Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
Tue Jul 28, 2015, 11:36 PM Jul 2015

Los Angeles Council Passes Ban on High-Capacity Firearm Magazines

Source: NY Times

Responding to the recent rash of mass shootings across the country, the Los Angeles City Council unanimously voted on Tuesday to ban the possession of firearm magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

The Council said the ordinance would close a loophole in a state law, which already bans the sale and manufacture of such magazines. Mayor Eric Garcetti said he would sign the ordinance.

Anyone who already owns high-capacity magazines will have 60 days to remove them from the city or turn them over to the Police Department, which will then destroy, transfer or sell them.

New York State passed a similar law in 2013 shortly after the shootings in Newtown, Conn., in which 20 children and six staff members at Sandy Hook Elementary School were killed.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/29/us/los-angeles-council-passes-ban-on-high-capacity-firearm-magazines.html?_r=0

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Los Angeles Council Passes Ban on High-Capacity Firearm Magazines (Original Post) Recursion Jul 2015 OP
Good, but how many years after the North Hollywood Bank Robbery for this to happen? flamingdem Jul 2015 #1
The robbers were also the only people killed Recursion Jul 2015 #2
You're right, was going to delete this since I was off point flamingdem Jul 2015 #3
I'm not against magazine limits, but I don't know that they address the real problem Recursion Jul 2015 #4

flamingdem

(39,313 posts)
1. Good, but how many years after the North Hollywood Bank Robbery for this to happen?
Tue Jul 28, 2015, 11:44 PM
Jul 2015

Though I don't exactly remember what arms they had the cops needed to run to the gun shop to content with them.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
2. The robbers were also the only people killed
Tue Jul 28, 2015, 11:46 PM
Jul 2015

Automatic weapons are a totally different animal, though, and not usually what we worry about.

flamingdem

(39,313 posts)
3. You're right, was going to delete this since I was off point
Tue Jul 28, 2015, 11:47 PM
Jul 2015

it just seems like this should have happened years ago, well it's a start in gang infested LA..

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
4. I'm not against magazine limits, but I don't know that they address the real problem
Tue Jul 28, 2015, 11:51 PM
Jul 2015

Most murders just need that first bullet anyways; if I had a choice between limiting the number of handguns and limiting the number of high-capacity magazines I would definitely choose the former.

I'm glad to see motion about guns; I just wish it wasn't random mass shootings that drove that conversation, because they may lead us in less-productive directions than looking at most shootings. (Though for that matter, "most shootings" would be suicides, but even just looking at homicides, the big problem in the US is the sheer number of guns, not the number of bullets one of them can fire.) But, politics is the art of the possible, and all.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Los Angeles Council Passe...