High-Capacity Magazines Are A Constitutional Right?
“Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) drew a fairly strict line in the sand on Sunday with respect to the coming debate over gun control, suggesting that there is a constitutional right to buy high-capacity clips and magazines…”.* The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur breaks it down. *Read more here from Sam Stein of The Huffington Post: www.huffingtonpost.com More from Cara: www.huffingtonpost.com Support The Young Turks by Subscribing bit.ly Like Us on Facebook: www.fb.com Follow Us on Twitter: twitter.com Find out how to watch The Young Turks on Current by clicking here: www.current.com
Posted in: YouTubePosts
Leave a Comment (7) ↓
TYT and Cenk, the “assault weapons ban” did nothing to prohibit assault weapons. It banned certain combinations of cosmetic features which were prevented in NEW guns. All old guns were grandfathered in. These cosmetic features didn’t change the lethality or usefulness of the guns nor has any study shown that the ban was effective at stopping any crime. The correlation after the ban was lifted is the violent crime has gone down but this is not the causation. This shows there is more than one factor.
The senator is wrong in that we can’t do anything to try to prevent tragedy. Why don’t we start with refunding mental health in this country? Why don’t we listen to what forensic psychologist Park Dietz says about crime, media and mass shootings. The media he says turns these madmen into anti heroes where it inspires other madmen into action. Stop starting news stories with siren blaring and keep these events local.
This isn’t just a gun issue this is a societal issue. To think guns are the sole progenitor of violence shows just how into facts you really are. Listen to the experts, not politicians or in this case, news castors who are talking outside their field of knowledge.
Used an old lever action Winchester a while back.
It had a 15 round tube magazine.
Went through 150 rounds just that one day.
I own a 308 rifle that was modified to accept a 10 round box magazine.
I routinely go through 30 rounds at a time.
If you want to just shoot one round at a time, good.
It will allow you to remember how to put a bullet in the gun.
If you actually want to be proficient and stay familiar with the weapon, and stay a safe shoot, you need more range time.
I’m from Wisconsin, I’m a hunter and gun owner and Ron Johnson is an idiot!
I have deer hunted since I was 13 years old and have gotten a couple dozen or more deer in my lifetime. Each and every one of those successful hunts, I used ONE bullet to bring the deer down. For examples sake, let’s say it is 24 deer, that’s 24 bullets…there are 20 bullets in a single box of the shells I have used. And I typically don’t do a lot of target practice or sighting in, short of every other year, taking 1 or 2 shots at a target to make sure my sights are still accurate. I take very good care of my rifles and they are stored and locked away safely, along with any ammunition I have on hand. So that would be roughly two boxes of shells that have been used in my lifetime of hunting…40 bullets…with clips that never held more than 3 bullets at a time, with one in the chamber…at least 3 shells that went in and out of my clip multiple times per season and then the last time, came out of the rifle, and were put back into my gun safe until the next year’s season.
40 bullets over many decades…and the Colorado murderer had four guns on him, a semi-automatic with a 100 round magazine, the two hand guns probably had clips with about 14 rounds each and a shotgun that probably had 5 rounds in the magazine…all to shoot up a movie theater within an hours time. This guy purchased nearly 7,000 rounds of ammunition! At a bare minimum in my example, that would be 6,000 deer hunting seasons…6,000 years!
So Ron Johnson, you and your NRA, gun lobbyist and gun fanatic buddies, get the award for knowing nothing about guns, and definitely knowing nothing about deer hunting. True hunters have gotten a bad rap over the years. We believe in taking only what we need and use, respecting our weapons, the power and destruction they can inflict, and most importantly, we respect the animals we are hunting. When I was younger, we hunted out of necessity to help feed the family over the coming year. The last several seasons, I had multiple opportunities to get a deer, with more than a dozen within 10 yards of my blind, but I never fired a shot. I really didn’t need the venison and I had more fun being in the woods and enjoying the birds and animals coming in close enough to count eye-lashes!
Magic Marker I have serious doubts that you are a deer hunter or you are a dangerous one. You only shoot your gun at the range once or twice (1 or 2 independent shots) and then you “think” you are qualifies to go hunting? This is shocking and no one should follow your advice.
At a minimum one should sight in their gun and this is done with 3 to 5 shot groupings done at a bare minimum 2 to 3 times. People should know there is many variables that come into play and this is why you shoot a gun many times. This is for consistency.
Would it matter that he purchased 7,000 rounds or a million? He can’t carry them all. Even if he were to carry 1k of 9mm this would be very heavy and he couldn’t carry all of them in a loaded state (not in magazines).
Your whole post is filled with lies and emotive language and I hope readers will be able to gloss over your post and not believe what they read here.
I wasn’t going to respond, but what the hell, you and lalmazan66 called me a liar and dangerous.
So, you are saying that I can’t possibly be an accurate shooter because I don’t spend days on the range and 100s or even 1000s of dollars shooting at targets for “consistency”? You also incorrectly assumed that I go into the woods with a weapon that has never been sighted in. Since you claim to be the “Fact Checker”, although you simply called me a liar without checking any facts, I’ll give you some to think over:
My Dad was in the Navy, right out of high school, and his shooting scores qualified him as a sniper.
My Dad taught me to shoot with the same sniper’s creed to “make each and every shot count”.
I learned to shoot with a Remington ScoreMaster, model 511, bolt action, .22 rifle with open sights that was given to me by my parents for my 10th or 11th birthday. I re-did the bluing and refinished the stock and eventually put a 2x scope on it. I hunted squirrels with it and my brother and I became very successful at it. Of course you understand what it takes to shoot a squirrel in the head, when it is in the tops of the trees? Small target, trees blowing in the wind, a target that actually can move…you know VARIABLES!
I got my first deer at age 14. A spike buck that came running around the base of a knoll. I was using a Savage .30-30, sorry don’t remember the model, bolt action, open sights…one shot…fell dead immediately. This was after two other adult hunters had shot a total of 5 rounds at it and missed completely. This also was the only running deer shot, I have ever taken. I know where my bullet was, the other two guys did not…who was the more dangerous.
I’ve also owned/used other rifles and shotguns including, but not limited to: a Remington.410 and a New England Firearms 20 gauge, both break actions, both single shot shotguns; a Marlin model 336A, lever-action, .30-30 rifle, with tube magazine; a New England Firearms .243 caliber (my son’s), break action, single shot rifle; a Remington 7mm-08 (my daughter’s), bolt action, 4 round clip; a Winchester 12 gauge shotgun with interchangeable full, modified and improved chokes, 5 round tube and 3 round plug for duck hunting; a Tikka M658, .270 rifle, with bolt action and 3 round clip (Finland made rifle, Sako)……I could go on, but you should get the point from all these FACTS.
By the way, my hunting success is nothing compared to my Dad’s. I once watched him shoot 2 does standing together, shot within 15 seconds of each other, at 75 yards…in the heads…when he was in his 60s. And that is TRULY, NO LIE!!!
I realize that neither of you can believe someone can be a successful hunter, a safe hunter and a really great shot, all at the same time. But here’s the keys to my success: NEVER shoot at a running deer, you’re peppering the woods with multiple rounds and remember the 1st rule of hunter safety: know your target and beyond; NEVER shoot beyond 75 to 100 yards, they are not safe or high percentage shots; BE PATIENT, the best, highest percentage and safest shot is the one closest to you…my success is from most of my shots being within 40-50 yards; and last, but certainly not least, don’t think you have to shoot EVERY deer that comes your way, which means ALWAYS consider safety first. I realize that if you really do hunt, that you target practice and shoot at deer, in the 200-300+ yard range, where once in the woods, you have no idea what is beyond that target distance. I also suspect you adhere to the attitude that if “it’s brown, it’s down” mentality, but safety becomes secondary to shooting hundreds of rounds at a target and then taking that same philosophy to the hunt, while “scope-ing” across a field or woods.
But even though you missed my point, you also reinforced it with your comments about NOT being able to carry the sheer weight of that number of rounds. I never even thought about that aspect. So Thank you! I would hope you also agree that an assault rifle with a full 100 round magazine, would not be an optimum carrying weight either. I have enough trouble carrying my bolt action with 4 rounds and a scope, so I use a sling to throw it over my shoulder. So I am happy that we came to the same conclusion that none of the weaponry (except possibly the shotgun) or the huge number of rounds of ammunition are REALLY NOT suitable for hunting….which is where the Ron Johnson quotes began this whole conversation.
I’m not against buying and owning this stuff. I just don’t believe we need it for what you argue is their purpose (hunting). I would like to see more checks in place to keep them out of the hands of the deranged people, like the guy in Colorado. Finding the crazies in the billions of people in the world, is nearly impossible. Checking who is buying the hundreds of thousands of guns and ammunition rounds every year, just isn’t that hard. People are roaming around everywhere, but gun and ammunition purchases are restricted to point-of-sale and therefore can be checked for validity or just plain common sense in the timing, volume and types of weaponry. I know, I know, next you are going to say …”you can’t stop EVERYONE from purchasing these weapons” and you would be right. But if you can stop even 1% of these sales, those 12 people would still be alive and along with the 50 wounded, all of those movie goers would have enjoyed the movie to its conclusion.
I was going to write a churlish reply to all this but I’ll keep it short. Although your not by definition wrong you are far from right and it is hunters like you who define other shooters needs. Let me ask you this, who needs a rifle capable of shooting and killing people at 800 yards?
Nobody because only terrorist snipers want to kill people that far away in secret. No more powerful sniper rifles would be the slogan. You are a divider, it’s that simple.
(800 yards is easily obtained by many basic hunting rifles for the uninformed)
Really…REALLY…that is what you took from what I wrote? You should be ashamed of yourself for forgetting that this is about 12 people dead and 50 wounded in just this one instance. You are a waste of my time!
…And by the way, you are lucky for your anonymity online, otherwise you wouldn’t get away with calling my Dad, a U.S. Navy Vet, a terrorist. That’s un-American and hateful!