Slappy Posted January 16, 2009 at 09:18 AM Share Posted January 16, 2009 at 09:18 AM Here we go... article January 15, 2009 Holder: Gun control options 'narrowed' after high court ruling Posted: 03:40 PM ET WASHINGTON (CNN) — Attorney General-designate Eric Holder conceded during his confirmation hearing Thursday that the government's options for regulating the possession of firearms have been narrowed in the wake of the Supreme Court's 2008 ruling that the Second Amendment ensures an individual right to bear arms. "Reasonable restrictions are still possible," Holder said, including measures such as a ban on the sale of what are called "cop-killer" bullets. But, he granted, "we're living in a different world" since the high court's 5-4 ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller. Holder said that he previously viewed the Second Amendment as a "collective right" to bear arms, not an individual right. The Heller ruling, Holder said, was a "very significant opinion." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonymous too Posted January 16, 2009 at 01:47 PM Share Posted January 16, 2009 at 01:47 PM "Reasonable restrictions are still possible," Holder said, including measures such as a ban on the sale of what are called "cop-killer" bullets. I think he just means all ammunition, but would specifically like him to name an actual product that is for sale that he'd like to ban. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted January 16, 2009 at 04:26 PM Share Posted January 16, 2009 at 04:26 PM Live blog of Holder confirmation hearing legaltimes.typepad.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilphil Posted January 16, 2009 at 10:00 PM Share Posted January 16, 2009 at 10:00 PM How nice of Holder to concede that a Supreme Court decision is a "very significant opinion". Wouldn't you think someone that wants to be Attorney General would refer to a SCOTUS decision as "the law of the land"?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWBH Posted January 16, 2009 at 10:04 PM Share Posted January 16, 2009 at 10:04 PM "Reasonable restrictions are still possible," Holder said, including measures such as a ban on the sale of what are called "cop-killer" bullets. I think he just means all ammunition, but would specifically like him to name an actual product that is for sale that he'd like to ban. Weren't these called "Black Talons" or something like that and banned around 1999 or 2000? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armueller2001 Posted January 16, 2009 at 10:25 PM Share Posted January 16, 2009 at 10:25 PM Weren't these called "Black Talons" or something like that and banned around 1999 or 2000? The black talons were incorrectly referred to as cop killers because of their black Lubalox coating. They're really normal JHP's, Winchester continued making them but changed the name to SXT. They weren't banned, just not manufactured anymore due to the controversy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Talon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moparcardave Posted January 16, 2009 at 11:59 PM Share Posted January 16, 2009 at 11:59 PM Weren't these called "Black Talons" or something like that and banned around 1999 or 2000? The black talons were incorrectly referred to as cop killers because of their black Lubalox coating. They're really normal JHP's, Winchester continued making them but changed the name to SXT. They weren't banned, just not manufactured anymore due to the controversy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_TalonHolder, Obama, Dodd, Rahm... Scary thoughts, wasn't it Dodd's dad that help write the 1968 gun act? Almost positive it was, and it was almost an exact copy of Nazi Germany under Hitler to control weapons. Poland fell in days due to these "laws" to protect the citizens. My thinking is this admistration will try to "up hold" the 2nd ammendment, albeit in a backdoor way. They will add more restrictions as proposed in H.R.-45, but so really in a subversive way going after the ammuntion. What good are weapons without ammo? We just have to keep alert, and do what we can to uphold this freedom. I blog alot in the suntimes and rrstar. There are probably 70% out there that totally support the freedoms of the 2nd, but just aren't aware of the efforts that are underway to undermine it. Like President Ronald Reagon said "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction". and this could well be that generation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest YASLIFF Posted January 17, 2009 at 02:05 AM Share Posted January 17, 2009 at 02:05 AM Weren't these called "Black Talons" or something like that and banned around 1999 or 2000? The black talons were incorrectly referred to as cop killers because of their black Lubalox coating. They're really normal JHP's, Winchester continued making them but changed the name to SXT. They weren't banned, just not manufactured anymore due to the controversy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Talon 9mm Black talon on left Ranger SXT on right The only discernible difference is the brass colored casing on the Rangers. Heres an image of some Winchester silver-tips that was a popular ammo in the 80 before more aggressive hollow tip design. At the time emergency room doctors were complaining about the damages being done to victims. The press jumped on it because it was an easy story that helped sell advertising. Newer bullet expansion design and manufacturing techniques were producing better effective bullet expansion and core 1 piece retention. The Ammo design has certainly added to the reliability of semiautomatics. If you look back to the 60's and so Revolvers were more popular and normally the first reason brought up would be they don't jam up like those semiautomatics. Now a days you will very rarely see a LEO carrying a wheel gun anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.