoff
Who is old grey and cynical this morning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
Well, at least one Dem Representative is already going for our throats....

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47338.html

.
What these morons don't seem to understand is that the last time they banned hi-cap mags, the gun makers designed and marketed a slew of new guns that held up to 10 rds, but were much more concealable. And the public scarfed 'em up.

When the Clinton AWB was being debated, I would tell my anti-gun freinds that a person armed with a double barreled shotgun would wreak just as much havoc as someone with a FULL AUTO assault weapon, as long as the victims were unarmed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,498 Posts
I sent the following email to my Congress Person via the web page.

"Your Honor,
I note the Congress has decided, in the wake of the attack on one member, to spend a week considering your own security.
Your Company sized unit has taken ONE CASUALTY WOUNDED. She has been medevaced and has much better medical care than any of our kids in Afghanistan.
There is a WAR ON! Get back to work and complete your mission!
As my old Drill Sergeant said, "Your Fanny isn't as important as the mission!" Or words to that effect.
Perhaps you should send her to a VA hospital where they have much experience with gun shot wounds to the head.
Sincerely,
Geoff"
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,170 Posts
IrishCop said:
I think the media trying to convince the general population (and politicians) to severly limit our political free speech is even scarier than the return of the AWB.
Agree with you completely on that one. And you can expect the Dems to try their best to make whatever political hay they can of this, on any and all fronts from gun control to control of talk radio, cable TV and the internet, to immigration "reform." That's what they do, and they even brag about it--"You never want to let a good crisis go to waste."

I'm afraid we have a few rough days, weeks, or months ahead of us.
 
1 - 20 of 109 Posts
Top