High-Capacity Ammo Magazines Should Be Banned, Senator Says

U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg will ask Congress to approve a ban on ammunition magazines of more than 10 rounds. Do you agree with his proposed bill?

In the wake of the mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) announced plans to reintroduce high-capacity magazine ban legislation in the 113th Congress.

Lautenberg’s bill, the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act, would prohibit the manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds. It also would ban ammunition magazines that could be readily converted to accept more than 10 rounds.

“In light of yet another horrific shooting tragedy, it is clearer than ever that there is no place in our communities for deadly high-capacity gun magazines and I will keep working to pass my bill to reinstate the ban on them,” Lautenberg said in a statement. “If we don't pass a high-capacity magazine ban this year, it will be the first bill I introduce when the new session of Congress begins in January.”

New Jersey’s senior senator cited the Newtown shootings—in which the gunman used a high-capacity rifle in his murderous spree, killing 20 children and seven adults—as reason for the reintroduction. But it goes beyond the Dec. 14 shootings to other mass killings in recent years, he added.

“These high-capacity magazines, which were used in Newtown, Aurora, Tucson, Virginia Tech, and so many other tragedies, were designed for one purpose only—to shoot and kill quickly,” Lautenberg said. “We must take immediate action to ban high-capacity gun magazines and assault weapons so that we can prevent the next massacre.”

Lautenberg introduced the same legislation in the current Congress. It stalled after getting referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. A similar House of Representatives bill, sponsored by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), fizzled after getting referred to the House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) also pledged immediate action in the 113th Congress, but her bill would go further in seeking to ban all assault weapons, plus high-capacity ammunition magazines.

Almost immediately after the Dec. 14 shootings in Newtown, public and online debate over gun control laws raged. Some posit the shooting rampage wouldn’t have been as deadly if the Sandy Hook Elementary School staff had firearms. Others decry laws that allow access to such high-powered weapons.

President Barack Obama weighed in when he visited Newtown on Sunday, saying, “No single law—no set of laws can eliminate evil from the world, or prevent every senseless act of violence in our society. But that can’t be an excuse for inaction. Surely, we can do better than this.”

Tell us: Do you support a ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines? Would a ban go too far or not far enough?

M. Justicel December 27, 2012 at 09:13 PM
Again if you don't understand something, ask a question! Name calling is juvenile and typical from certain people!
Jersey December 27, 2012 at 09:15 PM
Yeah, M., I have to say - you cannot equate a knife and an AR-15 in terms of how many people you can take out within a given time period, especially to a relatively untrained kid or crazy person. I'm sure a well-trained Marine could kill 5 people in less than a minute with a knife. I don't think you could say that of most of the perpetraters of these mass shootings. More importantly, give that same Marine an AR-15 with a 100 capacity magazine and he could probably take out 50 in a minute. OK I'm pulling thosenumbers out of my a$$ but you get the point. Out of curiosity, if it were proven that these attacks would be less lethal.... Meaning, on average, fewer people would die, if the shooters had no access to those high-capacity clips, would you favor a ban then? I have to tell you, a lot of hunters and gun enthusiasts out there are saying they don't need 100 (or even 30) rounds to get the job done, whether they're hunting, shooting targets OR defending their homes.
M. Justicel December 27, 2012 at 09:18 PM
Did you ever hear me mention anything about distance? Exactly my point you don't understand what I'm talking about. Of course at great distances an AR is more lethal. Is that what happened in CT, no. By the way, I'm no mall or security cop and I've been in my job for over 20 years.
TCG December 27, 2012 at 09:22 PM
M Justice, I too am sane. Why can't I own a car that goes 200 mph? Or buy beer that is 15% alcohol content? Or use my freedom of speech to yell "fire!" in a crowded movie theater? Why is it only gun owners who should have ultimate purity in a law that stems from an amendment which is utterly mischaracterized as to eliminate the first half of the language contained therein? And if the government can ration the days on which I purchase gasoline, why can't that same government ration your the number of rounds in your magazines? Because Americans are in love with violence. The same gratuitously violent video games and tv shows and movies are seen all over the world. Yet with only a few exceptions, America is the only country where the slaughter of children is ok because there simply cannot be a limit on how many rounds are permitted in a magazine.
Adam December 27, 2012 at 09:29 PM
It seems like a lot of folks buy assault type weapons in order to guard against an oppressive government. Just understand that in Iraq during the 1980's, 1990's and currently, just about everybody had a weapon, including AK47's, and there were 26 Gun Shops open and doing a brisk business in Baghdad. All of these weapons did not prevent an oppressive government under Sadam Houssain, or prevent a dictatorship. No, it takes more than such weapons guard against a possible oppressive government. Assault type weapons and high capacity magazine clips should be banned in the USA-they really serve no purpose.


More »
Note Article
See more »