"High capacity" mags will be banned across the USA.


PDA






GiorgioG
January 10, 2013, 09:40 AM
The republicans don't have the stones to push back on this at a state or federal (in the NY Senate - the Republican majority leader has already stated he's going to back the governor's proposal to ban pre-ban mags as well (post-ban high cap mags are already illegal.)

Contact your reps folks immediately (don't resolve to 'do it later' - you won't do it.)

If you enjoyed reading about ""High capacity" mags will be banned across the USA." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Russ Jackson
January 10, 2013, 09:51 AM
bad link

GBExpat
January 10, 2013, 09:57 AM
"High capacity" mags will be banned across the USA.

Such a ban would create a whole new class of criminals well-populated by many/most of the tens of millions of firearms enthusiasts.

GiorgioG
January 10, 2013, 10:02 AM
"but it's for the children."

What worked for the Republican party in the past isn't working for them anymore...and I think they're going to change their attitudes toward firearm ownership/rights just to gain votes because we're in the minority now.

gunnutery
January 10, 2013, 10:03 AM
So because NY will ban them it means the entire US will?

Nico Testosteros
January 10, 2013, 10:13 AM
I lived through the last "high" (standard) mag ban and will live through this one, if it happens. The last one brought about hordes of " low capacity" weapons suitable for CCW.

GiorgioG
January 10, 2013, 10:13 AM
The legislation is be re-introduced by CO & NY US Reps DeGette & McCarthy.

Look at the parallels in NY - the dysfunctional NY Senate has a Republican majority. There's a popular governor who's pushing for a high-cap mag ban...and the senate majority leader is backing the proposal.

Boehner is in a weak position, and he's in the same situation as described above, against a popular president.

nathan
January 10, 2013, 10:37 AM
Maybe that wont stand in Texas.

243winxb
January 10, 2013, 10:38 AM
AR 15 type firearms & magazines will go the way of machine guns. They will be classified as NFA, with no new production for civilians. :(

armoredman
January 10, 2013, 10:40 AM
Boehner the Backboneless had better not ever be re-elected for any position higher than dog catcher. The only thing consistent about him is his absolute lack of ability.

MachIVshooter
January 10, 2013, 10:43 AM
AR 15 type firearms & magazines will go the way of machine guns. They will be classified as NFA, with no new production for civilians.

How many times are you going to post this? :rolleyes:

Zeke/PA
January 10, 2013, 10:54 AM
For a "nutcase" to be deadly he sure as heck dosen't need a high cap mag.
My hope IS that the wishy-washy members of our so called Congress will see beyond the typical Knee-Jerk, Window Dressing Crap and INSIST on STRICT enforcement of EXISTING Firearms Legislation.

Tommygunn
January 10, 2013, 10:57 AM
Why don't you guys use the energy to write your kongresskritters instead of to mope around pessimistically about gloom & doom antigun laws that the "spineless" republicans will cave on????????????

GiorgioG
January 10, 2013, 10:58 AM
For a "nutcase" to be deadly he sure as heck dosen't need a high cap mag.
My hope IS that the wishy-washy members of our so called Congress will see beyond the typical Knee-Jerk, Window Dressing Crap and INSIST on STRICT enforcement of EXISTING Firearms Legislation.
The wishy-washy members of our congress don't know anything about guns, and so the only time they care about them is when they feel scared/vulnerable because some 'nutcase' goes on a rampage...all this does is reinforce the idea that 'guns are bad mkay'?

That's how we get these 'barrel shroud is a shoulder thing that goes up' legislators to go along with laws that make no difference/sense. It's emotionally driven, not logically driven.

pat701
January 10, 2013, 11:00 AM
IMHO at least 50% of this nation lives rural. After 8:00pm the town P.D. shuts down. 911 calls get forwarded to the county sheriff dept for service and/or state police. At 3:00am when 3 thugs are kicking in your door and your wife a daughter are in the house in there baby doll P.J.'s a 45 minute response is a long time to wait for help as your family is being savaged by the thugs. This is the reason the people of America need/ have to have hi-cap mags. 10 rds mags are or not enough fire power. God forbid you need more fire power during the long wait for 911 response to your call for assistance

vtail
January 10, 2013, 11:06 AM
The solution is so simple.

They should just pass a law saying nobody can use a semi-automatic weapon to commit a crime.

That would solve everything.

Sheesh.

bhk
January 10, 2013, 11:19 AM
IMHO at least 50% of this nation lives rural. After 8:00pm the town P.D. shuts down. 911 calls get forwarded to the county sheriff dept for service and/or state police. At 3:00am when 3 thugs are kicking in your door and your wife a daughter are in the house in there baby doll P.J.'s a 45 minute response is a long time to wait for help as your family is being savaged by the thugs. This is the reason the people of America need/ have to have hi-cap mags. 10 rds mags are or not enough fire power. God forbid you need more fire power during the long wait for 911 response to your call for assistance
Unfortunately the real number is closer to 80% urban vs. 20% rural. This is a big part of our problem. We own most of the acreage, but our voting population pales against those living urban. It sucks when we love our form of government, but the numbers are against us big time.

It means the life I live out here in the boonies is becoming ever more endangered by the common vote of the people. How terribly sad.

btg3
January 10, 2013, 11:21 AM
... God forbid you need more fire power during the long wait for 911 response to your call for assistance
That's one reason that my wife is quite capable of using a fire arm.

phil dirt
January 10, 2013, 11:35 AM
Yesterday I received a phone call from a solicitor for the Repubs asking for money. I politely but firmly told them that all of my contributions, presently, are going to the NRA. I let them know that I'd be watching to see how Republicans counter the gun grabbers in the coming fight, and that would determine whether or not I continue to support them with my money.

psyopspec
January 10, 2013, 11:39 AM
Maybe that wont stand in Texas.

If that's a rallying cry, I'd take it back to the drawing board.

To the OP: What's your point? What's your plan of action? I get it, you're panicked. Please take a breath, calm down, and channel it into action or a constructive conversation. Enough with the clucking.

243winxb
January 10, 2013, 11:39 AM
How many times are you going to post this? Till the Government does it. :neener:

GiorgioG
January 10, 2013, 11:43 AM
To the OP: What's your point? What's your plan of action? I get it, you're panicked. Please take a breath, calm down, and channel it into action or a constructive conversation. Enough with the clucking.

I've been calling/messaging all my reps (several times a week.)

MachIVshooter
January 10, 2013, 11:45 AM
Till the Government does it

You seem to have the world's only functioning crystal ball. Why don't you go buy a lotto ticket instead of engaging in fear mongering.........

psyopspec
January 10, 2013, 11:50 AM
I just saw from your other posts that you were in NY. I feel for you, and I mean that sincerely. I know you're doing all you can, and for that you have my respect. But while things look bleak[er] for gun owners in NY, if Cuomo's plans come to pass, well, they come to pass. Beyond that there isn't much you can do.

243winxb
January 10, 2013, 12:06 PM
Well, MachIVshooter, when the gov changed the rules on full auto, the NRA didnt give a darn. The NRA did nothing to try and stop it, that i know of. Many gun clubs just let the law pass. Who needs machine guns was there thinking. Gun control creeps up on us, one by one. :)

Killian
January 10, 2013, 12:16 PM
Such a ban would create a whole new class of criminals well-populated by many/most of the tens of millions of firearms enthusiasts.

So did mandating everyone carry car insurance. It effected millions. When driving your car became illegal without insurance people thought about the consequences and then bought insurance. I realize that driving a car is not a recognized right in the Constitution and I'm not trying to equate gun ownership to car driving. I'm simply saying that the idea that a law will effect millions has rarely been enough to stop it being enacted.

Sam1911
January 10, 2013, 12:16 PM
Well, MachIVshooter, when the gov changed the rules on full auto, the NRA didnt give a darn. The NRA did nothing to try and stop it, that i know of. Many gun clubs just let the law pass. Who needs machine guns was there thinking. Gun control creeps up on us, one by one. That is not AT ALL an accurate representation of what happened in 1986. The matter has been discussed here many times.

Hughes introduced his amendment at the last minute and it could have "poison pilled" the whole FOPA (which was VERY positive for gun owners otherwise). The NRA made the calculated but very tough choice to encourage Reagan to go ahead and sign it anyway in order to win the very beneficial improvements that the FOPA would bring to ALL gun owners. At the time it was believed that Hughes' amendment would be easily and quickly struck down in the courts and it has been a continual thorn in all our sides that that gamble did not pay off.

Would we be better without the FOPA but with the MG registry still open? That's a very tough thing to answer, even in hindsight. It was the choice on the table at the time and in that moment way back in '86, it seemed like the right one.

To say the NRA didn't give a darn is ignorant of the facts and needlessly spiteful toward an (THE?) organization that works very hard and very effectively for the 2nd Amendment.

FIVETWOSEVEN
January 10, 2013, 12:17 PM
Well, MachIVshooter, when the gov changed the rules on full auto, the NRA didnt give a darn. The NRA did nothing to try and stop it, that i know of. Many gun clubs just let the law pass. Who needs machine guns was there thinking. Gun control creeps up on us, one by one.

The NRA and the American people support the ownership of AR 15s now far more then hey did with machine guns in the 80s.

Sam1911
January 10, 2013, 12:29 PM
The NRA and the American people support the ownership of AR 15s now far more then hey did with machine guns in the 80s.Also a very true statement!

We make the mistake eternally and universally of judging the actions of our predecessors by the standards of what is known, believed, understood, and appreciated by the people of today. The whole "gun culture" is vastly and maybe even fundamentally different today than it was 27 years ago. The closing of the registry (which, again, was considered an easily defeat-able temporary loss) would affect the very few gun owners interested in machine guns back then and benefit millions of others.

Now, with the gun culture vastly deepened and changed -- especially in the "tactical" areas -- many tens or hundreds of thousands of gun owners feel directly hurt by the registry closure and tend to have no idea what the benefits of FOPA even are. So they just say the NRA threw our rights away...

AlexanderA
January 10, 2013, 12:52 PM
The title of the thread is that hi-cap mags "will" be banned nationwide, as if this was a foregone conclusion. Then the author of the OP goes on to plead that everyone contact their representatives. Why bother, if the ban is a foregone conclusion?

The fact is, nothing is a foregone conclusion. Defeatism is our worst enemy.

Trent
January 10, 2013, 12:56 PM
Good grief, men, pick up your chins a little.

Wandering around the internet howling "The government is going to ban my {whatever}".... "The government is going to come take my guns"...

Walk like men. Talk like men.

STAND UP FOR YOURSELF.

Instead of whining about what they MIGHT do, go out and DO something about it.

If they, at a future date, DO ban your stuff, fight them in court. Rally against them. Meet people at those rallies of like mind.

If it comes down to confiscation, at the very least you'll have new like-minded friends for what comes next.

Wyndage
January 10, 2013, 12:56 PM
The fact is, nothing is a foregone conclusion. Defeatism is our worst enemy.

Agreed. At least the men are being separated from the boys.

Those of us who don't believe we've already lost this thing should be contacting our legislators and using social media to counter the anti-gun propaganda. Thanks to the Internet, the playing field is much more level than it was in 1993, and an individual really can make a difference.

VVelox
January 10, 2013, 01:01 PM
IMHO at least 50% of this nation lives rural. After 8:00pm the town P.D. shuts down. 911 calls get forwarded to the county sheriff dept for service and/or state police. At 3:00am when 3 thugs are kicking in your door and your wife a daughter are in the house in there baby doll P.J.'s a 45 minute response is a long time to wait for help as your family is being savaged by the thugs. This is the reason the people of America need/ have to have hi-cap mags. 10 rds mags are or not enough fire power. God forbid you need more fire power during the long wait for 911 response to your call for assistance
Your lucky to get a timely response here in Chicago. 5 minutes are a long time when there is a immediate threat.

It ultimately boils down to the police are a reactive force that come in after something has already happened. For this purpose the police will never be adequate to protect the public on the basis of they can't.

GiorgioG
January 10, 2013, 01:11 PM
5 minutes are a long time when there is a immediate threat.

This is what changed my wife's mind about guns this past weekend. We live in a "really nice neighborhood" suburb of Buffalo, NY. There's a big county park right behind our house that lots of people cross-country ski / walk through past our tree line.

Some idiot with a big dog walked through the trees and into our backyard, walking around to the front and then proceeded to ring the doorbell many many times, yelling and finally trying to open the front door. I was 2 minutes away at most when she called (she should have called 911 first, but that won't happen again.)

The point is in the 2 minutes it took for me to get home, lots of bad things could have happened. Luckily nothing happend, the guy walked back into the park (again through our yard), but obviously my wife was terrified for herself and the kids. I walked around back and found his tracks in the snow, but no signs of him. Well now my wife who's been deathly afraid of firearms suddenly wants to learn to use one because she learned firsthand that when seconds count...you know the rest ;)

Killian
January 10, 2013, 01:13 PM
I think that a magazine ban and possibly an "assault weapon" ban might *be* a foregone conclusion. That's my "take" on the direction I'm seeing in politics at the moment. I'm always willing to be pleasantly surprised though.

Just because I view myself as being a--self described--"realist" about where I think the direction of the country is heading in the Power Centers (media, Federal govt, some state governors and state Houses) does not mean that I think we shouldn't fight.

But...I'm from Mississippi. :D So yes, pessimism is rampant here on most issues (we can be a sour and contentious lot)and we're use to fighting for lost causes. Some fights you fight even if you think you are going to lose.

Edit: So if they "carry the field" today, it doesn't mean its over.

Cosmoline
January 10, 2013, 01:17 PM
I agree we should all contact our reps, but the unsupported claims are just that--unsupported. Unless you have a link to specific legislation being proposed, knock it off please. Otherwise you're just rumor mongering and not being helpful.

AR 15 type firearms & magazines will go the way of machine guns. They will be classified as NFA, with no new production for civilians.

Are you a remote viewer or something? Who is even proposing this apart from Piers Morgan?

SilentStalker
January 10, 2013, 01:28 PM
Ok, so what can we do to counteract this? It seems writing congress is not helping at all. I had hopes yesterday but not I am not so sure.

ljnowell
January 10, 2013, 01:28 PM
Maybe that wont stand in Texas.

It sure did last time.

All the gun owners crying for revolution must not remember last time. When it was time tio put up or shut up, everyone shut up. Just like they will this time.

Killian
January 10, 2013, 01:31 PM
Otherwise you're just rumor mongering and not being helpful.

Not being helpful in what way? I think discussion on issues and examining multiple viewpoints is a good thing. If not everyone is in lockstep, or thinks slightly differently than ourselves, or has an observation that could relate, why not share it? I've already learned a couple of things about the limits of executive orders from discussions that might have otherwise been deemed as "not helpful". I believed something in error that would not have been clarified had that discussion not been "approved". 1st amendment--the free expression of opinion and information, even if erroneous (or perceived as such by other people) may lead to a further understanding of a situation. Or be revealed is irrelevant over time. Labeling something as irrelevant BEFORE discussion--that's how you get nastily surprised.

GiorgioG
January 10, 2013, 01:36 PM
Now we know that Tuesday we'll find out what's coming:

Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. will present President Obama with proposals for stemming gun violence by Tuesday, setting in motion legislative and executive actions that will encompass guns, ammunition, mental health services and violent images in popular culture.

Biden to Offer Gun Proposals by Tuesday (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/11/us/politics/biden-to-meet-with-gun-advocates-including-nra.html)

Sam1911
January 10, 2013, 01:39 PM
It seems writing congress is not helping at all.What? There's not even a bill proposed yet, or even WRITTEN yet, so there's nothing for your congressfolks to vote on. Short of your own Senator or Representative coming out with his or her own press conference to say they'll oppose such a bill, there's nothing they even COULD do yet, so what are you basing your idea that writing is "not helping at all" upon?

Call, write, repeat! They aren't looking to be swayed by that one golden, irrefutable argument only you can provide. They're looking for numbers. X number of calls they figure represents X,XXX of their constituents. X number of letters sent equals XX,XXX of their folks back home. Make yourself heard and when (and if) the time ever comes for them to vote, then you can decide what a difference your efforts might have made.

bsheets20061
January 10, 2013, 01:42 PM
"ljnowell"

the proposed fienstien bill this time is a very improvised very different version of the last, the attitude of the people In my opinion is different as well. I don't feel people would just roll over a forget about if the proposed legislation were to pass this time. at least I hope we the people would not.

Killian
January 10, 2013, 01:48 PM
They're looking for numbers. X number of calls they figure represents X,XXX of their constituents. X number of letters sent equals XX,XXX of their folks back home.

I have been giving serious thought to emailing representatives outside my state. My own state is a "lock" on opposition to gun control. But you make a good point about it being a numbers game, especially in places where the politico runs a close margin on his support.

gym
January 10, 2013, 01:51 PM
If this is the only place you are venting, then please use your time where it does the most good . You need to have contacted all officials state and federal, before debating it here. This is a great place to talk about guns and gun related issues, but only if you already did your part. I would think that most of us have not just signed online petitions posted here, but actually wrote letters and faxes to your elected officials several times. That is the only thing that "may" soften the blow we are about to get.
Let's face it, most of us agree on the issues, so "preaching to the choir" is not really helping the cause.
If you haven't posted on your facebook, twitter, or whatever social media you use, "if any", then it really does no good to keep throwing stuff up here that we already know and support . All need to focus on the jackasses in Washington who have no clue what a magazine even is, and probablly only saw and heard what they were shown.
We need to educate them on semi vs full auto, mags,clips and the rediculous notions that this is somehow going to magically help in any way.
No offense to the hundreds of guys who have been carrying the ball. In the time it took to write this , I could have reached a few congressmen.
Point out the mental health and unemployment problems and the social climate that is hitting the economy, the failed justice system, all which lead us to where we are now.

Deanimator
January 10, 2013, 01:51 PM
So because NY will ban them it means the entire US will?
Perhaps in some "Fringe"-like alternate universe.

Certainly not in the real world.

RP88
January 10, 2013, 01:56 PM
the main problem that is causing the talks for bans now is mental health and mass shootings becoming like 400% more prevalent in the past decade.

If they actually did go ahead and lock up every violent felon (like they should), then yes: crime would plummet.

But, none of that would fix the instant-celeb status that can be acquired by a deranged narcissist the moment his friend count on facebook falls below an unacceptable minimum.

Can't find an assault rifle or two with a few 30-rounders? Fine. three times as many ten-rounders work.

Can't find those weapons at all? Fine. Four handguns and mags.

Can't get a few Glocks? Fine. Six revolvers and a few moonclips.

Takes forever to get guns in a significant speed of time? Fine. get one, get good with it, choose another creative gun-free zone. Maybe a Daycare center for toddlers and infants next.

Can't get guns at all? Well, they can't background check household chemicals that make bombs or sharp kitchen knives...

Seriously, the problem is mental health, and instead of simply monitoring and qualifying any juvenile records to carry over to adulthood (so it would show up on a background check), or maybe just increasing the age of ownership for some guns (even though, yes, the shooter stole his guns) so an 18-year-old fresh out of a setting as immature as high school can't instantly jump into gun ownership while taking their emotional stuntedness with them, etc. they go after guns because it's easy and cheap. No new record-keeping, no judicial backup, no potential to violate freedoms of speech and expression (apparently the only right we are still privileged enough to have without question - maybe because they know they can mace you and call you a rioter when you speak your mind for more than five minutes?), and more importantly: no political incorrectness.

Not even NY can stop the real problem from getting out, no matter how draconian their laws get.

It's really upsetting that every proposal seems to completely ignore the real problem. Why is that?

Xyr
January 10, 2013, 01:57 PM
I really need to move out of NY...

Cosmoline
January 10, 2013, 02:03 PM
If not everyone is in lockstep, or thinks slightly differently than ourselves, or has an observation that could relate, why not share it?

There's a big difference between saying Senator x is proposing legislation Y and here's the link to the details and announcing ALL YOUR GUNS ARE BELONG TO OBAMA! RUN FOR THE HILLS! ARGHHHH! MA HAIR'S ON FIRE!

The first is helpful and will make our letters sound better informed. The second is just fear mongering nonsense and makes us sound like loons.

It seems writing congress is not helping at all.

Not true at all. It absolutely makes a difference, especially real letters not just emails. I'm holding off till Tuesday when the Biden group makes its proposals, then I will go point-by-point through them and get those letters off to reps. We all need to do this.

Killian
January 10, 2013, 02:06 PM
If high capacity mags were to be banned in the US, and if those bans were based along "mental health" lines, then I would think one possible argument to be used in opposition would be the racial profiling that would result. Why do I say that? Well, quite simply a disproportionate number of minorities receive the oft cited "crazy check". By linking mental health and gun ownership it could be argued that you are disarming a minority class...which many states would find objectionable to their citizens. Being from Mississippi I know a lot of our African American residents would not like to be told they are going to be disarmed while "sane" white people were allowed to keep their guns. Not happy at all.

And yes, I'm proposing a method of "divide and conquer" among the base of support in the Democratic Party by pointing out how a hastily contrived idea put forth by the current administration could impact their supporters in the future. I know...rumor mongering again.

GiorgioG
January 10, 2013, 02:07 PM
"I've never quite heard as much talk about the need to do something about high capacity magazines, as I've heard spontaneously from every group that we've met with so far," Biden argued.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57563314/biden-gun-violence-proposals-to-obama-by-tuesday/

Cosmoline
January 10, 2013, 02:11 PM
Well yes that's because Biden has been meeting exclusively with supporters of gun control. He's supposed to be meeting with NRA reps but apart from them and maybe the WalMart guys, he's brought the choir in to cheer him on. These are not open meetings.

BHP FAN
January 10, 2013, 02:51 PM
VTail said....''The solution is so simple.

They should just pass a law saying nobody can use a semi-automatic weapon to commit a crime.

That would solve everything...sheesh''




genius!

HorseSoldier
January 10, 2013, 03:49 PM
If I thought it would help the argument at all, I'd personally be willing to go head to head with Diane Feinstein on a shooting range. Say 50 steel IPSC C-zone targets, or maybe 50 military pop-up targets, scattered from 7-75 meters.

Feinstein can have an M4A1 with as many Surefire-60 mags as she can carry plus an M9 or other high capacity 9mm of her choice and however many double stack mags for that she can carry also. I'll take an AR with a double basic load of 30 round mags pinned to hold only 10 rounds and a single stack handgun with less than 10 rounds in the mags for it. To keep it sporting, let's add that if at any point it takes me more than 10 seconds to reload, transition, or clear a stoppage I'm disqualified. Whoever pings or drops all fifty targets first wins.

Of course, rather than demonstrating some of the fallacies in Feinstein et al's notions of "solutions" I'm sure it would just encourage her in her overall belief that all guns are too dangerous to exist.

GBExpat
January 10, 2013, 03:49 PM
Such a ban would create a whole new class of criminals well-populated by many/most of the tens of millions of firearms enthusiasts.
So did mandating everyone carry car insurance. It effected millions. When driving your car became illegal without insurance people thought about the consequences and then bought insurance. I realize that driving a car is not a recognized right in the Constitution and I'm not trying to equate gun ownership to car driving. I'm simply saying that the idea that a law will effect millions has rarely been enough to stop it being enacted.
I am not suggesting that it would.

What I am suggesting is that many/most of the firearms enthusiasts would choose to not buy the "car insurance" if such a ban were enacted.

gym
January 10, 2013, 04:14 PM
Is a shotgun with a rod in it that limits it to 3 rounds, part of this proposed ban? Or is it the fact that the gun is able to be converted into a 7 round magazine problematic. As all but side to side or over and under shotguns would be banned also if they took over 3 rounds from what I read, is this correct?
So if you block the magazine size on AR's and other weapons, does that make them legal "if this nonsense is put in effect"?
It would seem that it would have to be that way, as before in the prior ban, the guns were able to take hi cap mags, with no alteration.
There is really no other way to do it without making 50% of the guns illegal. Anyone can make a larger magazine with some expertise. A revolver is the only gun that you could physically limit.

ScrapMetalSlug
January 10, 2013, 04:22 PM
The problem is easily solved if it only effects NY state. Just move. I am sure you won't miss having the highest income tax in the country either. Everyone talks about states rights when it is the fed gov infringing, but not when the state starts to infringe on individuals. If you still want to live in New England, gun friendly VT and NH aren't that far away.

I think the reason Biden is talking about executive orders now, is they know they do not have the votes to pass any new gun legislation through congress on a national level. However, that will not keep states with the worst gun control laws in the country passing new laws and making it even worse.

razorback2003
January 10, 2013, 04:27 PM
This is the R's mistake if they vote for this crap. I will never vote for an R again if they cave into this crap and make my firearms and accessories illegal.

What will be the point of voting anyway, bailouts, higher taxes, loss of freedoms, and now my guns?

HorseSoldier
January 10, 2013, 04:45 PM
The problem is easily solved if it only effects NY state. Just move. I am sure you won't miss having the highest income tax in the country either. Everyone talks about states rights when it is the fed gov infringing, but not when the state starts to infringe on individuals. If you still want to live in New England, gun friendly VT and NH aren't that far away.

I agree, though places like California, Massachusetts, and New York are already throwing off a lot of refugees for non-2A issues and they are not classing up the places where they land (Arizona, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Alaska to name a few places effected by the California diaspora). Mostly they seem to just want to turn where ever they wash up into everything they left behind, only with lower taxes and lower crime rates. (Though here in Alaska we are also "blessed" with being sufficiently remote from California and various other states that they won't pay to extradite their wanted criminals back home, so, in a sense, the refugees from California are bringing their crime problem with them . . .)

JohnBT
January 10, 2013, 05:29 PM
"The NRA did nothing to try and stop it, that i know of."

That you know of? How much have you studied the political process leading up to that law? The NRA didn't have a vote and they still don't.

243winxb
January 10, 2013, 06:14 PM
I guess i was to busy shooting my M16A1 Carbine? http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/guns/big-machine-gun.gif Sorry. :)

KTXdm9
January 10, 2013, 08:22 PM
Yay, another sky is falling thread! :banghead:

They don't have the votes. That's why Biden is blustering about executive orders. Write Congress and donate the the NRA. All is not lost.

glennv
January 10, 2013, 08:27 PM
Yeah I'm more worried about the states acting vs. the feds. Barry can't get the votes. I'm in RI and we're pretty lucky since we have very little gun crime. It hasn't precipitaed any bans...yet. One good thing is our state is so corrupt that even the most anti-gun legislators here have whored themselves out and have taken money from the NRA. We'll see though.

wgaynor
January 10, 2013, 08:28 PM
They can ban want they want, doesn't mean they can take away the MILLIONS that we American's own. Good luck with that.

MOHunter
January 10, 2013, 09:34 PM
I agree we should all contact our reps, but the unsupported claims are just that--unsupported. Unless you have a link to specific legislation being proposed, knock it off please. Otherwise you're just rumor mongering and not being helpful.



Are you a remote viewer or something? Who is even proposing this apart from Piers Morgan?
Actually Diane Fienstein is proposing to register all grandfathered "assult rifles" under the NFA. Here's a quote from her web site:

Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
Background check of owner and any transferee;
Type and serial number of the firearm;
Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration.

Just sayin.......

MOHunter
January 10, 2013, 09:36 PM
Yay, another sky is falling thread! :banghead:

They don't have the votes. That's why Biden is blustering about executive orders. Write Congress and donate the the NRA. All is not lost.
I agree 100%

barnbwt
January 10, 2013, 10:06 PM
They don't have the votes. That's why Biden is blustering about executive orders.

I'm starting to wonder if this is some mind-trick to get us gunnies scared enough to "spill the beans" and reveal the one thing they can do to beat us :D. Too bad there's more than the NRA working against the Statists this time; unlike the roaring '90's, we now have chronic economic malaise, a declining authority in the world, and a mountain of Statist debt coming home to roost. Politicians have actual work to do instead of gun control theater this time around.

Whatever the anti's come up with, it will undoubtedy be big and beauracratic, and they undoubtedly have a hard time getting funding for it.

TCB

jhb
January 10, 2013, 10:16 PM
I been writing mine. In the past I got...."I support gun rights and the 2nd amendment"....all repubs state level. All repubs federal level except one senator who's a demmy. Now I get...."I grew up on a farm and support hunting"...."I also believe assault weapons and high cap mags need to be loked at and addresed"

Mind y'all I'm paraphrasing.....but these repubs have gone soft....I've seen the change in the form letters as I write my reps often. I got no faith in them protecting my rights or the 2nd amendment. I hope I am very wrong.

larryh1108
January 10, 2013, 10:18 PM
I just sat thru a segment on Fox news, who we know is not pro-gun, talking about the meeting today with Biden and the NRA and the govenor who wishes to ban hi-cap mags.

The bottom line is they had a remote reporter with a useless summary of the event but then she mentioned that there are no statistics that showed that the last ban did anything to help their cause of banning hi-cap mags. I was surprised to hear that from a reporter's mouth on Fox, of all places.

Why bother with a ban that has already proven to be useless? The antis can't point to it and claim it worked when, in fact, it didn't do a thing. I believe our hi-cap mags are safe.

PedalBiker
January 10, 2013, 10:21 PM
When driving your car became illegal without insurance people thought about the consequences and then bought insurance. I realize that driving a car is not a recognized right in the Constitution and I'm not trying to equate gun ownership to car driving.

I wonder why nearly every auto accident I've been in, the perp didn't have insurance. That's why you have to buy uninsured motorist coverage because it's so common they make a special rider to go on your policy.

My brother in law was hit by a guy with no license, no insurance and an active warrant out for his arrest. Wow our gov is so efficient!

Cosmoline
January 11, 2013, 01:37 PM
Actually Diane Fienstein is proposing to register all grandfathered "assult rifles" under the NFA. Here's a quote from her web site:

Leaping from that to claiming "HIGH CAPACITY MAGS WILL BE BANNED ACROSS THE USA" is quite a jump.

Deanimator
January 11, 2013, 02:02 PM
"I've never quite heard as much talk about the need to do something about high capacity magazines, as I've heard spontaneously from every group that we've met with so far," Biden argued.
I'll bet that if you spend all of your time in the Tribal Territories of Pakistan, you'll hear a lot of calls for Sharia law too. Only a drooling imbecil would think that translates to popular opinion in Cleveland or Duluth.

Biden (and Obama) inhabits an echo chamber of malicious imbeciles.

barnbwt
January 11, 2013, 10:49 PM
"I've never quite heard as much talk about the need to do something about high capacity magazines, as I've heard spontaneously from every group that we've met with so far," Biden argued.

Yeah, the group he "spontaneously" formed; composed almost entirely of gun-control Statist organizations that just happened to come up precisely the same proposals he's been pushing for this entire time (not the last month; his entire political career).

These "working groups" and "conversations" conducted at the whim of the administration are little more than a show trial of our gun rights; a farce with a foregone conclusion. The whole mess has been pathetically predictable so far, so I see no reason why we can't out-manuever them this time. In the past, we've always tried logic-based approaches, assured that if we could get the other side to consider our argument, reason would carry the day.

The entire purpose of the political theater being put on now is to keep the undecideds from hearing our argument; to suppress our voice. Biden's pow-wow gives the public the impression we are being heard, considered, and disproven in honest debate. When in reality our side of the "debate" was only tolerated for a short period, before being forgotten as the other players collaborated against us.

We must call them out on this, and expose this charade for what it is to anyone willing to listen. Even to those unwilling to listen. We will at least force them to confront us honestly if we can discredit this despicable posturing. At that point, and only at that point, will our indisputable arguments carry any weight. Hopefully we can pressure the Administration to have this "discussion" in a more-legitimate bipartisan committee in the Senate (or even better, the House).

TCB

If you enjoyed reading about ""High capacity" mags will be banned across the USA." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!