“We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.” Ronald Reagan
One thing you can depend on in the American Left. They love to excuse criminals and punish the law-abiding. Gun control is one of the best examples of this. The vast majority of American gun owners are law-abiding citizens. We do not hurt innocent people. Many times, we even use our firearms to defend innocent people. Yet, the left loves to punish us for crimes which we did not commit.
Politico: Carolyn McCarthy readies gun control bill
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) is seeking to shamelessly exploit the recent tragic shooting of Representative Gabrielle Giffords to push yet even more restrictions on law-abiding Americans. She seeks to ban so-called “high” capacity magazines. She is being joined in this crime against liberty by Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ). As usual, the left is not letting a crisis “go to waste.” They are using emotionalism and untruths to get their way.
“The only reason to have 33 bullets loaded in a handgun is to kill a lot of people very quickly,” Lautenberg said in a statement. “These high-capacity clips simply should not be on the market.“
Well, Senator, it seems that you are speaking without knowledge. I have such a magazine and I have never killed anyone. I use it occasionally at the pistol range to avoid having to reload as often. That is the reason to have such a magazine. Killing a fellow human has nothing to do with my ownership of the magazine. I own it because it is a useful tool. I also bought it because statists such as yourself don’t want me to own it. More and more Americans are waking up to their rights under the Second Amendment (and we have statists such as yourself to thank for it). There’s nothing like the loss (or potential loss) of liberty to awaken the desire for it.
Another vocal supporter of gun control, Illinois Rep. Mike Quigley, told POLITICO that he hopes “something good” can come from the Arizona tragedy — perhaps discussion of a new assault weapons ban, sales at gun shows and tracing measures.
I love how voices I’ve heard from the left have told us that we are paranoid about “gun bans,” that they aren’t out to take our guns away. Yet when the opportunity seems right, they return to one of their favorite causes: the disarmament of private citizens.
“The ability to buy a weapon that fires hundreds of bullets in less than a minute” is a problem, said Quigley. “He had an additional magazine capability. That’s not what a hunter needs. That’s not what someone needs to defend their home. That’s what you use to hunt people.”
Again, the left is speaking untruth. Whether from ignorance or malice I don’t know. I’ve heard (admittedly anecdotal) evidence from experienced shooters who say that they could duplicate that kind of fire even while using limited-capacity magazines because they can reload very quickly. There are even competitive revolver shooters who can generate an incredible rate of fire using moon clips.
The assertion that someone would not need a certain capacity magazine for home defense is not only absurd, it is offensive. If I were defending my life, my loved ones, and my property I would want as much firepower as possible. When facing an intruder in the middle of the night, one does not know if the intruder is armed (or, for that matter, how strongly). One does not know if the intruder is drunk, stoned, or insane. I have heard testimony from police who emptied a magazine full of .45 ammunition at a stoned criminal who was charging them and it didn’t stop the criminal. As one officer put it, “he was dead, he just didn’t know it yet.” Certainly, the .45 caliber bullet is regarded as a “man-stopper.” Yet nothing short of a central nervous system shot would stop someone in that state. During the time it would take to reload (due to arbitrarily small magazines caused by hoplophobic lawmakers), an intruder, even a fatally injured one, could reach a homeowner and cause serious injury or death. When defending myself and those I love, I want to be able to have every advantage that I can to help stop the threat.
Who defines “large” capacity? A Glock model 19 (such as used by the perpetrator of the Arizona shooting) has a standard capacity of 15+1 rounds. (That means fifteen rounds in the magazine plus one in the chamber.) The model 17 has a standard capacity of 17+1 rounds. These are perfectly natural capacities for these firearms. Yet, by the now defunct Federal “Assault Weapons” Ban, these capacities were considered to be too large. That law arbitrarily set magazine capacity at 10 rounds. In a self-defense situation, the need to reload (or running completely out of ammunition) due to arbitrarily small magazines could spell disaster.
Again, the left loves to punish law-abiding gun owners for the crimes of others.