Colorado gun control lawmaker doesn’t realize magazines can be reloaded
J. D. Heyes
April 7, 2013
It is a concept that seems basic – almost rudimentary – even for a child, but apparently one leading left-wing gun-banning congresswomen didn’t seem to realize during recent televised proceedings that gun magazines can be reloaded.
Democratic Rep. Diana DeGette of Colorado has been a leading congressional sponsor of a federal ban on high-capacity magazines for years, even calling it one of her top priorities. With that said, you would assume, then, that this esteemed member of the House would at least have a base of knowledge about how such devices work – right?
Well, if you assumed that you’d be wrong.
Ignorance may be bliss but not when it comes to gun rights
At an April 2 forum on gun control that was hosted by The Denver Post, “the senior congresswoman from Denver appeared to not understand how guns work,” the paper said.
When she was asked how a ban on magazines holding more than 15 bullets would be an effective deterrent to gun violence, this is what the brainiac said:
“I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those know 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.”
These shiny brass-and-lead things, see, are bullets, and, you know, once you shoot ‘em, well, then, um, you know, they’re gone and with them, um, the clip thingies too.
What is she babbling about? She doesn’t know - and that’s the problem.
Per the Post:
What she didn’t appear to understand is that a magazine can be reloaded with more bullets.
No one seeks to infringe your right to keep and bear arms. The only measures under discussion are backgrounds checks for EVERYONE (including gun show buyers) who want to buy a firearm, a limit in high capacity magazines to cause an interruption or two or three in the killing, and PERHAPS a ban on rifles that are easily converted to fully automatic fire with "drop-in" parts freely available now all over the internet. That part is at least worth of some reasoned discussion.)
These limitations are no more infringement on the 2nd mendment than the 1930s ban on automatic weapons, the prohibition against possession of silencers or other restrictions already in place. So let's be reasonable and hammer out some reasonable laws. To say "absolutely no" to ANYthing is to further marginalize yourself into the "gun nuts" corner.