a right to bear Glocks ?

[daptech]

As expected the anti-gun crowd is feeling empowered.
The following is part of a column by a lefty......using the morons at
the Brady Campaign as a source of info.
-
Op-Ed Columnist
New York Times

A Right to Bear Glocks?
By GAIL COLLINS
Published: January 9, 2011

Jared Loughner came to Giffords’s sweet gathering with a semiautomatic weapon that he was able to buy legally because the law restricting their sale expired in 2004 and Congress did not have the guts to face up to the National Rifle Association and extend it.
If Loughner had gone to the Safeway carrying a regular pistol, the kind most Americans think of when they think of the right to bear arms, Giffords would probably still have been shot and we would still be having that conversation about whether it was a sane idea to put her Congressional district in the cross hairs of a rifle on the Internet.
But we might not have lost a federal judge, a 76-year-old church volunteer, two elderly women, Giffords’s 30-year-old constituent services director and a 9-year-old girl who had recently been elected to the student council at her school and went to the event because she wanted to see how democracy worked.
Loughner’s gun, a 9-millimeter Glock, is extremely easy to fire over and over, and it can carry a 30-bullet clip. It is “not suited for hunting or personal protection,” said Paul Helmke, the president of the Brady Campaign. “What it’s good for is killing and injuring a lot of people quickly.”
America has a long, terrible history of political assassinations and attempts at political assassination. What we did not have until now is a history of attempted political assassination that took the lives of a large number of innocent bystanders. The difference is not about the Second Amendment. It’s about a technology the founding fathers could never have imagined.
“If this was the modern equivalent of what Sirhan Sirhan used to shoot Robert Kennedy or Arthur Bremer used to shoot George Wallace, you’d be talking about one or two victims,” said Helmke.
Giffords represents a pragmatic, interest-balancing form of politics that’s out of fashion. But, in that spirit, we should be able to find a way to accommodate the strong desire in many parts of the country for easy access to firearms with sane regulation of the kinds of weapons that make it easiest for crazy people to create mass slaughter. Most politicians won’t talk about it because they’re afraid of the N.R.A., whose agenda is driven by the people who sell guns and want the right to sell as many as possible.

[bestatchess]

It is always tragi-comical when people that know nothing about guns write about them.

[jjski78]

I say they can go ahead and ban "ammunition clips", I'll just have to load the garand one by one. Since that's the only clip fed firearm around.

Nevermind the fact that they say the Glock has no use as a personal defense weapon, but then say it's only good for "killing and injuring a lot of people quickly". Sounds like a great self defense weapon to me.

And where was all the outrage over the FN Five-Seven after the fort hood shootings? Oh yeah, it was a terrorist posing as an Army officer, so we swept that one under the rug real quick in the name of political correctness. The FN holds 20 rounds from the factory, and 30 round mags are readily available for it. But we didn't hear an uproar about that.

[Titanistic]

Originally Posted by jjski78

I say they can go ahead and ban "ammunition clips", I'll just have to load the garand one by one. Since that's the only clip fed firearm around.

Nevermind the fact that they say the Glock has no use as a personal defense weapon, but then say it's only good for "killing and injuring a lot of people quickly". Sounds like a great self defense weapon to me.

And where was all the outrage over the FN Five-Seven after the fort hood shootings? Oh yeah, it was a terrorist posing as an Army officer, so we swept that one under the rug real quick in the name of political correctness. The FN holds 20 rounds from the factory, and 30 round mags are readily available for it. But we didn't hear an uproar about that.

There was much debate over the FN on the forums, and some political as well after the Ft Hood incident. I think the price tag and the availability of the firearm make not as available as the Glock Loughner used. I think if the guy at Ft Hood had any shooting skills we would be still talking about that gun. he basiclly just went in and just started spraying bullets and the result was a bunch of injuries vs deaths.

[Quartz]

I know I'll get flamed for this but here goes. Is there a single person on this forum that routinely carries a Glock with a 30 round magazine for personal protection?

[MartiniRossy]

Originally Posted by Quartz

I know I'll get flamed for this but here goes. Is there a single person on this forum that routinely carries a Glock with a 30 round magazine for personal protection?

No you won't! A semi-auto pistol with a 30 round clip is stupid. The psycho in Arizona relied on quantity vs accurately placed rounds because he couldn't shoot, or reload a mag for that matter.

The point is, if gun control advocates had it there way, it wouldn't be just this one model firearm that is banned from carrying a hi cap mag, it would be everygun, like the 94-04 era.

I'm ok, with only 12 rds in my xd-40 but if I could only have 10 rds in my AR, then I would be irritated. They go way too fast especially if you give it a little bump fire every now and again

[daptech]

Originally Posted by Quartz

I know I'll get flamed for this but here goes. Is there a single person on this forum that routinely carries a Glock with a 30 round magazine for personal protection?

You don't have to carry it.
My nephew works 14/14 offshore. He gave his wife a Glock 17 with 30 mag to
keep at the house. She has another gun to carry.

[bestatchess]

Originally Posted by jjski78

And where was all the outrage over the FN Five-Seven after the fort hood shootings?

And don't mention that a bolt action Remington 700 with a 4x Leopold scope was used in the Texas Tower shootings to kill victims at ranges up to 420 yds. And now they want to ban anything that is "not suitable for hunting."

[Quartz]

I have a concealed carry permit and from time to time I carry a 9mm Sig with a 15 round mag. Honestly I think that if I haven't taken care of a problem with 15 rounds, 15 more probably won't help.

[MartiniRossy]

Originally Posted by bestatchess

And don't mention that a bolt action Remington 700 with a 4x Leopold scope was used in the Texas Tower shootings to kill victims at ranges up to 420 yds. And now they want to ban anything that is "not suitable for hunting."

Yep, every single firearm in the world is dangerous to other peoples when it's in the hands of very bad person.

I'm assuming you guys have seen the huge picture of this guy? All I can say is wow. It should be legal to deny sale of a firearm to someone that looks like they are from another planet! I'm all for civil rights but come on, profiling works! This guy should have been flagged as a potential threat years ago and either gotten him help or locked him up.

[bestatchess]

Originally Posted by MartiniRossy

This guy should have been flagged as a potential threat years ago and either gotten him help or locked him up.

Loughner had prior police contact and was flagged, in writing, by the college that booted him out as having mental health problems. Striking similarity to Charles Whitman, the Texas Tower shooter, who actually met with a shrink and told him he had violent fantasies, including a specific fantasy about shooting people from the tower, prior to actually fulfilling that fantasy. Whitman's autopsy revealed that he was suffering from a brain tumor.

So perhaps we need stronger lunatic control rather than stronger gun control.

[Quartz]

Originally Posted by MartiniRossy

Yep, every single firearm in the world is dangerous to other peoples when it's in the hands of very bad person.

I'm assuming you guys have seen the huge picture of this guy? All I can say is wow. It should be legal to deny sale of a firearm to someone that looks like they are from another planet! I'm all for civil rights but come on, profiling works! This guy should have been flagged as a potential threat years ago and either gotten him help or locked him up.

Originally Posted by bestatchess

Loughner had prior police contact and was flagged, in writing, by the college that booted him out as having mental health problems. Striking similarity to Charles Whitman, the Texas Tower shooter, who actually met with a shrink and told him he had violent fantasies, including a specific fantasy about shooting people from the tower, prior to actually fulfilling that fantasy. Whitman's autopsy revealed that he was suffering from a brain tumor.

So perhaps we need stronger lunatic control rather than stronger gun control.

There are a few on this forum that I would flag. I'm not going to name names but if you are on my ignore list I wouldn't let you have a gun.

[helomech]

Originally Posted by Quartz

I know I'll get flamed for this but here goes. Is there a single person on this forum that routinely carries a Glock with a 30 round magazine for personal protection?

Yes, well a 29 round mag, they don't make a 30 round mag for the .40. Those mags are not in the gun, but on me.

[Titanistic]

Originally Posted by Quartz

I know I'll get flamed for this but here goes. Is there a single person on this forum that routinely carries a Glock with a 30 round magazine for personal protection?

I dont carry it, but I do have the high capacity 9mm mag and the one for the .40cal as well. I only break it out at the range. I also own the FN 5.7 that the idiot used in Ft. Hood, yet I dont carry it. These type items are not a typical, daily conceal/carry item. Too big and bulky.

[jimmy120]

Why ban guns? Why ban magazines? They will still be around no matter what laws are in affect. I mean who cares that he had a 30 round mag? I could kill 15 people with my 15 round mag if I needed too, or kill 10 with a ten round mag and so on....(strictly making a point, I do not want to kill anyone). If your crazy and want to kill people, there is nothing anyone can do to stop you and it's pointless to try by passing legislation. He could have easily gotten into a pick-up truck, uhaul truck, semi, etc. and ran over more people than he shot. Gun control is for the birds...