blaisenguns
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2009
- Messages
- 453
I have heard 30 for the AR.
Will We Sit at the Table?
- Thread starter HoosierQ
- Start date
- Status
I have heard 30 for the AR.
Deanimator
Member
The AHSA "we need to be disarmed" mantra was played twenty years ago when the NFA originated it.
If you don't think you can be trusted with thirty round magazines, an AR15 or firearms AT ALL, give yours away.
You're NOT giving MINE away, NO MATTER WHAT.
NO, I REFUSE.
R.W.Dale
Member
You might as well while we're throwing around canned NRA talking points.
*best if opened before 1994
And for the love of God someone please send Mr nugent on a safari to a primitive country for the next couple months.
posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about
Deanimator
Member
That seems to be EXACTLY what you want... only you want to GIVE it away.
Biometrics? Are you seriously advocating for biometrics now? On top of everything else you've already proposed? Wow. No issues with THAT technology... Again you're talking about handicapping the law-abiding in order to simply feel like you're doing something.
This sickens me, honestly. You go right ahead and impose those restrictions on yourself, but I'll never, ever agree to any of them because they do NOTHING to solve the problem.
This sickens me, honestly. You go right ahead and impose those restrictions on yourself, but I'll never, ever agree to any of them because they do NOTHING to solve the problem.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
As others have said, what is true is TRUE. Time doesn't diminish the facts.
And the events of today can't change the facts, either.
Let's focus on GOOD changes we can push for, not morsels to throw to the sharks we believe are circling.
R.W.Dale
Member
Mark my words things will be taken. No matter how much you or me cling to "the truth"
Do you want to have any input on what's to go first?
Today's Sunday. I predict that by the end of the year we'll be having threads about how stunned we are over the speed at wich Washington has acted.
posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Ok...now this is getting silly. "We" are going to have a say in what's taken from us first? ... so they're going to listen to what WE want? But we shouldn't say "NO?" Shouldn't stand up and with force defend what is true?
Sorry, that's just crazy talk.
Sorry, that's just crazy talk.
larryh1108
Member
I was under the impression that by using the guise of anti-terrorism, our government can, basically, do anything it seems fit (see GTMO) without regards to rights of citizens. If the president called for a halt of hi-cap, semi-automatic gun sales (not all guns, not previously sold guns but guns not yet sold) for a period of time to look into them falling into hands of "terrorists" and he tells the BATF to send out memos and faxes to every FFL telling them to immediately halt sales of any hi-cap, semi-sutomatic gun, that 99.9% of the FFLs wouldn't stop selling them? You'd think they'd risk their licenses for a "temporary" ban? You really believe that the FFLs across the nation will ignore this order? Come on, you can't say that and mean it. I'm sure, in the fine print FFLs sign, they are bound by any order coming from the BATF and they are at risk of fine for not obeying them as well as losing their livlihood. No, every FFL would comply. They don't need 100,000 agents knocking on doors when a certified letter, fax and emailed memo would tell them what to do and not to do. Do not believe these places will risk everything to disobey a direct order from above. It is that simple if this guy (Obama) decides to see how far he can push his powers "in the name of the citizens of the United States" and "for the good of all mankind". He is ruthless enough to at least try it. See his past relationship in IL with Daly and now Rohm as well as all his promises that are still unfilled. Do not think he will let this pass without trying something to push the envelope. He may not be successful but he will try anything in his power (as president) to get his way. Yes, he is that determined.
Deanimator
Member
Here's my "input":
NO, I REFUSE.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
No, you're under the wrong impression. The executive branch may be able to stretch things a bit and do a few "under the radar" things involving people caught in enemy combatant situations. That's a very far cry from a DIRECT assault on the 2nd Amendment, affecting millions of people. Ain't NO way.
He's only going to "try" something that might have some chance of sustaining a legal challenge. An order such as you describe would be struck down before the ink was dry. He'd look like an utter fool, and that's not his style.
Besides, he doesn't want a temporary hold on transfers. To the extent that he and those in that camp want to outlaw guns, they wan permanent changes.
Seriously, let this one go. It isn't worth worrying about.
You might want to post this link and get ppl to vote.. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...poll_n_2309324.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009
Citation please.
Both for him using the AR in the shooting, and for the magazine capacity.
Let's get facts involved here.
Rocketmedic
Member
Thank you.
I don't have all of the answers, and I'd love to see a real, honest debate and position take shape. I know it won't all be to my liking, nor anyone else's, but it would be an effective idea and position.
I'm tired and disgusted to see so many of the members of this forum screeching that it's not in any way tied to firearms. Y'all point out how 26 innocent people could be killed at the drop of a hat by one man with materials available at Wal-Mart with ten minutes of prep time that aren't firearms-related and you may have a case.
I don't have all of the answers, and I'd love to see a real, honest debate and position take shape. I know it won't all be to my liking, nor anyone else's, but it would be an effective idea and position.
I'm tired and disgusted to see so many of the members of this forum screeching that it's not in any way tied to firearms. Y'all point out how 26 innocent people could be killed at the drop of a hat by one man with materials available at Wal-Mart with ten minutes of prep time that aren't firearms-related and you may have a case.
10mm Mike
Member
Then leave. You won't be missed. People like you are hurting our cause. If I didn't know any better I'd swear you were a brady bunch implant, here to cause a rift in our ranks.
Deanimator and Sam1911 are right on the money on this one.
Rocketmedic
Member
The Bushmaster looked to have 30-round magazines, the Glock and Sig probably had 15-17 round magazines, unless they were AWB-compliant.
R.W.Dale
Member
They will listen if we have something to say. If we don't then no our opinions on the matter will not be considered.
I'm telling you guys we'll look back and they'll be pre 12/14/12 gun policy and post!
We make the mistake of assuming everyone is on our side or theirs. But in reality both sides are a very narrow margin on each edge. What this shooting has done is awoken the vast vast ocean of folks between our two extremes who will listen to what both sides say and choose one.
If you were one of those folks how would you see our record on preventing these shootings? Have you even comprehended that by its very nature this most heinous act has likely polarized 99% of women voters against us?
posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about
That is not what I have been reading at all.
R.W.Dale
Member
Then you have none.
posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about
Incorrect, his dollars flow to the NRA/ILA.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Really? Ok GREAT, cause that's EASY.
Would EIGHTY-SEVEN victims do for you? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Land_fire
zxcvbob
Member
At the Red Lake High School massacre a few years ago, the maniac killed his grandfather who was a police officer and stole his guns and police car, using them for his rampage.
Using the same logic that's prevailing this weekend, we obviously need to disarm the police.
Using the same logic that's prevailing this weekend, we obviously need to disarm the police.
r1derbike
Member
I'm not part of the problem. I've never killed, or threatened to kill anyone. I've had my life threatened twice, and had a huge semi-truck tire breaking iron brandished in front of me once.
No, I'm not part of the problem, but I intend to be part of the solution, if my rights to defend myself are trashed by executive order, or any other means.
No, I'm not part of the problem, but I intend to be part of the solution, if my rights to defend myself are trashed by executive order, or any other means.
Deanimator
Member
I have none to YOUR liking.
When it comes to my rights, your likes and dislikes are an utter nullity.
NO, I REFUSE.
larryh1108
Member
I am not aware of any magazine capacity maximum. However, here is their list, from their site, of what can and can't be owned:
http://www.ct.gov/dps/lib/dps/special_licensing_and_firearms/assault_weapons.pdf
- Status
Similar threads
