Civilian possession of "high-capacity" mags outlawed in San Francisco

[derby378]

Supervisor Malia Cohen's legislation expands on an existing San Francisco law making it illegal to sell firearms with magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds. Such weapons were used in last year's elementary school massacre in Newtown, Conn., as well as the 2011 Arizona shooting that severely injured then-U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, killed six and injured 18 more.

"While not a panacea, this legislation provides law enforcement with more tools to continue to address gun violence and also continues to strengthen our city's strong stance on gun regulation," said Cohen, adding that she hopes it serves as a model for neighboring cities.

Mayor Ed Lee is expected to sign the measure, which was co-sponsored by supervisors David Chiu, David Campos, Norman Yee and Eric Mar.

Under the new regulations, people already possessing a large-capacity magazine will have 90 days to turn it in to police. The proposal exempts members of law enforcement and armored car personnel, among others. Violations of the ban would be punishable as a misdemeanor.

http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/S-F-supervisors-pass-tough-limit-on-gun-magazines-4937604.php

[Deep13]

1. What will the city be paying for those who turn in non-complying magazines? EDIT

You can't punish people for conduct that was not illegal when they did it. The city may impose confiscation, but they have to pay FMV for the property they are taking. Otherwise, I'm all for it.

post script:
I just noticed they have a ban on expanding ammunition. That's just stupid. If someone has to use a pistol for self defense, hollow-points are far safer than full metal jacket because they are far less likely to over-penetrate and hurt a bystander after passing through the assailant's body. Also, most pistol bullets will not stop a determined attack with just one shot. By transferring all its energy to the would-be attacker (as opposed to going right through him), fewer bullets are needed to stop an attack. And getting shot once or twice with hollow points is far safer for the attacker than being hit 3 or 4 times with FMJ. Note: I'm describing the person getting shot as "attacker" and "assailant" because that is the only lawful time one may use deadly force.

[derby378]

2. Paying?

It would be hilarious if it weren't so ridiculously true.

[Lizzie Poppet]

24. Not nearly as much as they'll be paying to defend against the lawsuits.

I completely agree with your points about ammunition. Banning hollow-points significantly decreases public safety. It's the kind of legislation all too often proposed by people who have failed to do even the most basic due diligence on what they're proposing to legislate.

[gopiscrap]

3. good they should be outlawed everywhere

[Deep13]

5. Yes. It's better than nothing, but it really needs to be nation-wide to work. nt

[gopiscrap]

6. yup, I fully agree with you

[derby378]

7. 10 rounds good, 11 rounds bad

Every piece of legislation like this weakens the Democratic Party nationwide and violates our Constitutional rights.

Meanwhile, earlier this morning I got together with some fellow Democrats at the gun range and used a 30-round magazine with my rifle, and the world managed to keep on turning as it always has.

[Deep13]

8. I don't image you are going to shoot anyone...

...or allow your rifle to fall into the wrong hands. And I fully empathize as I am an avid shooter myself. 30 rounds is the legal limit in Ohio and I have them for Beretta and AR15. Still, the problem is that no one knows who the next mass murderer will be until he starts shooting. Every murderer started out as a law-abiding person. Plus, straw-man and unregulated sales of up-until-that-point legal items are fueling drug wars in Mexico and the industry knows it.

And yes, restrictions are authoritarian. Frankly, I do not think cops should be exempt from the ban. Ending the supply is the only way to prevent mass shootings. My real concern is that magazine limits tend to focus on mass shootings and not the hundreds of murders that happen with one or two shots.

I don't believe the bans are unconstitutional except for the takings-clause and ex post facto problems I mentioned earlier.

10 rounds-potentially bad, 11 rounds-potentially worse.

[gejohnston]

9. the next mass murderer may not use a gun

Mass murder by arson usually kills more people than shooting, then there is bombing. Even if he uses a gun, there is no guarantee he will use one with 30 round mags. See VT and Washington Navy Yard.
That said, basing legislation what someone might do is prior restraint.

[Deep13]

15. The ordinance is not aimed at stopping all possible mass murder.

Only the most common in this country.

Yes, you can kill people with a ten-round mag. or a six-shot revolver. You can kill more with a high-capacity mag. It does not need to be all or nothing. We regulate cars, even though banning them would prevent all auto fatalities. This is actually an argument for a comprehensive fire-arm ban, not the selective one the city council passed.

It is prior restraint. So what? If this were a free speech or free press issue, that would be significant. It isn't, so there is no Constitution prohibition on prior restraint. As stated, I am concerned about ex post facto penalties for items obtained before they were illegal.

[gejohnston]

17. I don't know if it is the most common,

it is the most publicized.
Car manufacturing is regulated for safely, and perhaps drivers licenses are as well. Registration is for revenue, like county pet licenses (which isn't the rabies shot tag, that is public health.). Besides, guns and gun ownership is far more regulated than cars or car ownership (the latter isn't actually regulated, only the operation of on public road ways.)
On a philosophical level, all prior restraint is significant.

[GreenStormCloud]

26. High cpacity mags have a higher jam (failure to feed) rate. N/T

[spin]

27. True and that fact has saved lives in some mass murders. ...

For example:

Source: Colorado shooter's rifle jammed during rampage
From Susan Candiotti, CNN
updated 7:07 PM EDT, Sun July 22, 2012

(CNN) -- The semi-automatic rifle used in the Colorado theater killings jammed during the rampage, apparently because of a problem with the 100-shot magazine feeding it, a law enforcement source with direct knowledge of the investigation said Sunday.

The military-style AR-15 had a separately purchased drum magazine, which can have trouble feeding bullets into the firing chamber if the gun is fired rapidly, the source told CNN.

"These after-market extended magazines have a tendency to jam," the source said.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/22/us/colorado-shooting-investigation/index.html

But to be fair mass murderers have been overcome while changing magazines.

Colin Ferguson (mass murderer)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Weapon(s) Ruger P-89 9mm pistol
Colin Ferguson (born January 14, 1958) is a black supremacist mass murderer who was convicted of murdering six people and injuring nineteen others on the Long Island Rail Road in Garden City, New York.

On December 7, 1993, as the train pulled into the Merillon Avenue Station, Ferguson pulled out his gun and started firing at passengers. He killed six and wounded nineteen before being stopped by three of the passengers: Kevin Blum, Mark McEntee and Mike O'Connor. Ferguson's trial was notable for a number of unusual developments, including his firing of his defense counsel and insisting on representing himself and questioning his own victims on the stand.

***snip***

Ferguson had emptied two 15-round magazines during the shooting. While reloading his third magazine, somebody yelled, "Grab him!"[14] Passengers Michael O'Connor, Kevin Blum and Mark McEntee tackled Ferguson and pinned him to one of the train's seats.[15] Several other passengers ran forward to grab his arms and legs and help hold him pinned across a three-seat row with his head towards the window and legs towards the aisle. While he was pinned, Ferguson said, "O, God, what did I do? What did I do? I deserve whatever I get."[14] He also repeatedly pleaded with those holding him, "Don't shoot me. I'm sorry, I'm sorry." Five to six people continued to hold him pinned for some time while they awaited relief. While those who hadn't tackled him, but were holding him down, inquired as to the location of the gun, they were assured that it had been kicked away and that there had only been one gunman. Most if not all passengers still in the car were concerned that no further violence take place and that the shooter be held rather than attacked. He was held down for several minutes. Soon, Andrew Roderick, an off-duty Long Island Rail Road police officer who was picking up his wife from the train, boarded the train car and handcuffed Ferguson.[15]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Ferguson_(mass_murderer)

[derby378]

10. One precaution that I do take...

...is that I keep my rifle and ammunition locked up when not in use. I used to store the ammo in a surplus military can, but there was no way to lock the can (I suppose I could have used duct tape) and no room for any 30-round magazines in the can, so I upgraded to a larger can that is able to hold all of my ammo and magazines, and it has a big fat Master lock securing the lid.

[oneshooter]

28. So now they can steal the entire can, how convenient. n/t

[rrneck]

4. It's not a panacea. It's a placebo. nt

[beevul]

11. Its never confiscation...

Its never confiscation, until it is.


All these voices that we hear opposing this confiscation proposal, voices like those of the brady bunch and csgv, the vpc, the state level orgs, and the voices of the folks who use buzzterms like "reasonable" and "common sense" when referring to this proposal or that here on DU or elsewhere...Their collective opposition...

You know - that huge deafening silence.

Even when "nobody is talking about confiscation", confiscation is quite obviously considered an approved of methodology, by those same folks.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

12. Gun ownership by home-invaders should be outlawed

without any consideration as to the size of the magazines, clips, or whatever.

Relatively recently in San Francisco, a 37-year-old man, his 31-year-old wife and two of their children were at home when they were the victims of a home invasion by three men.
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/S-F-Bayview-man-shoots-home-invasion-robber-4620549.php

One of the robbers shot the man in the leg and his wife in the chest. She suffered life-threatening injuries.

"Neighbors who work or live on Elmira Street, which consists of industrial garages and some small residences, said break-ins are common on the block.

"It's definitely an issue on this block," said a 38-year-old woman who runs a car and motorcycle paint shop across the street from the home.

"The woman, who asked not to be identified, said a security camera in the neighborhood had captured three people trying to break into the same family's home Monday morning, the day before the violent invasion.

While protecting his family, the husband was able to wrestle away one of guns from the armed robbers. He was able to use it to shoot one of them with the gun.

For the safety of law-abiding home owners in San Francisco, let's hope that the two who are at large and other self-employed home invaders like them will read the news. Let's hope they will turn in all their magazines which hold more than 10 rounds.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

16. Apparently other San Francisco home owners have been the victims of home invasions as well.

Some examples:

1) On "Sloat Avenue near the San Francisco Zoo, three men broke into the home of a family and robbed the place. The suspects tied up the occupants with electrical tape and then lifted their items -- around $5,000 in cash and jewelry."

http://sfist.com/2012/12/17/home_invasion_rattles_sf_family.php

2) "Several Mission District residents were held at gunpoint on Wednesday night during a home-invasion robbery. The frightening crime, reported at around 9:30 p.m., occurred on the 1400 block of York Street. "The suspects, two men believed to be in their 30s, came through the front door carrying handguns and ordered everyone inside onto the floor," notes SF Appeal. "The victims included an 18-month-old girl." Mission Local reports that the suspects "fled with phones and other items,"

http://sfist.com/2012/05/17/residents_held_at_gunpoint_during_m.php

3) Another home invasion robbery occurred in the 2500 block of Golden Gate Avenue. The victim told the police that he was letting a friend out when four men rushed the door and broke in while demanding money. "The victim was pistol-whipped by the intruders, who stole an electronic gaming system, a wallet and a cell phone before fleeing in a newer-model Jaguar." No arrests have been made.

http://sfist.com/2010/12/13/home_invasion_robbery_near_usf.php

4) In the nearby city of Antioch, a homeowner who was at home with his young son responded after a home invader kicked in his door. "The two fought, the homeowner won, and he shot and killed the thief."

http://sfist.com/2012/02/14/dad_becomes_hero_in_home_invasion_k.php

It seems that such home invasion stories are not given attention by the MSM. It may be bad for the tourist trade. But you can find some of them here: http://sfist.com/tags/homeinvasion

[petronius]

13. A useless law from the public safety perspective, but I suspect

it's 99.9% intended to be symbolic.

Los Angeles was talking about this a while back, but I don't think they acted - I imagine the L.A. City Council will be watching for a lawsuit here with great interest...

[beevul]

14. Thats true, but...

While its a symbolic law, and more or less useless from a public safety perspective, it IS a poke in the eye to those who are generally in opposition to such things.


From that standpoint, it (and any other law for that matter that does likewise) will be judged a success by its promoters and supporters, I suspect.

[Jenoch]

18. I realize many points about a law such as this one have been made many times before,

but why should a homeowner turn in a 'high capacity' magazine? If I lived in California, I'd mail it to my father in Arizona.

I have four so called 'high-capacity' magazines. If they were to be described with accuracy, they would be called 'standard capacity' magazines (15 round Sig).

[ileus]

19. Let's hope one doesn't need 12 shots in a SD situation.

Good job on limiting folks ability to defend themselves...

[petronius]

21. It would not surprise me if the crafters and supporters of this law view that

as a positive as well - after all, a lot of people seem to think that those who use guns in self-defense are as big a danger as what they're defending against (apparently assuming that self-defenders will inevitably kill a raft of innocents as they shoot wildly into the shadows)... :shrug

[friendly_iconoclast]

20. The NRA and Second Amendment Foundation will love the money they'll be getting...

...after they defeat this in court.

[DonP]

22. IIRC SFO has already written a couple of big checks to the NRA and SAF

I wanna say at least $350,000 last time about 3 years ago.

That must make them 2nd to Illinois in overall $$$ contributions to them.

[Lizzie Poppet]

23. Pointless, grandstanding incrementalism.

Moreover, the turn-in provision will be ignored by the large majority of owners of these magazines, needlessly erecting a barrier between them and law enforcement that did not previously exist. This is simply staggeringly idiotic...