LA Police Chief Supports Ban On Big Ammo Clips

45 Comments

LOS ANGELES—The city’s police chief endorsed a proposed ban Wednesday on the sale and possession of the types of high-capacity ammunition magazines that have been repeatedly used in mass shootings.

If passed, the federal ban would prohibit any magazine that holds more than 10 rounds of ammunition, though magazines legally purchased before the ban’s start date would be exempt.

“Large capacity ammunition magazines are still being used by violent street gangs,” Charlie Beck said in a statement. “Common sense restrictions on these magazines would help LAPD officers better protect the public and themselves.”

The federal bill was authored by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., whose husband was killed and son seriously wounded in a 1993 shooting.

Several law enforcement officials have endorsed the proposed ban but Beck, who heads the nation’s third-largest police force after New York and Chicago, has the highest profile.

Jared Loughner, the suspect in the January shooting that critically wounded U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed six in Arizona, legally bought the 9 mm handgun he allegedly used at a Tucson store, and was also carrying extended magazines that hold 30 rounds of ammunition.

“Large-capacity ammunition magazines carry far more bullets than any civilian could possibly ever use,” Richard M. Aborn, president of the Citizens Crime Commission of New York City said in a statement. “Common sense restrictions provide law enforcement with a tactical advantage over criminals, making us all safer.”

A message left with the National Rifle Association was not immediately returned after business hours Tuesday.

High-capacity magazines were banned in 1994 but Congress refused to renew the law and it expired in 2004.

Since the ban expired, large-capacity magazines have been used in several mass shootings including the Virginia Tech slayings in 2007 that left 33 dead and the 2009 killings at Ft. Hood that killed 13.

Flag as inappropriate

-24

GodblessTexas

about 2 years ago

156 Comments

the brady bill was a joke, and this ban will be too!
ilegworldchamp

over 2 years ago

8998 Comments

We can thank our "WORLD FULL OF LAWYERS" for mis-caricaturisation of the English Language. They tend to use the most inflammatory wording to create their depiction of their story. Lawyers spend the majority of their time in Law School learning how to "MANIPULATE THE QUEENS ENGLISH" like "ASSAULT WEAPONS" . My finger in your eye is an assault weapon !
1Tinman

over 2 years ago

616 Comments

To add to the comments of Lt. Stover: A magazine surrounds the bullets and has a follower. Though clips still exist, they are mostly used in womens hair.
As with some of you, this has driven me crazy for years (ok, decades). Most of the younger set have never seen a clip and STILL refuse to use the correct terminology. Arrrgh!... lol
Sorry for the off-topic rant.
JohnSmith338

over 2 years ago

52 Comments

Thank you Lt_Stover...it bothers me too. The other one that gets to me is the difference between a "silencer" (which does not exist) and a "suppressor" which reduces the sound of gunfire. Nothing can make any firearm in known existence completely silent.
Lt_Stover

over 2 years ago

78 Comments

Simply put, a magazine is a container in which ammunition is stored, whilst a clip is a small piece of metal which holds rounds in place. A clip was used in the old M1 garand, like you see in band of brothers or older style movies while a magazine is its replacement as used in m16 and newer. I see this word clip being used a lot by novice/green people who have no clue about the difference. Just wanted to clear this up =)
esu

over 2 years ago

498 Comments

This is just another knee jerk reaction to the Giffords shooting. My answer to these people is why do we have Ferraris that can do 180mph when the average national speed limit is 55 or so. If a guy can afford a ferrari and drive it within legal limts then why cant a gun owner have a 33 round mag (not clip) as long as he/she uses it responsibly?
Anonymous

over 2 years ago

I fail to see how in the grand scheme of things how this will help.
ssu459

over 2 years ago

153706 Comments

I believe that we, who have spent many years in the business are aware that three or four well placed shots are going to make a person just as dead as fifteen or sixteen.Ergo,why the ban,unless,of course,as it has been suggested the pols need a soap box.
ilegworldchamp

over 2 years ago

8998 Comments

More Liberal "Gun Control" pipe dreams to create more laws that do nothing to alleviate the problem. I'm sure that "EVERY LAW ABIDING CRIMINAL WILL NOT BUY ANY EXTENDED MAGAZINES FOR FEAR OF COURT ACTIONS" ! Did I just see the Easter bunny go by ? "The problem is Crime Control" . When the Police arrest someone for a gun related incident , any and all charges should be charged and prosecuted. Upon a guilty finding the actor should get the "MAX PENALTY BY THE JUDGE" , then the actor should have to serve "EVERY SINGLE DAY OF THAT SENTENCE WITHOUT TIME OFF OR PAROLE".
"COMMON SENSE DICTATES THAT THIS IS THE BEST WAY TO CURB GUN VIOLENCE DOWN TO A MINIMUM BECAUSE THE GUN DOES NOTHING WITHOUT THE ACTOR ON THE TRIGGER"!!!!!!!!!!!!! But we all know that the missing Gene in a Liberal is Common Sense . !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
gammyland

over 2 years ago

438 Comments

I've been to a seminar on the VA shooting... whether he had high capicity or not, he would've shot just as many. He had practiced his technique and reloaded several times. I really hate how people use 1 event, or a few events to try to make new laws that only affect LEGAl gun owners who want to use a gun for legal purposes.
BForJuvCor

over 2 years ago

846 Comments

What these high strung gun control lobbyists should do is concentrate on making harsher penalties for those caught attempting to commit or committed any crime using a firearm. Gun laws only effect those that obey the law. Penalties, however, effect those who break the law and the ones who should suffer. This country's right wing liberals think that they can stop viloent crime by taking the rights of the law abiding citizens. I'd love to see the statistician that comes up with this crap and smack him.
uncledennis1

over 2 years ago

22368 Comments

Stover. What is the difference between a clip and a magazine? RnG78 is so correct. The NRA will be on this like sweaty thighs on a vinyl seat.
clobster

over 2 years ago

1552 Comments

I have to agree with Stevemaynard. Criminals will not go to their local gun store and legally buy an extended mag or get it some other reputable way. They will go to some guy selling it on the streets where there are no restrictions, no safe guards, no nothing. The only people being prevented from buying them are people who probably want to use them at a gun range.

And last I checked, A LOT of guns carry over 10 rounds. The only upside I could see to this law is if a gang-banger was caught with an extended mag, he could be put away for another crime.
RnG78

over 2 years ago

104 Comments

Don't worry, the bill will not pass
Lt_Stover

over 2 years ago

78 Comments

Really dislike people that can't/won't find out difference between a clip and a magazine...and whether they are banned or not the criminals (non law abiding citizens) will still have and chose to use them.