Deep in Wednesday's Observer was a notable comment that we need to amplify. Ken Rinkor is the vice president of Tactical Arms Manufacturer Inc. in Huntersville. The family-owned company makes AR-15s, the kind of semi-automatic rifle Adam Lanza used in Newtown. Rinkor worries that his company could go out of business if assault rifles are outlawed.
Yet Rinkor supports a ban on sales to the public of high-capacity ammunition magazines. Lanza used large-capacity magazines to fire multiple rounds without having to reload.
"Frankly, I think there's no need for anybody to have such ... magazines, 20 or 30 rounds. It makes no sense at all to have that large of a magazine, even for personal protection," Rinkor told the Observer.
Doesn't that just about settle it? It's a common-sense step. And if one of the nation's biggest defenders of the AR-15 rifle says high-capacity magazines should be banned, who is to argue with him?
One other note on the gun control debate: How lame is it that one of North Carolina's U.S. senators, Republican Richard Burr, won't make any comment about it? The Observer interviewed members of the N.C. congressional delegation about how to respond to the Newtown tragedy. Republicans Richard Hudson, Robert Pittenger, Renee Ellmers and Patrick McHenry weighed in, as did U.S. Sen. Kay Hagan, a Democrat. Burr did not respond to a request for comment. North Carolinians are used to Burr being less than visible, but is it asking too much for him to tell his constituents his thoughts on one of the most horrifying tragedies in U.S. history?
Taylor Batten
Posts
48 comments:
Regardless of whether I agree or disagree with the above mentioned ban...saying things like "that just about settles it" and "one gun control measure we can all agree on" or "who can argue with him"...just because one person from one gun manufacturer happens to agree with the ban...I don't think that's cause to speculate that the issue is "settled", "unarguable" or "in agreement by everyone". That's akin to a doctor at an abortion clinic saying "I don't think teenagers should be allowed to have abortions" and that becoming the universal consensus of everyone.
Is he channeling Mayor Bloomberg? And I don't mean about gun control, I mean large - sodas.
God forbid a kid or some obese person get ahold of a 32oz. Big Gulp, even though they can buy two 16oz. Big Gulps.
So we cut clips to what? 10? 5?
Take two 10 round clips, tape them together inverted and pop 'em in and out.
I think many people have this belief that it takes a long time to switch clips in guns and by reducing the number of rounds, "lives will be saved".
Anyone who uses redundant terms like "magazine clip" is ignorant of firearms and is unqualified to discuss the subject.
Taylor, go back to the $1.1 million gated home your wifey bought you.
Wiley,
Obviously you know something about guns, unlike Taylor $1.1 Million Gated Community House Batten.
A skilled shooter can swap out magazines in about 5 seconds.
Go ahead and ban the high-capacity magazine.
It won't matter.
Then you all can whine and wring your hands and say we STILL haven't done "enough".
But remember...
Crazy doesn't demand the finest or latest technology.
It's happy with whatever it can find.
The worst schoolhouse massacre in US history (including today) was committed in 1927 using dynamite.
The man who did it was the 55 year old treasurer of the school district.
He was upset because he lost an election for township clerk the year before.
You really cannot stop crazy no matter how many silly laws you pass.
Garth Vader,
If one of the kids murdered in Newtown was your child, how valuable would those 5 seconds be to you?
mp, I wouldn't force anyone's child including my own into a "Gun Free Zone". Why would you, after seeing the results of "Gun Free Zones"?
Taylor,
While lounging at your $1.1 million gated community home that your wife bought you, please do some research on Mexican Beauty Queen Maria Susana Flores Gamez, killed with a Fast and Furious gun supplied to drug cartels by Lord God Obama.
When Suzanna Hupp testified before lawmakers regarding the shooting where her parents were killed, she made two salient points:
1. An experienced shooter can reload within a second (as an Army veteran, I can attest to this).
2. During the LA Riots, a man kept his property safe from crowds of looters by simply standing on the roof of his building with his assault rifle in hand. How about you tell me this isn't needed for personal defense? Do you honestly believe we'll *never* have another riot so long as we shall live?
This may be your opinion, but you are seriously misinformed if you think such a position "just about settles it". I respect your right to your opinion, but please don't try to pass it off as the only sane, rational, informed solution. It is NOT my opinion and no one elected you to represent anyone. In the future, it might behoove you to actually do a little research about the topic and speak intelligently about the subject...unlike you did here. If you would do that, you might garner a little more respect for said opinion - even if it failed to generate agreement. Blanket statements like you made here are symptomatic of what is wrong with this entire process to begin with.
I realize that this was an opinion piece, but that does not mitigate the fact that the writer, in supporting his opinion does not appeal to facts but rather employs classic logical fallacies: the self-evident truth, and the appeal to authority.
A high school debater wouldn't get by with that. It's surprising that a major daily newspaper tries.
Gun carrying man ends stabbing spree at Salt Lake grocery store
http://www.abc4.com/content/about_4/bios/story/conceal-and-carry-stabbing-salt-lake-city-smiths/NDNrL1gxeE2rsRhrWCM9dQ.cspx
Good thing Taylor lives in a $1.1 million gated home his wife bought and doesn't have to go grocery shopping himself.
"Doesn't that just about settle it?" One guy submits his opinion and that settles it? Really???? I think not. If thats the case then I think Obama should resign, be tried for treason and sentenced to the maximum punishment allowed by law, which for treason is...... That settles it....right?
Maybe Senator Burr has enough class to keep his comments to himself until after a proper morning period occurs, or at least until the last victim's funeral is over.
Interesting that with one interview, "that just about settles it." When will people truly understand that a ban on anything will not stop a criminal? Truly, murder is illegal- happens every day, selling drugs is illegal- happens every day, there a laws against child abuse- happens every day. Let's also start really doing some criminal profiling here... in looking at recent mass shootings, I can't think of one that anyone came out and said that the shooter was very well adapted and didn't have any social issues... A ban on ammunition, magazines or guns won't stop those that want to kill someone, it simply punishes those in a position to protect their home and target shoot for fun. At this point all you'll do is create a larger black market for guns and ammo... at least there won't be taxes on those items then...
Complex issues like this can't be solved by simply passing more laws and trying to control more people. Criminals are the very people who won't be controlled when you do that. Passing a law might make you feel good, and maybe that's all liberals are after. It doesn't really matter to them whether it's a solution, but it makes them feel better that they "did something:.
Taylor is an uninformed girly man, and that just about settles it from this female's point of view.
I'm with you, JG Streuber...treason it is. How do I get picked for THAT jury?
We should pass laws against heroin & meth and we'd never have to read about Lincoln County again. What's that...there's already laws against those drugs and murder?
@ TexGirl...
"It doesn't really matter to them whether it's a solution, but it makes them feel better that they "did something".
Amen - even if the "something" they did is meaningless in the bigger scheme of things.
Hey Garth - I think you can safely stop commenting on Peter's house now, which you've managed to insert in every increasingly unhinged post in this column. Enough.
We get it - you're a tiny, jealous, angry old white guy who's turned green with envy. You live in a trailer and are convinced it should be YOU livin' large in that gated community if it just weren't for all those dam Democrats who taxed you out of it.
You think all entitlements are bad, except the ones you take advantage of - including that gold-plated Medicare health care paid for by younger workers. If you're not old enough yet, you see nothing wrong with freeloading your health care at hospital ER's. Because making everyone pay into the system if they intend to take something out of it is clearly SOCIALISM! And a violation of your precious FREEDOM - to freeload. We get it.
And you're really, really spitting mad that the scary black man won re-election because you and all your buddies, who don't have a racist bone in your bodies (as you keep telling us), are convinced the President is a secret Muslim socialist who will sell the country out to the terrorists.
What I'm surprised about is that you're still posting here, still polluting every single comment section you can. I really thought the new Observer pay wall would weed out you right-wing freeloaders. After all, why would an upstanding patriot like you want to subscribe to such a heathen liberal rag like this?
Time for the Observer to take the necessary steps to return these comment sections to people willing to have an intelligent discussion. And send you back to the Glenn Beck show. Now there's a guy who speaks your language: crazy.
A card-carrying member of the far left berating someone for a "right to freeload" -- without any hint of irony. Beautiful...
Another case of someone writing about something they obviously know nothing about.
1. There are several manufacturers of the AR-15; the guy quoted in the article does not speak for the entire industry, nevermind all the owners.
2. It takes literally 1 second to change magazines....what the hell is the difference between 2-10 round magazines and 1-20 round magazine?
3. An AR-15 was not even used in the Newton shootings. Handguns were. There is video of the cops removing the rifle from the trunk of Lanza's car.
Archiguy,
I'm not old, and i live in a nice house that is paid for with money I earned. But I will freely comment on Taylor living in a $1.1 million house bought with his wife's money while he espouses the virtues of the OWS crowd. Its easy to take protection away from the masses, its easier for the criminals to take from the defenseless when you live behind a steel gate.
Oh, and the paywall has not even effected me, I see no difference. even my 5 year old knows how to turn off cookies.
Ghoul,
Shh...
Don't tell anyone about the cookies.
Some of us already had them disabled anyway, so didn't even feel a bump when this "paywall" went into effect.
As far as I am concerned, this just proves the inadequacy of CO's "investigative" powers that they probably pay for this silly thing.
Archiguy,
Banning these "magazine clips" will be LESS effective than CO's paywall at keeping the rifraff away from their weapons of mass destruction.
I see the anonymous comments are as informed as ever. One thing missing, though: Out of 26 comments, not one explains why anyone needs a magazine with 30 rounds in it.
Hey Arch,
Observer comment section says:
"The Charlotte Observer welcomes your comments on news of the day. The more voices engaged in conversation, the better for us all, but do keep it civil. Please refrain from profanity, obscenity, spam, name-calling or attacking others for their views."
But since all of Taylor, Fannie and Peter's writings violate those terms, I guess you're safe.
The day you see a low rider with four gang bangers pull into your driveway at 2am, you'll know why you need a 30 round magazine.
OEB,
The word "need" misses the whole point.
Why does anyone "need" chrome spinner rims or neon lights on their automobiles, for that matter?
Sure, ban everything that's deemed unnecessary, but it won't change a thing.
That's the whole problem with this particular "gun control" measure.
It won't change anything of substance.
But it will look like something is being done about it.
The "need" or lack of "need" for any particular device does not matter much at all.
It's the wrong question.
Taylor..or.."The Observer Editorial Board": I think several people have answered that question, possibly in an indirect manner. Several people have commented that "it only takes one second to change out a clip, so what is the difference between one-20 round clip or two-10 round clips". Also that some people want to "do something" (like banning large capacity magazines) for the sake of "doing something", but that something might not really have much, if any impact on saving lives.
Observer Editorial Board, who cares whether it holds 10, 20, or 30 rounds? The Aurora theater shooter had a large drum. It jammed on him. So did the Portland shooter's magazine. How is it the Portland shooter, with all the ammo he had, only killed 2 people, which doesn't qualify by definition as a mass shooting? His gun jammed. But you have failed to report that a CCW holder went to engage him, thus likely causing him to take his own life.
Are you going to return to the days where handguns could only hold 10 rounds except for law enforcement? I personally have no need or desire for a rifle like the AR-15. Some do. They enjoy shooting.
I also have no need for $180 Air Jordans. Why do others need them? Why don't you call for a ban on expensive sneakers before more kids are killed or maimed over them? What about banning cars that go over 75 MPH?
As usual, you are using a tragedy to push an agenda that doesn't solve the issue. The ban is meaningless, but the decline of the culture isn't. Even Feinstein says the bill won't be retroactive, so there will still be large capacity magazines on the street.
Creating more gun free zones, where all of the mass shootings have occurred in the last 5 decades will not solve the problem. Stop your feel good, meaningless proposals, and let's find some real solutions.
In a similar vein, who actually "needs" sarin gas, anthrax, or Ebola viruses?
The answer, of course, is very few "need" this.
However, it didn't stop the Japanese religious cult Aum Shinrikyo from stockpiling enough of the stuff (and its precursors) to potentially kill millions in Japan.
Who really "needs" to kill millions of people?
Again, not very many people.
But those who DO "need" to do this will probably find a way.
Even in a tightly-controlled, gun-regulated country like Japan.
That's getting closer to the REAL problem out there.
Not whether someone can get a 30-round clip or needs 3 10-round clips to shoot into a crowd.
OK, I'll make it as simple as I can.
The real problem and question is:
Why do people feel the "need" to commit mass murder?
That's the real problem and until you solve that one, everything else is just dancing around the issue.
That's why this whole "debate" is somewhat silly.
If someone (or a group) has that "need" then they will probably find a way if they are serious.
In the mean time, we have a southern border over which any number of lethal devices could be smuggled with hardly a soul noticing.
And we will do absolutely nothing about that.
So why bother about "magazine clips"?
A person needs a weapon with 30 rounds in it to competitively compete with the armed forces of the government. The 2nd amendment is the right to keep and bare arms to overthrow/keep in check or worry the heck of the government. It is not a fashion statement or a means to assault your nieghbor. It is strictly for making sure that the government knows that there is a big sleeping giant in the background that they need to be mindful of.
If you think it wont happen I point
to 1776.
To those that say its silly to go against a tank. I point to Egypt Syria and other places in the world that have done just that.
To those that say it will never happen, I hope you are right. I pray that you are right, but i am not going to reach down and wish i had a different tool when hard work needs to be done.
Also note the art of an insurgency is NOT to go against the heavily armed main force. It is to cause as much pain and suffering to the enemy over a long period of time to get them to withdraw. AKA Afghanistan.
So you if say that I can not have a weapon that the federal government has, then i say the armed forces of the local and federal governments do not need them either.
Lastly, I need a 30 round clip because I have done nothing wrong and there is no reason to remove my rights to make people "feel better"
Let's focus on solutions.
Actual real reasons why this happened and fix those.
"one of the most horrifying tragedies in US history." ??? you should really study up on your US history
"I need a 30 round clip because I have done nothing wrong and there is no reason to remove my rights to make people "feel better"."
AWESOME
Observer Page 1: "Obama - act now to limit guns"
Observer Page 3: AK-47 supplied by Obama's Fast & Furious used in shootout
Too bad Fast & Furious didn't come to Taylor Batten's gated community of million-dollar homes
I need a 30 round magazine because it is one more then 29 and they do not make a 31.
Protection against ourselves is the answer the NRA has given. It sickened me to hear this. As a gun owner a vet who used a simi auto M-1 Rifle in the Marines that shot only an 8 round clip believe me that was an assault weapon. We do live in a different time. In high school I took a shot gun to school as did others. Brake them down put in our lockers and after school we would go dove hunting. Those days are gone forever never to return. Society today is filled with the complications of to many weapons with over powering destructive capabilities, a lame brain political system controlled by pressures financed by money and votes for career minded politicians. The new age of information, immediate news constant 24 hours exploiting evil deeds and fame for those who suffer from mental deficiencies. Entertainment of the most outlandish horrors in human destruction along with videos circulated throughout the population. Including our children who grow up without guidance or caring of watchful parents who are pressured daily in a fast pace society. There is no way to fully protect us against ourselves but certainly there are steps we can take to reduce some of the carnage. As a gun owner of rifles and pistols I without hesitation condemn the use and possession of semi and automatic rifles and all other assault weapons as a first step. I also support more control and restriction to access of harmful video games and movies. I believe a standard to restrict national news to specific guidelines limiting fame for those committing these atrocities. In the end we will never be completely safe from ourselves. Being more observant and improving mental care will help but as long as we remain fully armed with these deadly weapons no one is safe. I gave up hunting with guns years ago and use a bow and arrow which makes hunting more challenging and rewarding. I still have pistols but would gladly give them up to return to the days of carefree living in America. The NRA is basically saying we need to return to the old west and everyone arm themselves. If that's the case Wyatt Earp even made the cowboys turn in their guns before coming into Dodge City. So the NRA needs to look back at history just a little. I really don't know what our country will do but I do know the NRA and those legislatures who they seem to own need to look at reality.
Jim, how is banning of meth working out?
There is not a single gun control measure that the NRA will allow conservatives to agree to. Freeeeeeeeeeeeeedddddoooooooooommmmmmmmmmm!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just one small step for banning high capacity clips, one giant leap toward confiscation. Hey Taylor when you go home to your gated community tonight stop and ask the guard how many rounds are in his automatic and how may spare clips he has on his belt.
Oh sorry I forgot rich AHs like you get to hire armed guards to protect you but us regular slobs shouldn't be allowed to protect themselves.
To answer the question of why a person would need a magazine clip of 30 or more it would be so that the people can protect itself from the government. Why do you think the founders enshrined the right to bear arms in the bill of rights? So that poor farm boys living on the frontier can hunt? If the military has them then the people need access to them so when the enevitable happens the people can protect themselves.
Please stop calling them "magazine clips" or "clips". They are magazines. Clips are used to load firearms that have fixed magazines. There is no such thing as a magazine clip. Magazines hold the ammo.
The type of gun is irrelevant. The capacity of the magazine is irrelevant. Guns and magazines don't get together one day and decided to go out kill people. People decided to kill people, focus on the people.
I have decided to be Heard on this issue in the Loudest way I can manage; With my check book! The NRA, Second Amendment Foundation, Illinois State Rifle Association, Gun Owners of America, National Association for Gun Rights and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, all received my early renewals and/or contributions this week. Also: I VOTE!!
Nice try.
Yet another "journalist" faking the news.
Thanks for the information, you people can also take help from the MA Gun License to get the guns legally and get proper training to have them without harming yourself and your loved ones. This can also help you in maintaining safety and security of your surrounding with ease and comfort.
Post a Comment