A 7 round limit with no law enforcement exemption. But of course nobody cares if tens of thousands of cops commit felonies, because laws aren't applied to them, even when the law says it should be
NY seeks ammo sales cap
- Thread starter lobo9er
- Start date
- Status
A 7 round limit with no law enforcement exemption. But of course nobody cares if tens of thousands of cops commit felonies, because laws aren't applied to them, even when the law says it should be
ozarkhillbilly
Member
Companies need to just stop selling to NY, the police, everybody. If Glock and all the other gun companies, if all the ammo companies stop selling to NY it might make some people take notice. You know they are coming for you, why help them?
Warp, just chill a bit. Yes, some of these politicians straight up hate us and will do anything to "punish" us. But there are others who really are ignorant about guns. That's how we get quotes like:
"What is a barrel shroud?" "It's a shoulder thing that goes up" Carolyn McCarthy
"Some of these bullets have an incendiary devise, that means it's a heat seeking bullet" Patricia Eddington
or one of my favorites:
“I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those know they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.” Diana DeGette, who doesn't know mags can be reloaded.
"What is a barrel shroud?" "It's a shoulder thing that goes up" Carolyn McCarthy
"Some of these bullets have an incendiary devise, that means it's a heat seeking bullet" Patricia Eddington
or one of my favorites:
“I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those know they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.” Diana DeGette, who doesn't know mags can be reloaded.
Quote:
“The Senate and Assembly bills were drafted in an effort to keep potential terrorists from stocking up on ammo..."
How about just keeping terrorists out of the country to begin with?
It doesn't make much sense to let terrorists in, and then try to keep them from attacking by restricting the rights of citizens.
Sadly, politicians continue to fail at their jobs, and then sacrifice the rights of fellow Americans to make up for their incompetence.
“The Senate and Assembly bills were drafted in an effort to keep potential terrorists from stocking up on ammo..."
How about just keeping terrorists out of the country to begin with?
It doesn't make much sense to let terrorists in, and then try to keep them from attacking by restricting the rights of citizens.
Sadly, politicians continue to fail at their jobs, and then sacrifice the rights of fellow Americans to make up for their incompetence.
Carl N. Brown
Member
I shoot in the local gun club modern and vintary military rifle and pistol matches, 3 targets of ten shots per event, times 4 disciplines, equals 120 rounds for score, each month, seven months to a season. I bought .30 Carbine by the carton of ten 50 round boxes, 7.62x54R by the 440 round spam can, and 7.62x25mm and 7.62x39mm by the 100 round ziplock bag.
Under that New York proposal: no more than two magazines of ammo in 90 days? That would be 2/3rds of one match. Then nada to 3 months later. Oh, it would hurt gun sportsmen. I'll bet it would help the black market and not hurt criminals.
Yes, it's a New York proposal, and I'm safe in Tennessee. Not. Look at Virginia: Bloomberg is using his billions to spread New York City style gun control around the nation, and there are New Yorkers dedicated to imposing a federal version of Tammany Hall's 1911 Sullivan Act on us all (see Carl Bakal's book "NO Right to Bear Arms" 1965).
Under that New York proposal: no more than two magazines of ammo in 90 days? That would be 2/3rds of one match. Then nada to 3 months later. Oh, it would hurt gun sportsmen. I'll bet it would help the black market and not hurt criminals.
Yes, it's a New York proposal, and I'm safe in Tennessee. Not. Look at Virginia: Bloomberg is using his billions to spread New York City style gun control around the nation, and there are New Yorkers dedicated to imposing a federal version of Tammany Hall's 1911 Sullivan Act on us all (see Carl Bakal's book "NO Right to Bear Arms" 1965).
Deanimator
Member
- Stupid and evil are not and have never been mutually exclusive. Even a cursory examination of the last hundred years of German and Russian history are proof positive of that.
- This has NOTHING to do with "terrorists" as the word is normally defined. It's about attacking NON-criminal gun owners and suppressing the "gun culture". It's about stopping YOU from shooting a bullseye pistol match.
- This law should be applied to the NYPD. Maybe it'll stop them from shooting so many innocent bystanders. A 19th century governor of New York advocated defunding the firearms for the state militia and replacing their rifles with clubs. Perhaps that should be tried with the NYPD.
MagnunJoe
Member
I live in Miami where we have endured many, many hurricanes. Cops would never go door 2 door confiscating guns because people would exercise their rights. Enough said!
MagnunJoe
Member
This will keep happening until a group of people are forced to use their guns in anger to protect their rights.
OilyPablo
Member
All it takes is one party to have full control of the executive and legislative branches, then make the correct appointments to the judicial branch. We are then done.
***IF*** this is accurate, it's a farce. My Browning BPS has a five-round tubular magazine, so I could shoot one game of trap every 225 days.
But can anyone find any evidence that this was actually proposed and is actually working through the legislature? I can't find any reference to it on any NY legislative pages, and Article 270 of NY Penal Law regulates fireworks, not firearms. Article 265, not 270, is firearms regulation, yet this alleged change is for 270.00, not 265.xx. I think we may be dealing with a false article going viral?
http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article265.htm
http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article270.htm#p270.00
But can anyone find any evidence that this was actually proposed and is actually working through the legislature? I can't find any reference to it on any NY legislative pages, and Article 270 of NY Penal Law regulates fireworks, not firearms. Article 265, not 270, is firearms regulation, yet this alleged change is for 270.00, not 265.xx. I think we may be dealing with a false article going viral?
http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article265.htm
http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article270.htm#p270.00
Spooler41
Member
Well if the new law is intended to keep ammo out of the hands of
terrorists , why not make it clear that it only applies to terrorists.
This seems to be a reasonable answer to the problem and leaves
the other 99.99% of law abiding firearms owners out of harms way.
Now if the law makers have other ideas ,they should make those
perfectly clear also.
...................... Jack
terrorists , why not make it clear that it only applies to terrorists.
This seems to be a reasonable answer to the problem and leaves
the other 99.99% of law abiding firearms owners out of harms way.
Now if the law makers have other ideas ,they should make those
perfectly clear also.
...................... Jack
zb338
Member
I lived in New Jersey and all the crappy gun laws made
me move to Pennsylvania. New York makes New Jersey
look good. I would call both of those states communist
except that communist Russia is less restrictive than
they are. (well, almost)
Zeke
me move to Pennsylvania. New York makes New Jersey
look good. I would call both of those states communist
except that communist Russia is less restrictive than
they are. (well, almost)
Zeke
MilsurpShooter
Member
Voted in is... Well... I wouldn't exactly claim it was a fair vote
http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2013/03/state_emergency_gun_law.html
But hey I guess this is the way to make things safe once the Background check for ammunition purchases got sidelined
Caliper_Mi
Member
I believe his point was about the penalty for breaking these laws.
Multi year felonies for simply possessing a single mag that can hold "too many" rounds, or having "too much" ammo? Laws like this and others put these things up at the same level as some honestly heinous behavior. It's not whether these folks are ignorant or not. It's the fact that they are willing to take 5% or more of your life for something that causes no harm.
Candyman87
Member
Me too! But I do have concerns sharing a border with those two states... like you and me, they're coming over the border too.
Twenty years I figure until I have to move farther west.
Unless you are a television personality ("news" channel) who knowingly and intentionally possesses a 30 round magazine in D.C., on national television, to prove a point, after being denied permission to do so by the police. Then nothing happens because you are one of the special people.
ShooterMcGavin
Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2007
- Messages
- 629
What a slap in the face that was, to us "regular folk"!
Lord Teapot
Member
surrender your rights at the border; NY and cali are rogue states.
Let's look at the positive side of this, all the shovel ready jobs that will be created. Throw 50,000-100,000 fathers/mothers, grandmas and grandpas in prison, have family suites in prison. .....everyone knows the state can do a better job at raising children than parents. .....now NYS can create new parenting jobs to raise recent parentless children, not to discriminate. ....new state parent couples will be women/women, men/men and women/men......separation of church and state so children will be taught in public schools only, no church attendance.
Seems like a well thought out law to me.
Seems like a well thought out law to me.
plodder
Member
Wait a minute! Aren't these characters and their ilk the ones who are claiming there are too many people in prison now and we should let thousands of "innocent pot smokers" out on to the streets? I guess that way there will be room in the prisons for all of us
351 WINCHESTER
Member
If you don't like the laws they pass move or fire your elected officials.
Too bad that ever-increasing number of voters are people whose greatest "contribution" to society is being a professional registered voter, the kind politicians aim to please. The old adage of every election being little more than an advance auction of stolen goods.
Moving is a surefire way to eventually run out of places to move to, so while I'm not advocating widespread civil disobedience, it's bound to happen by itself at some point. The United States of America (and Finland, to a degree) was founded on acts of civil disobedience and the history has a bad habit of repeating itself. Sooner or later. It's not a question of if, rather than when.
Wait a minute! Aren't these characters and their ilk the ones who are claiming there are too many people in prison now and we should let thousands of "innocent pot smokers" out on to the streets? I guess that way there will be room in the prisons for all of us
Getting off topic. But the ones you are referring to, no, they should not be in prison, that is yet another thing we need to fix
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
