1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

GOP, Dems closer to compromise on Magazine Limits

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by sharpshooter74, Feb 19, 2013.

  1. sharpshooter74

    sharpshooter74 Well-Known Member

  2. r1derbike

    r1derbike Well-Known Member

    No compromise.
  3. bds

    bds Well-Known Member

    Reduction in magazine capacity will only decrease the law abiding citizens' ability to defend their lives at home from multiple intruders/attackers.

    It just may take a lone woman who gets raped/killed because she ran out of bullets after 10 rounds when there were multiple intruders in her home ...

    I say ... Just say no.
  4. 06

    06 Well-Known Member

    No compromise--not one inch (round). One compromises when weak---there are enough gun owners in America to vote them all out and call for a referendum on issues. Getting time we stood together against this crap.
  5. Cosmoline

    Cosmoline Well-Known Member

    This is one to really pound your reps on. A lot of them are just out of touch with how prevalent "high cap" magazines are, and how enormous the impact would be felt. Many if not most CCW pieces these days run with high caps.
  6. razorback2003

    razorback2003 Well-Known Member

    No compromise. Put pressure on the House for no compromise for this garbage. If i want my gun to hold 30 rounds, what is it t someone else?
  7. Big_John1961

    Big_John1961 Well-Known Member

  8. Big_John1961

    Big_John1961 Well-Known Member

    When this all started coming down, I told myself that at least some Republicans would roll over on this issue and sure enough here we go. The party is a disaster right now and I'm almost embarrassed to call myself a Republican. What a joke.
  9. akv3g4n

    akv3g4n Well-Known Member

    Looks like this article is only focusing on the Senators from both sides of the aisle that would be in favor of this type of legislation. Even if they could get it through the Senate, I still think that we could stop it in the House with the Republican majority.
  10. jamesbeat

    jamesbeat Well-Known Member

    ALL of the antis arguments are opinions made while ignoring the facts.
    There is plenty of evidence that shows more guns=less crime and vice versa.
    It may seem counter intuitive to them, but the evidence is there- they just choose to ignore it.
  11. 22-rimfire

    22-rimfire Well-Known Member

    I also would suggest you buy a few magazines if you are so inclined.
  12. fastbolt

    fastbolt Well-Known Member

    It wouldn't surprise me to see some sort of national legislation eventually enacted which reduced magazine & feeding device capacity to 10, 15 or 20 rounds (since the 30-rd magazines seem to be attracting the most attention).

    However, I'd also expect that more individual states might consider implementing their own restrictions, as has already been done (and is being considered) by several states.

    Of course, a patch-work of 50 state laws will probably complicate manufacturing, importation, shipment and sales of a variable definition of "hi-cap" mags. From NY's newest 7-rd restriction, to existing 10 & 15-rd restrictions, to whatever else comes down the pike at the state level.

    Everybody has facts ... and everybody has opinions.

    Let's see what happens at both the federal and individual state level in the next 2-3 years.

    I don't have a crystal ball, myself.
  13. Steel Horse Rider

    Steel Horse Rider Well-Known Member

    The drum magazine used by the Aurora theater shooter caused his gun to jam. REAL large capacity magazines save lives.........
  14. JFrame

    JFrame Well-Known Member

    And we may see a corresponding number of states nullifying, within their borders, any and all federal anti-gun legislation that might happen to come down.

    I just hope it doesn't have to come to that, and any movement toward anti-gun legislation gets soundly defeated.

  15. JRH6856

    JRH6856 Well-Known Member

    An AR-15 mag holds 30 rounds of 5.56 but it only holds 10 rounds of .458 SOCOM. Just roll mark all AR mags to say"

    "Cal. .458 SOCOM
    Capacity 10 Rounds"
  16. shafter

    shafter Well-Known Member

    I wouldn't count on the house majority to stop anything anymore. They may be the majority but when it comes down to crunch time the dems have their way with them. The house has NO leadership right now.
  17. AlexanderA

    AlexanderA Well-Known Member

    There is no room for a deal on magazine capacity. Consider that standard magazine capacity for an AR-15 is 30 rounds, and that a standard belt for a Browning machine gun is 250 rounds. As long as the weapons are legal, so too should be their standard feeding devices.

    As far as the advice to buy your magazines now while you still can, that presupposes that existing magazines will be grandfathered. If Feinstein had her way, there would be no grandfathering. Any new ban would probably not be similar to the 1994-2004 ban, because the antigunners keep saying that they "learned their lesson."
  18. JayBird

    JayBird Well-Known Member

    Oh please.

    This 'article' is based of some bull article by the NY Times. Big Headlines with no real bite in the story.

    They quote like 1 dem and 1 independent.

    This is the news trying to push their agenda to seem 'reasonable'. Dont be fooled.

    Keep writing your congressman.
  19. shafter

    shafter Well-Known Member

    I wouldn't count on the house majority to stop anything anymore. They may be the majority but when it comes down to crunch time the dems have their way with them. The house has NO leadership right now.
  20. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    The article is a straight out reprint of a NYT article with an inflammatory headline to get eyeballs. Not only is there no evidence offered to support the article; but several prominent Democrats quoted actually refused to commit to a magazine ban.

Share This Page