It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US Lawmaker Urges Ban on Large Gun Clips

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 08:09 PM
link   
Ignorance to the highest degree, on so many levels.

First the term "Clips" is absolutely incorrect and shows ignorance. A "clip", a shortened term for "stripper clip", is a small strip of metal used to hold a number of rounds of ammunition. The rounds are fed from the clip into the internal magazine of the firearm 5 to 10 rounds at once, to shorten reload time. The terms "clip" and "magazine" are NOT interchangeable. They are two distinctly different pieces of hardware.

Second, although this is a tragedy it shows the level of self-centeredness of our government politicians, so now they spend millions on new legislation for high capacity magazines? If a lunatic wants to buy high capacity Mags he'll do so with or without a ban.

Our country is going broke from over spending and these self-centered politicians are thinking only of themselves, prime example right here.

We're not sure about unemployment reform, healthcare reform, jobs going over seas, but let's introduce a multi-million dollar bill for high capacity magazines ASAP, and pass it.

And I am sure this will happen on many state levels now too, what a waste of tax payers money only putting us into further debt and ignoring the real issues.

Ban on Large Gun Clips


WASHINGTON — A US Senator announced Monday he would soon present legislation to ban high-capacity ammunition clips after a gunman used one in an attempted assassination of a US lawmaker over the weekend.

"The only reason to have 33 bullets loaded in a handgun is to kill a lot of people very quickly. These high-capacity clips simply should not be on the market," Democratic Senator Frank Lautenberg said in a statement.

Lautenberg said high-capacity ammunition "clips" holding more than 10 rounds at a time were banned under the Federal Assault Weapons Ban that the US Congress enacted in 1994 but did not renew in 2004.


New York Times
edit on 10-1-2011 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 08:15 PM
link   
also while theyre at ir ban sharp pencils i love the US but your gov is a bunch of spastics



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Knee jerk response from people who are completely ignorant on the subject.

Some, like Carolyn McCarthy, were just waiting for something like this to happen.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Realtruth
 


realtruth good great post as always.

From the information I am processing, the politicians, are wasting No time politicking this ahem tragedy in AZ, it is pretty insane they are ready to shove more then likely a pork filled ban on gun mags or whatever right away, and your exactly right, we have a deficit that went up a few million or billion today, unemployment and health care issues abroad the country, and here they are purposing bans on large gun clips, um purposing more control laws on the populace www.rawstory.com...

it does look reminiscent to how allot of the unconstitutional laws were passed after 911.

allot of people are emotional and will follow the beats of the drums when they think they government can save them from nuts in the world, even if it takes from their liberty's or constitutional right.


I don't and will never ever and I mean ever understand how these people think.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Bicent76
 



Bic what happens is the service if you call a "clip" a "magazine" or vice versa, remember? lol

Get down and give me 50 boy!

I don't think most politicians have a clue as to what they are passing, nor even care, only if it make them look like a hero.



edit on 10-1-2011 by Realtruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Realtruth
 


you know RT, I hated my English teacher in HS, so I blame her for my laziness when it comes to my grammar. Yet I will tell you this, I am by no means illiterate, just lazy, I am ..


does his push ups

1 DRILL SERGEANT
2 DRILL SERGEANT






posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 08:41 PM
link   
AWWWW We did this one already...


I know it's gonna scare the resident Anti's who are beyond understanding the simple mechanics of sidearms.

IIRCC There's video ( I wish I could find) on youtube Where a competent shooter demonstates the difference between a standard 7 round and extra capacity11round (?) .45acp magazine by shooting a "course of fire of 11 (target backers with one balloon taped to each). The targets were linedup on either sideof an aisle one after another.

Theshooter advanced down the lane shooting one target after another advancing a couple of steps between each alternating right and left. With a common stock 1911 style handgun.

After the seventh round the shooter completed a magazine change (reload).and completed the course. Next Time he used the single 11round hi-cap magazine ( 10 rounds is considered "hi -capacity":10+ 1 could stand in for 15; 20or 30) ( no reload necessary to "get" all 11 targets.)

The time difference between the two runs run was less than one second between hi cap and stock magazines All 11 targets were "engaged" both times.After the last target the 11round magazine was empty . completing the the other run the gun was 4rounds into a second magazine leaving the gun charged with 3 round.The point being counting bullets in a magazine is as ridiculous as legislating pistol grips and"barrel shrouds"( "military looking" dress up items).

edit on 10-1-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 08:59 PM
link   
Yes this is truly a waste of "we the people" time and money... asinine at best...a futile attempt to fool the public eye into seeing our congress' intelligence and compassion (seemingly for "their own") by making laws for societies safety.. gimme a break.. whats the difference between a 33rd mag, to 3 or 4 10rd mags.. other than it takes approximately 1.5 seconds to drop 1 then insert another... please congress, do your job right, or dont do it at all.. find it in yourself to say i'm unable to do this most inportant job and find someone who can... im sure many citizens would have great respect for such actions..



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 09:18 PM
link   
They might manage to push it through the Senate, given the Dem majority, but I still think it stands no chance in the GOP controlled House. I don't even think it'll make it to a floor vote.

And just to note, Lautenberg, like McCarthy (the author of the House version), is also an anti-gunner who has pushed several failed gun bans in the last few years. Their history will likely contribute to the failure of this particular attempt, simply because everyone knows what their real agenda is and that they're just attempting to capitalize on a tragedy.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by snowman9364
 


Starred

It is the thin end of the wedge. Of course the less able will simply double up and have two pistols as is the style in certain films. Not everyone is equally good with right and left hand shooting.

A kneejerk law is frequently a bad law. this would be a bad law.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 12:28 AM
link   
I see the gun lobby is in full force.

While I support gun ownership. and I don't think that large magazines should be banned in any way, I believe that responsible gun ownership should be left to the responsible, and not every single nutcase and wackjob out there.

I have read posts by some gun supporters that make me question whether or not these people are even mature enough to handle a firearm.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 06:27 AM
link   
Probably a good idea to loose these things



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 06:35 AM
link   
Probably a good idea to loose these things



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by manitobacanuk
Probably a good idea to loose these things

Go on were're listening:
because?:
We already had a lunatic on the "loose" this week: I take it you meant we should "lose" pistol magazines that hold more than 10 rounds? 8rounds? In the military I carried a 1911 pistol with 3 govt provided 7round magazines So 8 would be hi-capacity? I have privately bought and own a 1911 style pistol which came from the factory with 8 round magazines.)

So 10 in the gun makes it especially evil?




top topics



 
4

log in

join