U.S. Representative Ted Deutch: Why The Feds Should Ban ‘High Capacity’ Magazines

Las Vegas shooter's AR-15, equipped with a large capacity magazine and bump fire stock (courtesy dailymail.co.uk)

“Combined with bump fire stocks, high-capacity magazines allowed the Las Vegas shooter to kill 58 concertgoers in a matter of minutes,” Democratic Florida Congressional Representative Ted Deutch writes at miamiherald.com. “But the massive scale of violence extends so much further. High-capacity magazines make killers capable of firing dozens of bullets before reloading. In the recordings captured by victims in Las Vegas, you can hear the killer fire 90 rounds in just ten seconds.” You know where this is going . . .

Representative Deutch wants to wield the federal ban hammer on “high capacity” ammunition magazines. He’s joined the usual Democrat suspects to throw his support behind the [thankfully doomed] Keep Americans Safe Act outlawing “large capacity ammunition feeding devices.”

Specifically, a “magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, helical feeding device, or similar device, including any such device joined or coupled with another in any manner, that has an overall capacity of, or that can be readily restored, changed, or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition.”

The strange thing about Mr. Deutch’s knee jerk reaction: the Gunshine State politician is happy to recognize the fact that a high-cap mag ban wouldn’t do sweet FA to reduce “gun violence.”

Limiting magazines to ten rounds would be a small step toward safety. It would also be popular.

Banning high-capacity magazines is supported by 72 percent of Americans, including law enforcement officers, military veterans and gun safety advocates.

We admit that this legislation won’t fix everything and won’t end gun violence. It won’t address the majority of the 33,000 lives lost to gun violence every year in this country, half of which are suicides.

But without 30-round magazines, mass killers would be forced to spend time reloading, precious time that could allow a victim to escape or law enforcement to intervene.

If that time could help save at least one life, it would be worth it.

And if you could save one life by infringing on another Constitutionally protected right — say, freedom of speech — would that be worth it too?

You can’t expect Mr. Deutch to consider such profound issues when he and his staff (and The Miami Herald) can’t be bothered to get their facts straight.

Banning high-capacity magazines is not a bold new idea. These devices were illegal until 2004 when Congress allowed the Assault Weapons Ban to lapse. That was a mistake, and it’s time to correct it by renewing restrictions on these devices which have no purpose other than highly efficient murder.

Where’s the Keep Americans Safe from Pandering Politicians Act? And here’s a strange thought: the Las Vegas killer’s use of a bump fire stock has diverted attention away from large capacity ammunition magazines (so far) preventing a more concerted effort to ban them.

comments

  1. avatar Rick the Bear says:

    LE supports the ban? Not for themselves, I’ll wager.

    1. avatar Hank says:

      Right. The amount of ass pulling of statics after this mess is absurd. And I only know one veteran, out of the hundred or so that I know, that supports an AWB.

    2. avatar fiun dagner says:

      “(30) The term ‘large capacity ammunition feeding device’—

      “(A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, helical feeding device, or similar device, including any such device joined or coupled with another in any manner, that has an overall capacity of, or that can be readily restored, changed, or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; and

      “(B) does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

      “(31) The term ‘qualified law enforcement officer’ has the meaning given the term in section 926B.”.

      “(v) (1) It shall be unlawful for a person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

      it also allows the use of something called BYRNE GRANTS to allow for a buy back program, but what are the odds they would actually pay for this instead of just outlawing them retroactively. so yeah cops and “campus law enforcement officers” are exempt. strangely enough it doesn’t make any mention of allowing them for military use. so i guess the army has to get rid of all the high capacity mags stateside

      1. avatar Mark N. says:

        This sounds like California’s law, But California just banned them no buy backs. Although the only legal 10 round mags in this state (other than those possessed by LE) had to have been acquired before 1/1/2000, the taking without compensation was a basis for the restraining order barring the law from taking effect (pending further orders). I think California tried to skate around this restriction by a) allowing them to be sold out of state, and b) declaring them nuisances for which no compensation is owed. Didn’t fly. If the judge’s ruling were to be applied in a later case against the feds, then I would think the feds would have to buy up tens of millions of 20 and 30 round mags. That’d cost a pretty penny.

      2. avatar Higgs says:

        We really need to stop letting the Antis define the language on these things.

        How many of you see ARs sold with less than 30 round magazines unless they are for restricted states? 20/30/40 rounds is a normal size magazine. 10 is a low capcity. I would probally agree that 60+ is high capacity.

        The main point……30 round mags are NORMAL.

        1. avatar Scoutino says:

          Let’s agree on “STANDARD” capacity.

    3. avatar FlaBoy says:

      “Rick the Bear says: LE supports the ban? Not for themselves, I’ll wager.”
      You couldn’t be more correct. With the typical LE hit ratio and their habit, acquired with the advent of semi-auto pistols, of spraying the entire scene with bullets, they’d be lost if they had to actually aim and account for every shot fired. If you are an innocent bystander accidentally hit by one of their stray bullets, you should not even expect to get an apology from the LE agency. And forget suing them…”qualified immunity” and all that. “Some animals are more equal than others.”

  2. avatar Rabbi says:

    Given the enormous time that it took police to arrive, he could have shot hundreds upon hundreds with a single shot rifle. Bumpfire and normal capacity magazines made no difference.

    1. avatar Tom Forrest says:

      While we are on that topic, could someone PLEASE tell me how many actually died from gunshot wounds and how many were trampled to death? It’s been over two weeks and still nobody has answered this important question.

      1. avatar ConcernedAmerican says:

        Why would any of them care? There not trying to ban feet….Yet.

      2. avatar Eighty says:

        And no defined timeline either. When did the hotel security agent get shot? when did the first police get on scene? How long did they wait (stage – sounds more tactical) for SWAT?

    2. avatar DC says:

      Ya it’s the same as all those idiots that were more than ready to go straight to war immediately after 9/11 and kick someone’s ass don’t kno who did it but someone has got to pay! Kinda looking familiar don’t it just another stupid immediate reaction where something is at fault, so let’s do something stupid to try to make the weak feel better, couldn’t possibly the way our society is now days

  3. avatar ATFAgentBob says:

    Oh F*ck this bullsh*t I don’t get paid enough for this!!! I’m a federal employee and now they expect me to actually f*cking work!?!? I didn’t sign up for this!!

  4. avatar Geoff PR says:

    “But without 30-round magazines, mass killers would be forced to spend time reloading, precious time that could allow a victim to escape or law enforcement to intervene.

    If that time could help save at least one life, it would be worth it.”

    Any form of auto-loading firearm isn’t safe from those Leftist scumbags.

    If you’re ‘lucky’, they’ll ‘allow’ you to have a single-shot bolt action rifle and a total of 5 rounds of ammunition…

  5. avatar Ing says:

    “If it could save at least one life…” Ever notice how that only gets brought up when they want to take something away?

    We need to turn that around. If something has saved at least one life somewhere, then it’s worth keeping. Anyone who wants to take it away is condemning people to death.

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      “If it could save one life…”

      You notice how they NEVER bring that up when there is talk of de-funding abortion mills?

      1. avatar RMS1911 says:

        I’m glad somebody else noticed.

  6. avatar Woody says:

    no one ever recognizes the hundreds of thousands of rifles, magazines and pistol in circulation right now. All the “Ghost guns”, no one counts. Are the Gov’t going to each door collecting these full capacity mags? no, are the police gonna confiscate them from legal people? I doubt it. Remember the AW ban, and what happened, Did it stop shooting? no Criminals won’t give up their guns, only honest (Gullible) people will. The north holly wood shootout in 97, was during the AW ban, They had illegal firearms. The police had to “borrow” AR-15’s to combat them. The LA riots, citizens had to arm themselves to protect their lives and property.

  7. avatar doesky2 says:

    “But without 30-round magazines, mass killers would be forced to spend time reloading, precious time that could allow a victim to escape or law enforcement to intervene.

    Yeah because we all know that the black swan occurance of a mass killer would never be able to procure some standard capacity magazines from the millions, upon millions, upon millions of existing supply.

    Gawd they are stupid.

  8. avatar Joe R. says:

    Banning the evil POS (D) wouldn’t just be productive, it would be popular.

  9. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    I hope I never have to use my 30 round magazine capacity weapons to stop an Antifia mob from attacking me in public.

    Since the police are being given stand down orders.

  10. avatar Hank says:

    Again mr liberal, I ask: Who’s gonna come and take them from everyone? You?

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      The cops and military that support the repeal of the 2nd amendment. There is more than you think.

      1. avatar Hank says:

        Not enough of them to do so, however… they’ll get away with it… in places where guns are already illegal…

      2. avatar Cliff H says:

        And they would be the first to be eliminated. Molon Labe is not just a slogan, it is a DANGEROUS fact.

        The gung-ho anti-2A cops would be the first to attempt this confiscation. How many gunfights and deaths would it take before the thugs decided the result was not worth their lives?

        Totally disregarding, of course, that none of this would happen short of a total repeal of the Second Amendment and the court fight that would ensue.

        1. avatar Hank says:

          As a veteran and current LE member, I can tell you that the gung ho “turn em in mr and mrs america” types will lose all their steam by week 3.

      3. avatar Big Bill says:

        Whilke I, myself, would not meet such a demand with hot lead, there are more than enough who would do so (at least going by some of the comments by the keyboard commandos here) to make any of those LEOs give serious thought to just not trying it.
        Even discounting the KCs, one would have to wonder just how many nutjobs it would take to put a serious crimp in such an endeavor?
        Of course, I seriously doubt it would ever come to a houst-to-house search, as I’m hardly the only one able to imagine the evening news if they did.

  11. avatar W says:

    “If that time could help save at least one life, it would be worth it.”

    More rigorous vetting of immigrants and visa applicants? Nah, too much work and the rest of the world would frown and pout.

  12. avatar Stereodude says:

    Because 300 rounds loaded in thirty 10 round magazines is way less dangerous than ten 30 round magazines.

  13. avatar CZJay says:

    Looks like Paddock was smarter than the average American.

    1. avatar Hank says:

      He some kind of hero of yours?

      1. avatar Arc says:

        You would be surprised.

        The old saying goes, when you are child, batman is awesome. Once you become an adult, the joker makes much more sense.

        -edit-

        It shouldn’t need to be said but since there is always one drama queen that intentionally doesn’t grasp sarcasm. This entire comment is sarcasm.

  14. avatar Aaron M. Walker says:

    Meanwhile, Everyone’s focus has been about debating minutiae, and wading through BS infringements…Anyone notice that the Vegas/MGM unarmed security officer suddenly vanished?!?! Anyone want to borrow a tinfoil hat, and some more books regarding “Lee Harvey Oswald”…Remember, What happens in Vegas…Stays secret in Vegas….

    (Re: “Deep State, False Flags, False Narratives, and the attempts to curtail American Freedoms within our US Constitutional-Bill of Rights….” )

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      If I were the lawyer representing MGM, I would tell him to STFU and prohibit him from talking to the press. For obvious reasons. He will be deposed soon enough. One examination by a slew of lawyers all asking the same stupid questions is enough.

  15. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    He’s my areas rep. As simple and stupid as the rest of the Libitards. F^^)ing useless. Just tows the party line. He has absolutely no record in Congress. Shows up every 2 years. Tells the senior citizens what they want to hear and somehow gets re- elected a few terms now.

  16. avatar NJ2AZ says:

    “in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce”

    the insertion of this language, as if it somehow legitimizes this nonsense, should insult the intelligence of anyone who reads it

    Wickard v Filburn…worst SCOTUS decision ever.

  17. avatar AlanInFL says:

    (JALT) Just another libtard. How I hate the State’s D-party.

  18. avatar strych9 says:

    “But without 30-round magazines, mass killers would be forced to spend time reloading, precious time that could allow a victim to escape or law enforcement to intervene.”

    This claim has been effectively disproved in the past.

    I’m not even going to get into the thought experiment/analysis I did of this measuring the distances of the venue and whatnot. It’s way too depressing for a Monday night. Suffice to say, smaller mags wouldn’t make a hell of a lot of difference and, in reality, might actually force the shooter to go a “non-bump stock” route that very may well have caused even more causalities due to the increased accuracy of the rifle(s) in question.

  19. avatar TyrannyOfEvilMen says:

    This logic is of course completely spurious. This man was barricaded in a room all by himself and likely used multiple firearms because the bump fire stock likely caused some to overheat and jam. Magazine capacity was irrelevant.

    It should by now be clear to anyone reading this blog that these people have no intention of doing anything that could have stopped this massacre. Even if they could do something that would’ve stopped it, that is not their intent. Their intent is to deprive you of your constitutional rights and of your ability to defend yourself.

    Any person submitting such bills or anyone who votes for them needs to be defeated politically, regardless of party.

  20. avatar Anonymous says:

    Rep. Ted Deutsch is disconnected from reality. One can print a very durable and reliable 3D printed polymer mag at the click of a button from their desktop. Also, the sheer number in circulation right now is staggering. There is no way they can control this.

  21. avatar Mr. Anonymous says:

    Supported by 72% huh? So where’s the source for this so called “poll”?

    1. avatar E. Grey says:

      Since “gun safety advocates” is the current euphemism for “gun prohibitionists,” it’s safe to assume that 100% of them support 100% of all proposed gun-control laws.

  22. avatar GW says:

    These made up stats are poor attempts of comedy.

    Maybe 70% of libtard fails support this fail but, not a one good American or vet.

    Gun Control created bump stocks and the 1934 NFA Infringement!

  23. avatar joetast says:

    I believe I heard there is 40 dead from wildfires in California so far. Perhaps they should ban wildfires too. ,,,, ,,,. ,Oh they have n they’re still burning

  24. avatar Gunrunner says:

    “Banning high-capacity magazines is not a bold new idea. These devices were illegal until 2004 when Congress allowed the Assault Weapons Ban to lapse. ”

    No, they were NOT banned or “illegal” during the AWB. You could not make new ones, but there were plenty out there and they were legal to own and sell.

    How can you trust a lawmaker who doesn’t know the law?

    1. avatar Eighty says:

      The same with fully automatic weapons. They all say they are illegal; they are not. They are heavily regulated but not illegal. With enough time, money and paperwork/background check/clearance from the Feds most non-felons can own one.

  25. avatar Rob says:

    Ban all buildings higher than 2 floors and this type of crime will not happen again.

  26. avatar anarchyst says:

    It’s called TREASON…a rope and a tree are all that is needed to provide “corrective action”…

  27. avatar GunTotinDem says:

    Did anyone else notice that this guy was doing new york reloads. Single magazine capacity really wasnt one of his concerns.

    And I’ll ask the question again how many victims were trampled.

  28. avatar JS says:

    I can see a run on 30+ round magazines if this gets any traction and good luck ever tracking those down for a future confiscation. Just like in the land of milk and cereal flakes (aka California), no one was turning them in or selling them out of state.

  29. High capacity magazines are no more at fault than are the weapons in which they are used. Its the idiot that picks up a weapon and decides for some ungodly reason that they will kill people, any people that happen to be in front of that weapon at the time they decide to discharge it.

    The Second Amendment is in place as a safeguard for all Americans to fend off “tyranny at the hands of those serving as government they elected to represent them in management of their country”. No other reason.

    All other protections provided by the Second Amendment are secondary to its primary reason. “Shall not be infringed” is an order that cannot be arbitrated or summarily abridged for any purpose or at any time. “Shall not be infringed” is as cast in stone and no matter how badly “gun grabbers” want to regulate, change, alter, or obfuscate the order as given, they cannot and “shall” not ever infringe on citizens right to protect themselves from government run “amok” of their constitutional authorities. Which, in case you haven’t been paying attention, those comprising government for the people of the United States of America, have already done.

    Keep all of your guns of whatever flavor that pleases you and that you can afford or wish to possess. We may soon be called upon to bear those arms in order to pull our country and our Constitution back from the brink of destruction and safe it for those that follow us.

    Term limits already are required by the Constitution. Term lengths are established in Article I. Sections 2. and 3. and Article II. Section 1.

    Article I. Section 2. Members of the House of Representatives shall be chosen every second year
    “Members” is all inclusive, add “shall be chosen every second year” and you get a direct order that “shall” be used as written requiring that every member of the House shall be chosen every two years.
    DO NOT CHOOSE THE SAME PERSON NOW SERVING TO SERVE AGAIN IN 2018!!

    Article I. Section 3. Senators shall serve six years meaning that each Senator shall serve for six years, One-third of Senators are chosen each second year.
    DO NOT CHOOSE THE SAME PERSON NOW SERVING TO SERVE AGAIN IN 2018!!

    Article II. Section 1. Concerning a president: He shall hold his office for the term of four years This sentence includes several important orders about which American citizens are little aware. “He shall hold his” means that “a man shall hold his office” and there can be no other meaning because of the way that command is written.
    This means a male President shall hold his office. How long shall he hold his office? “For the term of four years, ….” Please note “the term” which means one term of four years because the word “the” is singular.

    The 22nd Amendment limits a president to serving but two terms of four years and includes special provisions for those who serve less than four years of a term. An amendment is a vehicle used to change something that existed prior to its creation. Yet, the 22nd Amendment does not amend and/or mention a part of the Constitution that it supposedly changes. What it does is first, allows a president to serve two terms. Then, it limits a president to serving no more than those two terms. Why, because its not possible to limit someone to something they can’t already do. Also, the 22nd Amendment creates a conflict between its requirements and the requirements of Article II. Section 1.

  30. avatar Richard Steven Hack says:

    This moron doesn’t realize the that primary reason Paddock had 23 guns in his room is so HE WOULD NOT HAVE TO RELOAD! He was doing “New York Reloads” – just grabbing another rifle which already had a limited number of bullets in it.

    So next time, the shooter brings FIFTY guns with 10-round mags and still shoots 500 rounds in ten minutes.

    Or he simply modifies the rifles he has – or buys them already modified by a criminal gunsmith – and he still ends up shooting 500 people.

    Or, unlike Paddock, he doesn’t NEED to shoot into a crowd of 22,000 people and picks a crowd of, say, 2,000 people who are too packed in an enclosed space to be able to get out the door before his 10 round weapons can still kill 50 people, even if wounding fewer.

    Also, how does this get rid of the hundred million or so EXISTING firearms that have magazine capacities larger than 10 rounds.

    This is the level of government this country has…run by morons.

  31. avatar Mansfield Lovell says:

    Jay in Fla nailed it. Ted Douche or Douchebag is a Democrat Party lickspittle. If he ever had an original idea and a cold drink of water at the same time, it would kill him dead.

    Same goes for the rest of the fascist fucktards on the Left. I reckon the Leftists knowing that true thoughtfulness would kill them dead is why they keep on proposing the same old discredited and debunked bullshit over and over again.

    I want to know three things about this shooting:
    1) what percentage of the killed and injured were trampled but not shot?
    2) where the fuck is Jesus Campos?
    3) was Paddock on anti-anxiety drugs and/or SSRI antidepressant drugs ?

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email