Posted on 03/25/2011 5:33:10 AM PDT by marktwain
I don't really care if you have a gun for hunting or a pistol to give you some sense of protection at home. It's your right.
But what's the point of ammunition magazines that allow the shooter to fire dozens of bullets at a clip? I stopped by a legislative hearing Wednesday at which a roomful of gun enthusiasts was irate about a bill that would make it a felony to own a "large-capacity magazine" that uses more than 10 bullets.
The shooter in the Tucson attack on U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords earlier this year that killed six and wounded 13 used a legally purchased semiautomatic Glock pistol with an ammunition clip holding more than 30 bullets. Large-capacity magazines like this, illegal from 1994 to 2004, were used in the mass shootings in East Hartford, at Virginia Tech and in Fort Hood, Texas, to name a few.
Cops such as Bridgeport Police Chief Joseph Gaudett see "no reason whatsover" for anyone to have these ammo clips. "The large-capacity magazines put not only the general public at risk, but especially the men and women of Connecticut's police departments," Gaudett told the General Assembly's judiciary committee in testimony Wednesday.
Banning these magazines isn't going to magically stop deranged killers. But it's an important start and it certainly might help police -- and prevent the next Jared Loughner from going into Walmart to buy a 33-bullet ammunition clip.
As I listened to opponents and read through their testimony, I realized how little I know about the violent wild-west-of-a-world some of these folks inhabit, a place that doesn't reflect the reality of Connecticut.
"Anyone who knows anything about firearm self-defense knows that you want as many bullets loaded as you can carry in a practical manner,'' Robert Crook, director of the Connecticut Sportsman's Alliance, said in his testimony. "He who throws the most lead wins."
A doctor from Guilford, Daniel Vining, said in his testimony that criminals will ignore the law while law-abiding citizens "will be hindered."
"As a practicing ER physician, I have seen many shooting victims with as many as 6 separate bullet tracks who are not seriously injured. Consider then, trying to defend your family with a 10-round magazine against two home invaders ... five shots per attacker, even with 100 percent accuracy might not be enough."
Michael Fifer, CEO of Sturm, Ruger & Co., a gun manufacturer in Southport, explained further. "In defensive situations, magazines in excess of 10 rounds provide ... private citizens the ability to deal with multiple offenders ... one-third of aggravated assault and robbery victims are attacked by multiple offenders."
We should not let these views distort a sensible response to these recent mass killings. Instead of throwing lead at marauding home invaders, I keep thinking more what Dallas Green, grandfather of shooting victim Christina Taylor Green, said not long after the Tucson attack.
"Even though I'm a hunter and I love to shoot and love to have my guns, I don't have a Glock or whatever it is and I don't have a magazine with 33 bullets in it. That doesn't make sense to be able to sell those kind of things,'' Green said. "I just don't understand that."
Neither do I.
First four words are probably a lie.
Translation: We can't stop deranged killers, and you shouldn't be able to stop them either.
But it's an important start and it certainly might help police
It might help police if we can protect ourselves before they show up for the cleanup.
An important start to what exactly?
Well said. If they can dictate magazine capacity, why not caliber too? Pistol in 22 shorts only, with a 5 shot magazine. (actually I don't think there is such a thing).
Wow, nice investment.
Yes he is. But unfortunately there's a lot of Police Chiefs like him with the same mindset.
And IMO it's guys like this who originally joined some PD not to 'fight crime', 'serve the public' or anything that noble. It was simply so THEY could carry a gun and have power over others. This is commonly referred to as: 'Penis Envy'(1).
And besides being able to carry a gun while us peons can't, they get other neat perks like being able to buy 'Assault Rifles', high powered LEO Only ammunition, Automatic Knives (Switchblades), Blackjacks, etc. All because they have a badge and we don't.
In Germany of '33 they'd be in the SS. Or the KGB if in the USSR. And when the pooh hits the fan here, they will be 'on the other side'.
(1) In Freudian psychoanalytic theory: feelings of inferiority and defensive or compensatory behavior
“How Much Firepower Do You Need?”
This is a trick question. NEED has nothing to do with it. NEED implies that you are allowed to have only what you can JUSTIFY having to some bureaucrat. Why do we need cars that can travel 120 mph when the speed limit is 65? Why do you NEED a $10,000 sofa? I have lots of things I WANT but dont NEED and refuse to justify it to anyone since ITS NONE OF THEIR DAMN BUSINESS.
BTW screw the “clips” I am going belt fed.
When seconds count the police are only minutes away.
Detroit, MI 1967: 43 killed, 467 injured, over 7,200 arrests, more than 2,000 buildings destroyed.
GREAT EXAMPLE Condor. You should take that on over to the blog where the article is and post that verbatim.
and as far as I’m concerned, little rick can kiss this (_!_)
I hear in NY under some circumstances the cops can be coaxed into pumping 29 or so odd bullets into one just by pulling out a wallet or a comb....
For the same reasons people need vehicles that goes 120mph . . ▼
Even a .22 can kill someone. All you need is the ability to use your weapon and, most importantly, the will to use it. I am thinking of the recent case of the lady with the pink .38. At the firing range, she could barely pull the trigger. But the tiger came out when she was defending someone she loved.
I don't remember the name of the gun writer who said that the most terrifying sound in the world is when your gun goes “click” when it should go “BANG”!
Don't Let It Happen To Your Town
Well, the 2nd Amendment does not apply to the state. Any state has the right to restrict weapons. But state and local governments are—or should be—much more accountible to the citizenry. Which is why the concept of electing judging is vital to the preserving of state rights. In 1789, the legislature was supreme, the governor was weak and the power of the counts was limited in scope and function. But as the legal profession has grown so has the power of the courts. There is hardly an institution in American that does not dance to the tune called by the lawyers.
This flaming liberal HATES our guns.
If he met a thug on Broad Street in Hartford, he'd melt in his own pee.
This is difficult to know beforehand.
Afterward it is easy. If you are still alive and the perp isn't, then you had enough firepower.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.