Standard Capacity Magazine Ban In The Works

Posted: January 4, 2013 by ShortTimer in Democrats, Government, Guns, Second Amendment

From The Hill:

House Democrats will waste no time in the new Congress pushing legislation to tighten the nation’s gun laws.

Reps. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) and Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) will introduce a proposal Thursday, the first day of the 113th Congress, to ban high-capacity ammunition magazines like those used last month in the Newtown, Conn., elementary school massacre.

The usual suspects, dancing in the blood of children to push their control agenda.

“These assault magazines help put the ‘mass’ in ‘mass shooting’ and anything we can do to stop their proliferation will save lives in America,” McCarthy said in a statement. Her husband was killed and her son seriously injured in a 1993 shooting on a Long Island, N.Y., commuter train.

No, they don’t.  Just yesterday the Military Arms Channel showed the whopping difference of a second to change magazines (towards the end of the video), and Dr. Suzanna Hupp talked about how changing magazines takes only a second years and years ago before congress (who are still trying to crush citizens rights – and often the same damned people still in government).

“These devices are used to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time possible, and we owe it to innocent Americans everywhere to keep them out of the hands of dangerous people,” McCarthy said.

Yup.  That’s why police carry them, to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time possible.

dc capitol police

Clearly this cop’s job is to “kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time possible“.  Yup, that’s why cops need them.  Note that his sidearm, judging by the back, is probably a Glock, and as it’s a duty pistol, probably full-size.  So it’s holding between 15-22 rounds, with a magazine fit flush, as it was built to hold.  That’s standard capacity.

The Democrats don’t seem to be deterred, and they see Thursday’s proposal, which would ban magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, as one of their best chances to rein in gun violence.

This is mind-numbingly stupid.

Reducing the citizen to 10 rounds for self-defense, for 10 rounds for defense against tyranny either by one criminal, a violent mob, or the potential tyranny of the state, is absurd; but this is really just a step down the slippery slope.

Photo by Oleg Volk.

Photo by Oleg Volk.

Write your reps:

  1. Daniel J. Fortune says:

    Why should we demand a plan to preserve the 2nd Amendment?

    Because, “Democide Prevails When Law Abiding Citizens Do Nothing.”

    Demand a Plan,

    For Liberty Sake!

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s