“I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.” – Rep. Diana DeGette in CO Democrat Doesn’t Understand High-Capacity Magazines Can Be Reloaded [courtesy realclearpolitics.com]

Recommended For You

104 Responses to Quote of the Day: Legislation Without Comprehension Edition

  1. At the same meeting, when responding to a concerned senior citizen, who (I’m pretty sure) was asking why he can’t have 30-round magazines to defend against assailant(s) with similar weaponry:

    “Good news, you live in Denver and the DPD would be there within minutes.” That got another chuckle from the audience. And then she had to try and save face by nervously saying this: “Probably be dead anyway…with that kind of firepower.”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WypFNHOl5_Q

    Hat tip to Miguel at gunfreezone.net

    • Do not be surprised that she cannot get it right, anti-2A folk usually screw it up. Here is a tidbit from the Connecticut law-

      (7) Pursuant to a valid permit to carry a pistol or revolver, provided such large capacity magazine (A) is within a pistol or revolver that was lawfully possessed by the person prior to the effective date of this section, (B) does not extend beyond the bottom of the pistol grip, and (C) contains not more than ten bullets.

      As we all know revolvers do not use magazines. CNN in an online story this morning concerning a cop robbing dope dealers, displays the accused officers Glock pistol and describes the photo as “Alleged crooked NYPD officer Jose Tejada’s service revolver which was allegedly used in a hold-up.

      http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/04/justice/ny-robbery-cop/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

      • So if I am carrying a Glock 19, I can have 1 15 round mag with only 10 rounds in it, but I can’t carry a spare mag unless I can find a 10 round mag, which are impossible to get right now.

        • Does a 15-round mag for a Glock 19 extend beyond the bottom of the pistol grip? If so, you can’t carry it, no matter how many rounds you load into it.

        • Nope – that’s the normal size. The baseplate is below, like all Glock mags, but it’s not like putting a 17 or 33 rounder in which sticks out.

        • They’re available at Gunbroker. The law hasn’t taken effect yet (as I type this, anyway). Could you order one by mail?

        • I’m aware that the 19’s normal (i.e. standard 15-rd) mag has a plate that sticks out below the bottom of the grip – that’s the point.

          a) The standard 15-rounder is a “large capacity magazine” according to the new law.
          b) The magazine’s bottom plate extends below the bottom of the pistol grip. That plate is an integral part of the magazine – the magazine is not functional without it.

          Therefore, it doesn’t seem to meet the exception in the new law. According to the new law, it seems you’d have to permanently modify your standard Glock 19 mag so that it can only accept 10 rounds and is no longer a “large capacity magazine”.

      • Please be aware they are not necessarily as stupid as they sound. In fact, it’s hard work to be that stupid. It isn’t in CNN’s interest (or any other MSM source) to reliably inform you on this issue; in fact it’s in their interest to spread misinformation, disinformation and confusion.

        They’re NOT TALKING TO US; they’re talking to the underinformed, the misinformed, and the disinformed. It is NOT in the media’s best interest to set the record straight. It’s their mission to keep the confusion at an unimpeded flow.

        Our job is to stop the flow.

  2. Another comment from the article, “‘The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to “magazines” when she should have referred to “clips,” which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism,’ Johnson said.”

    Again, dafuq I just read?? Those were words and they were all joined together in the form of sentences, and it looks like English, but close examination shows it to be pure gibberish.

    • Agreed.

      Just strung a bunch of mag and ammo related words with the party line dogma. My heart sunk deeper after seeing this the first time. Of course, I live in Colorado.

    • It kind of makes sense in that I think en bloc clips for the Garand are not as easy to reload as a magazine, it terms of putting rounds into the clip, buuuut… Still dumb.

      • It makes sense if you’re sprinting your Garand up Mount Suribachi (Iwo Jima), but like you said buuuuut… she is still absolutely wrong.

  3. One wonders how many of these nimrods thought the same thing and so imagined the mag ban would eventually eliminate them.

    • I bet dollars to donuts that the answer is……..MANY.

      Hell they don’t even understand that a Ruger 10/22 can be dressed with a “nice” wood stock at one moment and an “evil back” Tapco stock the next.

  4. She isnt alone. I distinctly recall one of those moron round tables on MSNBC soon after Newtown where no less than two of the idiots at the table agreed that magazines were disposable single-use containers that you bought charged and tossed once empty.

    Not to mention several articles from the UK in the Independent and the Telegraph which alluded to the same functionality.

    There is no requirement for anyone to know what they hell they’re talking about to write up or support legislation over it.

    A witch hunt. It’s all magic and heat-seeking armor-piercing incendiaries with shoulder things that go up to these imbeciles. Oh snap! Nikon makes rifle scopes!

    • “She isnt alone. I distinctly recall one of those moron round tables on MSNBC soon after Newtown where no less than two of the idiots at the table agreed that magazines were disposable single-use containers that you bought charged and tossed once empty.”

      I wonder if this is the single misconception that all these morons have based their voting on?

      • What about the asshat who – in referencing incendiary rounds – questioned why hunters needed “heat seeking bullets”

      • “I wonder if this is the single misconception that all these morons have based their voting on?”

        I’d bet $50 that 50%+ of them have the same lack of knowledge.

        This is where NRA could spend good money making ads showing that the new laws are based on hysteria and stupidity.

        They need to have a rapid response team to capitalize on moments like this to undermine the credentials of the gun grabbers.

    • Because they, and most people in general, get all of their information about how guns work from action movies, where no one ever reloads, but on the off chance that they do, you never see their dump bag. The boondock saints have left THOUSANDS of dollars in perfectly good mags just scattered around.

  5. Maybe she was ineloquently suggesting a ban on the sale of actual ammunition?

    A thirty round mag containing the last four bullets, after all, would be less “dangerous.”

    Scary.

    • Having heard the whole clip (news magazine…?) I must conclude that it’s a wonder that she can dress herself – poorly.

      It’s plastic, therefor it’s disposable. Yeah. Oh – wait – so are guns. Once you empty them, you then throw them. Right?

      • Russ, don’t give them any ideas about disposables – next they will propose mass produced tamper sealed home defense pistols that have a ten round capacity, you will first have to trade in your current handgun and then be issued the disposable one which of course will be replaced with another disposable should you ever have to actually use it. Kind of like those disposable cameras back in the day.

        • Good Gods! I’ll shut my trap forthwith, and (silently) pray that the idea never travels beyond this page!

          Yikes!

    • This woman doesn’t bother me too much. The voters that put her into office scare the crap out of me.

  6. DeGette is just one of the dumber than a bag of rocks liberal democrats that have infested Colorado over the last 20 years………………

    It is difficult to understand how people this stupid are even allowed to vote, let alone hold public office.

    I wish they would all have a big cup of STFU and then PTBAGTFO…………

        • Thanks. GTFO was familiar, but now I’ve got the PTBA part. With any luck these people won’t even have time to pack with how quickly they will be thrown out of office when election time rolls around.

    • “… just one of the dumber than a bag of rocks liberal democrats ”

      That is an insult to rocks to be compared to someone that completely incompetent.

    • Yep, which makes assault weapons so deadly because every time you pull the bolt it sends 30 high powered casings down the barrel shroud, and all of those protruding grip things make them a lot easier to conceal underneath an anti-government extremists’ coat, so he could probably sneak onto an airplane with it due to the plastic parts sending a jamming signal to the metal detectors. And if he were to blow open the cabin door, he could conceivably rain death upon thousands of innocents below with all of those large capacity magazine chambers. Dear heavens!

      • I seriously suggest you keep an eye out for those jerks plagiarizing you, this stuff looks like gold to them.

  7. Rep Degette, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

  8. Yeah cause that there high capacity magazine will only take high capacity bullets so sooner or later you gonna shoot up all dem high capacity bullets from the high capacity magazines……what kind of a law did this dumb soulless bimbo think she passed? a total ammunition ban? I am sure they would of, if they could have…but I disgress, you should actually be required to have some basic knowledge of a product before voting to ban it!

  9. What we need is universal background checks before someone can run for public office….

    Oh, wait…. That doesn’t work for stupid, does it?

    This woman has the IQ of a snail – with apologies to all the snails.

    • We have them, but they only disqualify one based upon sexual activity. Stupididy is actually preferred.

    • What we need is universal background checks before someone can run for public office….

      That was hilarious.

  10. It has been some time since i stopped being amazed at how stupid and corruptible are the people whom we elect. This is one fine example, imagine how many more there are across the country. Sadly, these are who we have given our power to take away our rights and they are to stupid to know when they are taking them away.

  11. Unfortunately I live in Colorado at this moment in time. Whether or not they understand any of what they do these D-bags are in charge of the government. Hope we can start removing some of them this fall and vote to repeal these new laws. Love to see Gov. Dicklicker’s face if he is replaced after 1 term.

  12. Oh boy. This legislator thinks that magazines are a one-time use object — disposable in other words!

    Wow.

    Now that we can illustrate the flaw in their thinking, I wonder if a simple education campaign would enough to get the legislators to reverse their legislation?

  13. I hope they understand because of the softness of lead; that if ammo is stored for more than a year it turns soft and if no longer effective. All they have to do is wait us out 😉

    • Yep, there was a discussion that unused ammo would just expire like milk among the grabbers. Let the stupid roll. Let them talk themselves out of office. What else are they so wrong about? All the facts about guns are easily accessible on the internet. Nobody bothered to check them out prior to “do something” about it?

      Damn, just damn.

  14. The backup “she meant clips, not magazines” doesn’t answer the original question. What’s worse, clearly not understanding the topic or twisting the answer to fit her argument to the point of not even answering the question? It may be she doesn’t know the difference between a magazine and a clip, which is just as bad. Anyway you write it it’s sheer stupidity.

    “How would banning mags over 15 rounds be beneficial”?
    “If you shoot all the clips in the world you won’t have any clips left”.
    “And what about the actual question”?

    • The quote being:
      The Congresswoman has been working on a high-capacity assault magazine ban for years, and has been deeply involved in the issue; she simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism,”

      Which is still silly. I reload my Garand and Mosin-Nagant clips all the time…

      • The “correction” was an attempt to coverup the fact that the congress critter is an idiot.

        The only thing we learned from the “correction” is that the ENTIRE TEAM of people who sat down in a conference room and calmly manufactured the “correction” are idiots themselves. Not surprising at all.

      • As in stripper clips?!? I’d thought the “correction” referred to “clips” as slang for removable internal magazines in handguns, which is still stoopid.

        What amazing imbecils!

    • Last I knew, the difference between a (detachable) magazine and a clip is the difference between a tortoise and a turtle; one’s a subset of the other.

  15. I live in her district. The sad thing is that this won’t make any difference when she runs again.

  16. The idiot gun grabbing liberals never take the time to actually learn what they are talking about-you know-the details and such.What fools and evil scum liberals are.The world would be a better place if they were all gone-why?Because they just cannot stop meddling in the lives of others.

  17. “She isnt alone. I distinctly recall one of those moron round tables on MSNBC soon after Newtown where no less than two of the idiots at the table agreed that magazines were disposable single-use containers that you bought charged and tossed once empty.”

    I cant help but wonder if this single misconception is what the majority of these morons are basing their voting on.

    • No doubt she’s on life support.

      We’re it not for the voters, she’d need to get a real job, and would starve.

      Critters this stupid should not be KEPT alive at taxpayer expense.

  18. Er, Rep. DeGette? These “high capacity magazines” – are these the ones you buy at Staples or Office Depot? That you load into that box on your desk with the paper tray sticking out?

    The “Canon” on the label doesn’t mean what you think it means.

  19. Everyone in my state that voted for this sham of a Rep, this is what you get. I don’t thank any of you for inflicting this level of stupid and crass into office.

    Damn, just damn.

  20. Okay boys and girls take a deep breath and consider something… suppose the look on her face means something else. Our president cannot legally ban firearms but he CAN put the squeeze on ammunition. Using current laws, add a little propaganda, the popular view of a nice little UN Treaty to a spending spree and what she said is dead-on, “the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.” Yes, she’s your prototypical daft bint in office, but she could have just realized she said something she shouldn’t have for a whole different reason. After 31 years behind one of their badges and having my professional beliefs and ethics pushed aside over and over, I’ve become a little bit of a conspiracy nut myself.

    • I agree. We’re all having a good laugh because she showed her stupidity, but she also showed her true intentions. She managed to push this crap through without knowing her ass from her elbow, but once someone intructs her (the concepts are easy enough for even her with a tutor) she will continue towards her actual goal.

      • Something just ocurred to me… back in the ole days when I was honored to be a member of the USAF Air Staff in the Office of Security Police we shared a joke with oue Marine & Army opposite numbers (Navy pogs wouldn’t join in). Whenever one of our junior officers said something idiotic during an interservice briefing, one of us would hold our right hand up to our forehead so the thumb was parallel to the ground and index finger pointed straight up… formed a quick “L” and symbolized “Loser.” Inevitably one of us would respond quickly flashing four fingers then the “L” again…thus the guys from the other services agreed with us and made the hand signal “L 4 L” as in “Loser for Life.” She must’ve sat in on subcommitee meetings where some of my compadres were present… she’s shooting a self admission that shes a “Loser” for what she just said! and using her LEFT hand… fits! She’s a die-hard Lib.

  21. Ignorant and smug. Great combination. This is the same lady that told one of her elder constituents who asked her “what about my ability to defend myself if someone breaks into my house?” – “you’d probably be dead anyway”

    • You know, most people are at least intelligent enough to know that they are ignorant about different topics. Such as, I know I am “ignorant” about quantum mechanics.

      But this congress critter is the type that is so stupid that she doesn’t even realize that’s she’s ignorant of the facts. She’s at the DANGEROUS STUPID level.

        • Christ…stumbled upon another idiot on this board along with the occasional truther and Alex Jones kneelers.

          This place just about ain’t worth it.

        • Jeez…stumbled upon another idiot like the occasional truther or Alex Jones ball washer.

          This place just about ain’t worth it.

  22. She’s playing to her base…they like the fact that she’s ignorant on the subject. On a far-left discussion that just banned me (again), I posted an article about DeGette shortly before getting the axe.

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022610262

    Reply #21 is typical: “The argument of her not understanding guns sucks swamp water. I am, for one, am glad she does not understand”.

    There are some sane voices on that board regarding firearms, but they’re (very) few and far between…just like real life Democrats.

    • Holy crap…. I understand that you have to research the enemy to understand their “thought” (LOL) process …. but diving into the cesspool of the DemocraticUnderground is REALLY taking one for Team 2A.

      How exactly do you hose off your brain after visiting that sheet hole?

      Kudos if you can maintain your wellness.

      • Oh, I’ll definitely have to take a breather for a while; this particular ID only managed to last 380 posts. The best I ever did was as Johnny Rico, where I lasted for about half a year and over 1,200 posts poking and prodding them (mostly on 2nd Amendment issues) before Skinner kicked me off. It was a post titled, “A message to those wishing more gun control: give up” that did it. Much foul language (even more than usual for DU!) ensued, and I got the boot.

        You can last for quite a while if your first 100 posts are innocuous (by their standards), and approach things from a Libertarian (but not too Libertarian) point of view. You just have to be careful never to actually say how you vote, since admitting that you vote (R) is cause for instant banning.

        It’s getting quite boring over there lately, though. Anytime you bring up a reasoned defense of the RKBA, they simply respond “NRA talking point!”, and “Tell that to the parents of 20 dead babies!” and refuse to discuss the matter rationally.

        A few of them are being even more explicit in their wishes for those who advocate Constitutional rights…saying that the NRA should be declared a terrorist organization, that anyone who donates to them should have their assets seized, and calling for drone strikes pro-RKBA organizations.

        Yes, they’re entirely serious.

      • Oh, I’ll definitely have to take a breather for a while; this particular ID only managed to last 380 posts. The best I ever did was as Johnny Rico, where I lasted for about half a year and over 1,200 posts poking and prodding them (mostly on 2nd Amendment issues) before Skinner kicked me off. It was a post titled, “A message to those wishing more gun control: give up” that did it. Much foul language (even more than usual for DU!) ensued, and I got the boot.

        You can last for quite a while if your first 100 posts are innocuous (by their standards), and approach things from a Libertarian (but not too Libertarian) point of view. You just have to be careful never to actually say how you vote, since admitting that you vote (R) is cause for instant banning.

        It’s getting quite boring over there lately, though. Anytime you bring up a reasoned defense of the RKBA, they simply respond “NRA talking point!”, and “Tell that to the parents of 20 dead babies!” and refuse to discuss the matter rationally.

        A few of them are being even more explicit in their wishes for those who advocate Constitutional rights…saying that the NRA should be declared a terrorist organization, that anyone who donates to them should have their assets seized, and calling for drone strikes pro-RKBA organizations.

        Yes, they’re entirely serious.

    • An even better strategy is to go in and spew all sorts of different nonsense (bait), note how they react to different things (research) and then use it against them later.

      Normally you want to separate your test bed (where you’d be doing steps #1, #2) from your real production area (step #3) – which is the place you post where you think your time invested there as a debate participant can actually make a difference.

  23. It seems to me Gotham and Metropolis are BOTH New York. One is in Batman comics, the other Superman comics.

    But I’ve been out of comics for a LONG time. About 50 years.

  24. The scary thing isn’t even that people who neither know nor care to know anything about firearms are writing our gun laws. It’s when you realize they are just as knowledgeable about most everything else they legislate. She clearly has no qualms about spouting her uneducated opinions on the hottest topic of the day, do you really think she does her homework on anything else?

  25. The pure ignorance of the people attacking our human rights is truly sickening. I could see if she was just intentionally lying to people but its even worse than that! She truly feels she has the knowledge to speak about the subject. America lost its way when people lost the ability to critically think and self inform.

  26. This qualifies as negligence and dereliction of her duties as a legislator. This also applies to her staff. If you live in her district, you should immediately recall her.

    How much effort would her staff have to do to provide a video showing how the subject magazines work? hardly any.

    About her delusion of the swift response times of City Police response times, Most agencies publish AVERAGE response times, again a web search, couple phone calls would provide accurate numbers (and keep in mind most dispatch goals are Xminute response times in (9x) percent of the time. If you fall out of average tough luck!
    again with minimal effort she could have been informed. If she doesn’t take the Peoples rights and safety seriously, you have to ask what other responsibilities she has shirked!

  27. The “clips” correction was one of the simplest tricks in the book…. Delay Delay Delay. Someone called her on her mistake, she makes up some nonsense “correction” and the person that caught the original mistake just slaps their forehead and says “Fu&% it”. We’ve probably all been guilty a time or two of just letting things go instead of arguing with a brick wall.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *