high-capacity magazines

Media Using Boston Bombers to Revive Gun Control Debate

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

Well, that didn’t take long. The media is already pointing out that the Tsarnaev brothers, who are suspected of planting the bombs at the Boston Marathon and getting involved with a shootout with police, were not licensed to own firearms:

The two brothers suspected in the Boston Marathon bombings, who police say engaged in a gun battle with officers early Friday after a frenzied manhunt, were not licensed to own guns in the towns where they lived, authorities said on Sunday.

In the confrontation with police on the streets of a Boston suburb, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were armed with handguns, at least one rifle and several explosive devices, authorities say.

But neither brother appears to have been legally entitled to own or carry firearms where they lived, a fact that may add to the national debate over current gun laws. Last week, the U.S. Senate rejected a bill to expand background checks on gun purchases, legislation that opponents argued would do nothing to stop criminals from buying guns illegally.

Let’s hold on just a second here. The Tsarnaev bothers didn’t legally obtain the firearms used during a shootout with police in a state with some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country. For example, Massachusetts has banned so-called “assault weapons” and has limited magazines to 10 rounds (similar proposals failed last week in the United States Senate). Massachusetts also prohibits anyone under the 21-years-old from owning a handgun. Dzhokhar, who was apprehended on Friday evening, was 19.

Did Dianne Feinstein Lie About Guns?

Dianne Feinstein

You get it, right? Dianne Feinstein doesn’t like guns.  I’m sure I speak for everyone when I say, “Yes Dianne, we get it.”  Feinstein has a history with guns.  You see, she became mayor of San Francisco when Harvey Milk and Mayor George Moscone were murdered by city supervisor Dan White.  This is a point that Feinstein uses to leverage her position on guns into being somehow more moral than that of gun rights advocates.

Yesterday, Sen. Ted Cruz asked her if she would be as quick to circumvent the First and Fourth Amendments as she is to gut the Second.  Her response [emphasis added]:

“I’m not a sixth grader,” said responded. “Senator, I’ve been on this committee for 20 years. I was a mayor for nine years. I walked in, I saw people shot. I’ve looked at bodies that have been shot with these weapons. I’ve seen the bullets that implode. In Sandy Hook, youngsters were dismembered. Look, there are other weapons.”

“I’ve been up — I’m not a lawyer, but after 20 years I’ve been up close and personal to the Constitution. I have great respect for it. This doesn’t mean that weapons of war and the Heller decision clearly points out three exceptions, two of which are pertinent here.”

Feinstein is saying that she saw Milk and Moscone’s bodies, and that is at least half true.  She is the one who discovered Milk’s body, and she might have seen Moscone’s.  However, she goes on to imply that they were killed with “these weapons”, which is complete bull. Dan White, who murdered Milk and Moscone, used a revolver, the one weapon type that Feinstein is doing nothing about.

The facts of life on high capacity magazines

Second Amendment

James Holmes is an evil man.  Sick?  Quite possibly, but evil none the less.  The same can be said of Jared Loughner who is responsible for the Tuscon shooting.  The two men, and the events they started, also have something else in common.  Both sparked the debate regarding high capacity magazines.

First, let’s clarify something for the non-gun folks who may be reading.  Most semi-automatic weapons are designed around specific magazines.  For an AR-15 or an AK-47, that is a 30 round magazine.  For a 9 mm pistol, it’s usually in the neighborhood of 15 rounds.  Those are properly considered standard capacity magazines, not high capacity.

Now that the bit of nomenclature is out of the way, I know that opponents of guns don’t see any reason why someone needs so many rounds in their magazine.  Well, let me touch on that one.  I probably don’t.  On that note though, neither do the vast majority of police officers in this country who could legally secure these so-called “hi capacity” magazines during the Assault Weapon Ban.  Law enforcement was exempt from the ban, yet how many officers legally discharge their firearms during the course of their career, not counting range time?  Very, very few.

Despite what the movies tell us, police officers find themselves needing to discharge their weapons remarkably few times.  Most police officers go their entire careers and never fire their weapons. The same is true for most private gun owners as well.

Stanford law professor doesn’t understand the law

The left and their fixation on guns never ceases to amaze me.  In particular, it’s amazing the mental gymnastics some go through just to make sure they don’t have to acknowledge that they’re wrong on guns no matter what.

Take, for example, Stanford University’s John J. Donohue.  Stanford has a reputation of a top flight school, which means it should have top flight faculty.  Well, Donohue makes me question that belief.

From The Daily Caller:

“I support the right to self-defense,” said Donohue during the debate, according to The Stanford Review. “But that doesn’t mean that you have a right to high-capacity magazines.”

Donohue explained that the Second Amendment must be interpreted in historical context. The founding fathers had no idea how powerful–and destructive–today’s weapons would become, he said.

He also criticized the argument that the right to bear arms was necessary for American citizens to guard against tyranny.

“It’s fanciful to think that guns in the hands of citizens acts as a realistic check,” said Donohue. “They’re not really trained to do so. And it’s fanciful to think that the military would ever turn on U.S. citizens.”

First, let’s look at his assertion that we have no right for so-called “high-capacity magazines”.  The last four words of the Second Amendment say, “shall not be infringed”.  That’s a pretty clear case that we actually do have the right to have as many bullets as we can handle.

Study: Assault weapons not used in most mass shootings, background checks largely ineffective

After the tragic December 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook, lawmakers in Washington and state legislatures scrambled to enact onerous new gun control laws. Among the many policies pushed was a ban on so-called “assault weapons,” which targeted certain types of semi-automatic rifles because of their cosmetics.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), for example, pushed renewal of the federal Assault Weapons Ban last year, despite the fact that the policy wouldn’t have an impact on gun violence, according to a January 2013 memo from the National Institute for Justice — the research arm of the Department of Justice. The Senate, however, overwhelmingly rejected the measure.

Despite the bias against this type of rifle, a recently released study authored by James Alan Fox, a criminology professor at Northeastern University, and Monica J. DeLateur explains that handguns are used in most mass shootings.

The study — Mass Shootings in America: Moving Beyond Newtown — debunks various myths about mass shootings, disputing that assault weapons are used in this type of tragic incident. The authors also take aim at claims that mass shootings are on the rise and that mass murders snap before they commit these horrible acts.

Maryland gun stores saw surge in sales before gun control laws took effect

New gun control laws in Maryland led to surge in gun sales in the days before the onerous measures, which includes a ban on so-called “assault weapons” and high-capacity magazines, took effect at the beginning this month:

Gun owners in the state aren’t happy, and in recent weeks, they’ve been flocking to snap up firearms. On Monday, outside Fred’s Sporting Goods in Waldorf, there was a huge crowd and a countdown sign advertising: “1 day left.”
[…]
Joe Herbert, the store owner, says he was ready for the onslaught of customers ahead of the deadline. “I got full staff for the last week and a half … working overtime,” he says.

And, he says, he can’t keep his shelves stocked. In recent weeks he’s done about five times his usual sales.

It’s been like this all over the state. Sgt. Marc Black, a spokesman with the Maryland State Police, the organization responsible for processing background checks, says the office has been “working 21 hours a day, seven days a week.”

As of Sept. 20, he says, “we’re looking at 106,000 applications.”

That’s more than double the number for all of 2011 and represents an unprecedented surge in gun purchases, he says.

The laws may have good intentions, but they’re unlikely to prevent tragedies similar to Sandy Hook. For example, a memo from National Institute of Justice — the research arm of the Department of Justice — noted that the ban on assault weapons is “unlikely to have an impact on gun violence” because they “are not a major contributor to US gun homicide.”

Gun rights group sues Colorado government over new anti-gun laws

Rocky Mountain Gun Owners

The fight over Colorado’s new gun control laws didn’t end with the recent recall of two anti-gun state senators. Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (RMGO), a Colorado-based organization associated with the National Association for Gun Rights, has filed a lawsuit against the new gun control laws.

The new laws, which were passed by the Colorado legislature in March and signed by Gov. John Hickenlooper (D-CO), took effect on July 1. They include a ban on high-capacity magazine and universal background checks.

The suit filed by RMGO in Colorado State District Court says the new gun control laws infringe upon the rights of law-abiding citizens.

“Rocky Mountain Gun Owners will fight to keep the constitutional rights of Coloradans intact by challenging these laws on every front,” said Dudley Brown, executive director of the gun rights organization, in a press release last week. “Two anti-gun Colorado senators were rejected by their constituents [on September 10], and we are now looking to overturn these laws in court.”

Colorado legislators facing recall over onerous gun control measures

A couple members of the Colorado legislature are facing a recall over gun control measures — including universal background checks and a ban on high-capacity magazines — passed earlier this year.

Gun rights supporters and groups have organized a recall campaign against Colorado Senate President John Morse (D-Colorado Springs) and State Sen. Angela Giron (D-Pueblo) for their support of the gun control measures in what the Washington Post calls a “referendum on guns”:

In the wake of mass shootings in suburban Denver and Newtown, Conn., last year, Colorado became one of the few states to pass new gun control legislation. Now, the architects of that legislation face recall elections that have become proxy wars for conservatives angry about the new gun rules, among other liberal initiatives the Democratic-controlled state legislature passed earlier this year.

Colorado Democrat Doesn’t Realize Magazines Can Be Reloaded

Diana DeGette

Very rarely do I advocate for stricter requirements on members of Congress; after all, the Constitution already has a set of qualifications that members of Congress must possess in order to serve.  Every once in a while, though, a member of Congress will say or do something that makes me wish that there was an IQ test required.  My two favorite examples are the speech from Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL) “gradulating” the Florida Gators on their BCS Championship a few years ago and Rep. Hank Johnson’s (D-GA) fears that Guam may “tip over and capsize” if more Marines are sent there.

Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO) gave them both a run for their money this week, though, with comments on gun control that prove her complete and utter ignorance of the topic at hand.

To preface her comments, keep in mind that Rep. DeGette is the lead sponsor of the Democrat’s bill banning high-capacity ammunition magazines.  That makes her idiocy even more terrifying.

At a Denver Post forum on gun control Tuesday, DeGette was asked how limiting the size of magazines would reduce gun violence.  I’ll just let her comments speak for themselves:

I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those know they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.

Maryland Looking to Pass Onerous New Gun Control Measures

Maryland Capitol

Gun owners in Maryland took one on the chin on Friday as proposed gun control measures — that not only bans so-called “assault weapons” and high-capacity magazines but also puts personal privacy at risk — came one step closer to becoming reality:

Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley notched a victory late Friday in a House committee that had become a linchpin in his efforts to pass one of the most far-reaching legislative responses to last year’s deadly school shooting in Newtown, Conn.


The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.