NYT's columnist: "A Right to Glocks?"

[pnwmom]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/opinion/10collins.html?_r=1&hp

. . . 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.

SNIP

[Recursion]

1. Isn't a Glock what most Americans think of when they think of a pistol?

and it can carry a 30-bullet clip.

And people who stubbornly refuse to learn how to use terminology correctly are not the people I want to listen to on a given issue.

[pnwmom]

3. Yeah, the terminology is what's really important. Not how many people

can be killed in a couple seconds.

:sarcasm:

[krispos42]

50. Would you take medical advice from a doctor...

...who called penises "beefsticks" and vaginas "slits"? Or who mixed up the names of internal organs?

And what happens if incorrect terminology gets put in the laws that are passed?

[pnwmom]

100. I want the doctor to be able to fix the broken leg.

And I want Congress to fix our broken gun laws.

[TheWraith]

108. And if the doctor says the way to do that is to bleed you?

Then it wouldn't be a doctor, it would be a kook who wasn't competent to practice medicine. Just as this columnist doesn't know the first thing about firearms.

[pnwmom]

110. The columnist knows the most important thing.

That guns that can kill dozens of people in seconds shouldn't be available for personal use, unless under the strictest regulation.

[Glassunion]

112. I know that my liver thingy goes somewhere behind my belly button, but I would not dare

tell a doctor what to do with it or how to do it.

[pnwmom]

117. I suppose you'd rather the gun industry write the gun laws

since they're such experts in terminology.

[Glassunion]

121. Yes and the insurance companies can write the health care laws because

They are experts in the terminology as well.

[TheWraith]

132. Computers that can distribute child porn across the world shouldn't be available for personal use.

See how absurd that sounds when you follow an irrational, emotionally driven argument on a topic one doesn't understand?

The idea that some guns are somehow "super duper extra deadly" or "only made for killing people" is a belief not grounded in any facts. Loughner's rampage would probably have been equally as deadly if he'd used a 12 gauge shotgun firing buckshot into the crowd.

[one-eyed fat man]

96. Musical interlude

GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK

.. good thing we brought the glock


Yo, yo
Yo - GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
It's a block party, niggaz just bust shots
Pssh - GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
Thought you had props, with yo' gangsta bop
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
Meet me on the Hill or the Ave. hilltop
Pssh - GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
You like what you see, my shiny-ass rock
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK


I fuck the shit out of Patricia Drummonds
Looked out the window when her man was comin
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
Catch me at the Ruckers game
Playin the side with my spaghetti chain
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
Riker's Island shanked down
There go them niggaz who blew Hal my nigga
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
I'm at the ATM
Niggaz lookin sneaky in the grey BM
Yo - GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK


Twenty drunk crabs try to push through the back door
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
Five boxcutters drawn they was ready for war
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
That's that thug down from Southside who tryin to front son
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
Little dog bout to flip, someone fucked his baby moms
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK


Never leave home without it
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
Y'all niggaz ain't bout it, bout it
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
Never leave home without it
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
Y'all niggaz ain't bout it, bout it
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK


You niggaz thought somethin was sweet
cause we rollin with the seeds today
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
Back in the A-Train, Halloween
Niggaz in masks, want my name ring
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
It's Brooklawn day, Pinkhouse day
Park Hill Stapleton day
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
That same cat we stomped out
Seen him at Eastern Parkway, to park (?)
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK


We in the spot where the money's marked
NARCs just jump through the window yo
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
Them niggaz killin young niggaz at will
Check how they did my little man son
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
We ain't slaves, we just rich renegades that's paid
Born in the ghetto yo
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK
Up in the staircase, flooded with cakes
Screwfacin with the dirty eights
- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK



- GOOD THING WE BROUGHT THE GLOCK

Wu-Tang Clan, hip hop group from New York City and apparently, the NYT's Gail Collins' firearms research team from the sounds of it.

"...carrying a regular pistol, the kind most Americans think of..."

[rfranklin]

4. People who dogmatically demand that others learn gun lingo...

are a pain in the ass.

[Recursion]

5. If someone wants to ban certain things...

...I like to have an idea that they know what the words their using mean. (Google "barrel shroud" some time.)

[sailor65]

13. Yes, the "Shoulder thing that goes up..."

I still have that video. You chose a perfect example!

[WingDinger]

6. It is the least you can do to learn the item you intend to ban.

Ignorant knee jerk legislation is ALWAYS bad.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pnwmom]

36. You got it. (Except it was 20 people.)

:applause:

[Recursion]

40. Nope. That's not what a clip is.

That's my point.

[beevul]

9. People who ignorantly stand on the soapbox...

People who ignorantly stand on the soapbox wanting to ban or restrict, and can't be bothered to know anything about the subject matter they're so ineptly fumbling through, are a pain in the ass too.

Particularly when it leads to the misinforming of others, which leads to restrictions on yet others, for no good reason or result.

[texshelters]

59. Banning some types of guns that kill many people is just ignorant...

Yea, why regulate anything? Some people want to regulate guns to reduce this kind of violence, some don't. You don't? Fine.

Check out this "ignorant" post.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x163977

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[TheWraith]

46. If you want to comment on a subject, you should actually UNDERSTAND it. The columnist doesn't.

Glocks were in no way affected by the 1994 "Assault Weapons Ban," which in turn didn't actually ban any weapons--it banned features like foregrips and bayonet lugs. Glocks are a standard pistol no different from any other semi-auto made within the last 100 years.

Acting like Glocks are some special, scary sort of super-gun is no more or less ignorant than looking at an econobox car and equating it to a formula 1 racecar because they both have a manual transmission.

[texshelters]

60. I don't understand all the feature in a car, but

I still recommend we wear seat belts.

The writer focuses on the Glock 19 because that is what was used and it can shoot many rounds rapidly.

You can ignore that fact, or decide whether people need these guns, in this case, a Glock.

You are confusing one gun with the issue.

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[TheWraith]

68. How is the Glock different from any other pistol?

Every gun made in the last hundred years "shoots many rounds rapidly." What makes the Glock different, that it's so evil? Please be exact.

You're attempting to say we should ban something that you don't understand, for reasons you aren't clear on, because that's the way you feel. Emotional reaction without rational thought is not a valid basis for public policy, not in this case any more than it is in the hyperventilating reactions to sex in the media or drugs in schools.

[pnwmom]

111. Any gun that can shoot dozens of people in seconds

without reloading is a "scary sort of super-gun."

[Glassunion]

115. Are revolvers scary? You know those 200+ year old thingys?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3fgduPdH_Y

Or is it just pistols?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VeZrDIk0gE&NR=1

[pnwmom]

116. Any gun that can shoot dozens of people in seconds is scary.

Whatever the label. And, when the 2nd Amendment was passed, such guns hadn't been invented yet.

[Glassunion]

122. I'm afraid to tell you that the vast majority of firearms made today can do that.

Even my little nephew's target pistol.

[pnwmom]

126. Then perhaps we need to move into the 21st century

with Canadian style gun laws -- not relying only on a Second Amendment that never anticipated today's technology.

[Glassunion]

127. Specifically, how would adopting Canadian style gun laws reduce crime in the US?

[pnwmom]

130. There are far fewer fatal shootings in Canada,

even when accounting for their smaller population.

http://www.everydayhealth.com/blog/zimney-health-and-medical-news-you-can-use/firearm-fatalities-the-awful-toll/

Firearm Fatalities – The Awful Toll
The tragic murders of 32 innocent people at Virginia Tech on April 16 should be a wakeup call to the shocking fact that, on average, and in some macabre coincidence, 32 people are murdered by firearms every single day in the United States. This is based on data from 2004 (the most recent figures available) in which there were 11,624 firearm-related murders. That’s in comparison to a total of 184 firearm murders in Canada in 2004, 73 in England and Wales, 56 in Australia, 37 in Sweden, and 5 in New Zealand.

In 2004, there were 29,569 total firearm fatalities, including 16,750 suicides, 649 accidents and 235 with unknown intent. That’s 81 firearm-related deaths every single day in the United States.

The presence of a gun in the home triples the risk of homicide in the home and raises the risk of suicide fivefold. There are approximately 194 million privately owned firearms in the U.S., including 65 million handguns. In 1998, licensed firearm dealers sold an estimated 4.4 million guns, of which 1.7 million were handguns.

In 2004, nearly 8 children and teenagers, ages 19 and under, were killed by guns every single day. Each year during 1993-1997, an average of 1,621 murderers were under the age of 18 when they took someone’s life with a gun.

[Glassunion]

133. Saying that there a far fewer Fatal shootings in Canada, did not answer my question.

Specifically, how would adopting Canadian style gun laws reduce crime in the US? What I'm asking is what laws(specifically) would have what result(specifically)?

[pnwmom]

138. Canada limits guns. Fewer guns, fewer shootings with guns. n/t

[Glassunion]

139. The same goes for Mexico our other neighbor. They limit guns even more so

than Canada. They have fewer guns but an exponentially higher rate of shootings.

Specifically, what Canadian laws should we adopt and what would the result be?

[X_Digger]

142. That's rather simplistic thinking..

The ownership rate of firearms in Canada is fairly close to ours, yet their violent crime rate is a fraction.

If there were a correlation between the number of guns and the number of shootings, those two would track closer.

Additionally, if your assertion were true, we'd have experienced more shootings with guns in the last 15 years, because the number of guns has gone up. We haven't- they've gone down.

Got it? # of guns up, # of shootings down.

[X_Digger]

136. Post hoc ergo propter hoc..

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Did Canada have a high percentage of gun crime before they instituted a control measure, which then dropped?

[TheWraith]

134. The first amendment never anticipated computers, either.

Therefore because one person in a million can misuse them, computers should be banned. :eyes:

Or would you object to that?

[AtheistCrusader]

140. I'm actually on a waiting list for a rail gun. Feel better now?

Hell yeah, 21st century!

[X_Digger]

125. Yes, they had..

Girandoni Air Rifle..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_Air_Rifle

It fired a .51 caliber ball at a velocity similar to that of a modern .45 ACP and it had a tubular, gravity-fed magazine with a capacity of 20 balls.

[SteveM]

79. You should knowledgeable, not intentionally ignorant, of the things you wish to ban

[PavePusher]

101. People who demand that others bring intelligence and knowledge to a discussion...

yes, yes they are...

[tridim]

7. Why can it carry a 30 round clip?

Why can you buy one? I want specifics.

[Indydem]

10. Why does everyone keep focusing on the 30 round clip?

Klebold and Harris didn't have 30 round clips at Columbine and killed and injured more people.

The weapons they had (if they had been of age) were legal under the AWB.

The problem was a crazy kook who was pushed to action by right wing extremists (and I ain't talking about kokoo Palin).

Banning 30 round clips won't do a damn thing.

[RamboLiberal]

22. Exactly - he could have just as easily taken 2 or 3 or more guns

to the shooting. The Virginia Tech shooter was carrying 2 pistols. And I read this shooter had bought 2 guns. No info has surfaced yet on the 2nd gun which he wasn't carrying.

[TheWraith]

49. I thought they recovered another Glock from his home? nt

[RamboLiberal]

75. Might have missed that - thanks

[texshelters]

63. Yea, so there, and aint it grand

that we can have so much fire power to kill strangers in America?

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[oneshooter]

81. He is a Democrat a leftwing nut. n/t

[Recursion]

12. My point was about the word "clip"

The author meant "magazine". "Clips" are little pieces of metal that you can line the rounds up on to get them into the magazine.

[Xenotime]

18. This is what they look like

Why stop at 30?

[krispos42]

52. It can carry any length magazine

The magazine is inserted through the bottom of the grip. In all cases, pistols are sold with magazines that are only as long (or maybe a smidge longer) than the bottom of the grip. That configuration is by far the most convenient for carrying and shooting.

However, you can stick a longer magazine in the gun; it will simply protrude.

Glock pistol with regular magazine:





Glock pistol with larger magazine:



As you can see, it would be pretty awkward, though, which is why they are not commonly used.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

54. Top picture is an airsoft toy...

just thought you should know ;)

[krispos42]

135. LOL

well, dimensionally-exact to a Glock 9mm...

[tridim]

55. I know what they are, I just want to know why they're legal.

The answer isn't "The Second Amendment", I need a real reason. Just one.

[GreenStormCloud]

72. Why should they be illegal?

When you want to restrict any freedom, it is the person who wants to restrict that freedom who must supply the reason for the restriction.

Restricting an extended magazine servers no real purpose. A magazine change can be done in less than one second, assuming the handgun has an thumb-button release for the mag.

[X_Digger]

74. Laws don't work that way..

Something isn't illegal by default until some legislator gets around to passing a law making them legal.

Quite the reverse- by what justification would you have this magazine made illegal?

Leaving aside the constitutional issue, what percentage of crimes involve 30 round magazines? Surely you can demonstrate a drop in such usage during the AWB, right?

[SteveM]

82. Who knows? It is incumbent upon banners to defend their actions. nt

[shadowrider]

90. I won't answer

Since you're the arbitor of what is a "real reason". From past experience on this board, no reason is good enough so I won't take the bait.

[Glassunion]

92. Why are lightbulbs legal?

I need a real reason. Just one.
Bad analogy?

Why are Toyotas legal?
Bad analogy?

Ask youself why anything is legal.

My personal rule of thumb is that if it feels good, it's probably illegal.

[tridim]

94. As I suspected, nobody can provide a single reason.

Might as well label them mass murder magazines.

[Glassunion]

97. Here is your single reason.

As has been explained to you. For something to be illegal, it has to be made illegal. Things that people invent, make or produce are not illegal by default. They need to be made illegal.

Meaning, Glocks and all of their accessories are legal, because no group of politicians have written legislation and voted on it to make them illegal.

So to your question that you posted. I know what they are, I just want to know why they're legal. The answer isn't "The Second Amendment", I need a real reason. Just one. - They are legal because: No group of politicians have written legislation and voted on it to make them illegal.

So, this would then beg the question of you. If you don't feel that they should be legal, make a case for it, and tell us why they should be illegal.

[tridim]

98. I've already stated mass killing machines shouldn't be legal.

That's my reasoning.

There is no other purpose for these magazines other than to kill lots of life, very efficiently and very quickly.

Since you have no other reason other than stating the current (bad) law, I have to assume you agree. Unless you can provide another reason, the debate is over.

[Glassunion]

106. I'm sorry. I did not pick up on your reasoning from reading your posts.

Post#7: Why can it carry a 30 round clip? Why can you buy one? I want specifics.
Post#55: I know what they are, I just want to know why they're legal. The answer isn't "The Second Amendment", I need a real reason. Just one.
Post#94:As I suspected, nobody can provide a single reason. Might as well label them mass murder magazines.
And the post you just made.

So I'm sorry I did not pick up from your 3 posts that "Might as well label them mass murder magazines." was your policy stance. I'm sorry for the misunderstanding.

I will take the time to try and bundle up all of your questions in this post. As to post 7, it can carry a 30 round magazine because each caliber of the Glock firearms have inter-changeable magazines. I own a Glock 9mm, Model 26. Some people refer to it as a "Baby Glock". It is the smallest version of their 9mm that they offer. However, Glock also makes the following models all in 9mm that I can purchase: 17(The first), 17C, 17L, 17MB, 19, 34. Suppose for a moment you are a police officer and your duty weapon is a Glock 17. You carry a 26 as a backup on your ankle. Something really bad happens and you have to discharge your firearm and it jams. So you go to your backup. Once you exhaust the ammunition in your backup, you could effectively take the magazine from your jammed weapon and use it instantly in your backup. It boils down to simplicity in design. Glock designs their firearms to have as many interchangeable parts as is possible.

But back to your question in post 7. You ask; "Why can it carry a 30 round clip?" There was one model of Glock that I did not mention. The Glock Model 18. The Austrian counter-terrorist unit requested from Glock to develop a selective fire variant of the Glock 17. This is a hand gun that can fire full auto. It is referred to as a machine pistol and can fire at a rate of about 1,100 rounds a minute. This is where the necessity of the 33 round magazines came in. They are the standard magazine sizes for the model 18. The answer to the second question in post 7 "Why can you buy one?", I would answer simply because it is not illegal to do so. There is no law currently on any "federal" books that state it is illegal, so if you so desired, and your state has no laws forbidding it, you could go and purchase one at your local gun shop. I hope the prior two paragraphs were detailed enough to meet your demand of "I want specifics.".

As for their purpose, I do use mine quite frequently, however probably not for its intended purpose. I initially purchased it as a gag for myself, just to see some faces at the range when I go with my friends. It does truly look silly having a 33 round magazine attached to the smallest firearm that Glock offers. I however did notice that when using it, it reduced recoil and I could more accurately guage ammunition performance in a smaller firearm with a very short barrel. I also found that it tended to jam quite frequently if I did not feed it the right ammunition. This same ammunition would end up jamming in my standard 10 round magazines however far, far less frequently. Now whenever I try out new ammunition, I use the 33 round magazine as a guage to how well the ammunition will perform in my firearm with the standard magazines.

I have already answered post #55 and #94, so I will skip over that and go directly to the post that I am replying to. You've stated that "Mass Killing Machines" should not be legal and that is your reason. By whose standard do we determine what is, and what is not a "Mass Killing Machine"? Yes, an individual did indeed happen to use this exact magazine in a mass shooting, however these magazines have been available all over the world for over 20 years and have not been a problem thus far. So your reasoning to ban something is based on an isolated incident. But I do absolutely see and understand your reasoning. But now that I understand your reasoning, may ask you a question in turn?

What specifically should be changed in our existing law?

[AtheistCrusader]

141. Are you sure? Because the Army doesn't use these. You should call the SecDef

and let him know you've found a more efficient and quick killing implement.


Hopefully that gives you pause to think about the issue for a moment.

Your collorary on the other side of the political aisle is the freeper that wants to ban books about things like meth labs, 'anarchy' or 'dem homo's' because they find the content emotionally objectionable. They are willing to wholesale shred the first amendment to further a partisan political agenda. Are you?

[tridim]

153. I don't want to shred your right to bear arms.

I support the second ammendment, with reasonable restrictions.

Always have. Do a DU search.

[AtheistCrusader]

155. They support the first amendment too, with 'reasonable restrictions'.

'Reasonable Restrictions' is of course, highly variable from person to person.

[HiDemGunOwner]

113. Here's one

Why is it that folks who want to ban "large capacity" magazines feel only the police should have them? The police usually carry at least two magazines ("High capacity")besides the one loaded into their duty weapon, usually carry a backup weapon, have a radio to call for more police, usually have a shotgun or "patrol" rifle, if not both, and often a Taser and almost always a chemical agent. However, if I awaken to a noise in my house in the middle of the night, or am the victim of a home invasion, or get jumped by multiple attackers, you want to restrict my ammunition supply to 10 rounds per magazine? Sure, I could grab two or three magazines (or carry them for the last example) and get the same overall capacity, but why should I have to do that in the middle of the night or when the bad guys come busting in my home?

And don't tell me the odds are against me ever having to use that many shots; the odds are also that a police officer will never have to shoot his weapon in the line of duty, so I guess by that reasoning, they shouldn't have guns at all.....

[eqfan592]

128. Wow, epic fail on your part.

Ever hear of the concept of a free society?? It is on YOU to come up with a reason for something to be banned, not the other way around.

[krispos42]

137. Because they are not illegal. Are you asking for a reason why somebody would buy one?

I can imagine a couple, although I don't think I would personally.

While target shooting, it lets you spend more time focusing on technique before you have to break your concentration and your grip to reload. This also lets you do more reloading at home and more shooting at the range.

When in a life-threatening situation, it is better to have and not need than need and not have. When you're facing down home invaders in your skivvies, you don't have a lot of room on your person to carry spares. If you can carry the equivalent of a second magazine in your first magazine, that makes things much simpler for you in a time of crisis.

:shrug:

If I had a pistol, I wouldn't keep a big magazine in it... my pistol safe is probably a bit too small. But I might keep the big one next to it as a reload, on the theory that if I have to empty a 15-round magazine during a crisis and I'm still in danger, then I'm eyeball-deep in some kind of "Die Hard" situation, above and beyond a typical home-defense situation.

[tridim]

154. If that's the only reason, they definitely shouldn't be legal.

That is pathetic.

Seriously, take a step back, open your mind and re-read what you just wrote.

[krispos42]

157. What did I write?

"Gee, I hope that if I'm ever in a situation where I have to fire a gun to prevent death or injury to me or my family I hope I don't run out of ammunition before I run out of attackers".

Wow, that's a really weird hope, isn't it?

[YllwFvr]

159. not really

spending more time shooting and less reloading is a good reason to take one to the range. pretty much any reason, however weak, beats your argument

[YllwFvr]

158. ive had one

it was fun to shoot. It jammed sometimes. Not a lot, but often enough it was frustrating. I also wouldnt rely on it in ANY self defense situation for that reason. Oh for sure I carried it once or twice, and I could conceal it too. I put a forward canted holster just to the right of the small of my back so the mag was angled upwards. Which made it impossible for me to access. But I wouldnt carry something like that out and about. Totally impractical. I sold it for less than I bought it for since the prices had dropped. Wish id kept it now.

[krispos42]

160. The seem to be mfore like "gun bling" than a serious tactical tool

You can buy a 90-round magazine for a Mini-14 or an AR-15 as well for about $120. But they never seem to come up in any articles about armed self-defense.

Some things just don't work well in the real world.

[slackmaster]

104. They're legal because they're not illegal

Like everything else that isn't illegal.

[littlewolf]

99. I carry a Glock 19 as my CCW ... I use a 17 rnd mag ..

not because I feel the need for 17 rounds ... but I have large hands and the 10 round mag it came with fits even with the bottom of the grip ...
the 17 round mag gives me a better hold on the weapon ....

I asked a armorer at work about the 33 rnd mag and he told me it was primarily designed for the Glock 18 which is a full auto weapon ....
used by police and military ....

[TheWraith]

109. Because it's technically possible to build.

Since the gun's MAGAZINE (the correct term) doesn't have a fixed physical size, you can build one larger, theoretically as large as you can produce a spring for. Of course, these are notoriously unreliable, which is why his malfunctioned, jammed the gun, and caused him to try and flee.

If he had been using regular sized magazines, he might have been able to continue firing until everyone was dead or someone else returned fire.

[one-eyed fat man]

124. Let's make this simple enough for you.

Detachable magazines have been around for about 140 years. Here is a design from 1902.


For a Glock pistols they look like this:


Installed in the gun they fit flush with the grip.



If you look and see how the magazine is made, an extended magazine is exactly that. There is virtually no limit on how long you make the magazine. If you didn't fail shop in high school and know what a sheet metal brake is, you could form a box magazine as long as you wanted. Even to the point of impractical.



The pistol has absolutely no way to know what size magazine is in it.

You can buy one for the same reasons you can buy a 45 foot sloop, a P-51 Mustang, or the latest Kesha song and music video, you have money and you want one. In most places they are legal. New ones, except for law enforcement use were banned for between 1994 and 2004.

And even if they are banned, oh say, like prostitutes on Craigslist, you have money and imagination...

While you're on your high horse, consider these quotes from Al Capone,

"All I ever did was sell beer and whiskey to our best people. All I ever did was to supply a demand that was pretty popular."

"Public service is my motto. Ninety percent of the people of Cook County drink and gamble and my offense has been to furnish them with those amusements. My booze has been good and my games on the square."

While I think William Howard Taft had you pegged!

"No tendency is quite so strong in human nature as the desire to lay down rules of conduct for other people."

[Euromutt]

148. And on the topic of that design from 1902...

That's the long-barreled "Artillery" model, so named because it was issued to artillerymen as a sort of proto-"personal defense weapon." While it could take the standard 8-round magazine, it was issued with the 32-round drum magazine pictured, as well as a detachable shoulder stock. So that's a design dating from 1908.

[texshelters]

57. I don't automatically think of a Glock, and I am not sure what

terminology you want used? I think of a .44 Magnum (Smith & Wesson Model 29). Now that's American.

I think most people think of Dirty Harry. I also think of a Sig Sauer because that is one fine pistol for target practice and is more than enough to protect one in the home.

So, where did the poster go wrong?

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[Recursion]

69. Clips are not magazines (nt)

[texshelters]

156. Here's a definition I found

clip
n 1: a metal frame or container holding cartridges; can be
inserted into an automatic gun cartridge clip, clip, magazine]

http://onlinedictionary.datasegment.com/word/clip

It seems like "clip" and "magazine" are synomyms. But I get your point.

However, I don't understand how that makes a comment invalid.

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[SteveM]

77. Nah, it's AK-47; I mean, didn't you see the flint and revolving cylinder? nt

[oneshooter]

78. No. I think 1911a1 or SIG 220, sometimes Broomhandle Mauser or Webley. n/t

[Endangered Specie]

118. Shoot most of those "no gun" signs are clearly an outline of a GLOCK

[Glassunion]

123. Wrong!

Baretta

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Recursion]

14. There, I rec'ed it

So I canceled whoever that was out.

[RamboLiberal]

28. I'll K&R it since it is a good discussion between both sides of the issue

[sailor65]

30. Isn't unreccing what we're supposed to do

With content that is poorly researched, poorly written, and generally ignorant?

[villager]

34. Yes, I guess you've been schooled that you're "supposed" to do it when a guns-at-all-costs

worldview is challenged, or even brought up for discussion...

[beevul]

41. The piece is...

The piece is poorly researched, poorly written, and generally ignorant, just as the poster said.

[villager]

51. i.e., "I personally disagree with it"

n/t

[beevul]

53. You are dismissing or ignoring the factual inaccuracies.

Go ahead, say you aren't.

[villager]

56. so in your benighted view, the troubled shooter had an *absolute right* to gun access

along with unrestricted access to larger magazines (more ammo without reloading)?

I assume you think so, since you seem upset at the thesis in the column....

[beevul]

58. i'm disapointed in the amaturish writing, and the repetition of lies, contained within.

Why arent you?

[villager]

62. ah, so "amateurish writing" is one of your "objective" criteria then?

Nice dodge of the question too, btw...

[beevul]

64. And the repetition of at least 1 verifiable lie.

Want to discuss it?

[villager]

145. You seem unable to.

n/t

[SteveM]

84. Worse than amateurish, it is repetitive. nt

[villager]

144. Well, I'm glad we've established you can't come up with any "objective" objections

But are instead criticizing from the usual vantage of the pro-gun amen chorus...

[PavePusher]

103. Easy, there mate. Don't you know there's a straw shortage in these parts? n/t

[YllwFvr]

161. have they done anything wrong

up until then? are they a prohibited person? did they pass the back ground checks required of everyone?

Then yes. To do otherwise would be precrime, arresting and charging people who havent done anything wrong. This is the way our system works. For the most part, our justice system punishes people AFTER they committed a crime, not before.

[texshelters]

61. You are deliberately ignoring the issue of gun violence because

you know the difference between a clip and a magazine.

Nice try. The issue is gun deaths and violence, not the mistake that many make regarding clip or magazine.

Now, do you think it okay that semi-auto hand guns with large magazines (over 10 shots) are so easily available? Can you address the topic? And I will conceded you know more about guns than me, so let's move on.

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[beevul]

66. Not at all.

"Now, do you think it okay that semi-auto hand guns with large magazines (over 10 shots) are so easily available?"

Yep. I think its just fine.

"You are deliberately ignoring the issue of gun violence"

Not at all.

It concerns me.

What concerns me more is when the usual suspects use deaths and gun violence to push an agenda. And lie doing it.

[eqfan592]

131. Bingo!

And what's even worse is that the agenda the usual suspects will as an agenda that would literally do NOTHING to solve the violence problem in our nation. Note I said violence problem and not GUN violence problem. Like any rational person, I'm able to recognize all forms of violence, and their interchangeability of implements.

[SteveM]

85. In answer to your question: Yes, it's okay. So? nt

[spin]

93. I see no problem with high capacity magazines ...

I don't own one but know people who do.

To me 10 rounds is enough, if not I can change out the magazine and have another 10 rounds in one second.

But if someone wants a 30 round magazine, that's their choice. Some enjoy shooting and hate reloading. I'm different. I usually only load five rounds in a magazine at the range, that way I can practice swapping magazines. I find that the more rounds I load the more likely the firearm is to jam. To me extended magazines are a pain in the ass. They also add weight to the firearm and make it awkward to handle.

I carry a five shot revolver for self defense. I have a speed loader with an additional five rounds in my pocket. I could carry a Glock if I wanted but I like "wheel guns" because they are more reliable. Like I said, I'm different. I have occasionally carried a Colt .45 Auto but it had a 8 round magazine.

But I see no reason to stop selling, ban or confiscate high capacity magazines. This would accomplish little if not nothing and if pushed by the Democratic Party would us cost votes in the next election.

[PavePusher]

102. Yes, I do disagree with blatent, prideful ignorance.

Including yours.

[hobbit709]

8. Any pistol is extremely easy to fire over and over since the days of Samuel Colt.

And if you know how to do it well, it only takes a couple of seconds to swap magazines.

And Glocks are not the only handguns that have 30 round magazines available.

[rfranklin]

20. And it was that reloading moment that allowed the lady to prevent more death...

in AZ. If he had needed to reload after only 10 rounds it is likely fewer people would have died.

[RamboLiberal]

26. It was more than the reloading moment

He had been hit in the head by a folding chair, knocked to the ground. She had taken cover on the ground. She grabbed the magazine there. And if the shooter hadn't been carrying the long extended mag I doubt she could've grabbed it. The shorter mags are basically hand size so it doesn't stick out.

It was the incredible bravery of the bystanders that brought this shooter down.

[Statistical]

27. He only fired 20 of the 30 rounds in the weapon.

Either he had a jam or the magazine malfunctioned. Either is much more common with those very large capacity magazines. You will never see any professional using 30rnd mag. When it is much easier to have a high quality 15-18 rnd mag and simply change magazines in about 2 seconds.

[RamboLiberal]

29. Curious where you got the fired 20 rounds?

Just something I hadn't read yet.

[Statistical]

35. I have seen it in numerous reports.

Witnesses said the suspect, Jared Loughner, walked calmly up to Mrs Giffords and fired at point blank range.
Loughner then fired 15-20 shots into the crowd, witnesses said. He was tackled to the ground by two brave men.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1345486/Arizona-shooting-Police-seek-SECOND-suspect-caught-security-camera.html

My assumption (likely the only reason you attempt to reload prior to exausting magazine) is that he had a malfunction. Either failure to feed, jam, or possible failure/malfunction of the mag spring. Very high capacity magazines tend to be bad when it comes to reliable feeding.

[RamboLiberal]

38. 15-20 rounds I won't take as gospel

Bystanders are very poor witnesses counting shots. I heard sheriff say the gun was empty and he was reloading. Another witness who is a gun owner (and was carrying) when he became fourth person holding him down said the slide was locked back. Sheriff also said spring in 3rd mag(15 rounder) he loaded (after woman ripped away the extended slide) spring malfunctioned. Perhaps round jammed when shooter tried to rack the slide or release it. That would make sense if he was struggling with the people trying to hold him down and take the gun away.

Don't know if info will come out now but law enforcement will be able to tell of course by number of shell casings on the ground.

[Statistical]

45. True more information will be available with time. n/t

[RamboLiberal]

76. Witness that was in Wahlgreen's as shooting started

And got to the scene to help in holding down shooter.

Zamudio said he never pulled his gun out. He saw that the slide on the shooter's gun appeared to be empty and decided the shooter was not in a position to fire.

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/01/09/20110109gabrielle-giffords-arizona-shooting-morning.html#ixzz1Afb4Vnef

I figure he knew what he was seeing since he carried a gun and that the gun was at slidelock. And slidelock only happens when last round is fired from gun or you manually lock open the slide.

[Statistical]

83. Good point. I hope eventually they release the exact number of rounds fired.

If nothing more than to satisfy my need for real facts not casual phrases the media is so common of using. The media rarely seems to realize words matter and using them casually when trying to convey facts is counterproductive.

[beevul]

33. One of the sheriffs said the magazine spring broke. N/T

[beevul]

32. Actually ...

Actually it wasnt.

If you dig a little, youll see it was a broken magazine spring. Which would create a jam. Which would require clearing a jam before a mag swap could be done successfully.

The aftermarket 30 round mags have a lot of spring in them - that is, the spring inside the magazine which forces rounds to the top of the magazine, and into position to feed, is quite long and far less reliable that a standard length spring in a standard capacity mag - and are prone, relatively speaking, to broken springs because of it.

It is entirely possible, that with standard capacity mags, that there would have been no failure, and instead of the broken spring which DID happen, the shooter may have had a simple 2 second mag change and kept shooting.

A simple standard magazine is a 2 second swap, or less.

A quick google would confirm for you that there were still rounds in the gun when the police gained possession of it.

[rfranklin]

37. I can also google that the Representative Giffords is dead...

but 20 rounds is still more than 15 and double 10.

[beevul]

39. Whoosh...

And shes not dead.

The rest...you simply don't get.


Your bias prevents it.

[RamboLiberal]

42. I'm not sure it was the 30 rounder that failed

I heard sheriff say it was after the woman ripped away the 2nd 30 rounder he tried to insert one of the two 15 rounders in gun and magazine spring broke. I wondered if in struggling on ground with the bystanders trying to load that 3rd mag if he jammed the gun.

But in the chaos of news reports who knows. May be something we have to wait for the trial to find out for sure.

Also the shell casings on the ground will tell how many rounds he managed to fire.

And I agree with you on the spring problems with the 30 rounders. I have read of that. Though I own several Glocks I have no interest in wasting my money on one.

[beevul]

44. True.

Yeah, I have a beretta and I wouldn't waste the money on one myself.

Don't see any real compelling reason to ban or restrict them, though, iether.

[TheWraith]

47. He was caught when he attempted to flee, not due to a reload.

http://gawker.com/5728501/

[RamboLiberal]

80. I've read more accounts where people were saying he was reloading

And he was close enough to be clocked by a chair.

"The shooting stopped and I raised up and didn't realize it, but he was right beside me. Right in front of me. And I got to my feet and one of the individuals who was there to see her was on the other side of the walkway, you know, right where he was walking and that individual took a folding chair, folded it and hit him on the back of the head and he moved his head forward so much of the blunt of it came right on the shoulders of his back and when they did that his left arm came out and it was my opportunity," Badger told KOLD.

"I grabbed his left arm and started to twist it back and grabbed him on the shoulder with my right hand another individual grabbed his right hand and together we pushed on him and he went right down on the sidewalk."

Badger and the other man pinned the suspect to the ground until police arrived.

"Anytime he would even start to move, I would tighten my grip on his throat, and the other guy would put more pressure on his neck to hold him down," Badger said. "And he'd holler, 'Oh, oh, you're hurting me! Oh, oh,' - like that. And that guy said, 'I don't give a .'"

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/01/10/national/main7230550.shtml?tag=stack

[TheWraith]

107. According to the police press conference, he still had ammo in the mag.

Some of the folks may have mistaken him trying to clear a jam for reloading.

[RamboLiberal]

114. I listened to the sheriff and what I heard

Was that he still had mags with ammo on him since he had another 33 round mag, and two 15 round mags.

[SteveM]

86. And the concealed-carry guy who got to him as well...

Actually, "it is likely fewer people would have died" if others in Congresswoman Gifford's entourage had been armed.

[one-eyed fat man]

147. Dichotomy

"I want to get the Republican party small enough to drown it in a bathtub."

Violent rhetoric? Goose or gander?

[texshelters]

67. Did anyone think that perhaps the use of "Glocks" was an example

of what guns should be questioned and not just the Glock itself. I guess we read into this what we want, but why should people own such pistols with such fire power? What's the point other than to kill many people quickly?

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[Recursion]

70. Are you saying pistols made by Glock are more powerful than other pistols?

It's just a brand.

[SteveM]

87. Not really. Gun controllers "tag" a gun in order to get SOME kind of victory...

Heretofore, it's been "All AK-47, All the Time;" now it may be the horrible "Glock;" I mean, it sounds awful, doesn't it?
I'll treat your question seriously: what you seem to want is to ban the most popular class of self-defense gun in the U.S. This is what gun-control has always been about: sweeping bans, starting with the stigmata of a certain class of gun. If you wish to ban these guns, then state the reason for such bans, instead of speculating on why people want "such fire power."

Incidentally, Helmke (a Republican in a Republican founded and led organization) said the 9 mm gun is not good for self-defense. This "expert" doesn't seem to realize that many thousands of police use the Glock make as well as the caliber.

My "firepower" is a .357 revolver, far more powerful than a 9mm.

[YllwFvr]

162. I think this is the first time

ive read of someone using the words "that much firepower" when talking about a nine millimeter cartridge.

[Mark Maker]

11. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords owns a Glock herself

and under current Arizona law didn't need a permit to carry concealed. I suppose she should be vilified for that.



http://www.newsweek.com/2010/10/28/target-practice/gabrielle-giffords.html
Democratic House candidate, Arizona’s Eighth District
Gabrielle Giffords owns a Glock handgun, and as a two-term Democratic congresswoman representing a swing district in Arizona’s rugged southeast, she may have needed to stress that. Still, the NRA only gives her a tepid D+ rating.

[rfranklin]

23. That's a cool Glock!

where do I get one of those?

[Mark Maker]

31. That ain't no Glock, it's just a toy rifle she's playing with

The article claims she owns a Glock.

[Statistical]

15. A glock IS a regular pistol.

A Glock IS a regular pistol. Where do these anti-gunner get this junk? It would be like saying "The drunk driver was driving a Ford Taurus, is only he had been driving a regular car".

Glock 17 (9mm)


Springfield XD 9mm


Smith & Wesson M&P9 (9mm)


Sig Sauer Pro 9mm


Notice the similarity? I could provide another two dozen examples of modern 9mm pistols. They are look and function pretty much the same. They fire the same round, have very similar muzzle velocity, have similar capacity, and roughly same rate of fire. Each has slightly differing levels of quality, finish, durability, recoil, and handling but essentially they all work the same. Every* modern pistol works the same way.

The Glock 17 is merely the evolution of the M1911 which was invented in 1911.


There is nothing radical about it. Its mechanical operation is based on a design from almost a century ago.



*Some exceptions apply like the gas recoil operated Desert Eagle

[sailor65]

17. What BS.....it had nothing to do with Glock

One could get a 30 round magazine into almost any autoloading handgun. But hey, as long as he invokes the "Founding Fathers," who cares whether or not the author has any idea what he's talking about, right?

And the only Americans who think of the "Other kind" of pistol when they think of RKBA are equally ignorant and undereducated.

[RamboLiberal]

19. In this column Gail Collins showed knee-jerk reaction

uninformed commentary on the gun she was writing about.

From article:

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.

A Glock is a regular pistol.

Loughner’s gun, a 9-millimeter Glock, is extremely easy to fire over and over, and it can carry a 30-bullet clip.

Most pistols are easy to fire over and over. A Glock is not the only pistol that can have an extended magazine. There were extended magazines I believe before the Glock in USPSA shooting.

[SteveM]

88. You cannot get a job at NYT or WaPo unless you make a pledge...

to remain studiously ignorant of guns, and to intentionally make stuff up in order to propagandize. It's the law, I tell you.

[NickB79]

21. Glocks were not banned before 2004, only NEW high-capacity mags were

You could still buy all the 30-rd magazines you wanted for your Glock before 2004, DURING the ban. They just had to be manufactured before 1994, which many thousands were. The only difference the expiration of the ban made was that it now costs a bit less to buy such magazines.

[beevul]

24. A brady bunch lie. Right here for all in GD to see.

"It is “not suited for hunting or personal protection,” said Paul Helmke"


Yeah, thats why police carry them. Because its thier job to kill and injure a lot of people quickly. (do I need to insert the sarcasm smiley here?)

If there were a better more reliable handgun for personal protection, the police would use them, without hesitation.


Look folks. This is the brady bunch.

Paul helmke is a 3 term republican.

The brady bunch was founded and is led by republicans. The outright lie, tell half truths, and lie by omission, on a regular basis.

The above is but one example.

Beyond that:

"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..."

The semi-automatic handgun is a hundred years old in design, give or take. It IS a regular pistol. The guy that wrote this piece has been watching too many westerns or something. "Six shooters" havent been the "common pistol" for decades.


"It’s about a technology the founding fathers could never have imagined."

Yeah, and they never imagined tv radio or the internet either.

What with all the talk about hate speech, that line of argument ought to give one pause. At some point someone on the other side might decide to deem something WE say as hate speech. And go after the internet, or tv, or radio...

[Recursion]

71. Well, not so much in GD anymore... (nt)

[NickB79]

25. It is “not suited for hunting or personal protection,”

"said Paul Helmke, the president of the Brady Campaign."

Yeah, the guy in charge of an organization pushing to make all handguns illegal is telling us what firearms are suitable for self-defense? :eyes:

Someone alert the MILLIONS of police that carry Glocks around the world that their firearms aren't suitable for defending themselves.

[Euromutt]

149. Yeah, that sprang out at me too

The Glock 19 is, in fact, ideally suited for personal protection. It fires a readily controllable yet reasonably powerful round (provided you're using JHPs), carries a decent number of them, it's simple to handle, fire and maintain, reasonably concealable while still being large enough to keep a solid grip on (if your hands aren't too large). It is the gun many firearms instructors recommend a novice handgun owner look at first.

I don't own any Glocks because they don't quite work for me, but they work very well for a great number of people.

[Edweird]

43. The Glock was never restricted - only the high capacity magazines were.

Those were still available AFTER the ban, only they were more expensive.

[texshelters]

65. I saw a 33 shot mag on line for less than $30 for the clock so

they are not that expensive.

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[Glassunion]

73. During the ban they were expensive.

[Endangered Specie]

120. The '94 ban did not ban those made pre-1994

Those that were pre-94 made soared in price, as would ANY commodity that is of fixed supply and ever increasing demand, much like an out-of-production vehicle (they stay out long enough, and their value goes up enough, they become collectable.


Same reason why civilian legal machine guns (banned in '86, pre-86 grandfathered in) cost 20-100 times more than they originally did

[krispos42]

48. "It’s about a technology the founding fathers could never have imagined"

Says the person posting on the INTERNET via a computer. Yet, somehow, the First and Fourth Amendments have made the technology change without being declared null, void, or outdated.


DU really needs an "Irony" emoticon

[Travis_0004]

89. My Favorite quote "not suited for hunting or personal protection"

If its not suited to personal protection, why does the VAST majority of cops use glocks. I bet the percent of cops that use a glock is probably 80%. I know quite a few cops, and every single one uses a glock. THe glock is one of the best choices for personal protection.

[Atypical Liberal]

91. The article makes little sense.

. . . 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.

That's because they know that it's political suicide to go up against the NRA. Good! That's why I pay my NRA dues every year. I pay to pressure Congress to do what I want them to do, and to help insure that pro-second amendment politicians get elected.

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.

Notice here that the author doesn't bother to define what a "regular pistol" is, or what "most Americans think of when they think of the right to bear arms".

Without this definition, we really can't debate what the author is saying. Who knows what constitutes a "regular pistol"? Revolvers are over 200 years old. Semi-automatic pistols are over 100 years old. Most police departments have been using semi-automatic pistols as duty weapons for over 20 years. So what exactly constitutes a "regular pistol"?

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.”

Glock pistols are extremely easy to fire over and over - just like all semi-automatic pistols. And just like nearly all of them, you can get extended magazines for them. Note, however, that this is not necessary. The stock Sprinfield Armory XDM carries 19 rounds in its regular, non-extended magazine.

And they are extremely well suited for personal protection, which is the police carry them.

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.

The founding fathers could never have imagined the Internet, either, but this is no reason to truncate our freedom of speech. Lee Harvey Oswald shot two people, killing one and injuring a bystander, with three shots from a bolt-action rifle. No doubt if he had wished to shoot more people, as Loughner did, he easily could have.

[one-eyed fat man]

95. NYPD, what do they carry?

Firearms

New NYPD officers are allowed to select one of three 9mm service pistols configured in double-action only (DAO): the SIG P226 DAO, Smith & Wesson model 5946, and Glock 19. All are modified to a 12-pound (53 N) trigger pull. All of the service pistols utilize hollow point bullets, as do most law enforcement service weapons in the United States.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_Police_Department#Firearms

The Glock 19 was not banned by the expired Assault Weapons Ban.

The Federal Assault Weapons Ban separately defined and banned "large capacity ammunition feeding devices", which generally applied to magazines or other ammunition feeding devices with capacities of greater than 10 rounds.

During the period in which the AWB was in effect, it was illegal to manufacture any firearm that met the law's definition of an "assault weapon" or "large capacity ammunition feeding device", unless it was marked "FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ONLY".

"It’s about a technology the founding fathers could never have imagined." They did however likely envision reporters who would dissemble and fabricate stories, and wrote the First Amendment anyway.

If the mischaracterization of what the Assault Weapons ban did or did not ban are due to the reporter's sloppy fact checking or a deliberate lie is yet to be determined.

[Euromutt]

150. UN Dept. of Safety and Security, what do they carry?

Also the Glock 19! Actually, UNDSS tends to copy most of their kit and procedures from the NYPD. Accordingly, UN security officers used to carry S&W 5946s, prior to the NYPD's adoption of the G19.

An acquaintance (and former co-worker) of mine is currently working as a close protection specialist (i.e. bodyguard) with a UN agency in the former Yugoslavia, and yes, he carries a Glock 19 under his suit jacket while protecting visiting dignitaries.

[one-eyed fat man]

152. You would think

that a prize-winning journalist for the allegedly premier newspaper in the country would do research as basic as flashing her press card at the next NYPD officer she saw on the street and asking, "Officer, what kind of gun is that?"

Every time there is a tragedy there is a rush to DO SOMETHING! This can never be allowed to happen again. Hardware is the most tangible constant that can be readily identified, so by default that is it.

What is on the "too hard to do" list is cognizance of the fact that out there, somewhere among 325 million people is a mind that has become galvanized at the news of this catastrophe. Some one somebody knows. Someone people might find mildly eccentric. Someone no ever heard of, someone no one pays much attention to, who has decided, "he" will make them take notice.

...and like countless times before, "he" will make himself known out of the clear blue. On which occasion we will get all the same questions from reporters and pundits about how could someone so apparently deranged (in the clear illumination of hindsight) evade so many laws meant to prevent him from acquiring guns, bullets, rental trucks, fertilizer, matches, paint thinner, hair bleach, toilet bowl cleaner or bleach...to commit such a travesty.

[PavePusher]

105. UnRecced for pandering to ignorance. Try again. n/t

[Endangered Specie]

119. I'm guessing the 'journalist' is unaware of the fact that 20-30 rd mags are made

for nearly every reasonably common pistol in existence, either by the factory or a 3rd party manufacturer.

A glock is no easier or more difficult to shoot then nearly every other pistol, its trigger arguably makes it more difficult to shoot 'well'.

[one-eyed fat man]

129. She would be even more dismayed

To find out a "mere slip of a girl" became the youngest USPSA Master Class shooter at age 17.

She would be even more horrified to know she is a college student in Indiana, and now past age eighteen qualifies for a concealed carry permit under Indiana law.

Here is what she can do with a 9mm Glock. Despite the Glock's trigger she does quite well.

[benEzra]

143. Oh, geez, I just read the whole article.

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

A Glock 19 is a regular pistol. In fact, it pretty much defines "regular pistol", based on its dominance of the civilian and law-enforcement market for more than two decades now. A 20-second Google search and a five-minute read of the Glock Wikipedia page would have confirmed that. Heck, the NYPD itself uses the G19, and they are about as conservative a department as you can find.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock_pistol

Do journalists even bother to fact-check press releases anymore before re-publishing them?

[krispos42]

146. It's like reading Faux News about the economy, isn't it? n/t

[benEzra]

151. Yup. (n/t)

[Francis Marion]

163. duplicate

duplicate

[Francis Marion]

164. She won't take the same medecine she prescribes

"...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."

Said the journalist, on nytimes.com, by means of the Internet, a means of communication the Founders could not have imagined. Confident, the whole time, in an expectation to speak freely in a manner the Founders couldn't have imagined.

Maybe Gail Collins should set an example for the rest of us. Gail, would you mind restricting your journalism to short run broadsides and quill-penned letters? Delivered by sail boat and by horse drawn wagon?

And please insist that your city police show up when you call them equipped with Brown Bess muskets and bayonets, and no cars, please, but again, horses are fine. Then again, Gail, I hope you're within shouting distance of the constable...

She won't apply the same reasoning to the remaining Bill of Rights which she applies to Amendment Two. Why not?

[Union Scribe]

165. Holy shit, did the editors take a day off?

Nice quality control, NYT.