Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (8 total)
10:09 AM on 04/07/2011
"High-capacity magazines -- devices that dramatically boost a weapon's firing power -- were prohibited from 1994 until 2004, when the federal assault weapons ban was in place." This not true. The prohibition was for "new" high capacity magazines". Those on the market and those already owned were perfectly legal. Please try to be accurate.
photo
schotts
This We'll Defend
10:32 AM on 04/07/2011
But being accurate would not help their cause.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RDWidner
A Libertarian by nature. A free man by act of God.
09:43 AM on 04/07/2011
The Second Amendment reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court issued two Second Amendment decisions. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Additionally, the Court enumerated several longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession that it found were consistent with the Second Amendment. In McDonald v. Chicago (2010), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits State and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government.

The wording of the Bill will determine the Constitutionality. There are numerous handguns sold on the market that have a capacity higher than 10 as shipped from the factory. If this Bill causes them to be banned or covers the factory replacement magazines than I believe it is unconstitutional. These handguns are in common use for self defense and are often carried by law enforcement.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
frank day
Obama cares about all of U.S.
09:40 AM on 04/07/2011
"A gun in your home makes it three times more likely that you or someone you care about will be murdered by a family member or intimate partner (Kellerman,New England Journal of Medicine v329, n.15 1993)"

Just one of many startling statistics.

http://www.kqed.org/w/baywindow/guns/stats.html
10:20 AM on 04/07/2011
Hmm 1993, nearly 20 years ago. And Violent Crime has decrease startlingly in the nearly 2 decades since. An inanimate object is incapable of determining anything and you could pick any number of objects in a household that would yield a similar coloration.
11:52 AM on 04/07/2011
Correlation
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:25 AM on 04/07/2011
Yes, there are a lot of people for whom it is unwise to possess firearms.
09:30 AM on 04/07/2011
I guess the police need to "kill a lot of people quickly" since they are exempted from this bill. I also guess the old civil war 1863 Henry, which holds 16 rounds, is a killing machine too, no doubt, since the Congresswoman's bill bans them. All will be destroyed within a generation.

And I guess the Senator and Congresswoman feel we don't like our wives much, since accidentally leaving a magazine in a car, or, you know dying, renders our loved ones instant felons.

The law bans any magazine that holds more than 10 rounds. My target pistol holds 12. Since I can't transfer the magazines under the proposed law, the gun is worthless. It's not made anymore. There aren't 10 round magazines out there, and without the magazine, it's a brick.

If it were print magazines they were talking about, we'd rightly cry foul. This shouldn't be any different just because it's the Second Amendment being defiled instead of the first. These two took an oath to honor the Bill of Rights. Apparently they are not much interested in keeping it.
09:29 AM on 04/07/2011
"We' must not ! Life is too important to run out of ammunition. Are you all going to be available for lawsuits if I am injured or killed because I am unable to protect myself. Don't let your emotions override logic....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
frank day
Obama cares about all of U.S.
09:59 AM on 04/07/2011
Who in blazes are all of you gun toters so afraid of???

Get real.

The only gun deaths I ever read about are people shooting friends, neighbors, or family members.
Or, the occasional loony on a rampage.

Guns are WAY to easy to obtain.

There need to be SIGNIFICANT restrictions on the purchase and transfer of guns.
photo
JimInHouston
Arma virumque cano...
10:53 AM on 04/07/2011
"Who in blazes are all of you gun toters so afraid of???"

Your lifetime odds of being a victim of violent crime is greater than 50%. Being armed is being prepared, not fearful.

"Get real."

Here's reality for you: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/104274.pdf

"The only gun deaths I ever read about are people shooting friends, neighbors, or family members.
Or, the occasional loony on a rampage."

Only because YOU'RE not paying attention. Try these newspaper accounts:
• Fatal shooting deemed self defense (FL)
• Self-defense considered in shooting at Tulsa apartment complex (OK)
• Police Say Man Shot by Homeowner in Self-Defense (TX)
• Man fatally shoots area woman's ex-boyfriend (TX)
• Pearl, MS store manager kills 1 robber, wounds another; both heavily armed (MS)
• Armed Beauty Queen Fatally Shoots Intruder (FL)
• Woman Shoots Ex-Boyfriend In Self Defense (AL)
• Fatal Flint Shooting May Have Been Self-Defense (MI)
• LPD: Lubbock man stabbed while attacking older man with tire iron (TX)
• Suspect Shot and Killed During Attempted Store Robbery (OH)
• Gary police: Woman shot ex-boyfriend after he attacked her (IN)
• Police investigate whether Kearns shooting of 3 was in self-defense (UT)
• Street justice: Bronx man allegedly beating his baby's mother fatally shot by vigilante passer-by (NY)
• Wilton homeowner fires at intruders with shotgun (ME)
• Paris Hilton Praises Gunslinger Boyfriend (CA)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:03 AM on 04/07/2011
"Who in blazes are all of you gun toters so afraid of???"

Rapists, robbers, murderers, bears, dogs.

"There need to be SIGNIFICAN­T restrictio­ns on the purchase and transfer of guns. "

I disagree. There should be no restrictions.
09:10 AM on 04/07/2011
"These deadly devices are the weapon of choice for the deranged." Yes, precisely the reason they should not be withdrawn from law-abiding citizens. "The deranged" and criminals DON'T FOLLOW YOUR LAWS! Don't take weapons and their accessories from law abiding sane citizens who use them to protect themselves and others!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
frank day
Obama cares about all of U.S.
09:36 AM on 04/07/2011
B.S.

Take ALL handguns away . Period.
photo
rikilii
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
09:41 AM on 04/07/2011
....but nobody is talking about bans...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
molonlabe
Gun Cabinets & Wombs should be off limits.
09:52 AM on 04/07/2011
You're about 3 years behind the times.

Suggested reading: D.C. vs. Heller. Specifically, "firearms in common use of the time."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gerald4
Author "NATIONAL WEALTH" by Spencer
09:45 AM on 04/07/2011
I totally agree that the average citizem should be equally armed as the recent mass murderers.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:03 AM on 04/07/2011
What? Compromise the manly fantasies of our most manly of men???..UNAMERICAN I say!
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
photo
Grumpy Man
Disappointed idealist
07:20 AM on 04/07/2011
Spend a little time on You Tube watching Jerry Miculek shoot his revolver faster and more accurately than most people could shoot a machine gun. Some of you may go into shock. Ole boy can shoot twelve rounds (includes a reload) in under three seconds, on target. He can shoot four different targets in 1.06 seconds.

Then there's the guy shooting a semi-auto who switches magazines on his semi-auto handgun in less than one second.

Next up, a guy who can throw ten clay pigeons in the air with his own hand and shoot all ten of them before they hit the ground using a shotgun.

I tried to post links to the videos of these guys last night but evidently the mod(s) didn't approve. I suppose you'll have to look them up yourself.
ThinkCreeps
Seriously, it's time.
07:54 AM on 04/07/2011
Good for Mr Miculek.

It still doesn't alter the fact that his suicide risk is about six times higher than a non-gun-owner's.
08:31 AM on 04/07/2011
No it's not.
08:33 AM on 04/07/2011
Japan's suicide rate is much higher than the US's yet the access to firearms is very limited. How can that be if firearms are the determining factor as you suggest?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
David Carson
01:08 PM on 04/07/2011
and don't forget Ed McGivern
abetterplace
Capitalistic reverand
07:18 AM on 04/07/2011
The "beginning with" phrase is what bothers me.
photo
schotts
This We'll Defend
09:22 AM on 04/07/2011
Exactly. One more reason we gun owners say NO - no compromises. And one reason they will fail. They can't contain themselves when it comes to letting the cat out about their real goal, highly restrictive gun controls or all out ban of all.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
frank day
Obama cares about all of U.S.
09:41 AM on 04/07/2011
All out ban. I'm in the majority on that one.

We need a constitutional convention like the Tea Party is calling for. Then we can end this nonsense.
05:35 AM on 04/07/2011
This will drive the price of these mags way up starting now. What goes for 15 bucks will be 120.00 in no time.
hagenjr
Shovel ready freeborn son of the Republic
03:15 AM on 04/07/2011
Many handguns come standard with a magazine > 10 rounds. Most. The vast majority of these guns have never been used in a crime. Their owners are law abiding and responsible gun owners. Why are we taling about restricting the rights of the law abiding because of the actions of the deranged.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hagagaga
You can't take the sky from me.
09:25 AM on 04/07/2011
The grabbers don't care. They exist in a world without facts.
01:51 AM on 04/07/2011
"These deadly devices are the weapon of choice for the deranged." It's right there in your article, you aren't against high cap magazines, you are against guns...all guns. These also happen to be the non leathal weapons of choice of 80 million, law abiding citizens. The poster child for your cause, Mr. Brady was shot with a revolver as I recall - .a 22 cal. Rohm RG-14, 6 shot pistol, not a high capacity semi-automatic (which means nothing but sounds great in a headline.) This is victory thru incrementalism. You ban this, limit that and continue to chip away until you reach your ultimate objective. No one is fooled.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
robnelsong
Dire Wolfman
12:58 AM on 04/07/2011
The majority of comments to this article are from gun nuts or enthusiasts as they would probably prefer to be termed. I really don't understand the gun fetish, especially the love for semi-automatic weapons which only exist to kill people rapidly and efficiently. The paranoia that gets expressed about the terrible people who would take over America were it not for the "patriots" who are saving themselves and ostensibly the rest of us is completely over the top. Over the years, I have enjoyed shooting legally registered weapons on a range, but I have absolutely no problem with the concept of licensing weapons, nor do I have any problem with licensing drivers of motor vehicles. Any potentially dangerous object should be regulated.
01:12 AM on 04/07/2011
Many of the "patriots" to whom you refer have stated openly on this site that they will resist until violent death any attempt made by our government to abridge their right to own and carry firearms.
08:34 AM on 04/07/2011
evidence?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Berettasskeeter
The Lord will provide
08:47 AM on 04/07/2011
Do you mean to say that we, the People of the United States, should kowtow to government tyranny; that we, the People of the United States, have a duty to allow the government to debase and contravene the Constitution of the U.S.? At what point, in your opinion, does a government instigate an uprising against itself? Or, can there be such a point, in your opinion?!
Semper fi
photo
OdinsEye
Silenced by HP. Cant be intimidated into Facebook
01:22 AM on 04/07/2011
"semi-autom­atic weapons which only exist to kill people rapidly and efficientl­y"

Semi-autos (fire only a single shot per trigger pull) are very popular for hunting (the first semi-auto hunting rifles and shotguns were first sold in the US over 100 years ago) and competition as well as for recreation.

"Over the years, I have enjoyed shooting legally registered weapons on a range, "

Unlikely, based on the above comment, but we'll roll with that for now. BTW, if your firearms are registered, you live in only one of a small handful of states.

"I have absolutely no problem with the concept of licensing weapons, nor do I have any problem with licensing drivers of motor vehicles."

One is a right and the other a privilege. So what other rights shall we license?

"Any potentiall­y dangerous object should be regulated. "

Firearms are regulated by a great many laws at the federal, state, and local levels -- some estimates are that there are thousands of such laws already in effect.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
robnelsong
Dire Wolfman
01:43 AM on 04/07/2011
Several clarifications: (1) It is common knowledge that semi-automatic weapons can be converted to fully automatic weapons by just about any person with the will to do so --- I don't care about their history as hunting weapons because their capacity to do harm is greater than their good to society ... you can whack a six point buck with some other form of firearm; (2) You have no idea what my personal history is regarding firing various firearams on shooting ranges, so don't make false assumptions that you can't prove. Also, I do live in one of the small handful of states that you referred to and I'm glad I do; (3) I do not agree that the possession of guns is a right, regardless of the Supreme Court's opinions on this subject ... after all, the Supreme Court at one time upheld slavery and Jim Crow laws; (4) there is a huge public health problem in the United States and it is death by gun .. guns, by definition, are dangerous objects and must be highly regulated as they are in virtually every civilized country (e.g., Europe, Japan.)
12:19 AM on 04/07/2011
We don't need to Ban anything just be more secure on who we sell it to, and besides I go on a shooting range blowing up Gasoline Tanks with G36 Assault rifles very fun you should try.
photo
Stilyagi
Making a board with a bigger nail in it.
12:48 AM on 04/07/2011
Yes, like not selling arms to Gadaffi any longer. Which doesn't matter, because now that they're getting some oil out in Benghazi, we'll have a chance to sell plenty of arms to the rebels.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Berettasskeeter
The Lord will provide
08:51 AM on 04/07/2011
Qaddafi's army has long been armed with the AK-47. We have not sold him arms, beyond a small amount. And that was done purely as a politically gesture.
Semper fi
09:38 AM on 04/07/2011
You know this does bring up a great point! As an American citizen I have to go through a pretty decent background check just to obtain a fire arms and then a multitude of restrictions are placed upon me about how I use and carry that firearm. Now we are speaking of giving rebels weapons by the hundreds if not thousands. I am just wondering, and I would like to present this question to Frank Lautenburg and Carolyn McCarthy who wrote this article, What restrictions and Background checks are required of these rebels to obtain these firearms? Also if your stance on gun violence is as such in America what about the violence you not only condoning, but giving the arms and amunition to these people to commit? Just my .02 cents worth.

And just for a little reference there Frank and Carolyn it is not with in your power to "ban" and type of firearm, amunition, or Mag "clip" as you call it. Just a little interesting reading for you, a good little piece called the United States Constitution...Just take a quick look at the part noted as the 2nd Amendment!

Stilyagi great post!
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:28 PM on 04/06/2011
Several hours ago I wrote a response to this article on gun magazine capacity but it wasn't posted. I'll try again What I said was that today I'd read another HP article titled "Pitchforks for the Peasants" in which the author hinted at the need for 'revolution' of some form... and since there are no longer any pitchfork manufacturers... perhaps it might be a good idea for the peasants to have guns at home, huh?