Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Expect a floor vote soon

Posted in:

Illinois

* Back in January, the Connecticut State Police released this description of the guns used in the Sandy Hook school massacre…

Seized inside the school:

#1. Bushmaster .223 caliber– model XM15-E2S rifle with high capacity 30 round magazine

#2. Glock 10 mm handgun

#3. Sig-Sauer P226 9mm handgun

Seized from suspect’s car in parking lot:

#4. Izhmash Canta-12 12 gauge Shotgun (seized from car in parking lot)

The shooter used the Bushmaster .223 to murder 20 children and six adults inside the school; he used a handgun to take his own life inside the school. No other weapons were used in this crime.

Let’s keep these facts in mind as we consider the Senate bill to ban gun magazines that can hold over ten rounds.

* As I see it, the ban on purchasing those magazines has a real problem with enforcement. Magazines have no serial numbers, so they can’t be easily traced. Without receipts and a very robust investigation, it would be tough to pinpoint when or where a magazine was purchased.

Even so, there’s a good argument to make for limiting the size of these magazines…

Nicole Hockley, told the committee that in her 6-year-old son Dylan’s class, 11 children escaped while the shooter was reloading a high-capacity magazine, and even more lives could have been saved if more reloading had been necessary.

“What happened in Newtown can happen anywhere,” Hockley said. “It can happen in Illinois.”

* More…

“All of those lives were taken in less than four minutes by a single gunman,” Barden said, adding that the shooter “made a conscious decision” that day by bringing multiple 30-round, high-ammunition magazines and leaving the smaller ones at home. “He knew he could kill a lot more people. And he did.”

If the Newtown gunman had been limited to smaller ammunition magazines, he would not have been able to spray 154 bullets in such a short time frame, said Barden,

* From Hockley’s opening remarks…

“As part of Sandy Hook Promise, I think it’s important that you know we’re not just a gun-control group. We’re not gun lobbyists. Sandy Hook Promise actually looks at holistic solutions and common-sense solutions for all the causes of gun-violence. So, we look very closely at school security and school safety, how we strengthen and build communities, support parenting - good parenting, and also mental health legislation.

“And in fact, one of the other parents and members of Sandy Hook Promise was in Hartford today proposing a new mental health bill for Connecticut that she helped co-author. So I just - I kind of want to position that we are not a gun-control group. We are a common-sense solutions group. But here today, in Illinois, the topic of the day and the topic that we’re discussing is Senate Bill 1002 to limit the purchase and sale of high-capacity magazines that have more than 10 bullets.

* Two Republicans supported the bill in committee yesterday…

Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno and Palatine Republican Sen. Matt Murphy voted in favor of the measure.

Murphy said that hearing from the parents [of the slain Newtown children] had an emotional affect, but he is trying to keep a level head on the issue.

“We do need to try to legislate in a way that is reasoned. You don’t want to be devoid of emotion, but you don’t want it to control you either,” he said. “This is not a be all end all solution to these circumstances, but the opportunity that a smaller capacity provides for lives to be saved, while maybe unlikely, I think exists. I think there is a chance that this bill could save lives, and I think it’s worth taking that chance.”

* But there was serious opposition…

Jay Keller, a representative of the Illinois Firearm Manufacturers Association, said there are 65 gun-makers in the state, with 8,500 employees. Some of them will consider leaving if the bill passes, Keller said.

Senate President John Cullerton, a Chicago Democrat, told Keller the manufacturers wouldn’t lose much business because they still could sell such magazines to residents of other states.

Sen. Matt Murphy, R-Palatine, said he understands if gun manufacturers in Illinois feel they’re “under seige,” but added: “I think there’s a chance that this bill could save lives, and I think it’s worth taking that chance.”

And…

Todd Vandermyde, Illinois lobbyist for the National Rifle Association, showed committee members a photo he said depicted Chicago police officers holding semi-automatic AR-15s to guard the home of a slain colleague and said the Illinois governor’s security detail is issued handguns outfitted for magazines of more than 10 rounds.

“If it’s good enough to protect their lives, and it’s good enough for them for the protection of their families, then why is my family worth any less?” Vandermyde asked. “I’m on the road as much as all of you are, away from home, and these are exactly the types of tools that I leave in the hands of my family to protect themselves.”

And…

Keller said another client, the Motion Picture Association of America, would no longer oppose the bill now that Kotowski had amended it to exempt the use of the magazines in filming movies.

That led to a curt exchange between Kotowski and Sen. Dale Righter, a Mattoon Republican. Righter asked if Kotowski believed violent movies contributed to societal violence. Kotowski said there were a number of cultural factors that contributed.

So Righter asked the reason for the movie carve-out, and when Kotowski said it was because movie actors use blanks, Righter, attempting to stress that movie violence looks real, said, “I would hope they’re not using live-round ammunition in movies, senator, and I’m assuming that the actors who fall over are not really dead.”

posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:00 am

Comments

I understand what they want and why. But I also recognize that these magazines have been around since the 60’s and 70’s. These are not new… I have 14 round magazines that are 40 years old…

May it say a life? maybe. we had one of these for a decade (Nationally) and it didnt do much. how about other details in the bill… Like I cannot sell a firearm with the magazines that came with it now? or me handing someone a mag of mine at the range? or the portion of the bill that says a magazine HAS TO BE LOCKED and EMPTY in a container for transport… How does that work with CCW on the way? These are details no one is talking about. Because its moving fast and being driven by lots of emotion.

My problem is what is next? Is it NY style? when 10 rounds is deemed ‘too much’ do we say “Oh you can have a 10 round mag, but its illegal to put 5 or 7 or 8 rounds in it?”

Or as was stated by a proponent of this bill here yesterday, that this is really just symbolic and one step to the laws that they really want?

Comment by RonOglesby Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:15 am
In my perfect world none of you would own guns for any reason except to hunt animals that are legal to hunt and you would only do so in legal hunting seasons. That being said, I think this is a stupid law. Plenty of people already own the magazines this law would ban and plenty more would run out and buy one before the law could take effect. We’re not going to be searching homes and confiscating the ones already out there, so this is actually just a waste of time.

Comment by Chavez-respecting Obamist Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:16 am
I would have to agree with Chavez…and I am really diappointed but not surprised at the level of rheotoric that passes for respectful discussion on the floor of the IL Senate…

Comment by Loop Lady Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:21 am
“disappointed”

Comment by Loop Lady Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:22 am
I think this law is a good first step and Illinois should implement it, but it really only matters if it’s done on a national level (which it should be). We know for a fact that this can help save lives because gunman can be taken down easier when they are reloading (see Arizona).

Is there any actual instance of someone not being able to “protect themselves” by only having 10 bullets? Has this actually ever happened in an instance that was not war or a sting operation?

Comment by Ahoy! Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:23 am
So I guess criminals will be following this law? If a person is hellbent on going on a shooting spree they are not going to care if they break a magazine limit law.

It only takes a couple of seconds to swap a mag out. This will just put more money into the gun manufacturers and NRA’s pockets.

I feel a trip to the gun store coming on. I’ve already got more mags than I can shoot fast without the barrel overheating but if they are going to turn magazines into a commodity, so be it.

Comment by downstater Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:31 am
@ahoy
My comment to that is why do retired cops get to have mags with more than 10 rounds?

There is no logical answer to that. Personally I think a 14 or 15 round magazine (standard) is fine for LEOs or even non-LEOs to have. who cares. But they carry them because you never get in a fight for you life sand say “I wish I had fewer bullets”.

But their logic falls apart by saying only cops rush into dangerous situations and “need” more than 10 rounds. then let RETIRED cops have more than 10 rounds. Just like letting only retired cops conceal carry in Illinois. They are civilians like the rest of us.

Comment by RonOglesby Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:31 am
===So I guess criminals will be following this law?===

Great logic. Let’s just get rid of all criminal laws while we’re at it.

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:32 am
This law is purely doing something to look like you are doing something. Unfortunately this law will do nothing to prevent future Sandy Hook atrocities from occurring.

Comment by why? Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:35 am
I’m not in favor of it and it really won’t make any difference with experienced shooters; they can change a magazine in a few seconds.

But if it’s going to be passed, the bill should recognize the reality that a lot of firearms have standard magazines in the 10 to 15 capacity range. If the objective is to ban large capacities like 30 or 50, setting the capacity at 15 would do so with minimal impact on the average person.

Comment by RNUG Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:36 am
In Will County many years ago State Troopers stopped a biker for a traffic offense not knowing he earlier committed an armed robbery. A gunfight occurred. The troopers who then used 8 shot 9mm Smith & Wesson semi-autos shot the biker more than 15 times and the biker kept standing and shooting back at the police. One trooper ran out of ammo including his spare magazine and the other trooper had only two rounds left when the criminal went down. Luckily there was only one bad guy to deal with. A citizen could of had a similar interaction with that biker, if the biker tried to rob him. A person involved in a shoot out against a determined or drugged up bad guy or guys will never complain of having two much ammunition in his gun. Not having enough ammunition could be fatal. If having more than 10 rounds of ammunition in a firearm only saves the life of one law abiding citizen attacked by criminals, then SB 1002 should not be supported.

Comment by WillCo Pros Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:39 am
Good on Sens. Radogno and Murphy. Along with Sen. Kirk, they give some glimmer of hope that the Republican Party isn’t a wholly owned subsidiary of the NRA.

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:40 am
In a few years the easy availability of 3D printers with capacity to literally “print” a large capacity magaizine will outstrip this law.

Just sayin

Comment by dupage dan Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:50 am
Rich, the cat is already out of the bag. There are literally millions of these 10+ round mags out there. They do not have serial #s or date stamps. This is purely feel good legislation that will do nothing.

If they want to have a prayer of stopping another Newtown they need to put police officers in the schools or allow some teachers to go armed. I say that as a teacher here in the state.

Comment by downstater Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:52 am
===So I guess criminals will be following this law?===

=== ===Great logic. Let’s just get rid of all criminal laws while we’re at it. === ===

Actually, it is logical. When evaluating public policy it merits a look if the law is actually effective and people are following it. You need reactive criminal laws (e.g. murder) in order to prosecute, but preventative laws (e.g. clip size) should be evaluated differently to determine if actually prevents something.

Comment by Just Observing Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:54 am
=== We know for a fact that this can help save lives because gunman can be taken down easier when they are reloading (see Arizona). ===

Just because the stars were alligned in Arizona to allow that scenario… don’t think that will ever be the norm. We shouldn’t pass laws based on a million-to-one scenarios.

Comment by Just Observing Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:57 am
Nothing but silliness and theater. I feel sympathy for the Sandy Hook parents but this will change nothing for them and nothing for the criminals, while adversely affecting only the law abiding. It is poorly written and misguided, emotionally driven feel-good nonsense and should not be passed.

Comment by Gee Whiz Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:57 am
4 minutes is 240 seconds.

153 rounds in that same 4 minutes could be done with 10 or 30 rd magazines.

Comment by John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:00 am
==Actually, it is logical.==

Actually, no it isn’t. It’s a ridiculous argument to say since criminals won’t follow a law then we shouldn’t pass a law. It’s a dumb argument and will remain a dumb argument.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:02 am
I’m not an NRA guy but 97 percent of people killed by guns are killed with magazines holding fewer than 10 rounds. These discussions need to start with what went wrong and what can we do about it, not how can I use this event to push my agenda that had stalled and isn’t necessarily going to prevent this in the future.

Comment by shore Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:04 am
–In a few years the easy availability of 3D printers with capacity to literally “print” a large capacity magaizine will outstrip this law.–

Yet it would still be a violation of the proposed law and the federal Undetectable Firearms Act. But if some want to commit felonies for the chance of a Mold-a-Rama POS blowing up in their faces, cest la vie.

Just sayin.

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:05 am
@Word

Plastic magazines do not violate the undetectable firearms act. If it did all the millions of plastic magpul magazines on the market wouldnt be there.

Comment by RonOglesby Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:08 am
–Just because the stars were alligned in Arizona to allow that scenario… don’t think that will ever be the norm. We shouldn’t pass laws based on a million-to-one scenarios.–

Like the trillion to one scenario where an ordinary citizen would need more than a 10 mag?

Comment by Ahoy! Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:08 am
I find it odd that everywhere this has been tried on a national level it has worked …. And yet there are so many gun fetishists who claim the opposite despite this fact.

And Just Observing, it’s not a million-to-one event. These shootings using such magazines are happening on a regular basis.

–

@Will Co Pres -

For your one biker bank robber there are 20 dead kids from Sandy Hook Elementary. They are joined by several adults — a mom, teachers, a school administrator…

There is also a dead ballerina who just wanted to talk to her Congresswoman because she was interested in civics from school. She is joined by a judge and several adults who were doing nothing other there being in the right place at the right time — at a grocery store to chat with their Congresswoman…

Your “bad guy” scenario seems to be outnumbered by all the innocent Americans who are killed by gun violence.

Pouring more gas on that raging wildfire of gun violence is clearly not the solution.

Comment by G. Willickers Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:11 am
Ron, I stand corrected. There is a proposal to ban plastic magazines as part of the extension of the Undetectable Firearms Act.

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:12 am
@word, yeah. only problem with that is tons of them are synthetic now. Even military mags. cheaper, easier to make, etc.

Comment by RonOglesby Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:14 am
~allow some teachers to go armed~

You want to give guns to UNION MEMBERS?

Comment by Chavez-respecting Obamist Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:15 am
@ Sen. Dale Righter -

They have violent movies in Japan, Australia, Canada, England, etc.

Heck, James Bond is “from” England and Mad Max is “from” Australia.

Why is it that those nations do not have anywhere near the epidemic of gun violence that we have?

Could it be because they have common sense gun regulations?

Why yes. Yes it is.

Now go back to regurgitating failed NRA talking points and complaining about lame straw men.

Comment by G. Willickers Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:16 am
I’m a Teachers Union Member and with the proper training, yes. We are the ones on site and ready to respond fast. The police are minutes away and are there to write an account of the incident after the carnage is over.

Comment by downstater Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:18 am
@G. Will

We also have a gang and drug problem that is disgusting. Looking at gun murders, the vast majority are gang or drug (or both) involved. I mean of that 500 or so in chicago what did the study say? like 80+ were committed by those with prior violent arrests and gang related? I’ll have to find that CPD study for here.

we concentrate poverty here and foster this crap. of the 300 Million guns out there and what 100 million gun owners, the real problem is a tiny percentage of the guns and a tiny% of the population involved in crime.

Comment by RonOglesby Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:19 am
Instead of focusing on the possession of extended magazines by law abiding citizens, focus on the use of extended magazines during the commission of a felony by adding a mandatory additional sentence, similar to the 15-20-Life law. Many have pointed out that magazines are unserialized, and many law abiding citizens own them. Why turn a class of citizens into lawbreakers at the turn of a key? As many people pointed out, there are too many of these magazines in circulation, and even an extreme confiscation action won’t get rid of them.

Comment by Cincinnatus Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:21 am
Ron, thanks for the info.

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:23 am
“I find it odd that everywhere this has been tried on a national level it has worked …. And yet there are so many gun fetishists who claim the opposite despite this fact.”

Like the 1994 national ban? That one was *so* effective.

By the way, ridiculing people who do not share your viewpoints isn’t a particularly effective debating tool and doesn’t reflect well on you. I will say it’s a skill that you have down pat, though.

Comment by Ken_in_Aurora Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:24 am
@ - Cincinnatus - Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:21 am:

I suggested making the use of extended magazines in the commission of a violent crime yesterday and was laughed at. Maybe you’ll have better luck.

Comment by Ken_in_Aurora Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:27 am
@Shore - “I’m not an NRA guy but 97 percent of people killed by guns are killed with magazines holding fewer than 10 rounds.”

So those 3% should be sacrificed because you don’t think they’re worth the effort?

Same goes for the rest of the folks opposed to this. We should sacrifice our fellow Americans because they just aren’t worth it?

Or because doing so might impact your … What?

Your recreational fun?

Your fear and paranoia that you’ll be in a Mad Max-style shoot out with a deranged biker gang full of druggies and bank robbers?

Please.

Comment by G. Willickers Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:27 am
==By the way, ridiculing people who do not share your viewpoints isn’t a particularly effective debating tool ==

Yeah, because the gun lobby never does that. I’m not condoning any of it. And you are right that it isn’t effective. But perhaps you’ve missed the kooky press releases coming from the ISRA.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:28 am
@G Will

I dont appose this for my ‘recreation’.

Comment by RonOglesby Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:29 am
oppose… sorry typing on a bumpy plane.

Comment by RonOglesby Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:29 am
Would you care to cite some stats to support your claim of an “epidemic of gun violence”? I ask as such a statement runs counter to the recent US Justice Department study showing that gun violence in the US has fallen drastically in the last two decades. Murders with guns are down almost 40 percent and other crimes committed with guns were down over 70 percent. The report also stated that around 70 percent of murders were committed with a firearm. However, the vast majority of those murders (70-80 percent) involved the use of a handgun.

Comment by Slick Willy Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:30 am
==typing on a bumpy plane==

You’re not flying it are you? No typing and flying.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:30 am
Something for the “raging wildfire” of gun violence would be nice too.

Comment by Slick Willy Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:32 am
@Demo

No, flying your own costs cash… and no one wants me flying. Southwest flight, $250 round trip and they bring me coffee!

Comment by RonOglesby Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:34 am
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry that we appear to be looking and working toward a headline that says,”Only 9 Children Slain in Latest School Shooting, New Magazine Limit Law Proclaimed a ‘Success’ “

Comment by steve schnorf Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:44 am
We live in an era of absolutely no privacy. The government monitors our calls, emails, and texts. They deny people their Constitutional rights to participate in the political process through intimidation and force of IRS audit. If you oppose the ruling class, they will even ask you to provide them with the content of your prayers.

So, in that spirit, let’s put some real teeth in this law. I say we add an amendment that orders people to turn high capacity mags over within 90 days. If they don’t, I say call in the gestapo and take the magazines by force. Activate the guard, start in Cairo and work up to Chicago. Where there’s a will, there’s a way right?

I would think that a state controlled by leftist, liberal, big government Democrats from Chicago would have no problem endorsing that kind of intrusion. Don’t just use the families of such a tragedy as political props. If you really think that limiting high capacity mags will stop mass murder, then put your heart into it guys.

Comment by So. ILL Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:50 am
@cincinnatus

This law does not focus on possession as possession of extended magazines will not be unlawful. This law only bans the sale, transfer or delivery of said magazines. Also, this bill DOES provide for extended sentences when a large magazine is used in the commission of a crime. Read the bill folks!

Comment by 332bill Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:52 am
–Don’t just use the families of such a tragedy as political props.–

Where did that vulgar talking point originate? It’s repeated constantly by The Usual Suspects.

By that logic, I guess Mary Shepard should just keep quiet and stay out of the public arena as well.

Guess what came before the 2nd Amendment? The First. It’s unconscionable to belittle those whose lives have been directly impacted in connection with the gun debate — whether its the Newtown folks or Mary Shepard.

They deserve to be heard and they deserve respect.

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:59 am
Assault Weapon vs Sporting Rifle

30 round cli[p vs 10 round clip demo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8C-CLsMRcA0

Comment by anon Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 12:08 pm
How did this insane killer gain posession of an FOID card, gun, ammunition, and then this horrible high capacity mag? Seems they should have been denied way before they got to the offending mag.

Comment by A Citizen Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 12:10 pm
Magazines are awfully simple to make. Some metal, and some springs are needed. The technology is basically 100-150 years old.

Comment by BobInPeoria Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 12:16 pm
So a crazy person planning the details of a mass murder can’t plan for a trip out of state to get 30 round magazines? It seems most recent mass murderers have not acted without planning many details so this will just add another one to their list.

Comment by Nuance Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 12:17 pm
Todd’s argument for an AR-15 is ridiculous. Law enforcement is different, so is the military.

Comment by Amalia Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 12:25 pm
Amalia, what is it about an AR-15 that makes it unsuitable for non-police and non-military use? It’s a serious question.

Comment by Ken_in_Aurora Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 12:29 pm
@ Ron - I agree with attempting to resolve underpinning cultural issues of poverty, gangs, etc.

I’ll be happy to join you in calling on the Tea Partiers in Congress to stop slashing the social safety net.

(I find it odd that billionaire conservative Ken Griffin said yesterday we can’t afford to do better.)

That said, Adam Lanza, Jared Lochner, Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, James Holmes, etc were solidly middle class.

It was the ease of access that helped them commit their murders using guns.

–

@ Cincy -

It does not turn current owners into law-breakers overnight.

Read the bill. It grandfathers them in.

Plus, anyone who currently has one is still able to sell it out of state.

Comment by G. Willickers Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 12:30 pm
@Amalia
My last post before landing… wont be able to respond.
BUT

sorry Law enforcement is not the military. we have MILITARIZED law enforcement in the last 20 years but a standard cop does not need to law down suppressive fire, use fire and maneuver tactics, use HE ordinance, etc. Their job is not to close with and destroy an enemy. Their job is to enforce laws. Actually, the vast majority have very little training in weapons and re-qual minimally.

As far as what an AR is good for… if a person has never shot them, used them, and know little about how they operate, can compare them to “hunting rifles” or other rifles and see the operation is the same… how can that person say we dont need them? Maybe that individual doesnt see a use for it. just like I dont see a use for a private planes… but I dont ban them based on cosmetics or even function when it matches other weapons not banned.

Comment by RonOglesby Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 12:33 pm
- 332bill - Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 11:52 am:

Do you have a link to the text? SB1002, right?

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=1002&GAID=12&DocTypeID=SB&LegId=70706&SessionID=85&GA=98

Comment by Cincinnatus Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 12:36 pm
My bad. Got it.

Comment by Cincinnatus Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 12:38 pm
What a diversion it all is. The laws we have now are not being enforced and yet the common mindset is that if we just pass another law everything will be fixed becuase the criminal will abide by the law.

Do we enforce our immigration laws? Did we enforce our banking regulation laws and bring the bankers to justice which was a prime reason Obama was elected to office?

Was the DOJ properly held responsible for running guns to Mexico drug cartels? Are the SEC, DHS, CIA, FBI, IRS, held accountable for their actions.

Everywhere you look you see corruption and cronyism. You can argue that the previous gun ban in Chicago did not work because guns were easily availble to be brought across state borders. However even if there was a universal ban across all the states what good would it do if the Mexico border where the drugs and guns easliy travel is left wide open? There’s no will to enforce the law to that regard. Why it would impact the number of illegal immigrantes that the US could exploit.

This entire magazine ban and “assalt-like” weapons ban dog and pony show is a waste of tax payer money. The debate is used as a tool for political fund raising and that’s about it. It has no other meaningful value

Comment by anon Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 12:42 pm
==I suggested making the use of extended magazines in the commission of a violent crime yesterday and was laughed at. Maybe you’ll have better luck.==

My stance is if we already have a 15-20-Life law then we should use that or make the penalties more harsh for the use of any firearm in commission of a crime. Adding a magazine capacity limit is kinda like saying if you drive a sports car the crime of speeding 10MPH over the posted limit is greater than if you are driving a Mini-Van the same speed over the posted limit. It just doesn’t make any sense.

Comment by Kevin Highland Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 12:43 pm
Seek first to understand, then to be understood.

I think Rich had a post yesterday about someone who was absolutely against something; but needed to attend the meeting to find out what it was.

I would encourage those who are gun control advocates to actually take the time to learn the facts about the effectiveness of gun control, understand how firearms work, the impact of the laws for which you advocate, spend some time at a range shooting a firearm, and spend some time talking (not arguing) with gun rights supporters to understand their perspective.

Comment by Logic not emotion Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 12:52 pm
Logic, gee whiz, why don’t you just tell folks what to think?

Clearly, you think people who disagree with you arrive at their positions dishonestly, through ignorance or some misfirings of the synapses.

I guess that’s only logical.

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:02 pm
“Great logic. Let’s just get rid of all criminal laws while we’re at it.” Conversely, let’s make more laws with higher sentences to fill the prisons that are closed. While we’re at it let’s minimize tornado speeds and save lives. Now we’re both silly.

Comment by Anon. Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:03 pm
Could somebody give me an example of when a high capacity magazine saved the live of a civilian?

I don’t see how restricting these violates anyone’s 2nd Amendment rights.

More guns in schools is definitely not the answer, unless carried by trained law enforcement.

Comment by Wensicia Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:04 pm
I agree with schnorf…our country is going to hell in a handbasket and we’re counting clips…

Comment by Loop Lady Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:05 pm
If they took the Sandy Hook shooter out with a US drone attack and ended up taking 20~30 kids and/or innocent people with him — that would be okay becuase it’s just collateral damage. I mean that’s what the USA does overseas when it’s not our kids.

Heck we even do the double taps that intentionally take out the first responders in foriegn countries.

So just use more drones..

/sarcasm

Comment by anon Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:09 pm
Sorry, “life”.

Comment by Wensicia Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:10 pm
@ Anon -

Yes, criminals will still - by definition - be wiling to break the law.

In Australia, they have found that overall crime has dropped 10 years after their more comprehensive, more sensible regulations went into effect.

They recently hit a record low number of murders. Not just less murders with guns but overall murder as well.

But you and your comrades refuse to acknowledge this is what happens when you remove the tools that make murdering people easier.

Comment by G. Willickers Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:12 pm
There is NO valid argument for banning high-capacity magazines, since there is NO proof that banning them in the 1994 anti-gun bill prevented a single shooting. Also, because they are in common use for sport and target shooting, banning them will simply cause another court challenge as an unlawful infringement on the Constitutional RIGHT to keep and bear arms. It is time blame is placed on the criminals and psychotics–NOT inanimate objects having no will of their own. We do not have to meet a “need” to exercise a RIGHT; the 7th Circuit has already made that abundantly clear.

Comment by CrookCounty60827 Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:15 pm
>>>> Could somebody give me an example of when a high capacity magazine saved the live of a civilian?

The Lake of Egypt Massacre of 2012.

Comment by John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:15 pm
@ Wensecia - “More guns in schools is definitely not the answer, unless carried by trained law enforcement.”

Armed, well trained security guard at Columbine HS got in a shoot out with the gunners. He couldn’t take them out.

And, very recently, two retired cops were visiting schools and accidentally discharged their weapons - one in the school, the other a bus. Luckily no students were accidentally shot which is remarkable given the sheer numbers of kids present.

Comment by G. Willickers Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:17 pm
@ Crook -

Your fun on a shooting range is not a valid reason for making it so easy to kill 20 young children.

Comment by G. Willickers Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:23 pm
@ John Jacob -

Got a link?

The Manchester, IL (Scott County) shooter Rick Smith used a shotgun and had a hunting rifle. He killed 5.

Lake of Egypt isn’t anywhere near Scott County though. And the cops caught

Comment by G. Willickers Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:33 pm
==unlawful infringement on the Constitutional RIGHT to keep and bear arms==

Perhaps some of you can explain how limiting how many bullets your gun can have is an infringement on your constitutional rights. I think the law is silly but I don’t see how it’s unconstitutional.

==the 7th Circuit has already made that abundantly clear==

They also made abundantly clear that limitations were acceptable.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:34 pm
G. Willickers - Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:17 pm:

Armed, well trained security guard at Columbine HS got in a shoot out with the gunners. He couldn’t take them out.

————

Actually, the security guard was of school grounds on his lunch break when the shooters arrived at the HS. After hearing the call on his radio, he returned to the school where he engaged one of the shooters from the parking lot while helping evacuate students. A motorcycle police officer who was involved with a traffic stop nearby also heard the call and responded to the school. He also engaged the shooters and evacuated students.

The result of the two armed responders was that Klebold and Harris had to change their plan of attack and entry point into the school.

So yes, the armed guard and armed police officers saved many student lives that day.

Comment by Smittyp83 Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:42 pm
G,

Some would think that tracking owners and serial numbers of weapons were not all that “sensible.”

Comment by Cincinnatus Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 1:56 pm
==Some would think that tracking owners and serial numbers of weapons were not all that “sensible.” ==

Only if your paranoid.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:04 pm
Ron Oglesby
Their job is not to close with and destroy an enemy. Their job is to enforce laws. Actually, the vast majority have very little training in weapons and re-qual minimally.

Actually most law enforcement in the US is trained in responding to active shooters since Columbine to close with the shooter and stop the attack. Before Columbine LE would contain and try to negotiate. Mass shootings changed that tactic. Now the goal is to stop the attack as quickly as possible to end the killing. That is how police responded in Sandy Hook, officers arrived and immediately entered the school. I have no political agenda, just wanted to share a fact.

Comment by Thin Blue Line Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:06 pm
@Ken and Ron, my point is that Todd is not equal to a cop or a soldier.

Comment by Amalia Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:11 pm
Will this Bill also require that break-in artists work alone, to ensure that a 10 round clip is enough for defending one’s home?

Comment by titan Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:15 pm
==to ensure that a 10 round clip is enough for defending one’s home==

I don’t buy that argument. Look, I don’t favor the limitations being sought. But how many rounds do you need exactly to “defend one’s home?” Are people having gun fights in their homes that require them to have 30 bullets locked and loaded at all times?

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:22 pm
We had a magazine ban for 10 yrs in this country. with the 10 rnd limit Kotowski wants. It expired in 2004 Logic would say that if these Evil things came on the market again than Crime rates must be skyrocketing Right?? Yet i looked up the FBI data and the rate has declined from 5.5 per 100 thousand (2004) to 4.7 per 100 thousand (2011). SO how is it these magazines are fueling our crime. For that matter there are more firearms in the U.S. than at any time in our history. Yet in most of the country the streets aren’t running with blood. In fact overall violent crime as described by the FBI is down from 758 in 1992 to 386 in 2011. More women are owning firearms and carrying firearms maybe that is why rape is down from 43(1992) to 27 (2011).

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-1

This bill is nothing more than busy work. It makes it look like Kotowski is doing something to help when what he is doing is unlikely to help anyone. However he can go home to his constituents and say he got a win. Kotowski lives close to the most violent area of the state. Chicago and it’s metropolitan areas had 609 murders and non negligent homicides. The State of IL had only 721 of the same. 84.5% of all murders in the state happened in his backyard. That is a lot of pressure to “do” something. To follow his logic maybe we should ban cities of over 250k.

(http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/murder tables (5 and 6))

Comment by Mason born Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:28 pm
Amalia

–Ken and Ron, my point is that Todd is not equal to a cop or a soldier.–

So Todd isn’t a cop or soldier but doesn’t he have the same right to protect himself as a cop or soldier?? Or is his life worth less?

Comment by Mason born Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:30 pm
@Demoralized - my 4′11″ mother-in-law (back in her days as a single mom to two teenage daughters) had the enlightening experience of confronting two break-in artists in her home in the middle of the night. She was armed and they fled when she loudly announced that she had a gun. But she didn’t know how well she’d have been able to shoot had they not fled. Would 10 rounds have been enough if they had attacked?

Comment by titan Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:33 pm
===doesn’t he have the same right to protect himself as a cop or soldier?===

So, he gets to buy a tank?

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:36 pm
==Would 10 rounds have been enough if they had attacked? ==

I don’t know. I was asking the question. For me it probably wouldn’t be, but then again I would probably do just as well throwing an unloaded gun at them vs. trying to shoot them. In all seriousness, though, I honestly don’t get the argument you are making. That doesn’t mean I think you are wrong. I don’t know.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:38 pm
From what I have read reagarding all the recent mass shootings, it appears that the perps spent a lot of time planning the shootings and aquiring the equipment / material to perform the acts. With hundreds of thousands of weapons on the street now, along with thousands (millions) of existing magazines, does anyone really think that a law will prevent anyone that is determined to perform a violent event such as a mass shooting from aquiring the means to do so, either legally or illegally. This will work about as well as our laws against drug use, or drinking and driving. It feels good, but the reality is that it will not prevent anything from happening, and it may keep someone from actually protecting themselves.

Comment by ParisIllini Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:52 pm
==I would encourage gun control advocates to take the time to learn the facts, etc, etc==

@Logic: I think that’s a reasonable expectation for all sides of many political arguments.

Having met all your listed learning requirements, and also having grown up with guns and experienced military combat — I do oppose 30 round magazines as excessive and unjustified for civilian use.

I do favor the limit at 15, just to acknowledge the realities of what’s widely used and owned for handguns right now.

Comment by walkinfool Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:54 pm
Rich

I personally would have left soldiers and Marines out of the comment but Amalia had the soldier part in. If you read Tod’s comment he never said soldier. An Ar-15 isn’t the same as the M16 and M4 i carried by a long stretch. Just FYI a tank isn’t a personal weapon. The rifles, Pistols, or submachine guns of the crews are personal defense weapons. The tank is a seperate Weapon System. As an aside i think you can own a tank it just has to have the MG’s and Cannon rendered inoperable.

Comment by Mason born Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:54 pm
“@Ken and Ron, my point is that Todd is not equal to a cop or a soldier.”

That’s kind of insulting, that he’s somehow inferior to police or military. But seriously - what is it about AR-15s that bothers you so much?

Comment by Ken_in_Aurora Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:55 pm
@ Rich -

And nukes. Don’t forget Todd will need nukes in case Iran invades his house at 3am.

He needs the 30 rounds in his magazine in case a similarly armed gang of drug-deranged break in artists arrive at 2am.

It’s not clear why all these ne’er-do-wells are targeting Todd (and Titan and Cincy and Ron and RetiredArmyMP….).

Must be the doubloons hidden under their mattresses and the fracking rights on their land.

Comment by G. Willickers Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:55 pm
@ G. Willickers
I haven’t (yet - thank God) been targeted by miscreants. And in my mother-in-law’s case, I suspect an attractive young widow with a couple pretty teenage daughters might have been the lure there

Comment by titan Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 3:10 pm
@ “- Ken_in_Aurora - Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 2:55 pm:

“@Ken and Ron, my point is that Todd is not equal to a cop or a soldier.”

That’s kind of insulting, that he’s somehow inferior to police or military. But seriously - what is it about AR-15s that bothers you so much?”

The comment was very clearly not implying that any one person’s life is less valuable than another’s.

You, and your comrades, are the ones actively defending hard, long inaminate objects that spew hot projectiles out of their tips …. And would rather have that than have 20 schoolchildren learning about 1+1 in a classroom.

When was the last time Todd or Ron or you volunteered to run headlong into an active crime scene or war zone?

No, civilians are not equivalent to cops or soldiers.

We don’t volunteer to our lives at risk every day.

As for AR-15s….

Sure, they’re fun to shoot and they help take down a grizzly when necessary.

But they also make it really easy to kill a whole bunch of people very quickly and very accurately.

Comment by G. Willickers Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 3:15 pm
@G. Willickers take a look at the image in the link below and if you can, explain what besides appearance makes this different than an AR-15?

http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14/images/index.jpg

Comment by Kevin Highland Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 3:33 pm
I hit send prematurely

@G. Willickers take a look at the image in the link below and if you can, explain what besides appearance makes this different than an AR-15?

http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14/images/index.jpg

With the exception that some of the rifles in that image have plastic stocks & foregrips they are all identical rifles. Are the non-wood stock rifles more dangerous than the one with the wooden stock?

Comment by Kevin Highland Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 3:37 pm
Mr/Ms Willickers I believe Todd served his country in the military, as to running head long into an active crime scene, I believe he’s more calculated than that….and one point..I truly believe (know) he loves his family as much as those devistated families at any shooting scene, lets not forget its not about the “soul” its about the constitution and interpretation…tic toc

Comment by railrat Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 3:43 pm
An AR-15 and 30 round magazine versus grizzly. I’ll put my money on the grizzly.

Comment by RSW Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 3:48 pm
>>>>> An AR-15 and 30 round magazine versus grizzly. I’ll put my money on the grizzly.

How does it go?
“Make sure that you remove all the sharp edges on the AR-15 and the magazines”

Comment by John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 3:54 pm
JJJS

I think the grizzlys prefer a little Salt and Pepper as well. Maybe some steak sauce on the buttstock.

Comment by Mason born Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 4:07 pm
==its about the constitution and interpretation==

And I’ve still not heard an argument that shows that limiting the number of bullets you can have in your gun violates the Constitution.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 4:07 pm
Word: On some issues, otherwise perfectly logical people advocate a position which is not supported by the evidence and refuse to acknowledge otherwise. Firearms is one.

The following two links are from sources most would expect to favor gun control. Have you reviewed them?

• The following link is to the Community Guide. Their research is reportedly evidence based. http://www.thecommunityguide.org/violence/firearms/index.html As you may read, their conclusion is that there is “Insufficient Evidence” that any of the firearms legislation was effective at reducing violence.
• The following link is from the CDC. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm As you may read, their conclusion was: “In summary, the Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence.”

Comment by Logic not emotion Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 4:37 pm
Perhaps the gun control advocates should take a look at the FBI statistics concerning murder between Chicago, population 2.7 million and Houston, TX, around the same size at 2.1 million. Chicago had 254 for 2012, while Houston with its very unrestrictive gun laws only had 105. Robberies were also about half in Houston.

I would love to see Chicago’s violent crime stats, but they don’t comply with the standard so the FBI won’t publish them. One wonders if they don’t comply with the standard because they don’t want the numbers to be published.

Comment by Jack Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 4:40 pm
apparently, every home deserves not only an AR15, but a bazooka, a tank, a nuke silo and, of course, several fighter jets. what the blurg people?!?

Comment by Amalia Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 4:57 pm
@railrat - It’s Mr. but I’ve been called worse than Mrs.

Heck, one of your comrades yesterday thought I was Mike Murray.

That’s way worse.

And you keep watching that clock. At 12:00 A.M. on June 10th just watch a massive, unwieldy hodge podge of gun restrictions and municipality-by-municipality bans go into effect.

Isn’t that hodge podge patchwork exactly what the gun lobbyists and their lay-people supporters claim to be against?

It’s exactly what will happen if the legislature doesn’t pass a bill that the Governor is willing to sign.

–

@Jack - Compare population density, poverty rates, drug-related gang activity, ease of straw purchasing, etc. and you’ll get a better picture of the differences between the two cities.

For one thing, Houston is very spread out whereas Chicago is relatively dense and compact. Makes it harder to get to a targeted destination in Houston for one thing.

–

@Logic - The NRA pays big bucks to get politicians and yes-men scholars into high places.

It’s a good investment strategy on the part of the gun manufacturers… launder millions of dollars in order to hamstring CDC studies and get “non-partisan” echo chambers to publish information they know will help advance your cause (that cause being profits).

The gun manufacturers invest relatively small change compared to the profits they reap in exchange.

Comment by G. Willickers Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 5:06 pm
Willickers I’ll let the “comrade” reference go as a term vs. an insult, I always view “comrades” as leanings to the left, its your mirror you judge. A “hodge podge of gun restrictions” maybe so just like pension reform maybe we are all at the point where we should just let the courts pass judgement….time to chill be safe everyone

Comment by railrat Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 5:17 pm
So G… would statistics would you use to support your argument, or are you just making stuff up?

Comment by Jack Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 5:17 pm
@ G Willikers
=Heck, one of your comrades yesterday thought I was Mike Murray.=

Lol. Ya old dog you. I am the one who should have been insulted…

Surprised you still have energy to comment on this post. Trying to have a rational conversation with some of these extreme pro gun people will cost you a whole bunch of energy and time, and get you know where. I’m still recovering from yesterday…

Comment by Mike Murray Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 5:19 pm
And how would a magazine limit fix “population density, poverty rates, drug-related gang activity, ease of straw purchasing, etc”

Comment by Jack Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 5:20 pm
Btw, just to clarify for the public at large, I say “extreme” pro gun because I am pro gun.

I own 5 different weapons (including a handgun) and I hunt pheasant in IL and deer in MI. I support the 2nd amendment.

You can be pro gun and still be in favor of common sense guns laws that will reduce crime and save lives. A lot of my gun buddies are rational about the issue actually (although a few fall in the crazy category).

There is a balance between the 2nd amendment and public safety that protects our freedoms as well as people’s lives.. Only the EXTREME pro gun people fail to see that.

Comment by Mike Murray Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 5:33 pm
Mike, you keep repeating that you are in favor of “common sense gun laws” and that anyone who disagrees is “crazy”. Repeating it over and over doesn’t make it correct or factual - from what I’ve seen you post here, your views are rather extreme.

Comment by Ken_in_Aurora Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 5:43 pm
I completely support and appreciate Mike Murray’s comment at 5:19 PM.

Comment by Wensicia Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 6:10 pm
OK, Murray, what would your “crazy gun buddies” have to do to get in your good graces? Please be specific.

Comment by Mr. Wonderful Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 6:28 pm
Mr Murray; I’m glad I have an “EXTREME pro gun person” he’s driving to his home he defended, University of Saigon ‘69-’71 I won’t say “bite me” but you get the jest!!

Comment by wifeofrailrat Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 6:38 pm
@G. Willikers, et al

—
when was the last time Todd or Ron volunteered….
—

1989, panama,
1990/91 shield/storm
for me at least

Regardless, doesnt matter. AR 15 is a weapon (gun) in common use. It is neither dangerous nor unusual as compared to any other arm. Actually you could argue that handguns or hunting rifles are more dangerous.

And to the Thin Blue Line, yes since columbine the police have been trained differently to engage active shooters. BECAUSE of the mistakes at columbine of waiting and securing the area vs moving in and looking for the shooter…

But that is not what I was arguing. I was arguing that the average police officer RARELY trains with their weapons, much less long guns. You didnt even mention that. I take numerous classes to keep up to date and to keep my skills solid. My shooting buddy (a FLETC instructor for 5+ years) validated the often mentioned point that close to 90% of officers rarely train w/ their handgun and instead run one practice session before their annual or semi-annual requal. I can get the DOJ study name if you want…

Comment by RonOglesby Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 6:48 pm
And if you want to get 10 cops to shoot competition with me (Long gun or handgun) I will do it. Most wont.
Sorry but assuming the second you dont have a badge or a stripe you are no longer trained and proficient is some fallacy of those that prefer others be disarmed and that only gov employees be armed.

Comment by RonOglesby Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 6:51 pm
GW: I could provides quotes from cdc staff which would make most people to conclude that such studies would be heavily biased.

Comment by logic not emotion Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 7:00 pm
As follow up to Oglesby, I’m not sure why cops are considered experts on firearms by default. Heck they certainly spend more time per shift pushing pencils but that doesn’t qualify cops as literary critics.

And something that is rarely mentioned when talking about the crimes at Newtown - tactics. The criminal went in and killed all the adults first. That left him with easy prey. He didn’t need the AR-15. Given the amount of time he had before the cops arrived, h could have been just as effective with the Glock and/or the Sig. The AR-15’s effectiveness in this crime is way overrated.

Comment by Mr. Wonderful Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 7:04 pm
@ Ken
My views are extreme? Lol. If you say so dude. what in particular have I posted thats extreme? And I repeat it because I don’t want people to think I am crazy or stupid.

I am done arguing with you people. Gun violence is a complex issue and any solution is even more complex. Any reform needs to address social aspects of gun violence as well as the hardware problem. Tons of facts were posted to show that hardware is part of the problem. But you extreme gun nuts refuse to admit reality

Comment by Mike Murray Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 7:10 pm
Actually, “gun violence” isn’t a complex issue. Gun violence happens because criminals decide that social conventions be damned, they’re going to injure or kill someone.

Again, if we look at the CPD figures, the vast majority of murder victims and perpetrators have previous convictions. The answer is simple, either rehabilitate them or keep them locked up for good.

Yes, I know - if they didn’t have guns they wouldn’t be able to commit gun crimes. That statement of the obvious notwithstanding, do we really want to live in a society with folks walking around saying to themselves, “…if I only had a gun I’d kill that guy over there.”

Comment by Mr. Wonderful Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 7:23 pm
@ mr. Wonderful

=OK, Murray, what would your “crazy gun buddies” have to do to get in your good graces? Please be specific.=

First, they are my buddies, do they are always in my good graces. And second, I have no ill will or anger toward any extreme pro gun nuts.

All I want is for all parties to admit that 1.) we have a problem with gun violence in the US and 2.) that the hardware (the wide spread availability of weapons with significant killing power) is PART of the problem.

We can’t start creating policy to fix a problem until we all agree on what the problem is.

In short, I want my extreme gun buddies to admit the facts in front of them, but they often refuse to do so. But ce la vie. It’s a free country

Comment by Mike Murray Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 7:28 pm
Cpd stats are irrelevant. Local gun regulation does not work. We need a federal system

Comment by Mike Murray Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 7:30 pm
Sens. Radogno and Murphy are disciplined, well-reasoned Legislators. If they have come around to support it, cmon’ Legislature, let’s get this thing done already. This is not about taking away people’s guns, but about protecting our children, and, indeed, all of us…!

Comment by Just The Way It Is One Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 7:50 pm
OK, Murray. I’m sure you thought about this a bit, so please give us an idea of what sort of federal policies might be effective in stemming this so-called “gun violence.”

Comment by Mr. Wonderful Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 8:08 pm
@G — 1983 - 2002. Last count was 18 years 10 months and 2 days if memory serves me correct

Deployed to Central America and called up for desert storm but stayed state side for it and was part of jtf 6 on the border in Yuma seen a lot of other places too

Comment by Todd Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 8:10 pm
–Perhaps the gun control advocates should take a look at the FBI statistics concerning murder between Chicago, population 2.7 million and Houston, TX, around the same size at 2.1 million. Chicago had 254 for 2012, while Houston with its very unrestrictive gun laws only had 105.–

Those numbers aren’t right, but never mind. Houston had fewer murders than Chicago.

New York, with three times the population, had fewer murders than Chicago.

Jack, by your logic, perhaps everyone should adopt New York’s gun laws, don’t you think?

Here’s a list with homicide rates for major U.S. cities. Chicago is middle of the pack. Some cities with c-c laws are higher. Some are lower.

I’m starting to think this whole issue is a little more difficult than bumper-sticker slogans and revisionist, fabricated Constitutional history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_cities_by_crime_rate

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 8:19 pm
As to assault weapons (or any other type of long gun) am I correct in my recollection that virtually all (90% +) of gun homicides in this country are committed with handguns?

Comment by steve schnorf Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:09 pm
Maybe the solution to gun crimes is to bring back public executions? That would certainly deter a person from using a gun to commit a crime. Our stabbing and blunt object murder rate would certainly go up. They are already higher than murder by rifle.

Comment by downstater Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:11 pm
I really don’t have a horse in the CC/gun control race, but I do get unhappy when elected officials propose, as solutions to problems, actions that advance their own agendas but don’t really do much, if anything, about the problems.

I’ve read that the Sandy Hook shooter fired 153 rounds. If so, he probably changed magazines 5 times. With 10 round magazines and 5 changes he would have fired up to 60 times (in a shorter period of time which might have allowed time for a 6th magazine changes). This is the solution we are pursuing? Not a solution at all, but a good “yes” vote for some and a good “no” vote for others. What a shame.

Comment by steve schnorf Tuesday, May 21, 13 @ 10:19 pm
@ Steve -

So the other 10% should be sacrificed under some bizarre attitude of “they’re not worth it” because you think 90% of homicides are committed with handguns?

Odd argument you’re making.

We Americans don’t do things because they’re easy. We do them because they’re difficult.

As for Adam Lanza, he specifically left the smaller magazines at home.

Larger capacity magazines made it easier for him to shoot children.

Period.

We should be making it more difficult — whether using a handgun or a long gun — for would-be murderers to kill our fellow Americans.

If other civilized nations like England, Canada and Australia why is it suddenly too difficult to accomplish here? Each of them speak the same language, have a proud heritage of recreational hunting and target shooting, share basically the same traditions and watch the same violent entertainment as us.

Comment by G. Willickers Wednesday, May 22, 13 @ 2:37 am
@ Ron and Todd -

I honor your service, but Gen. Noriega and Saddam Hussein have never invaded Illinois — let alone sent troops to burst into your bedroom at 3am in a full scale battle.

Weapons of war belong on the battlefield killing enemies, not elementary school rooms killing children.

That was my point and it was abundantly clear for those willing to listen to it.

Unlike you, Todd, I don’t get paid to make my points so perhaps that’s why you ignored my point.

Comment by G. Willickers Wednesday, May 22, 13 @ 2:45 am
@Mr. Wonderful

I certainly do not have all the answers, and we will never end gun violence, but we can reduce gun violence through gun regulation on a federal level. What that policy would look like is totally dependent upon the legislative process and compromise. That said, if I was to submit a bill, it would have the following in it:

All assault weapons manufactured, imported to, and or sold in the U.S. would be registered with a singular federal agency. Any current assault weapons in circulation must also be registered.

It is a felony to have an unregistered assault weapon.

You need a special license to sell assault weapons.

All individuals who wish to own assault weapons must have a FOID (Firearm Owner Identification) card. To get a void card you have to go through a thorough background check and pass a safety certification class.

Felons and mentally unfit people forfeit right to own a weapon.

Waiting period of some kind (3 to 5 day)

no magazine larger than 10 to 20 rounds. 15 to compromise

concealed carry legal in all states if is you pass special advanced certification and accuracy classes. (I am open to making certain areas, like schools, bars, etc off limits to concealed carry.)

Shotguns and Bolt action Rifles have standard 18.5 inch barrel law, no more than 5 shells, existing guns of this type do not need to be registered with federal agency, but any new purchase should be.

No gun shows with the exception of shotguns and hunting rifles, and only people with FOID cards can attend these guns shows. Any registered weapon (a new shotgun or rifle, that was registered and then later sold at a gun show would have to update ownership with federal agency

Comment by Mike Murray Wednesday, May 22, 13 @ 4:04 am
Ok Murray. I have to hand it to you, you certainly have an active imagination when it comes to ways to discourage people from exercising their rights. None of what you propose would discourage violent criminals from acting violently.

Comment by Mr. Wonderful Wednesday, May 22, 13 @ 5:36 am
@mr wonderful
=None of what you propose would discourage violent criminals from acting violently.=

No, you are right, it wouldn’t, but I never said it would. My argument is that gun regulation makes it harder for violent criminals to use a firearm when they decide to act violently. The stats (Australia, UK, Canada) show that gun regulation reduces violent gun crime as well as reduces the murder rate, and this fact follows logic when you think about it…

Violent criminals can be more violent with a gun then they can without a gun. Have you ever heard of someone going on a stabbing spree and killing a whole bunch of people with a knife? I sure haven’t.

Comment by Mike Murray Wednesday, May 22, 13 @ 10:41 am
“Shotguns and Bolt action Rifles have standard 18.5 inch barrel law, no more than 5 shells, existing guns of this type do not need to be registered with federal agency, but any new purchase should be.”

This would make a very large percentage of existing rifles and shotguns illegal. If you were really a gun owner, you would know federal law calls for 16″ barrels on rifles and 18″ barrels on shotguns.

I am honestly beginning to believe you are running a false flag operation here pretending to be a gun owner and enthusiast.

Comment by Ken_in_Aurora Wednesday, May 22, 13 @ 11:35 am
@Rich,

Why couldn’t Todd buy a tank?

http://armyjeeps.net/armor1.htm

Comment by Confused Wednesday, May 22, 13 @ 12:32 pm
Doofus, I meant an armed tank. Sheesh.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, May 22, 13 @ 12:33 pm