10 round ban justification

[LiquidTension]

Smurfslayer - you are correct, the problem is that it will take someone going up against the federal government to make the necessary changes. And that's only if the SCOTUS agrees that it is unconstitutional IF the case ever gets there. The Rule of Four makes it kinda hard to get a case heard by our highest court. The bad part is that there won't be any court case unless someone is arrested for some weapons charge and the case makes it all the way to the top - not likely, me thinks. Hopefully Bush will appoint some pro liberty people to the SCOTUS if any openings become available.

 

[MeekandMild]

Let me get this straight. Is it illegal to MAKE, SELL, or POSSESS said mags? Is the basis for the law the interstate commerce clause or another clause?

In the past I've wondered what would happen if someone made and sold standard capacity toilet tanks for sale only in their home state or selling them interstate as "dog waterer tanks".

 

[boing]

No so far from the truth as you might think.

High Capacity Assualt Toilets:

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32246

 

[Dr.Who]

This is a classic way that the federal government is looking out for our welfare. They don’t want their citizens to be injured by carrying around the extra weight of the bullets in the gun on your hip. Extra mags are OK, since they are carried on the other side. Hence, they balance out the weight of the gun on the opposite side. This will allow your spine to stay in a vertical alignment. This act in itself will relieve the suffering of all those chronic back pain suffers. I believe this was a mandate from the Surgeon General…

If you believe that, then how about this….

Maybe it has to do the government not wanting to be out gunned, one on one, with the average gun holding citizen. Meaning: An Officer meets a citizen (with intent to create mayhem, Bad Guy). The Officer has a 10 round 45, BG has a 17 round G17. The officer is out gunned, clip-to-clip. Yes, the officer may be a better shot, and have 30 more rounds on his belt, but he will still be outgunned without a re-load. It does not make a lot of sense, but they (Big Brother, Anti Gunners) want to create a “forced break†if someone wants to go on a shoot’n spree, where an officer can take advantage and take out the BG while he reloads…

Don’t shoot the messenger…. Enjoy…

 

[longeyes]

Shssssshhh

"Should the govt limit you to having sex 10 times a year?"

No, but over ten it's going to cost ya, Citizen.

 

[edamon]

10 round v.s. 15 round?

totally pointless.

10 is plenty to kill someone.

Another perfectly unthoughtout ban.

-d

 

[dustind]

Police officers work in teams with backup, and carry over thirty rounds, or atleast can. Why was it that they stopped using revolvers? it couldn't be because six was enough despite thier jedi training and backup. Swat carries over 120 rounds each member to go after just a few guys, someone needs to tell them they dont need more than two rounds, since they have teamates. :banghead:

 

[bad_dad_brad]

Before hi-cap semi-automatic pistols (BHP excluded), only the semi-automatic military rifle had magazines with capacities exceeding ten rounds.

It was probably the Glock that got everybodies attention. Seventeen rounds and they don't show up in xrays or metal detectors! Ha! Oh my god! The sky is falling!

Hi-cap magazines are seen by the firearms neophyte as having offensive capability. Hence an arbritary ban was set at 10 rounds to placate the media, the un-informed public, and feel good politicians.

Personally, I don't really feel underarmed with ten round magazines. In a defensive situations, ten rounds are usually going to be enough unless you are fighting off a mob. I just load up on lots of ten round mags.

What ticks me off is that I am so dang lazy. I hate having to load magazines at the range. So more rounds makes that chore a bit easier.

Also, because of liability reasons, the new ten round magazines for Glocks and AR15s etc, are sprung so tight that I am constantly shorting the magazine capacity one round to function the firearm properly.

Oh, and if anybody thinks the ban will be lifted when it expires, think again. No way.

The ban stinks, but what can you do? B*tch about it I guess.

 

[rick_reno]

10 round ban

It's just another example of our elected representatives not understanding what the words "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" really means.
Are our elected repsentatives infringing on our right to "keep and bear arms" when they restrict the number of rounds a magazine can hold? I think they are. Once you accept the premise that this infringement is ok - what's next? You can only keep and bear arms that are pink? Your arms can't have optical sighting devices? The arms you are ALLOWED to keep and bear must be 8 feet in length? There is no end to this, and why should there be? There's been no public outcry over the restrictions they've imposed tso far- why should they stop? This is the rational approach to limiting your Rights - start small and every year or two climb another rung up the ladder.

 

[OF]

Since most gunfights end after 2 or 3 rounds, maybe we should be forced to justify 4 round magazines?

You don't have to 'justify' anything. You are a free human being.

- Gabe

 

[T.Stahl]

Q: A good argument against a 10 round mag ban?
A: Even in Germany, where the gun laws are much tighter, there's no such thing as a silly HiCap ban.

 

[CZ-75]

Even in Germany, where the gun laws are much tighter, there's no such thing a silly HiCap ban.

Yet....

 

[T.Stahl]

Yet....

That is the reason why I have nine mags for my Glock and plan to buy some more.

 

[CZ-75]

Perhaps you ought to do what I'm doing - buying mags for guns I don't own yet.

I don't think I'd want to be down to just one gun, esp. a Glock. Pols would probably ban them first, since they're black, polymer, and too "tactical."