Magazine Ban Question

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

giggitygiggity

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
2,250
If a high capacity magazine ban was to be enacted, would magazine manufacturers simply sell the components (springs, bodies, followers, baseplates) in order to allow them to still make money and in order to allow citizens to have the means to repair or build high capacity magazines? I don't see how the President or Congress could ban people from buying springs or pieces or pieces of metal.
 
I don't see how the President or Congress could ban people from buying springs or pieces or pieces of metal.
Click to expand...
Well, they've already banned people from acquiring commonly available plants which produce psychotropic effects when consumed...
 
I assume it would be like the last ban which banned the manufacture and sale of mags that hold more than 10 rounds... People will be able to keep what they have until they wear out, but will not be able to buy more.

The last ban was a ban on manufacturing/sale, not possession.
 
Right, but I am asking about the individual pieces. I do not see any way how the President or Congress could stop a company from making the magazine box and selling it, making the spring and selling it, and making the follower and selling it, and making the floorplate and selling it. Basically instead of selling the high capacity magazine as a complete unit, a company could sell only the components and give people the ability to put it together themselves. It would be difficult if not impossible for the government to take legal action to prevent a company from selling a spring (mag spring), a metal box (mag box), a small piece of plastic (follower), or a small piece of metal (floorplate).
 
How would the company advertise it for sale and how would the customer identify the part they need to complete it? There in lies the problem. All they have to do is prove intent and they have you... If you don't imply intent, nobody knows what you are selling, except that it is a spring.... springs fit lots of things.
 
If they ban unicorns will we have to turn in our stuffed animals?

There is no ban, there will be no ban. Stop acting like chickenlittle. You're helping the anti's.
 
6.5x55swedish said:
I assume it would be like the last ban.......
Click to expand...

WHY would you assume that?

Far too many people are "assuming" that any AWB won't be any worse than the last one. But they don't realize that the antis aren't about to cut back in their wish list.

They made mistakes, errors and omissions last time (in their mind) and they will remedy that this time around.
 
David E said:
WHY would you assume that?

Far too many people are "assuming" that any AWB won't be any worse than the last one. But they don't realize that the antis aren't about to cut back in their wish list.

They made mistakes, errors and omissions last time (in their mind) and they will remedy that this time around.
Click to expand...
No. They weren't "mistakes". They intentionally did not ban arms, because if they did the law would have been thrown out by the courts under the Miller test; "suitable for Militia use". So they made an incremental law that could pass; cosmetic features. Now Heller and McDonald are even tougher for them to get around.

If Congress makes a law that bans AR15's (which they won't) it would be quickly tossed by a federal judge. Fundamental rights cannot be legislated away. They haven't been, are not now, and will not be.
All this chickenlittle panicing plays right into the anti's plan.

Feinstein says "Boo"! I'm not scared of her. I know my rights.
 
Read the decisions on Miller, Heller and McDonald. Know your rights and the limits already placed on government.
 
joeschmoe said:
No. They weren't "mistakes". They intentionally did not ban arms, because if they did the law would have been thrown out by the courts under the Miller test; "suitable for Militia use". So they made an incremental law that could pass; cosmetic features. Now Heller and McDonald are even tougher for them to get around.

If Congress makes a law that bans AR15's (which they won't) it would be quickly tossed by a federal judge. Fundamental rights cannot be legislated away. They haven't been, are not now, and will not be.
All this chickenlittle panicing plays right into the anti's plan.

Feinstein says "Boo"! I'm not scared of her. I know my rights.
Click to expand...
As much as I agree with you on the odds of a bill passing, there are a few points that we ignore at our peril:

1. Don't depend on judges, federal or otherwise to protect your rights...history should prove why. The 2nd Amendment can, has and will be ignored/reinterpreted just as easily as all three branches of government have ignored/reinterpreted the rest of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. We are now a country where one can be spied on, indefinitely detained or even killed by our government without due process of law - do you really think the omnipotent government types give a darn about Amendment #2?

2. If anything passes, it will be the background checks. Even gun owners are piling on that bandwagon. If that doesn't change, expect some kind of background check bill to pass as a quid pro quo for some other legislation...like Medicare cuts, for example. Besides the obvious negative effects on private sales, consider this...based on the wording of some of the bills introduced at the Federal level, it will be illegal for a non-licensed buyer to take possession of a firearm without going through a background check. Think about that for a minute...if you have any firearms that were not purchased from private sellers without some kind of notarized receipt, how are you going to prove that you took possession of that firearm before our hypothetical law went into effect? What is going to prevent them from charging you with illegal possession of a firearm?

Remember, we're talking about lawyers and politicians here...words are their game, they make their living by taking seeming innocuous words and twisting them to their purpose.

I applaud you for not buying into the panic...but keep in mind that knowing your rights isn't enough...you gotta be able to defend them against those who don't give a crud about trampling them.
 
joeschmoe said:
No. They weren't "mistakes". They intentionally did not ban arms, because if they did the law would have been thrown out by the courts under the Miller test; "suitable for Militia use".
Click to expand...

Who, besides Dianne Fine Swine, has said anything about banning arms? I said that in their mind, they made mistakes on the previous AWB and that they will rectify that in any new one.

Fundamental rights cannot be legislated away.
Click to expand...

Really? Have you tried to buy a 32oz soda in NYC lately? Or load 8 rounds in your magazine this past week in NYS?
 
1. Don't depend on judges, federal or otherwise to protect your rights...history should prove why.
Click to expand...
"John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!"
 
You may quake in your slippers when Cummo or Feinstein bark. I do not. I know my history, the law and my rights.
 
David E said:
Who, besides Dianne Fine Swine, has said anything about banning arms? I said that in their mind, they made mistakes on the previous AWB and that they will rectify that in any new one.
Click to expand...
And I said they weren't mistakes. They were intentional ommissions because they cannot ban arms.Their goal is incremental attack. Magazines are part of the arms and IMO, would have eventually been stuck down (but it expired so it doesn't matter) So is ammo, cleaning supplies, gun ranges, etc. "Well regulated" means to keep in good working order. None of those things can be banned. If they try, they will fail. Either in court, at the ballot box, jury box or ammo box. We have not and will not give up our rights. 100% certain. Hasn't and won't happen.
Really? Have you tried to buy a 32oz soda in NYC lately? Or load 8 rounds in your magazine this past week in NYS?
Click to expand...

I disagree that a 32oz soda is a fundamental and Constitutionaly protected right. Give the system and voters time. This will be, must be corrected. Get angry, but not scared.
 
I wondered something similar.
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=512696

Magazine repair kits and the '94 AWB

http://www.44mag.com/product/high_capacity_magazine_repair_kits/

In the same way that these ↑ magazine repair kits are legal to purchase and use in the state of California today, would they have been legal under Clinton's AWB?

Was anything like this even available back then?

Anyone remember being able to buy a replacement spring, floor plate, follower, or mag body separate from one another?
Click to expand...
 
Dave:

In case you missed the title... We are talking about a High Capacity Mag Ban, not an AWB. I assume it would be like the last in that the ban will be on manufacture and sale, because that is all they really can regulate.
 
Joe, I'm not panicking and being Chicken Little. I am only offering suggestions and preparing in the unfortunate case that some magazine restriction or ban is able to be pushed through. Sadly, I do not have full faith and confidence that all of our politicians will do the right thing and uphold the 2nd Amendment or even go through the proper procedures in order to enact a law or amendment.

By the way, I use the term "politicians" purposely because I do not consider most of them to be respectable and deserving of being called "leaders," especially when they use a mass murdering of children to cowardly capitalize on a political goal.
 
joeschmoe said:
You may quake in your slippers when Cummo or Feinstein bark. I do not. I know my history, the law and my rights.
Click to expand...

You take curious delight is assuming others "quake" or are "afraid," whilst you take comfort in your alleged knowledge of history, laws and individual rights, smugly assuming no one else knows them. :rolleyes:

You ignore pertinent points to perpetuate your own. I'm reminded of the folks that naïvely blathered how Obama wouldn't pursue any anti-gun legislation during his second term.

What IS interesting is the media hush on Sandy Hook details. Investigators apparently have found NO spent casings from the "evil assault rifle with 30 rd magazine" .223 that all this current hoopla is supposed to be based upon.

Odd, ain't it.
 
Other than the fact that crap tends to stink and spread as it settles, why should most of us be concerned by what they do in crazy NY? 7rd vs 10rd vs ????, if you aren't a resident and have a NY permit, everything you've got was already illegal.
 
joeschmoe said:
If they ban unicorns will we have to turn in our stuffed animals?

There is no ban, there will be no ban. Stop acting like chickenlittle. You're helping the anti's.
Click to expand...
You know, a couple of guys in New York were saying the same thing last week.
 
joeschmoe said:
If they ban unicorns will we have to turn in our stuffed animals?

There is no ban, there will be no ban. Stop acting like chickenlittle. You're helping the anti's.
Click to expand...

I am sure they said the same thing when Clinton was talking about a ban in the early 90's but no one believed he would do it. I am not about to "hope" that people like Feinstein, Biden, and Schumer get lucky and vote on a bill when most pro-2A are mad about something or Obama slips in an EO. Sitting around hoping something doesn't happen is called being an ostrich, having your head in the sand means it can still happen.

The last ban is really all we have to go on at this point. Clinton's own DOJ team said the AWB of 94 had little to no measurable effect on crime. The antis know this too so if they have a chance to pass something stricter in an effort to reduce crime they will. So when considering what they will try I take into account what the 94 ban did at the very minimum and guess from there using news, voting tendencies etc.
 
cl4de6 said:
You know, a couple of guys in New York were saying the same thing last week.
Click to expand...
Then those are the only two guys in NY who didn't know there was already a AWB and a 10 rd mag limit in NY. Probably 2 of the millions of NY'ers who keep voting for the same gun grabbing politicians year after year and now act surprised at what happened there. I'm not surpised.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top