In Wake of Giffords Assassination Attack, Calls To Ban Extended Clips; UPDATE: Rep. King To Call For 1,000 Foot Ban?

In the wake of the attempted assassination of Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords that left six dead and 13 injured, several members of Congress have proposed banning extended clips such as the one apparently used by Jared Loughner in the attack.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) has introduced a measure in the Senate while New York Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney is expected to introduce a similar measure in the House.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) said he would introduce the measure to re-establish a prohibition that lapsed in 2004 on clips that feed more than 10 rounds at a time.

"The only reason to have 33 bullets loaded in a handgun is to kill a lot of people very quickly. These high-capacity clips simply should not be on the market," Lautenberg said in a written statement announcing his plans. He said he would file the bill when the Senate returns to session later this month.

The focus on Capitol Hill isn't a gun ban, but rather on the extended clips that allow a user to fire off 30 rounds before having to reload. However, expect Republican and NRA opposition to the proposed measures.

UPDATE:
Huffington Post is reporting that Rep. Peter King (R-NY) is going to introduce a measure that would make it illegal to carry a weapon within 1,000 feet of an elected official.

Rep. Peter King, a Republican from New York, is planning to introduce legislation that would make it illegal to bring a gun within 1,000 feet of a government official, according to a person familiar with the congressman's intentions.

King is chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. The proposed law follows the Saturday shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) and a federal judge that left six dead, including the judge, and 14 wounded.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, one of the nation's most outspoken gun-control advocates, is backing King's measure and is expected to put the weight of his pro-gun-control organization behind it.

Such measures wont prevent criminal acts such as the Giffords attack, but provide additional criminal sanctions for those who break the law. I think enforcement of the proposed measure would be extremely problematic.

It would seem to trump concealed carry among those who are lawfully within their rights to otherwise carry weapons and raises a question as to how the law could be enforced in the residential areas around members. Would this mean that a representative living in an urban area has a zone of 1,000 feet around them where possessing weapons is potentially illegal?

The measure may end up being limited to members participating in public events or at their offices or the 1,000 foot zone is reduced to something more manageable - 500 or 250 feet.

UPDATE:
The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, defined large capacity ammunition feeding devices but did not establish an outright ban.

DEFINITION OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING
DEVICE.—Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, as amended
by section 110102(b), is amended by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
‘‘(31) The term ‘large capacity ammunition feeding device’—
‘‘(A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar
device manufactured after the date of enactment of the Violent
Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 that has
a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted
to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; but
‘‘(B) does not include an attached tubular device designed
to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire
ammunition.’’

The prohibition was written such that it was unlawful to transfer or possess those items except if they were otherwise lawfully possessed on or before the enactment date (1994) and there were certain additional exemptions from the requirement. This wasn't an outright ban but did limit the transfer and production of new extended ammo feeding devices such as extended clips. Reenacting the 1994 legislation would not ban the extended clip and would not have prevented the attacks. Had a ban been in place, it could have reduced the number of people injured and/or killed.

Business Booming at Bergen Town Center

Bergen County has these odd blue laws which mean that you cannot sell many common items on Sunday. It means most stores other than restaurants, supermarkets, and book sellers are closed. In other words, Saturdays are a huge day for business in Bergen County.

With that in mind, we wandered over to Bergen Town Center in Paramus yesterday to check out whether the new Target had opened. It had.

In fact, it was absolutely packed. The whole mall was packed as people were busy making purchases at Target, Off 5th Avenue (Saks), Century 21, Marshalls, the new Nike outlet, GAP outlet, and Filene's Basement.

You wouldn't be able to tell there was a recession by the way the parking lots were stacked and by all the bags people were lugging back to their cars.

It says something about the nature of these particular businesses though that they were as busy as they were. The anchor department stores in Bergen Town Center are selling designer items at steep discounts. That's what they're known for, particularly Century 21. As such, they provide more bang for the buck - which is also what Target is known for. Therefore, they're much better positioned to ride out the recession than other department store chains.

While the Target in Paramus was busy, the existing store in Hackensack wasn't nearly as busy as it had been on a typical Saturday. I expected as much, given the fact that the new Target is just a few miles down the road on Route 4 in a much more prominent location. I think after the excitement wears off, both businesses will settle down into a comfortable traffic pattern.

Business at Bergen Town Center will continue to see big crowds as other stores continue rolling out, including the Whole Foods starting March 19 and Nordstrom's discount.

UPDATE:
Sen. Charles Schumer went on Meet the Press today and claimed that only the government can get the US out of the recession. The new jobs created by the private sector in Paramus would suggest otherwise. It takes a government that knows when to get out of the way of the private sector to allow job growth - in the private sector, rather than sucking revenues out of the pockets of consumers that could instead be spent in businesses and add to the tax revenues.

New York Gov. Paterson Picks Kristen Gillibrand For Clinton Senate Seat

The long wait is over. Governor David Paterson, who had courted with the idea of passing the seat on to Caroline Kennedy, has settled upon upstate Democrat Kristen Gillibrand.

Gov. Paterson, defying the liberal wing of his Democratic Party, has chosen little-known, NRA-backed, upstate Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand to succeed Hillary Rodham Clinton as New York's junior senator, it was learned last night.

The surprising - and, for many Democrats shocking - decision to pick the conservative Gillibrand, 42, from Hudson in Columbia County, was disclosed by the governor in calls to party officials and some members of the state's congressional delegation, many of whom said they were unhappy with the selection, sources said.

There are more Democrats in New York than Republicans, and not all Democrats in the state are as liberal as the downstate contingent who are already represented by the likes of Charles Schumer. Gillibrand was actually supported by Schumer in this move precisely because of the need to increase the voice of upstate Democrats. This is a sign that Paterson is attempting to provide a greater voice to upstate New Yorkers. Like him or hate him, Schumer is a very savvy politician who has steered the Democrats to a comfortable advantage in the Senate.

However, that isn't sitting well with some of the leading contenders for the position, including Carolyn Maloney, who is a staunch gun control advocate. Expect top Democrats to come out and challenge Gov. Paterson when he comes up for reelection, as well as Gillibrand when her term is up in 2010.