We were honored last week to join James and Sarah Brady as they marked the 30th anniversary of a tragic moment in history - the shooting of President Reagan.
James Brady, who took one of the bullets meant for the president, has since dedicated his life to preventing gun violence.
It was in his name that Congress came together to pass the Brady law to require a background check for gun purchases.
It is time for Congress to come together once again to eliminate senseless violence and save lives.
We're determined to ban high-capacity gun magazines like the one Jared Lee Loughner allegedly used in Tucson, Arizona, when he was able to fire 31 bullets in 15 seconds because he supersized his Glock 19 handgun with a high-capacity magazine.
Loughner's massacre ended only when he stopped to reload and bystanders wrestled him to the ground. If he had used a standard magazine and was forced to reload earlier, some of his victims might have been spared.
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. Since its lapse, high-capacity magazines have become easily accessible, turning up on shelves in gun shops and even some sporting goods stores.
As a recent investigation revealed, during the last year of the ban in 2004, just 10 percent of the crime-related guns seized by Virginia police were equipped with high-capacity magazines, a 10-year low. By last year, with the ban expired, the percentage had surged to 22 percent.
The fact is, guns are used to murder more than 9,500 people in our country in a single year. By comparison, about 5,900 American troops have died in Afghanistan and Iraq during the past 10 years.
Let's take a look at how gun-related murders affect some of our closest allies.
Altogether, Japan, Germany, England, Wales and Canada are home to 305 million people, and guns kill 450 people in these countries in an average year.
Again, the United States, which is home to 307 million people, suffers 9,500 murders by gun in one year. And that doesn't even include the approximately 20,000 annual other deaths and suicides with a gun.
It's time to end the bloodshed and restore common sense to our gun laws -- beginning with a permanent ban on high-capacity gun magazines.
These deadly devices are the weapon of choice for the deranged.
In the 1993 Long Island Railroad massacre, Colin Ferguson used a high-capacity magazine to kill six people and wound 19 others.
Major Nidal Hasan, the accused shooter in the Fort Hood tragedy, was armed with several high-capacity magazines and almost 400 rounds of ammunition when he went on his 2009 rampage, killing 13 people and wounding 34 others.
The onetime gun-shop employee who sold weaponry to Hasan testified that the alleged shooter told him he preferred extended ammunition clips because "he didn't like spending time loading magazines."
In addition to the Arizona, Long Island Railroad and Fort Hood shootings, high-capacity magazines were also used in the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre, as well as an incident in Manchester, Connecticut, last year, when a gunman killed eight people and wounded two others.
We introduced legislation in the Senate and House last month to ban the sale of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds at a time - just like the law that was in place until 2004.
This new legislation's goal is not to eliminate gun ownership in responsible hands; we simply want to restore a sensible safeguard that protects our families and children.
Robert Levy, a lawyer and prominent gun rights activist, has said our proposal is constitutional.
The National Rifle Association has called high-capacity magazines "standard equipment for self-defense handguns," but let's not kid ourselves: the only reason to supersize a handgun to two or three times its original bullet capacity is because you want to kill a lot of people very quickly.
In gun-friendly Washington, we need President Obama's leadership, reasonable gun laws, and policies that will save the tens of thousands of Americans who live with gun violence each year.
Even Dick Cheney is open to restoring the ban.
The former vice president, a staunch defender of gun rights, recently told NBC News with regard to restoring the high-capacity magazine ban: "We've had that in place before. Maybe it's appropriate to reestablish that kind of thing."
No one is arguing that a high-capacity magazine ban would have prevented our colleague Gabrielle Giffords from being shot -- but it might have spared the victims who were struck by bullets 11 through 31.
The bottom line: We shouldn't have to rely on innocent bystanders to protect lives when these lethal weapons are in the hands of killers.
This responsibility rests with Congress and President Obama -- and we shouldn't wait another day to get the job done.
Frank Lautenberg is a Democratic Senator from New Jersey. Carolyn McCarthy is a Democratic Congresswoman representing New York's 4th District.
Wow, 22%, so in other words 78% were not equipped with high capacity magazines. So much for high capacity magazines being favored by criminals. The more stats they provide the more apparent it becomes there's no rational reason for a ban
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAFxgQmxbGI
More proof that like all other gun control this is about control not about doing anything practical to reduce crime.
Here's a bonus: Carolyn Mccarthy proving she doesn't even know what the features she wants to ban are:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rGpykAX1fo
And yet they aren't proposing a ban on police buying and having these magazines so I guess the purpose of police must be to "kill a lot of people very quickly".
keeping worrying about only one amendment and one right while conservatives will be kicking you out in the streets and shipping your jobs away and laughing all the way to the bank while you continue to think this is the most important thing for you to get fired up about.
PS The country is going down the tubes because of a 14 Trillion + debt mostly due to spending on a failed welfare state.
I own several handguns that come standard with magazines > 10 rounds.
This high capacity line is BS! Next anything other than single shot shotguns will be banned, then anything larger then a 410. Next .22lr will be limited to 5 or 7 rounds. There is no appeasing the gun banners so we wil lfight tooth and nail on every issue.
Jim Pasterczyk wrote: "I recall many amicus briefs from them on
the other side of that fence when Heller was argued; they're
probably still available off the Supreme Court's
website."
Such as this one: BRIEF OF THE INTERNATIONAL
LAW ENFORCEMENT EDUCATORS AND TRAINERS ASSOCIATION (ILEETA),
THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT FIREARMS
INSTRUCTORS (IALEFI), MARYLAND STATE LODGE, FRATERNAL ORDER OF
POLICE, SOUTHERN STATES POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION, 29
ELECTED CALIFORNIA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS, SAN FRANCISCO VETERAN
POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, LONG BEACH POLICE OFFICERS
ASSOCIATION, TEXAS POLICE CHIEFS ASSOCIATION, TEXAS MUNICIPAL
POLICE ASSOCIATION, NEW YORK STATE ASSOCIATION OF AUXILIARY
POLICE, MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIF., SHERIFF THOMAS D. ALLMAN,
OREGON STATE REP. ANDY OLSON, NATIONAL POLICE DEFENSE
FOUNDATION, LAW ENFORCEMENT ALLIANCE OF AMERICA, AND THE
INDEPENDENCE INSTITUTE AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF
RESPONDENT Oh wait, that was in support of Heller... never
mind
http://www.vpc.org/studies/unsafe.htm
"No one is trying to take away your guns"
The authors confuse different issues.
1) High capacity mags: The law which the gun controllers want to bring back is an arbitrary limit to 10 cartridges in a mags. Anything above that, they call "high capacity".
2) Standard equipment mags: What the firearm normally ships with when you buy it. Standard equipment mags may hold more than 10 cartridges.
3) Extended capacity mags: Optional or after market mags which hold more than the standard equipment mags.
For example, my pistol's "standard equipment" mag is a pair of 16 cartridge mags. These are considered "high capacity" by the authors. I can buy a 20 cartridge mag after market. This is an "extended capacity" mag.
FTR, I normally carry 1 full mag in my pistol, 1 additional cartridge in the chamber, and 2 extra mags for a total load of 49 cartridges.
So let me clue you in: 1) I am a cop. 2) I am a retired military combat veteran. 3) I am a law enforcement and civilian arms instructor.
As you were then.
But, do you really want average citizens armed to the teeth???
Those of us who PRACTICE self-defense exercises frequently know that these things can happen at the least convenient time. Hence, 3 magazines is simply prudent.
By proposing a limit of only 10 rounds, you are talking about banning standard factory magazines for hundreds of the most popular civilian pistols and rifles in the United States. Most ordinary full-sized 9mm pistols hold between 15 and 20 rounds with standard flush-fit magazines, and the most popular small-caliber civilian rifles (which trade lower power for better capacity) generally hold 20 or 30 rounds with factory magazines.
Nor were over-10-round magazines banned 1994-2004, contrary to popular belief. The 1994 Feinstein law did not restrict the importation, sale, transfer, or possession of over-10-round magazines and allowed plenty of time to stockpile decades worth of supply, so they were just as available legally 1994-2004 as they are now. Proprietary pistol magazines *cost more* during the non-ban, but rifle magazine prices weren't significantly affected after the initial panic wore off. Case in point, civilian AK magazine prices were cheaper in the late '90s and early '00's ($9.99/30, $5.99/20) than they are now.
These aren't fringe items; you are talking about outlawing roughly a quarter-billion magazines owned by ~40 million likely voters, including me. No thanks.
Switzerland the homicide rate is lower than both the UK and Ireland, Switzerland has the highest gun ownership rate in all of Europe (3rd in the world), and yet they only have a murder rate of 0.71 per 100,000 people (and 0.3 homicide by firearm). The UK's is 1.28 per 100,000 people (probably the strictest gun laws in all of Europe) while Russia's murder rate is 15.0 per 100,000 people (very strict, all handguns are banned). South Korea is VERY strict gun laws (even more so than the UK) and their murder rate is 2.3, so clearly there is no correlation.
Switzerland homicide rate - 0.71 per 100,000 people (homicide rate by firearm is 0.3 per 100.000 people) - Lax gun control
United Kingdom homicide rate - 1.28 per 100,000 people - Strict gun control
Ireland homicide rate - 1.35 per 100,000 people - Strict gun control
Russia homicide rate - 13.0 per 100,000 people - Strict gun control
United States homicide rate - 5.0 per 100,000 people - Lax gun control
South Korea homicide rate - 2.3 per 100,000 people - Strict gun control
Czech Republic homicide rate - 1.94 per 100,000 people - Lax gun control
Japan homicide rate - 1.02 per 100,000 people - Strict gun control
Australia homicide rate - 1.3 per 100,000 people - Strict gun control
Brazil homicide rate - 27 per 100,000 people - Strict gun control
For those in the gun lobby who may be mathematically challenged, that is roughly eight to ten times the fatality rate of Switzerland, the UK, Ireland, the Czech Republic, Japan and Australia, based on the figures cited by "The Red Hornet." Only Russia and Brazil beat the good 'ol USA. Chew on that one.
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/01/the-geography-of-gun-deaths/69354/
I was referring to MURDER RATES, not deaths from guns as a whole,
What I was saying is that there is no correlation between MURDER RATES, and gun ownership,
There's countries with strict gun control and high murder rates, Like Russia or Brazil. There's countries with lax gun control and low murder rates, like Czech Republic or Switzerland. There's countries with lax gun control and high murder rates like United States. There's countries with strict gun control and low murder rates, like Ireland or the UK.
These deadly devices are the weapon of choice for the deranged.
Does that include the police, who are exempted from said bill?
http://daysofourtrailers.blogspot.com/2011/04/profiling-thier-agenda.html
Now why do you think that is?
(1) There is an Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not be denied the right to purchase and use firearms under any circumstances.
(2) The Second Amendment of the US Constitution is a secular codification of the Eleventh Commandment.
(3) Only firearms owners have the right to discuss technical issues related to firearms and accessories, including but not limited to high capacity magazines, ammunition, and the conversion of semi-automatic weapons to fully-automatic weapons. Persons who do not own firearms cannot comment about any of the above.
(4) Rep. Carolyn McCarthy is an Un-American heretic who should be immediately impeached, convicted, and deported to North Korea.
(5) All statistics regarding injuries and fatalities in the US related to firearms are incorrect, unless approved by the NRA.
(6) All statistics regarding gun-related injuries and fatalities in other countries are incorrect (see #5).
(7) If any form of gun regulation were allowed to become law, such unconstitutional statutes must be immediately repealed or overturned in a court of law, since gun control is the first step to the disarming of the American public.
(8) If all members of the US public were required to carry firearms, the US crime rate would plummet.
(9) There is no relationship between the use of alcohol/controlled substances and gun related violence, unless the gun has been illegally purchased.
(10) Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Likewise, ammunition does kill people, people kill people.
(2) The Second Amendment is no more and no less important than the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments, and should be interpreted similarly (i.e., strict scrutiny) instead of trying to explain it away. It protects an individual right to own guns that are in common use for lawful purposes, e.g. Title 1 firearms.
(3) When debating bans on firearms, it *is* helpful to actually understand what you are proposing to ban. Trying to turn the clock back to a mid-19th-century 10-round limit is no more "reasonable" than trying to outlaw all abortions after the 10th week. Both are extreme measures of dubious benefit, and both would cause immense political backlash. Failure to understand the issue cost Dems immensely in 1994, and the party doesn't need to repeat that mistake out of ignorance.
(4) I respect Rep. McCarthy, but disagree with her regarding banning the most popular civilian guns and the magazines they use. I own the guns and magazines she wishes to ban, and shoot competitively with them.
(5) I'd strongly suggest the FBI Uniform Crime Reports, Table 20, Murder, by State and Type of Weapon. The highest capacity guns are consistently the *least* misused (because they are less portable).
And so on...
Whether or not we should is meaningless. We still do. That's just a fact of life and always will be.
I carry and my number one responsibility is saving myself, my family, and my friends that may be with me, until the police arrive or we escape. I will absolutely call 911 when I get everyone outside but otherwise you are on your own.
That's what the left would have us do right? Aren't they scared of some gun owner going all Rambo and putting innocents into a crossfire?
My vote is that we take every opportunity to assure anyone that advocates being disarmed that we will NOT get involved in a gun fight on their behalf. We promise to save ourselves by fleeing if at all possible and let the professionals deal with the active shooter.
as in "Sorry, but you should have been better prepared"
After all you believe and advocate that law abiding citizens should be unarmed, then I'm sure you won't mind if I decline to help you when the 'bad thing' happens.
Correction, he said it might be a constitutional. More importantly, he did not say it was a good idea.
"The National Rifle Association has called high-capacity magazines "standard equipment for self-defense handguns," but let's not kid ourselves: the only reason to supersize a handgun to two or three times its original bullet capacity is because you want to kill a lot of people very quickly."
Wrong again. Ammo magazines containing more then 10 rounds ARE standard bullet capacity for the majority of handguns.
"Even Dick Cheney is open to restoring the ban."
Strike three. He merely said the ban "might be appropriate". Also, why should we take gun advice from someone who shot his hunting partner in the face?
"As a recent investigation revealed, during the last year of the ban in 2004, just 10 percent of the crime-related guns seized by Virginia police were equipped with high-capacity magazines, a 10-year low. By last year, with the ban expired, the percentage had surged to 22 percent."
Except the number of mags confiscated from criminals in one state has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not the law was effective at reducing crime or saving lives.
The 1994 ban died a natural death when it "sunsetted". Never again will it ever see the light of day.