CONFIRMED: Magpul PMAGs Used In Las Vegas Massacre

[angka]

Source: Colorado Pols

Why is this detail in the flood of news about the worst mass shooting in American history worth noting? That’s because in 2013, then-Colorado based Magpul declared its intention to leave the state following the passage of gun safety legislation that, among other things, limited the capacity of magazines sold in the state to 15 rounds. The limitation on capacity of magazines sold retail in the state didn’t affect their manufacture, of course, but Magpul regarded any such limit as an unacceptable infringement on the Second Amendment rights of Coloradans. It came out that Magpul had in truth been shopping for incentive deals from other states a year before the gun bills were ever proposed, and was most likely playing the people of Colorado like fiddles. Nonetheless, it’s an article of faith among gun-rights zealots in this state that Magpul was “driven out.”

In November of 2013, it also emerged with the final report on the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut that Magpul PMAG magazines were used in that shooting to kill 20 six and seven year old kids and six teachers and staff members. That detail wasn’t known when the debate over Colorado magazine limit law took place the previous spring–but for Democratic legislators who sacrificed their careers to pass these laws, it was a potent reminder of why their action was so important. In legislative testimony in subsequent years on perennial legislation to repeal the magazine limit, the sister of one of the teachers killed at Newtown, Jane Dougherty, tells the story of how the shooter’s pause to reload his weapon gave children a chance to get away.

Now we have another moment in which a Magpul product fulfilled its designed purpose according to specifications–and to horrifying effect.

Read more: http://www.coloradopols.com/diary/99963/confirmed-magpul-pmags-used-in-las-vegas-massacre

[lapfog_1]

1. the irony is going to be

when a disgruntled employee of Magpul (or the bump stock maker) goes into the plant one morning...

[hack89]

2. Colorado's hypocrisy was breathtaking

Magpul's product was a danger to public safety and couldn't be sold in Colorado - but it was perfectly fine for them to be made in Colorado for sale in other states.

[iluvtennis]

4. Wow. just wow. SMDH

[Kingofalldems]

3. The owners should be arrested.

[hack89]

5. What law did they break? nt

[SoCalMusicLover]

7. Maybe The Victims Will Sue This Company Out Of Business

Although Your friends at the NRA will probably bankroll their defense.

[hack89]

9. You can't sue companies for selling legal products in accordance with the law

to people that can legally purchase them. Especially a wholesaler who never sees the customer face to face.

Don't they teach civics anymore?

[SoCalMusicLover]

18. What Are You Talking About?

The families of these victims can sue Anybody they want. They can sue the gun shop owner that sold the weapon, even if he did nothing wrong.

Whether they win at trial is another situation. But finding a lawyer to take the case, and suing every party imaginable, is completely legitimate.

My guess is the gun companies usually pay up so these things never make it to trial.

[hack89]

19. The dealers are covered by the PLCAA

and a smart lawyer will know this and tell his clients.

[riverwalker]

62. The PLCAA only covers "firearms & ammunition"

I've read the law and found nothing about accessories.

[hack89]

71. OK. But it is hard to see how MagPul has any liablity

for the simple fact that they broke no laws.

[AtheistCrusader]

22. And encouraging that nonsense is how several Sandy Hook victim families ended up stuck with legal

costs from such activities.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/14/health/sandy-hook-lawsuit-gun-maker/index.html

[riverwalker]

63. Sandy Hook failed because it went after the firearm

Remington and Bushmaster, firearms and protected under PLCAA. However, Bump Stocks are not "firearms" as deemed by ATF. Why wouldn't they be vulnerable to lawsuits?

[AtheistCrusader]

72. Functioned as intended, sold lawfully for lawful purpose.

The law protecting gun manufacturers is for frivolous lawsuits, so they don't get chewed up by legal costs.

Sure, some frivolous suits will be brought, and the company that makes them will go belly up.


That doesn't solve the problem. These need to be illegal, full stop. Especially since you can 3-D print them all day long. That means a meaningful ban cannot only be for manufacture; it has to be for possession too. You realize this is actually a difficult problem to solve, right? Ex post facto banning of a thing that isn't a firearm.

First meaningful step is re-classifying them as a Machine Gun. I realize it's stupid, but it's how they handle auto-sears, and 'conversion kits' such as they exist (not really, but it's also part of the reason WHY they don't really exist). An auto-sear is two small pieces of metal that fit together. It's classified as not just a firearm, but a machine gun. That's how slide stocks need to be classified as well.

The crank-type is probably classified as more like a gatling gun, but one hurdle at a time.

[Eliot Rosewater]

26. We have a ridiculous carve out for guns, unlike any other product sold, this one is

protected in tort.

I would like one of our attorneys to expand on that.

Fucking guns.

[MichMan]

28. Sure they can sue everyone, but...........

Sure they can sue the gun manufacturer, gun seller, hotel chain, Jason Aldean, Live Nation, etc etc etc.

The couple that tried that in the Aurora Co. movie theatre shooting was ordered to pay hundreds of thousands in the defendants legal fees when those cases were dismissed

[Baconator]

39. A few did and the companies came out fine...

[forkol]

41. Here's an excellent writeup of all the legal ramifications of the shooting...

[link:https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/23104/what-are-some-possible-law-suits-or-civil-actions-the-las-vegas-shooting-victims|

[riverwalker]

66. One person there

Said the PCLAA "would apply to conversion kits to make the gun automatic". But the bump stock is not a "conversion kit" that permanently altered the gun, the bump stock was an removable accessory to put on the stock and take off. I still don't think it's protected under PLCAA.

[Mosby]

47. people sued the cig companies, and won.

[hack89]

48. The cigarette companies were breaking the law

they were sued for deceptive advertising while deliberately and secretly manipulating nicotine levels.

Gun manufacturers can be sued if they break the law. Hard to see how Magpul broke the law. They didn't even sell the magazines to the shooter.

[Kingofalldems]

25. Of course.

I knew the NRA defenders would jump in.

[hack89]

53. And I knew you could not answer a basic question.

Don't you believe that people should only be arrested for committing actual crimes? Aren't you a Democrat?

[crosinski]

8. The first law of nature: Preservation of the species.

[hack89]

10. Ok. Interesting legal theory. nt

[crosinski]

12. Maybe we should sue on behalf of the human race? n/t

[AtheistCrusader]

13. Sure, if you like being laughed at in court filings.

[crosinski]

14. I don't mind being laughed at. Do you?

[AtheistCrusader]

15. I prefer to do something productive. Like ask the BATFE to revisit its ruling that slide stocks are

legal.

Stroke of the pen, and they're banned. No legislation needed. No debate needed.

[crosinski]

16. So you think the way we have always done things is suddenly going to start working?

[AtheistCrusader]

20. Well, it's going to work better than doing something that has been tried over and over and failed.

IE: frivolous lawsuits that are expressly denied by law.

[crosinski]

21. I think you've missed my challenge. What can YOU do that hasn't been done before?

[AtheistCrusader]

23. Well, in the past i've told people slide stocks are stupid and a legal risk.

I expected the BATFE to ban them several years ago. They never did. I actively support the BATFE banning them now.

[EL34x4]

36. I think they'll get banned once they can figure out how to write legislation that specifically...

...targets these devices and a.) doesn't ban things that weren't intended to be banned which "poison pills" the law or b.) is so strictly written that someone only needs to make a slight modification to the existing bump stocks to turn them back into a legal product.

[AtheistCrusader]

37. Not necessary. The BATFE has sufficient authority to do it with a stroke of the pen.

They decided that using a shoestring tied to the bolt handle, looped through the trigger, and connected to a stationary part of the gun, constituted the manufacture of a new machine gun. They can do the same with slide stocks. They simply issue a new opinion and it is done.

Basically they classified the shoestring in the above example as a machine gun, just like the single part called an Auto Sear is classified as a machine gun. (Component inside a select-fire platform like the AR.)


It's within the BATFE's jurisdiction to make a ruling here.

[Calista241]

49. Congress is going to want to justify their existence

By weighing in on this issue.

[Ambivalent1]

51. a better solution

Yes, they classified a shoe string, used in a certain way, as a machine gun in writing. However, they never classified it as anything else in writing before the example was submitted to them. This type of stock was approved, in writing, with a submitted sample.

A temp fix may be an ATF ruling. As you see, those can be reversed or voided fairly quickly. For a more permanent fix a legislative action is required.

[EL34x4]

35. You won't be laughing when you have to pay Magpul's legal costs.

People really need to not encourage this nonsense. Better off writing your congressman and demanding the law get changed.

[RobinA]

24. No Standing

[HAB911]

43. good idea but that's like calling god as a witness

or even asking for his address

[crosinski]

46. Yeah, I was using that as a metaphore to talk about ideals.

But most people took me literally.

Note to self: Always speak literally when discussing guns.

[jamzrockz]

69. You talking about

Bird law?

[paleotn]

31. Blood on their hands...

and yours if you support them.

[hack89]

33. That's nice.

Feel better? Actually want to answer the question?

[Ambivalent1]

50. Difficult 1st post

No, they broke no law. Moral and ethical may be different. It should be mentioned that most of the magazines pictured inserted into weapons were Surefire, Not Magpul. It makes a commentator look bad when they miss identify instruments used in a mass murder.

Just like some of the stocks pictured appear to be "bumpfire system" stocks and some appear to be "slidefire system" stocks. They all function the same. However, for lawsuit purposes, they differ.

[Hangingon]

73. Thanks Ambivalent1. Welcome to DU

[harun]

74. Reckless endangerment.

http://dictionary.findlaw.com/definition/reckless-endangerment.html

But people get arrested for all sorts of things, a trial determines if said law was broke or not.

[hack89]

75. Nope

By that logic every liquor store in America is a criminal enterprise.

Selling legal products in accordance with the law can't be a crime.

[harun]

78. Over simplification. Do I think someone will charge them with this, no.

But even the sellers themselves asked for ATF review of the items as to their legal status.

Nothing is ever that black and white, especially law.

[AtheistCrusader]

6. That's not even 'high capacity'. A 20/thirty rounnd magazine is standard on an AR-15.

Shit, I though this article was going to be about Beta-C mags that hold 100 rounds. 30 rounds is 'normal', everywhere they aren't limited by law to something less than that. Those PMags are only different from the factory mags in that they are plastic and have windows to see how many rounds are left, and little grippy bits, instead of the shitty metal ones.

It's a function of the ammo size. For the AR-10, a .30 caliber 308 rifle, the standard mag is 10-20 rounds.

[Adrahil]

40. He had stacks of the Surefire 100 rd mags. NT

[AtheistCrusader]

44. Yeah, so THAT would be 'high capacity'. 3x what the manufacturer includes out of the box.

I hate how the details come trickling out as the narrative forms.

The facts inform policy suggestions/legislation, and it would be better to have all the facts up front. It doesn't take long to inventory what he brought with him.

[Mr.Bill]

11. Gun nuts will see the fact

that the Vegas shooter used Magpul products as an endorsement. Sales will go up.

These are the same people that will wait in line for George Zimmerman's autograph at a gun show.

This is the mentality we are dealing with.

[Marthe48]

17. Slide Fire makes the bump stocks

n/t

[riverwalker]

67. SlideFire marketing to children

Link to tweet

[Marthe48]

68. Shameful

n/t

[Just Yakov]

27. Thanks angka

for that key info.

Magpul are now criminals. Hope they enjoy their dwindling revenues in WY.

[EX500rider]

55. "Magpul are now criminals." For making a legal product?

How exactly?
Since they are amoung the most popular magazines in the military I doubt they will have dwindling anything.

https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htlead/articles/20170928.aspx

[Just Yakov]

56. They make nothing but killing items.

So they need to be banned for LIFE.

[jmowreader]

57. There are a lot of companies that make "nothing but killing items"...

...that aren't firearms manufacturers or cigarette companies.

[EX500rider]

61. Magazines don't kill anybody, bullets do.

Banned for life for making a legal product? Good luck with that.

[Turbineguy]

29. There are people

who want to make things worse.

[tiptonic]

30. Didn't I read

Didn't I read somewhere, where the NRA had a convention and no guns were allowed, inside the building?

[paleotn]

32. Common for the NRA...

evil, but not stupid.

[hack89]

34. They obey the local laws

Some conventions allow guns and some did not.

[Baconator]

38. Scary plastic..

[ileus]

42. The pic shows stacks of what I believe are Surefires.

The left hand firearm and the stack of mags at the column are Surefires.

[Adrahil]

45. Yup. 100 rds a mag.

And those mags are not cheap. This dude BURNT money to equip his massacre.

[ileus]

54. Yeah I've always wanted a 60 but I'm too cheap to buy one.

[xor]

58. Wasn't he pretty well off? Millionaire or something?

Short of combat, is there really any legitimate reason to have 100 round magazines? The whole idea of the bump fire and high capacity mags seems like it would quickly lose any 'thrill' or 'fun' factor after blowing through a lot of money really quickly.

[Adrahil]

59. Yeah, and he spent it on this stuff.

I can't think of why you'd need one ourside of a gunfight.

[Not Ruth]

52. The US Army just ordered 12,500 Magpul PMAG magazines

Could mean a very big contract in the pipeline

[locks]

60. We were so proud of Colorado Democrats

like Diane DeGette who worked long and hard to pass a bill to limit capacity of magazines sold in Colorado. I was at one "forum" sponsored by the Denver Post where the moderator, some sheriffs and Magpul big guns mocked those representatives who they said "really didn't understand the need for large magazines" and some Democrats who tried to pass sensible gun control laws actually lost their seats. This happened in Colorado with its sad record of mass killings, some with semi-automatic guns with large magazines.
I am so sick of the NRA, gun-rights zealots, including Trump, who continually spew their lies how guns are only tools and how much safer we would all be if everybody had a gun. And how much fun it is to teach our children to use them. Magpul's guns are made to kill and in the process make Magpul wealthy.

[EX500rider]

65. "Magpul's guns are made to kill.." I guess they would be if they actually made guns...

....but they don't, they make firearm accessories.

[hack89]

70. Bunch of hypocrites

Said that large capacity mags are a threat to Colorado citizens but also said that MagPul can keep making them in Colorado for sale in other states. Guess their lives are not so important.

[riverwalker]

64. The PCLAA

Here is the law protecting gunmakers from liability. It is specific to "firearms and ammunition".
Nothing about accessories such as Bump stocks, seems a hole in the law big enough to drive a tank through, but I'm not a lawyer. Sandy Hook lawsuit failed because it was against "a firearm" and protected. The ATF said bump stocks not a firearm, which is why they didn't ban.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/chapter-105

[Snackshack]

76. The 2nd...

Says not a word about capacity of mags/clips/drums. Limits on capacity does not infringe on the right “to bear arm”. A person call still own one.

Amazing how warped the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment has become. High cap mag/clips/drums should be banned and all of them made illegal.

[hack89]

77. The 2A is irrelevent to the discussion on magazine size

magazine size limits have been ruled constitutional. It is not that important to the public therefore politicians do nothing.

[Snackshack]

79. Correct.

The 2nd only says one has the right “to bear arms”

It does not say one has the right to bear arms that has a fire rate of “x” with an ammo capacity of “x”.

Even the unprecedented Heller ruling recognized that restriction of “dangerous and unusual” firearms does not violate the 2nd.

Justice Scalia wrote:

“It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service — M-16 rifles and the like — may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.”

[hack89]

80. Lack of gun control is due to lack of wide and deep public support

Some things like UBCs enjoy widespread support but support for things like AWBs historically oscillate in a relatively narrow band between 40 to 60 percent.

[Snackshack]

81. I agree.

With what you said in a sense but I actually think that 40-60% band you mention are just the people who let their support for things like the AWB be known. I think the other 60-40% if prodded suppprt it as well they just don’t care about it enough to take the time to vote and be heard.