Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: Tucson Arizona group trying to ban magazines to 10 rounds

  1. #1
    Regular Member fire suppressor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Kitsap County
    Posts
    872

    Tucson Arizona group trying to ban magazines to 10 rounds

    I was watching NWCN tonight and they had a story about the one year anniversary of the Tucson Arizona shooting, it had a very negative anti gun message. They showed pictures and videos of people holding candles and ringing bells while they recited gun related death and injury statistics and did nothing to cover the actual gathering held today in Tucson. The story focused on a Arizona biased group trying to get the federal government to restrict all magazines to hold no more than 10 rounds of ammo. The groups argument is because the shooter in Tucson was tackled during reloading fewer people would have been killed and injured if he was limited to how many rounds he could shoot. The story did not make it clear if survivor Governor Giffords would be supporting the group but anytime a politician as a reason to go after gun owners I get nervous. I could not find a video of the broadcast on the CWCN website only the link below, unfortunately the link below does not deal with the same issues the broadcast did. Something ells for us to watch out for http://www.nwcn.com/news/Giffords-Tu...136908153.html
    "Fight like you train, train like you fight"

  2. #2
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Yup! That'll do it. Prevent all that violence.

    Do these morons think that will stop anyone from reloading? Ban mag capacity to 10 rounds and they'll just carry more.

    But wait, there's more. Since these shooters are committing a criminal act anyway, what makes the idiots that want the ban think that anyone like this really gives a crap about their laws? They'll find "hi-cap" mags somewhere. It's not like they're scarce.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  3. #3
    Regular Member Difdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    996
    I have no doubt at all that such a ban would help prevent folks who would never go on a shooting spree from going on a shooting spree. Of course, they wouldn't do that without the ban, but the sheer lack of shooting sprees by law-abiding citizens will be upheld by politicians as "proof" the ban is a total success!

    Criminals, meanwhile, who are not noted for their respectful adherence to laws in general, will go right on possessing high capacity magazines. Murderers who are subject to execution for their crimes will, of course, respect a law that adds 5-10 years to their sentence, right?

    If a homeowner who respects the law gets shot while reloading after shooting his 10 rounds by a home invader who uses a 50-round magazine and therefore doesn't need to reload as often? Oh well, a little collateral damage is to be expected when you're tough on crime, right?

  4. #4
    Regular Member John Hardin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Snohomish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    684
    ...except that Loughner WASN'T tackled while reloading. He successfully reloaded and was tackled and disarmed when his gun JAMMED.

    The "tackled while reloading" claim is an outright lie that should be disputed whenever it appears. Come on, people! If an article or comment says this, call them on it! Don't let that lie go unchallenged!

  5. #5
    Regular Member Metalhead47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Whidbey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,812
    Of course, makes perfect sense really. Laws are so effective at preventing violence. Oh, wait, now that I think about it, the Columbine murderers were already in violation of numerous existing federal & state laws before they ever started shooting, and the most fired gun had 10-round magazines... nevermind, stupid facts.
    It is very wise to not take a watermelon lightly.

  6. #6
    Regular Member fire suppressor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Kitsap County
    Posts
    872
    Quote Originally Posted by Metalhead47 View Post
    Of course, makes perfect sense really. Laws are so effective at preventing violence. Oh, wait, now that I think about it, the Columbine murderers were already in violation of numerous existing federal & state laws before they ever started shooting, and the most fired gun had 10-round magazines... nevermind, stupid facts.
    +1
    "Fight like you train, train like you fight"

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974
    Quote Originally Posted by John Hardin View Post
    ...except that Loughner WASN'T tackled while reloading. He successfully reloaded and was tackled and disarmed when his gun JAMMED.
    Great, thanks for bringing up that! Now they are going to want a law that all guns manufactured after a certain date jam repeatedly! :-P

  8. #8
    Regular Member SnarlyWino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, United States
    Posts
    375
    I was part of a magazine band once, we only played covers.
    Keep Calm and Carry On,

    Snarly

    Pro Deo, Pro Familia, Pro Patria

  9. #9
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043
    *rolls eyes*

    As I made perfectly clear to Inslee back when they made this same call last year, magazines, even extra or "extended" capacity magazines are not exactly rocket science to make.

    A guy I knew in Alaska made a 23 round magazine for his 1911. All it took was 3 standard mags and a bit of careful welding and cutting. It worked like a charm, and it took him less than an afternoon to do it. He was working on welding together 3 double stack 9mm mags for an XD too, tho I never got to see it shoot.

    Like everything else, a lack of education on the simple mechanics of firearms is one the faults that fuel these pipe dreams of legislating firearms to a point where they are unable to be abused by the wicked and determined.

  10. #10
    Regular Member amzbrady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,522
    I wonder if they would feel better to see people with 6, 10 round mags on their belt?
    If you voted for Obama to prove you are not a racist...
    what will you do now to prove you are not stupid?

    "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism," they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas

    "They who can who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve niether liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

  11. #11
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by amzbrady View Post
    I wonder if they would feel better to see people with 6, 10 round mags on their belt?
    Only to be followed next by a call to ban carry of more than 2 magazines.

  12. #12
    Regular Member FMJ 911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    People's Republic of Snohomishia
    Posts
    351
    Oh come on! This whole "No more than 10 rounds" thing is just plain stupid.

    Look at the wars of the late 19th and first half of the 20th century. Their guns held only a few rounds, and they could still cause massive damage! So again, these "Capacity Limiters" have no base to work off from.

    The M1 Garand held only 8 rounds, The famous SMLE Rifle series held 10 rounds, and the Mauser 98 series of rifles held only 5, but you could do a lot with those 5 rounds!

    I know, they had Machine-guns and other "Exotic" weapons, but the vast majority of fighting troops used the good ol' Infantry-Pattern Rifle. Whether it be a Bolt-Action, or Semi-Automatic.

    For a very long time, most handguns held under 10 rounds. The Broom-Handle Mauser, was the only "Hi-Cap" until the 1930's, when the Browning Hi-Power came out. Even then, many Handguns never held more than 10 rounds.

    It's not how MANY bullets you can carry, it's what you DO with those rounds.

  13. #13
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Difdi View Post
    Murderers who are subject to execution for their crimes will, of course, respect a law that adds 5-10 years to their sentence, right?
    Someone once posted that we should execute using tree chippers. For most capital crimes it's "Head First" and for the especially heinous then "Feet First".

    There's a part of me that can see the justice in that method given what's happening in society today.

    Too bad the authors of the Constitution didn't word the "no cruel and unusual punishment" part to say "No more cruel or unusual than what was inflicted on victim(s)".
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  14. #14
    Regular Member Difdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    996
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    Too bad the authors of the Constitution didn't word the "no cruel and unusual punishment" part to say "No more cruel or unusual than what was inflicted on victim(s)".
    Well, we know that hanging and the firing squad aren't considered cruel and unusual under the Constitution, because the one crime and punishment enumerated in the Constitution specifies those as punishments.

  15. #15
    Regular Member John Hardin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Snohomish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    684
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    Too bad the authors of the Constitution didn't word the "no cruel and unusual punishment" part to say "No more cruel or unusual than what was inflicted on victim(s)".
    +1000

  16. #16
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    It always amuses me when idiots try to require schizophrenic nutcases to make 1.3 second reloads during their mass killing sprees.

    I hope they're happy when shooting 50 people takes 8 seconds longer than usual.

    Hopefully, someone will ask them "Hey, anti-gun, high capacity magazine freaks, how do you think these lunatics will feel now that they are required by law to make a 2 second reload during their killing spree?" (which appear to also be illegal)

    Or, here's a good one: "Hey Mr. Anti-gun high capacity magazine freak: If mass murders are illegal, why would a lunatic volunteer to follow your magazine ban when they could care less about killing as many people as possible?"

    Is there some strange, alternate universe bubble that surrounds murder scenes that causes a mindless killer determined to end as many lives as possible regardless of the laws against it to care deeply about a law requiring him to take an extra two seconds to do so?

  17. #17
    Regular Member Hardbuck90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Hobart, WA
    Posts
    76
    Last edited by Hardbuck90; 01-10-2012 at 05:44 PM.

  18. #18
    Regular Member John Hardin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Snohomish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    684
    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    Or, here's a good one: "Hey Mr. Anti-gun high capacity magazine freak: If mass murders are illegal, why would a lunatic volunteer to follow your magazine ban when they could care less about killing as many people as possible?"
    They seem to think that banning something will magically make it completely disappear from the entire world.

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974
    It's like so many other things we see regulated... Someone who doesn't know anything about the matter made up a number for an agenda item. Why not 7 rounds, like the venable 1911? Or 9 rounds so you end up (9+1) with 10 in a fully loaded sidearm. Or 12 rounds, a nice even dozen. Just making up stuff. ..

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    1,098
    Quote Originally Posted by fire suppressor View Post
    I was watching NWCN tonight and they had a story about the one year anniversary of the Tucson Arizona shooting, it had a very negative anti gun message. They showed pictures and videos of people holding candles and ringing bells while they recited gun related death and injury statistics and did nothing to cover the actual gathering held today in Tucson. The story focused on a Arizona biased group trying to get the federal government to restrict all magazines to hold no more than 10 rounds of ammo. The groups argument is because the shooter in Tucson was tackled during reloading fewer people would have been killed and injured if he was limited to how many rounds he could shoot. The story did not make it clear if survivor Governor Giffords would be supporting the group but anytime a politician as a reason to go after gun owners I get nervous. I could not find a video of the broadcast on the CWCN website only the link below, unfortunately the link below does not deal with the same issues the broadcast did. Something ells for us to watch out for http://www.nwcn.com/news/Giffords-Tu...136908153.html
    Minor correction... she was/is not "Governor"...

  21. #21
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818
    Guess someone will just have to start making 20 shot revolvers again.

    http://www.militaryfactory.com/small...allarms_id=315
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  22. #22
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    In increments of 5 and 10. Because boxes of defensive ammo never have a even number of rounds other than ending in zero, I hate having a partial row left in the box.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Eagle, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    639
    Quote Originally Posted by PavePusher View Post
    Minor correction... she was/is not "Governor"...
    She still retains her title even if she no longer holds the post....same with president and many other titles.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Fallon, NV
    Posts
    577
    Quote Originally Posted by IndianaBoy79 View Post
    She still retains her title even if she no longer holds the post....same with president and many other titles.
    She can't retain a title she never had. She was Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Arizona's 8th district, Member of the Arizona Senate from the 28th district and Member of the Arizona House of Representatives from the 13th district, but never a Governor.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by fire suppressor View Post
    I was watching NWCN tonight and they had a story about the one year anniversary of the Tucson Arizona shooting, it had a very negative anti gun message. They showed pictures and videos of people holding candles and ringing bells while they recited gun related death and injury statistics and did nothing to cover the actual gathering held today in Tucson. The story focused on a Arizona biased group trying to get the federal government to restrict all magazines to hold no more than 10 rounds of ammo. The groups argument is because the shooter in Tucson was tackled during reloading fewer people would have been killed and injured if he was limited to how many rounds he could shoot. The story did not make it clear if survivor Governor Giffords would be supporting the group but anytime a politician as a reason to go after gun owners I get nervous. I could not find a video of the broadcast on the CWCN website only the link below, unfortunately the link below does not deal with the same issues the broadcast did. Something ells for us to watch out for http://www.nwcn.com/news/Giffords-Tu...136908153.html
    She was never Governor, but is a Congresswoman and pro-gun. This is the same tired BS that the draft dodger in chief jammed down our throats, and President Bush ended. So I can only shoot someone 10 times instead of 13 with my Hi-Powers. Wow. Once again, the utter stupidity of the sheep subjects comes to light.
    "For any man who sheds his blood with me this day shall be my brother...And gentlemen now abed shall think themselves accursed, they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks who fought with us on Crispin's day." Henry V

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •