Cho at Virginia Tech did all of his damage using 15 and 10 round magazines. He fired over 174 times. When the police got to his body, he still had 204 rounds on him.

This is why it is more important to fix the mental health piece of the problem rather than limiting the effort to magazine reduction.

Try it and see just how fast the party that passed it will be in the minority for decades and I doubt the SC would hold it to be constitutional.

It would work for those that would obey the ban/law, but criminals would just ignore it and get them on the black market.

any political party that even seriously tried that would end up in purgatory for decades and the SC would probably rule it unconstitutional.

way too many gun

"enthusiasts"

I have to use that word, I actually have a much harsher word for them but this is DU and gun people here are very vocal and usually willing to alert your post if you say things that hurt their feelings.


Although, to be consistent on my part, my argument that you MUST vote for ANY dem in ANY election NO MATTER WHAT given all alternatives are unthinkable; I suppose one could argue that if I want to keep terrorists (i.e. republicans) out of power I have to make sure as many people as possible vote Dem, and there are tons of gun "enthusiasts" who would NOT vote Dem if we threatened to take their guns away, as guns are more important to them than true justice and liberty. Right?

I guess...kind of hard to know what to do anymore.

But I am often reminded that I best not scare away pro gun Dems, which MUST mean that if I were to say I would take their guns, they would vote for the terrorists, or republicans, right?

But that particular thing will never happen here. The Bill of Rights won't allow it.

nice try though.

you keep serving up the NRA talking points and we'll keep correcting ya!

You were implying that all semi-auto handguns could be banned. The SCOTUS made that impossible a few years back.

Correction right back at you!

when you disagree with liberal politics, you always find yourself arguing with most people here.

it's a lot of work isn't it?

I disagree with liberal politics? What the hell are you smoking today?

According to a 2014 review article in the Annals of Epidemiology, the 1-year population attributable risk of gun violence given mental illness is less than 4%.

That means that if all individuals with serious mental illness had the same likelihood of violence as the general population, violent acts in the US would be reduced only by 4%.

Here's the cite:

Swanson et al (2014 - in press, corrected proof) "Mental Illness and Reduction of Gun Violence and Suicide: Bringing Epidemiologic Research to Policy." Annals of Epidemiology.

I thought by the title it meant paper magazines (the kind you read), so I was about to say "well he had no choice, banning those would be against free speech." Lol!

Like when someone asks about a bridge closure? Sounds like some countries that can commit someone to an asylum if they question the policies of their government. So, pitch the ball back into the court of mental health treatments, which I am sure if I wasn't too lazy to research it, he has probably underfunded or cut back on in his administration.

He's just shopping for NRA money...can it be overriden!


rocktivity

so we know that 10 round mags can be used in a mass shooting.

So what evidence is there that it would be effective?

Loghner ( Gabby Giffords) stopped by senior woman as he reloaded. Eleven children escaped Alan Lanza as he reloaded.

shotguns don't have magazines.

I have no problem with the limit being 15 - that is what most handguns are built for.

And frankly my point stands, more reloading means more opportunity to stop a shooter. High capacity magazines are menace.

15 is a good number since it is a standard size for many handguns.

to support limited magazines" thing? Called any congress people? Sent any emails? Contributed to any organizations working for restricted magazines?

here is a clue - it is not as important to me as it is for you. There are plenty of social ills in America to keep all of us busy. Just be happy I am not actively opposing you.

and I applaud your active participation in the cause you have chosen. My issue is people who say "I support" when they really mean "I don't care enough to fight it."

that is support.

Pumps and semi-autos generally have tube magazines. Not detachable, but still magazines.

Just picking a nit, and I know that you know better, but for the others .....

And of course, Christie has the option of banning them altogether, since there's no reason to have them other than mass killings.


rocktivity

since that is the standard size for most handguns. Easier to enforce and removes the suggestion that it is simply a backdoor method to ban popular handguns.

There are 10 round mags available for those firearms. From 1994-04, all handguns were sold with a 10 round max mag.

My issues with the law were no provision to allow existing owners to keep their existing mags and no just compensation provision. If you are going to require the mags be turned in, the Bill of Rights requires just compensation and due process. Also, I am extremely offended that the police are always exempted from these types of bills. If 10 rounds is good for everybody else, it's good for the police too. I hate that double standard.

I figure it would be easier for all concerned if we allowed standard size mags - it is not like 5 more rounds will make that much of a difference.

It's a tighter rule that has plenty of existing replacements.

Unless you can quantify the actual risk having 15 vice 10 as the limit then why not simply let people keep their existing mags. As we see in NY, is is basically a unenforcable law. Concede to reality and write laws more in tune with what the public will support.

I do not think it is legal to force people to surrender existing ones.

Massive civil disobedience was the result in NY. It will be a common reaction. The controllers need to be careful they don't overplay their hand.

But anything that makes it more difficult for the gun-crazies to take on schoolyards full of children without having to re-load is a good thing.

So there'd be a black market for high-capacity magazines. So fucking what? Make the psychos work to fulfill their murderous Rambo fantasies.

This guy came armed with a shotgun, rather than a simi-automatic. He managed to kill one person, but had to reload. That's when he was taken down buy Jon Meis, who was armed with pepperspray. If he had a weapon with a larger capacity, he would have been able to kill more people.
I think limits on magazines is a very good idea. Make them work for it, as you said. If they have to keep reloading, it's more time they are not actively firing. More chance to stop them.

doing what right wing NRA supporters do. Right up there with his fellow right wing NRA supporter Governors from Louisiana and Georgia.

Tack to the Right, again and again. Make the tea baggers, gun nuts, and religious love you.
Unfortunately for him, his silver-plating has tarnished horribly, and no amount of dieting will change the fact that people really don't like or trust him.

The bill, which all of you have read, , would include all semi auto 22 rimfires. This would make illegal most all 22 rimfire semi-auto rifles as their under barrel tube magazines carry 15 rounds of ammunition. There was no grandfathering of currently owned rifles, and no time allowed to convert and/or dispose of these rifles. Had he signed the bill then the owners would have become automatic felons, subject to arrest and prosecution. And since NJ has a required permit and registration of all semi auto firearms law enforcement would have no problem arresting the owners.

I realize that many of the posters on DU would laugh and support that scenario, it would not end well for those that passed, or signed off, or for their political party.

HATE HIM and everyone else that tolerates and actually condones murder because they are so freaking afraid of the NRA and gun idiots er voters. Disgusting.

how much gun violence impacts life insurance rates and medical costs in this country.

Taxpayers Shoulder Bulk Of Gun Violence Health Care Costs: Study

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that gun violence deaths cost the U.S. economy $37 billion and gun injuries $3.7 billion in 2005, the last year the public health agency conducted an analysis. In addition, taxpayers often end up footing the bill for social services for gun violence victims, as well as building the expensive hospital trauma units needed for their treatment.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/13/taxpayers-gun-violence_n_3915434.html

Just the tip of the iceberg. I am also curious how much guns impact our insurance rates.

But it is clear that we are all paying for what is essentially gun nut welfare.

that would be $12.6 billion. So the gun economy costs about 3 times what it brings in. Human suffering is an added bonus.

Me likey gun. Gun makey mee man!

It didn't allow existing owners of large magazines to keep them. They would be required to surrender them without compensation for their market value. That is a violation of the 5th Amendment which requires Due process (court hearing) and just compensation be paid for the taking of private property.

They should have done what Conn. did and ban them but allow the owners to register and keep them. Or they could have taken Australia's approach, where full market value was paid for every item turned in.