• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

On not wasting a crisis: Limiting the size of handgun magazines

“Having shot Glock semi-automatics, I can tell you that it is a very impressive weapon--lightweight, accurate, simple to load and fire. What it is not is a gun for hunting. It's a gun for shooting people, which is what it was tragically used for in Arizona. So let's stop the nonsense.” — Alan M. Webber¹

“I'd certainly be willing to listen to ideas. I have always been a gun advocate, obviously had a strong voting record on behalf of the Second Amendment. That's just what I believe, and whether or not there's some measure there in terms of limiting the size of the magazine that you can buy to go with semi-automatic weapons -- we've had that in place before. Maybe it's appropriate to reestablish that kind of thing, but I think you do have to be careful, obviously.” — Former Vice President Dick Cheney²

Excerpted from “A message for Glock,” Editorial, New York Post, Last Updated: 12:16 AM, January 12, 2011, Posted: January 12, 2011
[SIZE="+2"]W[/SIZE]hy Loughner -- who'd been rejected by the military for his past drug use and arrested on drug charges -- was free to buy a 30-round magazine is a mystery.

Almost as much a mystery, frankly, as why Glock even markets them: They have no discernible civilian efficacy -- and damned little military utility.

Yet sales of the magazines reportedly are way up around the country in the wake of the Tucson massacre.

Here's an opportunity for the NYPD -- and every big-city police department in the nation -- to help turn this around by sending Glock a simple message: Halt all sales of the magazines to civilians -- or we'll stop using your weapon for our own officers.

The makers of the Glock must know that they'll pay a price unless they limit sales of the devices to those who truly need them.

Whoever they might be.

The stars are aligning. Now let's us step forward into the light of reason and limit the size of handgun magazines.
 

TheGirlNextDoor


DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
20,027
Reaction score
7,647
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Why. Please explain your position. Why limit the size of handgun magazines.
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
34,129
Reaction score
17,008
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
IMO sales will increase with any threat to limit. Some people will want to purchase before the change would go into law. Lets say large capacity clips are banned. Do you really think this will stop mass murder. Someone wanting to carry out the crime will adjust or aquire what they need.
 

Chappy

User
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
733
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
TheGirlNextDoor;bt413 said:
Why. Please explain your position. Why limit the size of handgun magazines.

The Tucson Massacre only ended when the shooter stopped to reload at which point survivors close to him were able to tackle him and wrestle him to the ground. The problem is, with the extra capacity magazine the shooter was using, he was able to fire off 31 rounds before needing to reload.

The assault weapons ban that was allowed to expire in 2003 contained a primary market ban of such large capacity clips. We should now ban those clips once and for all.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom