By Matt Bittle

DOVER — After a three-and-a-half-hour hearing, a House committee released a highly charged gun bill to the chamber floor Tuesday. The House Judiciary Committee voted along party lines to approve legislation that would prohibit magazines capable of holding more than 17 rounds, one of two gun-related measures the General Assembly is currently considering.

The proposal likely won’t receive a floor vote until after May 11, when the same committee is set to hear legislation that would require a permit to buy a handgun. Both bills passed the Senate with purely Democratic support on April 1, about a week after they were introduced.

Approximately 50 members of the public testified Tuesday, with about three-quarters in opposition to the proposal, Senate Substitute 1 for Senate Bill 6. The measure would outlaw “large-capacity” magazines, creating a buyback program and giving Delaware gun owners until June 30, 2022, to sell their magazines to the state for $10 apiece. If the legislation becomes law, possession of a large-capacity magazine would be a class-B misdemeanor for a first offense and a class-E felony for any subsequent violation.

Similar versions of the magazine and permit-to-purchase proposals were introduced in 2019 but never made it out of committee.

The bill would not apply to active or retired police, anyone with a concealed carry permit, federal government employees performing official business and licensed firearms dealers.

Per the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, nine states have restrictions on large-capacity magazines.

Supporters spoke of the bills as common-sense proposals that could keep weapons away from criminals and reduce the risk of mass shootings. Large magazines are unnecessary for hunting or self-defense, backers told the committee.

“I’m very familiar with these tools of war,” said Rep. Nnamdi Chukwuocha, a Wilmington Democrat and the prime House sponsor, referencing his military service. “I trained on them, and I know they have no place in our society.”

Heated debate

But opponents continually attacked the proposal as unconstitutional and unnecessary. At best, the bills won’t do anything to reduce crime, and at worst, they’ll result in more Delawareans being unable to defend themselves, they said.

Rep. Jeff Spiegelman, a Clayton Republican, noted the opening battles of the Revolutionary War stemmed from an attempt by the British to confiscate military supplies.

“This was on our Founding Fathers so greatly that they included the right to bear arms second when they drafted the Bill of Rights,” he said.

He was among those who questioned the “taking” aspect of the proposal, which would allocate $15,000 for a buyback. That sum doesn’t come close to covering the cost of all magazines in the state, even setting aside the fact most magazines cost several times the allocated sum of $10, with some surpassing $100 in value, several speakers said.

The bill, Rep. Spiegelman told colleagues, “essentially is saying we don’t care about the Fifth Amendment” to the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits the taking of private property without fair compensation.

Natalie Woloshin, an attorney for the House Democratic caucus, testified the state courts have not directly ruled on the constitutionality of the subject covered by the bill, prompting Rep. Spiegelman to question why the state is inviting litigation that could easily overturn the provision.

Others had much harsher words for supporters.

“It’s obvious you all just want to piss on the Constitution and just make it say whatever we want,” said Donna Austin, questioning whether legislators backing the bill are doing so because of sheer stupidity or simple arrogance.

Tim Collins described Democratic lawmakers as the dumbest people he’s ever met, and Lise Stinger called them “murderers” who will have blood on their hands if the bill passes.

“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” agreed Ken Jones.

Others took aim at the specific language, saying a provision in the bill about “a removable floor plate or end plate” could be interpreted to ban virtually all firearms.

Numerous speakers called for enforcing current laws instead of making new limitations that will only hurt law-abiding citizens, with many expressing a sense of feeling unsafe without firearms to protect them. Lawmakers, several people testified, should focus on the root causes of violence rather than treating gun crime as unique.

A gulf between the two sides was on display Tuesday, with people both for and against gun control pleading with the committee to do the right thing.

“No one should have to worry about being safe in their school, place of worship, workplace or a concert,” said Allison Quinn.

Mara Gorman cautioned a mass shooting in Delaware seems like more a “when” than an “if,” while Delaware Coalition Against Gun Violence Executive Director Traci Murphy described such massacres as “a uniquely American epidemic.” The United States indeed compares very unfavorably to other First World nations in terms of gun violence per capita.

Supporters pointed to data indicating the federal ban on certain semi-automatic firearms and select magazines from 1994 to 2004 worked, though opponents cited findings concluding the prohibition had no effect.

Despite the fact opponents strongly outnumbered backers Tuesday, a poll released last month by the Delaware Coalition Against Gun Violence showed majority support for greater gun control in Delaware. Democrats hold strong majorities in both chambers, and Gov. John Carney is behind the permit-to-purchase and magazine ban bills, meaning individuals seeking to stop the measures from becoming law are facing a tough battle.

Tuesday’s hearing was in contrast to the proceedings in the other chamber last month. Two hours were set aside to hear both gun bills in a Senate committee, and the majority of people did not get a chance to speak, leaving many Republicans upset.

The response prompted House Judiciary Chairman Rep. Sean Lynn, a Democrat from Dover, to set aside two separate four-hour blocks for the bills, which have drawn hundreds of online viewers for debates so far. Rep. Lynn’s handling drew praise from Rep. Spiegelman, who described his colleague as bending over backward in an attempt to be fair and let both sides be heard.