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

Why I am in favor of a ban on high capacity gun magazines

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by timmy4, Jan 26, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. meanmrmustard

    meanmrmustard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2011
    Messages:
    4,225
    Location:
    Missouri
    But that was the will of your officials in the State and those who appoint them, not an all encompassing passive aggressive law put into place by the Federal government.
     
  2. timmy4

    timmy4 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2013
    Messages:
    165
    That's a separate question. I don't want to give you a detailed answer until I know more. But personally, I'm very uncomfortable with guns being introduced into public schools.
     
  3. meanmrmustard

    meanmrmustard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2011
    Messages:
    4,225
    Location:
    Missouri
    But, you won't find it as it doesn't exist. No more so than finding proof that hi cap mags help end lives anymore so than standard or sub standard capacity.

    Your position lies in El Dorado.
     
  4. Warp

    Warp Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    9,541
    Location:
    Georgia
    4. Look up incorporation of the Amendments, RE: Application to the state governments

    So, these states that have limitations on magazine size...what have the positive, crime reducing effects of these limitations been?
     
  5. timmy4

    timmy4 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2013
    Messages:
    165
    Not sure I see the difference. Either a law is unconstitutional, or it isn't. Brown vs. Board of Education was a response to local laws, not federal laws.
     
  6. Warp

    Warp Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    9,541
    Location:
    Georgia
    Then you shall continue to have people kill numbers of children in the "gun free" criminal empowerment zones where only the psychopath out to make a name for himself is armed.
     
  7. Cesiumsponge

    Cesiumsponge Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,266
    Location:
    Washington
    Read again. I want EVERYONE to wear bicycle helmets at ALL times. More people trip and fall on sidewalks and stairs than fall off bicycles and crack their heads open. Everyone walks. Not everyone bikes.

    Wearing bicycle helmets only when bicycling doesn't protect your head when you're walking or negotiating stairways.
     
  8. avs11054

    avs11054 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2010
    Messages:
    649
    Location:
    AZ
    Timmy, I read the majority of the last thread that you started, but I don't have the time right now to read all of this thread, but I wanted to address your OP.

    You and others refer to the Laughner shooting to say that people can just take down the shooter when he reloads. This is the ONLY mass shooting that I know of where this has happened. Those people were extremely brave. Why didn't somebody take out Cho when he reloaded? Indications are that Lanza had to reload. Why didn't somebody take him out when he reloaded? Why didn't somebody take out Kleibold and Harris when they had to reload or change guns? The list can go on and on about all the mass shootings that weren't stopped by people who took out the bad guy during a reload. Again, the people who stopped Laughner were very brave, and they could have paid with their lives. Very few people wouuld be willing to do that.

    You also mention all these executive police organizations that support a ban, and they all say that it is to keep their officers safe. How many of those people saying that work the streets? Not very many. Virtually all of the officers that I know are 100% against any form of additional gun control. They know that it will not keep bad guys from getting guns, so why keep law abiding citizens from getting guns?
     
  9. timmy4

    timmy4 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2013
    Messages:
    165
    I don't know. I just asked that question. Do you know?

    (I want to add here that those in favor of gun control argue that state laws have little effect because they are too easy to subvert- for instance, anyone who lives in California and wants a high capacity gun magazine can simply drive to Nevada and purchase one. The argument goes on that only federal laws will be effective. I've always considered this to be a strong argument.)
     
  10. Warp

    Warp Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    9,541
    Location:
    Georgia
    timmy4: Do you think making it illegal to bring a gun to a school in Connecticut was beneficial to the Newtown shooting? What did that law help? It was illegal for him to possess those pistols. It was illegal for him to leave the house with those guns. It was illegal for him to kill his mother. It was illegal for him to kill those kids. What does it being illegal for him to have the guns at the school do??

    There are states where it's legal to carry a gun on school property, such as Utah. Been that way a long time? WHY IS IT BAD?
     
  11. skeeziks

    skeeziks Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2010
    Messages:
    395
    Timmy.... you don't need statistical evidence to know that helmets save lives.
    You also don't need statistics to tell you that restricting magazines from 30 to 20 or 15 will do nothing to aid in saving lives in a "mass shooting."

    Use the logic that God gave you.
     
  12. timmy4

    timmy4 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2013
    Messages:
    165
    But is that a fair analogy? Limits on high capacity magazines would of course be for gun owners only. Such a limit would not affect me at all as a non-gun owner. Am I proposing any restrictions that would cover every member of society?
     
  13. meanmrmustard

    meanmrmustard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2011
    Messages:
    4,225
    Location:
    Missouri
    The difference is that the law was made at a State level, by YOUR state. Not mine, not Warps, but your own. They deemed it necessary to uphold a semblance of safety, however ridiculous **** is in that regard.

    You take a law that the Fed is hell bent on seeing through that spans an entire nation that in reality is unconstitutional, watch what separate states do.
     
  14. timmy4

    timmy4 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2013
    Messages:
    165
    Your first point goes directly to my question about the Gascon editorial. Until I know the answer to that question, I can't really answer you. Previously, I was under the assumption that Loughner only represents the most famous of many examples which justified my position. Now I'm no longer sure.

    Also no longer sure of your second point. I wish some poll could be taken of law enforcement to find out what they really think about this. Virtually EVERY law enforcement agency that has given an opinion on this issue has come out in favor of this ban, which is a big part of the reason I supported it. But that in itself is not decisive, I acknowledge.
     
  15. meanmrmustard

    meanmrmustard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2011
    Messages:
    4,225
    Location:
    Missouri
    Should you not?

    If I'm told I can no longer own a certain inanimate object due to its proposed and unsubstantiated effectiveness for murder, should you be allowed to speak freely any longer?

    If I'm not mistaken, those that glorify these murderers as of late are using their 1A. Following this, more shootings at an alarming rate due to folks ending up on the 5'oclock news.

    Timmy, I'd hate to say it, but I think I'm going to march to have your first amendment regulated. It helps cause death.
     
  16. timmy4

    timmy4 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2013
    Messages:
    165
    But I already did. The AWB included a ban on high capacity magazines. It was in place between 1994 and 2004. What did the separate states do during those 10 years? Did they challenge it? Not to my knowledge. If they had challenged it, would it have been overturned? I doubt it, especially given the makeup of the court then (more liberal than it is now.) So I'm still not sure I see your point.
     
  17. John3921

    John3921 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Messages:
    483
    Location:
    Montana
    But you are a citizen - whether you actually own a gun or not - so it does affect you. You (presuming you're not a felon) can own a gun. So even if you choose not to, restricting the size of the magazine or the type of gun affects your personal liberty - even if you choose not to exercise that liberty.
     
  18. paintballdude902

    paintballdude902 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,872
    woops wrong thread
     
  19. SpazC

    SpazC Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    40
    Location:
    Alabaster, AL
    Timmy you know MOST public schools had firearms as a part of their shooting teams untill the 60's .

    My grandfather remembers taking his .22 to school and putting it next to his cubby in grade school.

    Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2
     
  20. timmy4

    timmy4 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2013
    Messages:
    165
    Again, I don't see your point.

    Right now it's illegal for you to possess heroin. That's a matter of public policy. Do you believe that only heroin addicts should be allowed to make a decision about this? Or do I and you as non-heroin users get a say as well?
     
  21. BHP FAN

    BHP FAN Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    5,810
    Location:
    Northern California
  22. Warp

    Warp Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    9,541
    Location:
    Georgia
    Don't be so sure.

    Gun control effects more than gun owners.

    The cities with the most restrictive gun control laws tend to have the most violent crime, too. Just look at Chicago.

    Other people being effectively and efficiently armed has a second-hand effect on you. The criminals don't know who is armed, who is not, and with what. And the government is more likely to respect your other rights when the people with guns are also concerned with those other rights.

    You don't live in a vacuum.
     
  23. Cesiumsponge

    Cesiumsponge Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,266
    Location:
    Washington
    Fair? Since when has anything in this discussion been fair? Punishing the majority for the crimes of a minute minority is hardly fair, but here we are on page 8 of this thread. Besides, who said I was making an analogy? Is it okay to target a specific group of people in the name of public safety, but it isn't okay to apply public safety so it applies to everyone in the spirit of being fair and impartial? Is it distasteful to support legislation that would effect everyone and prevent the deaths of thousands of Americans?

    If we all were mandated to wear helmets in our daily life, we'd be saving billions of dollars in hospital and ER visits. We'd be saving thousands of lives and preventing countless people who'd otherwise live as a vegetables because they slipped on an icy stairway and cracked their head open. For $20 per person for a helmet, it sounds like a perfectly reasonable program, if we were to start making the public safety argument.

    Less than a hundred people die per year from criminals abusing high-capacity magazines in high profile events. Have you ever taken a look at the CDC mortality data and the hundreds of preventable methods of mortality that have a higher chance of killing you? I'd say cranking up production of bike helmets is a jobs program, saves lives, saves our medical system money, and promotes national morale. What's not to like?
     
  24. timmy4

    timmy4 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2013
    Messages:
    165
    Well, exactly. So I DO get a say, right?
     
  25. G.barnes

    G.barnes Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2011
    Messages:
    352
    Timmy what would your opinion be if someone told you what computer you could use because of hackers or everyone must ride a scooter because of drunk drivers. What would your opinion be if it was something that affected you. There is no proof that magazine restrictions work for criminals, but because it doesn't affect you you figure what the hell lets give it shot if it works great if not I'm not out anything.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page