Should very large handgun magazines be heavily regulated

Status
Not open for further replies.
biku324 said:
Legislators will do what they will do, but good folks digging in their heels over really high cap mags is a great way to get labeled as unreasonable and extreme. It's a short step from there to being ignored, then end up dealing with lots of regulations/laws that would not/should not have happened if the argument was differently handled.
Click to expand...


"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Barry Goldwater

They already ignore us. They already consider us to be unreasonable and extreme. Why roll over and let them stick it to us?
 
johngalt said:
When would it be reasonable..

To prohibit prayer?
Force quartering of troops in one's house?
Seize property without compensation?
Deny the accused the right to face their accuser in a public trial?
Compel testimony against oneself?
Inflict cruel and unusual punishment?
Click to expand...

If nothing else, the events of the past two years have shown that we cannot trust those in power to protect individual rights and personal liberty.

The "crisis" turned some folks bonkers when it came to their authoritarian tendencies, imposing all sorts of un-Constitutional restrictions on the citizenry. I am not sure that we will every fully recover, but I, for one, intend to do everything in my power to hold these power abusers accountable.
 
Would you rather face a gang-banger with a Glock and a 32rd mag or the same dude with an 7+1 Mossberg 930 Tactical shotgun with 00 Buck...... in the hallway of a NY apartment?

For those of you in Rio Linda that's 72-135 .33 cal pellets/bullets coming your way at 1225fps................

Would you rather have the 930 or the Glock when someone is trying to break down your back door and the State Police are 20-30 minutes away?

So where's the line...how about convicted Felons can't have firearms? Wait......... don't we have that already?
 
Last edited:
gregintenn said:
Precisely!



We don't have a gun or magazine problem; we have a criminal problem.


It is foolish to believe that regulating inanimate objects will change human behavior.


Until criminal behavior is dealt with in a quick and severe fashion, this problem will continue to fester.


Politicians are more than willing to exploit this problem in order to gain more control over you, rather than do anything to correct the actual problem.
Click to expand...

DING DING DING DING!!!

WE HAVE A WINNER!!

gregintenn hit the nail on the head.
 
So...as someone who actually owned a gun prior to the GCA '68, I need to say that right now we are in a golden age of firearms ownership. Concealed carry licensing is widely available, in some places without any permit required. You can buy firearms on the internet and pick them up locally; you can buy ammunition and reloading tools/components online with no restriction (except a in very few places) and on and on. That was most assuredly was NOT true for the 70s, 80s, and 90s. Why the paranoia? Firearms access has expanded, not contracted, and even with last year's bump in murder rates, we still enjoy murder rates far less than those of the 70s, 80s, and early-to-mid 90s.

I'm unwilling to screw all of this up over 40, 50, to 100 round magazines.
 
Last edited:
Donn said:
Said it before in these pages, it's frightening how many of our numbers would fall in line with whatever edicts the powers that be thrust on the gun community, then scold the rest of us for not complying. After all, they'd say, "It's for our own good. You don't really need a fill-in-the-blank."
Click to expand...

What scares me is how many of our members would fall in line ENFORCING whatever edicts the powers that be thrust on the gun community.
 
Lets make more laws that do not actually address the problem and do almost nothing to curb it.

Reminds me of the need a ID to vote argument.

It is this it is that, it causes this and that!!! bla bla bla. Some don't have birth certificates, they can't drive or afford it.

What gets me is neither side has suggested the simple fix of establish who can't get one for what ever reason, but, deserves one and secure them one.. DUH End of problem

BUT

Government never actually fixes a problem. If they did that we would need less government and that sure isn't the goal. It has always increased in size since 1776 no mater who was running it.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I am wrong but, was the shooter another one that should have
behind bars. Don't blame our guns & eq.
Most LEO shooting's are ppl that should still be locked the +ell up.
Blame those who let them out to hurt others.
Defund the police, give me a break !!
 
We've lost sight of the reason the founders added the second amendment.
Because we can, because it's just plain fun, even personal self defense we're not the reasons, valid though they are.
It's not PC to even think about the real reason these days but PC be damned.
It's a toothless amendment if it's allowed to be whittled away.
That is the goal of many today. Not me
 
Perhaps recidivism means little to nothing to politicians, they just draw up another senseless bill, bribe, coerce or swindle so their bill becomes law and they put another feather in their cap.
Suggest everyone not familiar with Col. Davy Crocketts speech," Not yours to give", look it up, it Applies to 99% of the garbage coming from dc.
 
Should very large handgun magazines be heavily regulated


NO. Criminals should be regulated.
Oh wait they are but it doesn't do any good.
 
This thread needs pictures
dr-evil-how-about-no.gif
 
steelslaver said:
Locked up??? Prison over crowding????

Lots of these people are just a waste of space, money, food, water and oxygen.

They need something alright and it isn't locked up. I suggest it is a 40 gr 22lr behind the ear.

Ya, you heard me.
Click to expand...
Scientific studies of cases in which the death penalty was successfully carried out, the recidivism rate is less than 5%...Much less...:rolleyes:...Ben
 
Short answer: NO.

Here's a novel idea, pass a law making it illegal for a criminal to have/use a gun then the magazine capacity is a moot point.

How's that working out? I forgot, you also have to have ENFORCEMENT all the way from the cops, through prosecutors, to the courts with real consequences. Not longer terms of suspended sentences.
 
Goldstar225 said:
Short answer: NO.

Here's a novel idea, pass a law making it illegal for a criminal to have/use a gun then the magazine capacity is a moot point.

How's that working out? I forgot, you also have to have ENFORCEMENT all the way from the cops, through prosecutors, to the courts with real consequences. Not longer terms of suspended sentences.
Click to expand...


yes, point is actual criminals are seldom punished by such laws. The law abiding get their freedoms and choices curtailed and if they are the only ones who actually suffer when the run afoul of such laws through ignorance.

Its like this criminals regularly remove the serial numbers from guns. Who can give me a real example of one doing time for that or getting a longer sentence for it.


Now about once a month or so some one shows up on this site asking questions about a gun with the serial number removes. i content these other wise law abiding citizens who just do not know the law are more apt to end up suffering more from it than any criminal.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
Surpassed the 800 round mark on the 4" Shield Plus and at around 650-655 for the 3" Shield plus.
Replies
2
Views
134
Mahalo_.32
M
BB57
What makes a modern pistol “better”?
4 5 6
Replies
106
Views
5K
LVSteve
LVSteve
bushmaster1313
NJ 10+ Magazine Ban ANJRPC v. Bruck Update 9/21/2022
2
Replies
22
Views
4K
venomballistics
venomballistics
chief38
DAMNED RUGER - HAS CHANGED MY THOUGHT PATTERN A BIT
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
Gamecock
Gamecock
RM Vivas
NYPD - Bloomingdale Trophy - S&W .32HE #520705
Replies
3
Views
1K
Truckman
Truckman

Latest posts

Back
Top