Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    February 2024
    S M T W T F S
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Are Democrats really concerned with saving lives?

Posted by Richard on February 17, 2013

Friday night, Dem0crats rammed their gun control package through the Colorado House (preliminary approval; another vote is coming next week). They were aided by calls from V.P. Joe Biden to wavering freshman Democrats. The package includes HB13-1224, sponsored by Rep. Rhonda Fields, which bans high-capacity magazines. Fields argued that the only purpose of such magazines is “to kill people as fast as possible” and that they “have no place in our community.”

That bit of nonsense was easily topped by Arapahoe County Coroner Michael Dobersen, who said that “Even one bullet wound is devastating, but those from high-capacity magazines are especially bad.” Who knew that the wound channel created by a bullet varied based on what kind of magazine it was fired from? But hey, he’s the coroner so he must know what he’s talking about, right?

Before H.B. 1224 passed, however, Democrats learned that Magpul, the premier manufacturer of high-capacity magazines for AR-15s and other weapons (as well as many other parts and accessories), is a Colorado company and that it said it would leave the state if the bill passed, taking 600 jobs with it (some other Colorado manufacturers said they’d do likewise).

So House Democrats hurriedly cobbled together and passed an amendment exempting manufacturers from the high-capacity magazine ban as long as they sold those magazines for killing people as fast as possible in other states. Thus saving all those jobs while still affirming that those magazines “have no place in our community.”

I can only think of two possible explanations for this cynical move. Either (a) the Democrats know that banning high-capacity magazines won’t save any lives and have some other motive, or (b) they don’t care if people in other states die because of magazines manufactured in Colorado.

A free press worthy of the name would be asking each and every legislator who voted for that amendment which explanation justified their vote.

Magpul, meanwhile, is not assuaged by the amendment:

Richard Fitzpatrick, Founder, President, and CEO of Magpul Industries, said that regardless of any amendments that may be worked into the bill, he will no longer be able to continue to do business in Colorado if his core product is made illegal.

“Our company could not, in good conscience, continue to manufacture our products in a state where law-abiding citizens are prohibited from purchasing and owning them. ” Fitzpatrick said. “The passage of this bill will do nothing to enhance public safety, but will force us to immediately begin taking our business to another state.”

Magpul was started over a decade ago by Fitzpatrick, a former U.S. Marine. It has become one of Colorado’s fastest growing businesses, successfully marketing its products to American and allied military forces, police departments, sporting goods stores, and thousands of responsible private citizens. Fitzpatrick says that the rich western culture and strong values of individual freedom and responsibility, traditionally found in Colorado, were one of the reasons the company chose to remain in the state.

“It is heartbreaking to me, my employees, and their families, to think that we will be forced to leave,” Fitzpatrick said. “But if HB13-1224 passes, we will simply have no choice.”

Good for him. If you’re an AR owner, buy something from  Magpul.

If you’re an AK fan instead, Guns For Everyone is responding to this bill by giving away seven 30-round magazines.

I don’t own either an AR or an AK, but I’m thinking of buying one of each. And a bunch of magazines.

UPDATE: By the way, if you’re not knowledgeable about firearms and wondering about how much difference a large-capacity magazine ban might make (for those who would actually adhere to such a limit), check out this video (embed disabled, darn it) comparing how long it takes to hit 14 targets with and without a magazine change.

IMHO, that test actually overstates the difference (1.75 seconds). The gentleman who had to reload was shooting a .45 instead of a 9mm like the guy with the “high-capacity” magazine. The .45 has much more recoil and, all other things being equal, more muzzle-flip and a slower time to reacquire the sights. A fairer comparison would have had the same shooter with the same 9mm gun run the same course with a full magazine and with one containing only 10 rounds. I’m guessing the difference would be even less than 1.75 seconds, probably under a second.

Subscribe To Site:

9 Responses to “Are Democrats really concerned with saving lives?”

  1. jed said

    Well, best of luck buying an evil assault weapon. Unless money is no object. As of yesterday, CTD was selling 30-rd Pmags for $99.97.

  2. Rick Shultz said

    Richard, if you remember a few days back, I sent you a video that I believe may more effectively demonstrate your point concerning high capacity magazines, and how very little difference they make in mass shooting situations. This contains a very good illustration also of the obvious difference between the sporting rifles that these fools want to ban and the real assault rifles that have BEEN illegal since 1986. Try showing this one:

    I am sorry about the readers having to copy the link first. I tried but failed to be able to embed this as a hyper link but it will work this way.

    • Richard said

      Sorry, Rick, I meant to watch that video, but never got around to it. Now I have — thanks for posting the link. You’re right, it does a nice job of showing how little difference a reload makes (albeit with a rifle instead of a handgun). It’s better than the handgun comparison because it’s the same shooter and the same gun.

  3. jed said

    Well, I was thinking about making a video lampooning Doberson, but in context, it’s pretty clear he was talking about having multiple wound channels.

    The video would still be fun, but I have better things to throw money at.

  4. Rick Shultz said

    Whoops! Never mind. It DID embed as a hyperlink. Everybody enjoy.

  5. Billll said

    We do drills like this once a month at the club matches. On the same course of fire with everyone limited to 8 rounds in a mag, time varies from 20 to 90 seconds depending on the shooter. A fair comparison would have been to have the 9mm shooter run the course twice, once loaded to 8 rounds and once at a full load.

    At the speed they were moving, there’s enough time between targets to reload and I’m guessing you would see little or no time difference at all. Put up 12 targets and include a revolver in the mix, then you’ll see some time difference.

    • Richard said

      Yeah, I suppose a reload with a speedloader is going to be a couple or three seconds slower than slapping a new mag into a pistol. But in the real world (especially on a nightstand), there’s a lot to be said for the simplicity and reliability of a revolver. You could always carry two of them. 🙂

Leave a Comment

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.