Ghoulishness

Let’s just say that I didn’t particularly like the late Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and the policies he pushed. That said, I’ve tried to avoid posting about his death as I didn’t want to be seen as dancing on his grave.

I received an email this afternoon that I found crass, insensitive, and ghoulish. It was sent by the “sainted” Gabby Giffords and her AR-buying hypocrite of a husband Mark Kelly. The letter (see below) asks that Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ) appoint a gun prohibitionist to replace Lautenberg and concludes with a request for a contribution.

For God’s sake, Lautenberg’s corpse has barely begun to relax from rigor mortis and they are using it for political purposes. They really have no shame.

 

John –

Frank Lautenberg spent a career working tirelessly to reduce gun violence in our country.

He authored important legislation to keep guns out of the hands of
domestic abusers, and one of the final votes he cast was in support of
expanded background checks. He was wheeled down to the floor for that
vote, as his colleagues applauded his determination.

Senator Lautenberg cannot be replaced. However, New Jersey Governor
Chris Christie must now select a successor. And he should pick one who
supports expanding background checks to keep guns out of the hands of
criminals and the deranged.

Earlier this year, a Quinnipiac University poll found that ninety-six
percent of New Jersey residents support expanding background checks,
including ninety-five percent of gun owners.

These are staggering numbers, and Governor Christie should consider the will of New Jersey voters while making his selection.

Sign our petition calling on Governor Christie to honor
Senator Lautenberg’s legacy and select a successor who will vote ‘YES’
to expand background checks for gun purchases.

http://action.americansforresponsiblesolutions.org/christie

As we move closer to a second vote on background checks, this decision
could make the difference between passing background checks, or another
crushing defeat.

That’s why your signature is so important. We’ll make sure Governor Christie receives it.

All the best,

Gabby and Mark


I, For One, Wouldn’t Miss The Old SOB

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) had previously announced that he planned to retire at the end of his term in 2014. However, if this article from Politico is accurate, he doesn’t plan to return to the Senate this coming week – or maybe ever.

On Friday night, with the Senate still in recess, Lautenberg released a statement announcing he would be out next week. Lautenberg did not make clear any return date.

“I regret that I will not be returning to Washington next week as I continue treatment for, and recuperate from, muscle weakness and fatigue. My physician continues to advise me to work from home and not travel at this time,” Lautenberg said in a statement issued by his office.

Lautenberg added: “I am disappointed I will not be present for the opening of the debate on gun legislation in the Senate. It is an issue I am deeply passionate about, and my victories over the gun lobby are among my proudest accomplishments. I am, however, gratified that my legislation to ban high-capacity ammunition magazines will be one of the key amendments offered to this bill.”

I’m not disappointed nor do I think anyone who believes in the Second Amendment is going to be disappointed if Lautenberg never returns.

The Politico article goes into the timing of a potential early retirement. If Lautenberg retires before late August, an interim senator would be appointed to serve until November 2013 at which time a special election would held. If it goes beyond that time, the interim senator would serve out the remainder of the term. It is presumed that Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ) would appoint a Republican to serve as the interim senator. That said, if the Republican senator holds similar views on guns to that of Christie, it would be no gain for gun rights.

H/T Todd

Sample Letter Opposing Senate Gun Control Bills

One of the problems in keeping up the pressure weekly on Senators and Representatives is coming up with new ways to say “no more gun control”. Below is a letter that I sent today to both of my senators. I took the approach that magazine restrictions and bans on AR-15s are anti-woman and anti-family which it is. How many Senators want to be seen as being anti-woman and anti-family?

Both the Complementary Spouse and I have North Carolina Concealed Handgun Permits. I used that in the intro to illustrate that we were the “good guys”. If you have a CCW, say so. If not, leave that part out.

I sent my letters by fax to both their Washington office and one of their in-state offices. I used fax rather than the mail or email for a couple of reasons. First, due to the anthrax scare after 9-11, it takes regular mail a week at least to be delivered to an office. Second, a fax is instantaneous. Finally, I think a signed fax, since it takes a little more effort, gets more attention than an email.

The letter below can be cut and pasted into your own word processing program. I have put parantheses around the areas which can be filled in or left out. If you are a woman, I’d make sure to say so.

Senator (fill in blank)
US Senate
By fax

Dear Senator (fill in blank),

I am a responsible gun owner. (I have a North Carolina Concealed Handgun Permit which means that I’ve received training, been fingerprinted, and have had a complete background check. I’m one of the good folks out there.

This week Sen. Frank Lautenberg has introduced his bill to ban magazines with greater than 10 round capacity and Sen. Dianne Feinstein has or will introduce her bill to effectively outlaw semi-automatic firearms with ugly features.>

I vehemently oppose both of these bills.

Home invasions with multiple invaders have been rising nationwide. Placing a limitation on magazine size puts my family at risk. While someone using a firearm for offensive purposes has plenty of time to change magazines, that is not true of self-defense situations especially in the case of multiple invaders.

The AR-15 is an ideal firearm for home defense. (As a woman,) I find it is lightweight, easy to operate, and has low recoil. The .223/5.56×45 round that most use has been shown in numerous studies to be the least likely bullet to pass through a house wall and injure someone outside of it. The round falls apart when it hits the dry wall or gypsum.

I view both of these bills as anti-family and anti-woman. Passage of either or both will put more families, more women, and more children at risk from criminals, thugs, and rapists.

I urge you to oppose both of these bills. As President Obama recently said, “If it saves the live of only one child, it is worth it.” He’s right but he just had the wrong context in mind.

Sincerely,

(Your name and address)

Here are a couple of links where you can find the names and addresses of your state’s US Senators. First, by state, from the US Senate’s webpage. Click on the senator’s name to be linked to their home page. From there you can find their fax numbers. Second, the NRA-ILA has a “write your reps” address locator. It can be found here. Either way, write them, call them, AND fax them. Moreover, do it like voting in Chicago – early and often.

And Now The Senate Gets Into The Act

Yesterday was the first day that the Senate leadership would allow new bills to be introduced in the 113th Congress. So far five gun control bills have been introduced as well as a stealth bill from Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) that may or may not be a gun control bill. It is my understanding that Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) plans to introduce her ban on firearms with cosmetic features she doesn’t like on Thursday.

The text of all of these bills has not been received by the Government Printing Office.

S.2 – Harry Reid (D-NV)
Co-Sponsors:
Sen Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT] – 1/22/2013
Sen Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Brown, Sherrod [D-OH] – 1/22/2013
Sen Cantwell, Maria [D-WA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE] – 1/22/2013
Sen Durbin, Richard [D-IL] – 1/22/2013
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Hirono, Mazie K. [D-HI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [D-NJ] – 1/22/2013
Sen Levin, Carl [D-MI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Menendez, Robert [D-NJ] – 1/22/2013
Sen Murphy, Christopher S. [D-CT] – 1/22/2013
Sen Rockefeller, John D., IV [D-WV] – 1/22/2013
Sen Schatz, Brian [D-HI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
A bill to reduce violence and protect the citizens of the United States. 


Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee

S.22 – Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Co-Sponsors:
Sen Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT] – 1/22/2013
Sen Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Cardin, Benjamin L. [D-MD] – 1/22/2013
Sen Carper, Thomas R. [D-DE] – 1/22/2013
Sen Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE] – 1/22/2013
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Sen Levin, Carl [D-MI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Menendez, Robert [D-NJ] – 1/22/2013
Sen Reed, Jack [D-RI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Wyden, Ron [D-OR] – 1/22/2013
A bill to establish background check procedures for gun shows
Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee

S.33 – Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Co-Sponsors:
Sen Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT] – 1/22/2013
Sen Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Cardin, Benjamin L. [D-MD] – 1/22/2013
Sen Carper, Thomas R. [D-DE] – 1/22/2013
Sen Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE] – 1/22/2013
Sen Durbin, Richard [D-IL] – 1/22/2013
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Franken, Al [D-MN] – 1/22/2013
Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Sen Harkin, Tom [D-IA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Levin, Carl [D-MI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Menendez, Robert [D-NJ] – 1/22/2013
Sen Murphy, Christopher S. [D-CT] – 1/22/2013
Sen Reed, Jack [D-RI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI] – 1/22/2013
A bill to prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes.
Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee

S.34 – Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Co-Sponsors:
Sen Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT] – 1/22/2013
Sen Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Durbin, Richard [D-IL] – 1/22/2013
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Sen Levin, Carl [D-MI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Menendez, Robert [D-NJ] – 1/22/2013
Sen Reed, Jack [D-RI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI] – 1/22/2013
A bill to increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of firearms or the issuance of firearms and explosives licenses to known or suspected dangerous terrorists.
Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee

S.35 – Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Co-Sponsors:
Sen Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT] – 1/22/2013
Sen Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] – 1/22/2013
Sen Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
Sen Reed, Jack [D-RI] – 1/22/2013
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] – 1/22/2013
A bill to require face to face purchases of ammunition, to require licensing of ammunition dealers, and to require reporting regarding bulk purchases of ammunition.
Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee

S.54 – Patrick Leahy (D-VT)
Co-Sponsor:
Sen Durbin, Richard [D-IL] – 1/22/2013
A bill to increase public safety by punishing and deterring firearms trafficking. 
 Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee

Lautenberg Introduces Mag Ban To Senate

Today is the first day that Senators can introduce bills and Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) has wasted no time. I am presuming that Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) likewise has introduced her new “assault weapon” (sic) ban. The Library of Congress’ Thomas page has not been updated to reflect any bills introduced into the Senate.

While the exact wording of Lautenberg’s bill is not absolutely know, I am presuming that it will be identical to that of Rep. Carolyn McCarthy’s HR 138.

In the release below I find a couple of things interesting. First, Lautenberg implies that former President George W. Bush is in support of his bill. Second, that Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) is a co-sponsor of the bill. Franken has been a little wishy-washy in the last few weeks on guns as he looks to the 2014 election cycle.

From Lautenberg’s press release:


WASHINGTON, DC—On the first day for bills to be introduced in the 113th Congress, U.S. Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) today introduced his bill to ban high-capacity ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds. The proposal—which Lautenberg first introduced in January 2011—is a major component of the gun safety plan President Obama announced last week.

“The latest tragedy in Newtown was a wake up call for our nation, and now we must now turn our grief into action to reduce further tragedies. It is clearer than ever that there is no place in our communities for military-style supersized magazines like those used inside Sandy Hook Elementary School, in Aurora, and in Tucson, and I will keep working to reinstate the ban on them,” said Senator Lautenberg. “President Obama’s bold plan to address gun violence included my common-sense proposal to ban high-capacity magazines holding more than 10 rounds, and we will get to work in Congress to pass this bill and other reasonable reforms that protect children and families. This is the kind of sensible reform that has the support of Democrats and Republicans, hunters and responsible gun owners, and it is time for Congress to listen to the American people and put this ban back in place.”

A companion bill has been introduced in the House of Representatives by Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy and has the support of 48 cosponsors.

“Senator Lautenberg and I have reintroduced the bill to ban high-capacity ammunition magazines because they’re the common thread in every major mass shooting in recent history and taking them off the market can have a major impact on saving lives in America. The horrific murders in Newtown have shown how our nation’s lax attitude towards gun violence has gone too far and we must take action to save lives,” said Rep. McCarthy

Senator Lautenberg’s “Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act” would prohibit the manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that have a capacity of, or could be readily converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition. From 1994 to 2004, these high-capacity ammunition magazines were illegal as part of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in 2004. Since that time, high-capacity clips (holding more than 10 rounds at a time) have been legal to manufacture and sell under federal law.

Senator Lautenberg first introduced his bill after a high-capacity ammunition magazine was used to carry out the shooting spree in Tucson, allowing the shooter to fire off 31 bullets in just 15 seconds. The shooter was subdued when he stopped to reload. In addition to the Tucson tragedy, high-capacity magazines were used in mass shootings at Virginia Tech, Fort Hood, Aurora, Oak Creek, and Newtown.

The bill is co-sponsored by Senators Charles E. Schumer (D-NY), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Tom Carper (D-DE), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Jack Reed (D-RI), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Chris Coons (D-DE), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Carl Levin (D-MI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Al Franken (D-MN), Chris Murphy (D-CT), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY).

Former President George W. Bush and former Vice President Dick Cheney have expressed support for reinstating the ban on high-capacity magazines in the past, and polls show that 65 percent of Americans support such a ban.

UPDATE: Lautenberg’s bill is S.33. It currently has 16 co-sponsors as mentioned above in his press release.

Never Letting A Tragedy Go To Waste

The gun prohibitionists never let a tragedy go to waste. A gaggle of Democrat Senators led by Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) have proposed an amendment to S. 3414, the Cybersecurity Act of 2012, that would ban all magazines, stripper clips, drums, and belts that would hold more than 10 rounds. They do carve out an exception for .22 LR.

This is similar to the bill that Rep. Carolyn McCarthy proposed following the shooting in Tucson in 2011. Like her bill, while you could possess a pre-ban mag, it doesn’t allow you to sell or transfer it.

Sen. Schumer defended the amendment on the floor of the Senate yesterday. The Hill has video of it here. He said in part,

“Maybe we could come together on guns if each side gave some,” Schumer said.

He suggested that Democrats make it clear that their goal is not to repeal the Second Amendment.

“The basic complaint is that the Chuck Schumers of the world want to take away your guns,” Schumer said of the argument made by gun lobbies. “I think it would be smart for those of us who want rational gun control to make it know that that’s not true at all.”

Schumer also pointed out that it would be reasonable for the right to recognize that background checks on those buying guns is necessary — as called for in the Brady law. He also said average Americans don’t need an assault weapon to go hunting or protect themselves.

“We can debate where to draw the line of reasonableness, but we might be able to come to an agreement in the middle,” Schumer said. “Maybe, maybe, maybe we can pass some laws that might, might, might stop some of the unnecessary casualties … maybe there’s a way we can some together and try to break through the log jam and make sure the country is a better place.”

The only problem when gun prohibitionists like Schumer and others of his ilk say “reasonableness”, “rational”, and “common sense” is that they expect those of us who favor gun rights to give up something so that we don’t lose even more stuff. I never see them proposing the end to any of the 20,000 plus bills that are already on the books.

As Sebastian said last night, it is good that this fight is now out in the open. Moreover, now that it is, we need to counter it.

The full text of Senate Amendment 2575 is below:

SA 2575. Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. REED, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Mr. SCHUMER, and Mrs. FEINSTEIN) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3414, to enhance the security and resiliency of the cyber and communications infrastructure of the United States; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following

SEC. __. PROHIBITION ON TRANSFER OR POSSESSION OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES.

(a) Definition.–Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after paragraph (29) the following:

“(30) The term `large capacity ammunition feeding device’–

“(A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; but

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

(b) Prohibitions.–Section 922 of such title is amended by inserting after subsection (u) the following:

“(v)(1)(A)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), it shall be unlawful for a person to transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

“(ii) Clause (i) shall not apply to the possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed within the United States on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection.

“(B) It shall be unlawful for any person to import or bring into the United States a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

“(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to–

“(A) a manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, or a transfer to or possession by a law enforcement officer employed by such an entity for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty);

“(B) a transfer to a licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining an on-site physical protection system and security organization required by Federal law, or possession by an employee or contractor of such a licensee on-site for such purposes or off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized training or transportation of nuclear materials;

“(C) the possession, by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving ammunition, of a large capacity ammunition feeding device transferred to the individual by the agency upon that retirement; or

“(D) a manufacture, transfer, or possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney General.”.

(c) Penalties.–Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

“(8) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(v) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.”.

(d) Identification Markings.–Section 923(i) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following: “A large capacity ammunition feeding device manufactured after the date of the enactment of this sentence shall be identified by a serial number that clearly shows that the device was manufactured after such date of enactment, and such other identification as the Attorney General may by regulation prescribe.”.

– Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Lautenberg’s Bills

Sen. Frank Lautenberg introduced the following three gun control bills yesterday. While the text of the bills is not available yet, I am presuming that S. 32 is a clone of Rep. Carolyn McCarthy’s HR 308 and that S. 34 is a reiteration of Lautenberg’s proposal to ban anyone on the Do Not Fly list from buying a firearm (or explosives).

S.32 : A bill to prohibit the transfer or possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] (introduced 1/25/2011)
Cosponsors (9)
Committees: Senate Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 1/25/2011 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

S.34 : A bill to increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of firearms or the issuance of firearms and explosives licenses to known or suspected dangerous terrorists.
Sponsor: Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] (introduced 1/25/2011)
Cosponsors (8)
Committees: Senate Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 1/25/2011 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

S.35 : A bill to establish background check procedures for gun shows.
Sponsor: Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] (introduced 1/25/2011)
Cosponsors (10)
Committees: Senate Judiciary
Latest Major Action: 1/25/2011 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

The co-sponsors of the bills above read like a who’s who of gun banners in the Senate. Senators Boxer, Feinstein, Durbin, and Schumer are all co-sponsors of the bills along with an assortment of other lesser gun banners.

Shilling For Lautenberg’s Gun Proposals

The Brady Campaign is already shilling for bills that Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) is introducing. According to the Library of Congress’ Thomas legislation tracker, none of his anti-gun, anti-rights legislation has been officially introduced.

Jan 25, 2011

Washington, D.C. – The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence today announced strong support for a package of legislative proposals introduced by Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ). The three bills seek to close loopholes in federal gun laws and restrict civilian access to large capacity ammunition magazines.

“This important package of legislation is straightforward, reasonable, and long overdue,” said Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign. “We have only a few federal gun laws on the books, and even those have loopholes which allow dangerous people to get firearms all too easily.”

Sen. Lautenberg’s bills would strengthen the Brady background check system by closing the gun show loophole; prevent suspected terrorist from gaining access to firearms; and ban ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 bullets.

The package of bills comes during a month that has seen horrific examples of gun violence. Fourteen police officers have been shot to death in the past four weeks, and a tragic shooting in Tucson, AZ left six dead and wounded thirteen others, including U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ).

Sen. Lautenberg’s bill banning large capacity magazines is identical to a bill offered last week by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY). It would reinstate a ban, lapsed since 2004, on the type of ammunition magazines used by the shooter in Tucson. The House bill has already garnered 64 cosponsors.

“There is no legitimate reason for civilians to have 30-round magazines,” continued Helmke. “They aren’t useful for hunting or self defense. And in the hands of dangerous people, they can cause unspeakable damage.”

As to Helmke’s comments that standard capacity magazines aren’t useful for self-defense, what utter bullshit. Let him tell that to a guy who is defending his family against home invaders and see what the home owner’s response will be.

UPDATE: Lautenberg’s S. 32, S. 34, and S. 35 have been introduced into the Senate and have been referred to the Judiciary Committee.

First McCarthy, Now Lautenberg

The following was released by the office of Senator Frank Lautenberg today. Nothing like like piling on after a tragedy to score political points.

Press Release of Senator Lautenberg

Lautenberg Statement on Legislation to Ban High-Capacity Gun Clips

Contact: Lautenberg Press Office, 202-224-3224
Monday, January 10, 2011

NEWARK, N.J. – Today, U.S. Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) released the following statement on his plans to introduce legislation that would prohibit the manufacture and sale of high-capacity ammunition feeding devices, such as the high-capacity magazine used by Arizona shooting suspect Jared Loughner. Lautenberg is working with Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) on the legislation.

“The only reason to have 33 bullets loaded in a handgun is to kill a lot of people very quickly. These high-capacity clips simply should not be on the market,” Lautenberg said. “Before 2004, these ammunition clips were banned, and they must be banned again. When the Senate returns to Washington, I will introduce legislation to prohibit this type of high-capacity clip.”

From 1994 – 2004, high-capacity ammunition magazines (“clips”) were illegal as part of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban. When the ban expired in 2004, Republican leaders in Congress pledged to not resurrect it. Since that time, high-capacity clips (more than 10 rounds at a time) have been legal to manufacture and sell.
Senator Lautenberg’s bill, which will be introduced when the Senate returns to session in two weeks, would ban ammunition clips that have a capacity of, or that could be readily converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition. That standard was the law before 2004.

According to reports, in the Tuscon shooting, Jared Loughner used a high-capacity 33-round magazine clip in his Glock 19 pistol. The high-capacity magazine allowed Loughner to fire off 33 bullets without having to manually reload. Given that bystanders apprehended him as he attempted to change clips, if Loughner did not have access to the high-capacity magazine that he used, it may have prevented some of the other deaths and injuries that occurred.