High-Capacity Magazine Ban Proposal Stiffer Than Clinton-Era Law

 

mccarthy carolyn.jpg
Democratic Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy wants to make it illegal to buy or sell gun magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.
​Under the 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban, high-capacity magazines like the one used by Tucson massacre shooter Jared Loughner could still be found in Valley gun stores. That's because the ban allowed the sale of magazines that had been manufactured before the ban took effect.

 

A law proposed by New York congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy aims to prohibit the magazines again -- but this time, include the old ones, too.

 

  

According to the text of the gun control bill released by McCarthy's office today, her proposal would make it illegal to sell, buy or otherwise transfer any firearm magazine that holds more than 10 rounds.

Gun owners could legally possess the devices they already own, but they couldn't sell them. If McCarthy's bill passes, that would put a damper on the plans of some folks to make a boodle by stockpiling the magazines now.

 

   


Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help
34 comments
Rafaelt3
Rafaelt3

Jesse James only got six shots with a revolver so he just carried 6 revolvers if people were still finding ways to kill lots of people before removable magazines even existed its pretty clear that limiting the number of bullets a clip can hold wouldn't do much good. But if the democrats still want to proceed with this bill they should at the very least change the bill so it only limits the clip capacity for hand guns because even a democrat would have to agree its not like somebody could hide and AK or a Thompson in their jacket without anybody noticing.

A Tarintino
A Tarintino

Pencils don't write books, cars don't drive drunk, and hi-cap mags don't kill people. Baning these "standard" mags is as ludacris as banning cars when some idiot drives drunk and kills someone. THINK ABOUT IT...Alot of us lawabiding citizens experience great joy as gun enthusiasts. You're also wrong about 10 rounds is enough, I love going to the range with my AR-15 and letting off a 30 rnd mag[ which is the standard mag for that weapon. I'm not asking you to share in my love guns, but don't knock what you don't understand. It's us lawabiders that end up paying the price. The bad guys don't care about breaking laws so they will still obtain, posess, and use any firearms you ban.

TRUE FREEDOMS
TRUE FREEDOMS

Think about it like this. Say this ban was in effect when the shooting in Tucson occurred. Do you honestly think if Loughner had 10 round mags, he wouldn't of killed anyone!?

In other words, you can still commit murder and other crimes with 10 round magazines. Don't screw the good guys (law abiding, responsible gun owners) like me just because some lunatic killed some people. Don't "control" guns, CONTROL WHO CAN HAVE THEM YOU IDIOTS!

Steve0019680
Steve0019680

Something called "Enough with the BS" blurted: "Will banning extended magazines prevent this kind of thing? Of course not. Making bank robbery illegal hasn't stopped banks being robbed either, but that's not an argument for removing those laws that make bank robbery illegal. Seems like we could at least make it a bit more inconvenient to get an extended magazine."

The fact that you can't see the difference between laws banning inanimate objects, which in and of themselves do nothing, and laws banning inherently bad acts such as armed robbery demonstrates your complete lack of anything resembling a logical thought process.

It's also noted that you have conceded the uselessness of magazine bans.

Steve0019680
Steve0019680

If this argument had any merit the police and military forces of the world would all use 10 round magazines. None of them do, because high capacity magazines provide an obvious advantage. As far as hitting what you aim at: Bullets don't have magical stopping powers. Animals and people that are shot do not instantly fall to the ground like on TV. There are many documented instances of individuals taking 4 5 6 and more hits without going down. Two assailants at 5 hits a piece and you are out of ammo even if 100% of the rounds hit their target (which is unlikely even for highly trained law enforcement). More than two assailants is not uncommon in home invasions. Attacking dogs can also be extremely tough, pits and other aggressive breeds can absorb multiple hits before they finally succumb.

PS The only one I see babbling about penis size is you.

Steve0019680
Steve0019680

This would do nothing but create a huge black market in high cap mags. Most of which have no serial numbers and are virtually impossible to track. Enforcement with regard to intrastate sales would also be unconstitutional. Why? Since the law bans the sale of high capacity magazines there would be no interstate commerce in them to for the federal government to regulate, that being the case intrastate sales would not effect interstate commerce. Without this loophole to tie intrastate commerce to interstate commerce the federal government has no authority to regulate the intrastate sales at all. Of course the flickering lightbulb inside McCarthy's head hasn't even permitted her to figure out that her bill is DOA in the GOP controlled house so none of it really matters at this point.

patriot
patriot

Time is VERY close that we get rid of ALL the un-responsive MoFo's we call "our government".... Past time to start fresh and to start over with an elected body that represents the PEOPLE, and not the greedy bastards that call themselves "public servants". What bullshit..

Mike Butler
Mike Butler

Magazine bans are stupid, ridiculous, and ineffective, just like your off-topic remark about p€n¡$es.

As part of the 1994 "Assault Weapons" ban, the production of higher capacity magazines was halted. A comprehensive study by the Centers for Disease Control looked at these gun control measures and concluded that none could be proven to reduce crime.

Magazine bans have nothing to do with curbing crime!

Jim
Jim

This will do nothing for crime!!! Liberals doing their thing again. Fix the broken criminal justice system stop releasing repeat offenders and make room to treat the mentally ill who have no where to go. Criminals do not pay attention to gun laws, they are comitting murders and could not care less about violating a simple magazine capacity law. Also you can kill people with any size magazines and reload in secounds.

.40 Al
.40 Al

They should also have a ban having 2 hands because the shooter could just carry 2 pistols with 10 rounds in each gun. But wait a minute. That shooter down in Tucson wouldnt have shot anybody if this law was in force because im sure he wouldnt want to get a misdemeanor on his way to commit a dozen counts of felony murder.........

MakeMeProfit
MakeMeProfit

I'll still have my magazines whether you make them illegal or not so what of it? You're only making it a headache for those good law abiding citizens that don't have them and would like to aquire and enjoy some. Not to mention, making it profitable for people like me (that stockpile or don't buy anything under 20 rounds) so bring it on lady you're going to make me quite a bit of dough.

Power_surge2
Power_surge2

This new attack on our 2nd ammendment right is only going to make things worse if it passes for the sure reason of me and all other law abiding citizens will follow it because we don't break the law however the criminals are just that criminals and will still obtain these magazines on the black market and still use these magazine to commit more crimes so the only people getting punished are the ones that are the honest americans

Daewoodr300
Daewoodr300

We have another politition trying to get into the spotlight,you are not going to stop any crimes committed by the use of a restricted magazine. You need to focus your attention on something that is more important than wasting money by taking up the courts time. Even if this law was to pass, law abiding citizens may obey the law. Do you think the non-law abiding citizen would or the criminals? And do you think that this can stop people from getting high capacity mags, You havent been able to keep people from obtaining illegal drugs. Either do your job as a politition that is beneficial to the people or get out of politics.

AR-15
AR-15

Yeah i fyou can't hit your target with 10 you need to practice. However, bad guys will always have illegal mags and weapons. Here is a scenario. Home invasion, The guy has a illegal full auto AK-47 with a 20 round mag. I have a Legal AR-15 with a 10 round mag he now has 10 more rounds to shoot me with and another dead person because of the "wonderful smart" liberals and their save people gun laws (that do no such thing).

AR-15
AR-15

The magazines he used were normal capacity not high capacity.

AR-15
AR-15

Law abiding citizens don't break the law, they don't kill people, they save their own life. Having the ban again will kill more innocent people then save. Because when bad guys invade someones home and we are limited to only 10 rounds and they are not we will loose.

AR-15
AR-15

First magazines for an AR-15 Semi auto Rifle (not an assault weapon) hold 30 rounds. These are not High-Capacity, these are Normal capacity. High capacity for the AR is 100 rounds. Don't make Law abiding Civilians Pay the price for this wacko in Tuscan, AZ. He is mentally ill, if you want to stop things like this then make it where people like that (with mental illness) cannot get the gun. Spend the tax payers money in the right way to monitor people like this.

Talldarkandhung
Talldarkandhung

I expected this type of reaction after reading the articles that mentioned the shooters use of "high capacity" magazines.

Yeah OK let's limit magazine capacity to 10 rounds for all law abiding Americans because one lunatic opened fire into a crowd.

If things just go away when they're banned, why don't we just ban crazy people?

Capt. Tuttle
Capt. Tuttle

NAL, but..... the comparison to the 1st amendment restriction on (gratuitously) yelling "fire" in a theater is flawed. We are not allowed to gratuitously yell "fire" because the purpose of doing that is to create havoc. I.e. no useful purpose.

High capacity magazines most obvious legitimate use include self defense, convenience at a range, etc

So, the congressman wishes to ban a "device" that has legitimate legal uses, just because it can be used for illegal purposes.

What continues to amaze me is the lefts belief that by making something illegal, that "it" will go away. If that were the case, then why do our court systems have so much work on their docket?

Coz
Coz

More worthless knee jerk reactions that mean nothing.

Walter Concrete
Walter Concrete

It's a knee jerk reaction by some politician we never heard of so they can be heard and say "look at me!" There will be a long line of these people proclaiming their desire to keep us safe. Where was she when the guy at Ft. Hood reloaded several mags and blew away many more than 6 people? I know, there wasn't a do-nothing politician who was shot that time.

Schadenfriend
Schadenfriend

Good luck with this reactionary law, particularly with a Republican house majority. Just about every standard magazine for semi-automatic pistols holds 10 or more rounds....just about every Glock except for the subcompacts, most Sigs...not to mention standard AR-15 magazines that hold 30 rounds. You might as well order the redesign of the most popular firearms out there. It just is not going to happen...when it comes to "high capacity" magazines, the cat's out of the bag on this one.

Charles Ward
Charles Ward

"If McCarthy's bill passes, that would put a damper on the plans of some folks to make a boodle by stockpiling the magazines now."

No, it will just make them a black market item available at inflated prices.

AJ
AJ

They were "extended" magazines, meaning they extend longer/below where the "normal" magazine stops (flush with the bottom of the grip). Personally, I think they are ugly and would never ruin the aesthetic value of my pistol with one. However, I am strongly against a government ban. Who decided that 10 rounds is acceptable? How long until that goes to 7, then 3 and maybe even 1? I also think it is despicable that Lautenberg and McCarthy (two life-long anti-2nd Amendment wackos) are clearly using the Tucson shooting to advance their anti-gun agenda.

HelplessAndProudofIt
HelplessAndProudofIt

I think no one should be allowed to carry a gun for self defense. I mean, really. Just think about it. Why, if someone right there next to the congresswoman had tried to use a gun to protect her, someone might have gotten hurt.

Loosecannonsbluesband
Loosecannonsbluesband

What don't they understand about the word "illegal"?

What a bunch of law and order types those anti-illegal immigrants are, huh!

Proud American
Proud American

Dude, really. NO one should be allowed to carry a firearm? That is absurd. the right to carry a weapon is a natural, unbreakable, human right. Besides, if "helpless and proud of it," then you probably shouldn't be blogging. 

Now Trending

Phoenix Concert Tickets

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

Loading...