That works to a point, but the damage is already done by then.
House Bill Introduced To Ban High-Capacity Magazines
- Thread starter Robert_K
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
We needto be more in your face about or second amendment right than the queers, civil rightso/black/mexican and the pro abortion rights groups combined!
Its time to take their playbook and make out our own!
NeverForget and damn sure never forgive!
Its time to take their playbook and make out our own!
NeverForget and damn sure never forgive!
Whew! Some real heat going on here... Some of you folks sound like you are ready to blow. In today's environment, I suspect some type of remarks had best be kept in ones pocket rather than aired on an open forum. You think anyone who might take an opposite view might be paying attention? Anyway, I have never owned a "high capacity" mag as described in the news reports...such as 30 plus rounds. I suppose it would be a bit harder to conceal? I have a .380 with 15+1 and a .40 with 14+1. I have always found that for reliability, the single stack mag worked a tad better than the double. Is that anyone else's experience? How many of these aftermarket 30 plus round mags feed cleanly? Also, if anyone trains with dropping empty mags and reloading in a combat situation, I suspect there isn't a ton of advantage to a getting off multiple rounds. Anyone have any FIRST HAND experience? I am asking about pistols, by the way. For concealed carry and home defense, I have never considered a 30 plus round mag... How many folks actually own them?
I see nothing on this thread that anyone should be concerned about posting, nor does anyone seem ready to blow. You sound like many MSNBC employees that blame violence on those who voice their opinions.
I own 30 rd mags and know lots of others that do too.
What does a 30 rd mag have to do with concealed carry?
You think that being able to carry more ammo and get off more rounds in a combat situation is not an advantage...? LMAO
The fact that you have decided not to own 30 round magazines is certainly your right. Just as choosing to own them is my right.
I own 30 rd mags and know lots of others that do too.
What does a 30 rd mag have to do with concealed carry?
You think that being able to carry more ammo and get off more rounds in a combat situation is not an advantage...? LMAO
The fact that you have decided not to own 30 round magazines is certainly your right. Just as choosing to own them is my right.
You don't know me or know where I have been so I wouldn't make too many assumptions. I was never talking about your right to own any magazine. My comments about over the top remarks included these: "We needto be more in your face about or second amendment right than the queers, civil rightso/black/mexican and the pro abortion rights groups combined!"
I think that there are various agencies which monitor forums like this and they probably use "key words" to pull up threads. I don't think it is a great idea to get on the radar to put it plainly. By the way, have you been in a combat situation with a 30 round magazine?
I think that there are various agencies which monitor forums like this and they probably use "key words" to pull up threads. I don't think it is a great idea to get on the radar to put it plainly. By the way, have you been in a combat situation with a 30 round magazine?
Q +A with Sen. Lautenberg on gun control laws
Q +A with Sen. Lautenberg on gun control laws | NJ.com
Q +A with Sen. Lautenberg on gun control laws | NJ.com
First off... I made NO assumptions about you.
This is one of the days I chose to keep my tin foil hat in the closet, so I am not too worried about my activity on here being monitored. We still have the right to express our opinions and I haven't seen one posted in this thread that would be construed as threatening so I think we are pretty safe.
As for combat, I guess it depends on your definition. I have not been to Iraq. I have been in a situation where police were being shot at and were returning fire and I had a 30 rd mag in an AR15. That felt like a combat zone at the time. I have been to numerous pretty high speed firearms classes which involve 30 rd mags.
There are several on this forum that have much more training and experience than I do though and many that have been in military combat also are in our midst.
All that having been said.....what is your point?
This is something that gets glossed over all too often and too many people have fallen int their trap because even staunch supporters of the 2nd Amendment have bought into the term "High Capacity Magazine" to be anything over 10 rounds. Bullshit! 15, 17 etc. round mags are STANDARD Capacity for many guns. A 10-round mag is a "LOW Capacity" mag for many guns.
Even though their wording is banning "High Capacity" magazines, they really include "Standard Capacity" ones too! So even if you don't personally feel the need to have High Capacity mags, you better oppose any and all "High Capacity" legislation, because it really includes STANDARD capacity mags too!!!
The basic premise of the anti-"high-capacity" mags folks is that you don't need more than 10 rounds for sporting purposes or self defense. In doing so, the DELIBERATELY ignore the plain intention of the Founders who wrote the 2nd Amendment to allow the general populous to have similar capabilities to standard-equipped military infantry - like the Redcoats. The wording there is "security of a free State." The 2nd amendment, while is rightly should be applied to allow for hunting and self-defense, also allows the people to participate in the defense of their state. If Texas is ever threatened, we sure as shooting would want to have enough ammo to resist an invading force. If the Russian military, or even the US military has 30 round mags, then we should be able to have them, too. When we allow them to define the argument, we will lose every time. Even in self defense, I can easily see situations where more than 10 rounds might be appropriate. There are a number of major US cities where one could accidentally run into gang warfare and need some serious firepower. For that matter, right here in Texas, we have a very real risk of an eventual spillover of the violence currently on the other side of our border. It wouldn't take much IMO for Mexico to go the way of Tunisia or Egypt in recent days. I'd sure like to have my "High-Capacity" 30 round mags in my AR at that point.
R
R
Michael R. Bloomberg: Undercover at an Arizona Gun Show
How difficult is it for criminals, the mentally ill, and drug abusers to buy guns in Arizona?
We sent undercover investigators with hidden cameras to find out, and the answer is: not difficult at all. Just 15 days after the horrible tragedy in Tucson, our investigators found that people who may be prohibited by federal law from purchasing guns can nevertheless buy them as easily as a hamburger with fries at the local McDonald's.
How difficult is it for criminals, the mentally ill, and drug abusers to buy guns in Arizona?
We sent undercover investigators with hidden cameras to find out, and the answer is: not difficult at all. Just 15 days after the horrible tragedy in Tucson, our investigators found that people who may be prohibited by federal law from purchasing guns can nevertheless buy them as easily as a hamburger with fries at the local McDonald's.
See this is where we get screwed. The Gun Control people act purely on emotion. We can give facts, figures, statistics, anecdotes, etc. till we are blue in the face. All they really have to respond with that is legitimate at the end of the day is that guns scare them, so they want to get as much "control" of them as possible.
I know many of you are going to watch the video and respond with "Yeah, and? Its perfectly legal." And you are correct. However videos like this scare the crap out of the Gun Control people. It is just so damaging for our side because it takes an emotional argument and give it steroids.
My point? Do you have the right to express your opinion? Absolutely. I fought for my country and served 27 years to ensure that your freedom of speech continues to be maintained. At the same time, I defended your 2nd amendment rights. Do you have the right to call someone a "queer". Name calling isn't a right, it is a problem. The problem is rudeness. Do you have the right to own 30 plus round magazines? Sure, never said you didn't... just don't see a point. And I was in Iraq and most everywhere else in the world and came to appreciate a .45 ACP single stack for its reliable feeding in tactical combat situations...
Thank you for your service.
Whether or not you see a point is irrelevent. If I want to own them I have a right to. We dont have to prove why we want or need something to be allowed to have it.
As far as namecalling, I have that right also. I tend to avoid it, but it is my right to do so if I choose.
The argument that a single stack mag is better is a whole different issue.
Your argument is the same one the anti gun crowd uses. Is is a slippery slope, today we dont need 30 round mags, tommorow we dont need handguns, then double barrel shotguns. Its a road you dont want to start down. Unfortunatley for us we have already started down it. Our job now is to keep ourselves from going any further in the wrong direction.
I sincerely appreciate your service. I also respect your choice that you do not need a 30-round magazine for your had gun.
I think the point you are missing is when you said "'high capacity' mag as described in the news reports...such as 30 plus rounds. I suppose it would be a bit harder to conceal? I have a .380 with 15+1 and a .40 with 14+1."
Do you realize that "THEIR" definition of a high cap mag is anything over 10 rounds? So your .380 and .40 round mags ARE the "High Capacity" magazines they want to get rid of along with the 30 round glock ones?
That is without even opening the doors on whether the ban will actually accomplish anything or how much it flies in the face of the 2nd Ammendment.
So I am worried that you are missing the point. I don't want you to be ambivalent about the issue and down the road try to order a replacement 15 round magazine and be told that they are no longer available for sale due the the High Capacity magazine ban leaving you saying "Wait, what?!"
You could just as easily go and buy an assortment of knives and illegally use them. Or rent a vehicle that is capable of running over hundreds of people. The list is endless. The Glock is just a scapegoat.
It is impossible to eliminate ways to injure another human being. The human race is too smart, they will develop another way, prohibited or not. Reasonable prudence in the distribution of dangerous items is the best course, elimination just increases the desire to think of another alternate method. Known threats are much more preferential to unknown threats. At least you can identify them and take appropriate action.
It is impossible to eliminate ways to injure another human being. The human race is too smart, they will develop another way, prohibited or not. Reasonable prudence in the distribution of dangerous items is the best course, elimination just increases the desire to think of another alternate method. Known threats are much more preferential to unknown threats. At least you can identify them and take appropriate action.
BAN cars, they are used everyday by intoxicated individuals to cause accidents that injure and kill people!
BAN cheeseburgers, they tend to clog people's arteries!
BAN TV's, they tend to fall and kill children!
BAN going to work, trucks give off emissions that are harmful to everyone!
BAN airplanes, they tend to crash everynow and then and lots of people die they also are big polluters!
BAN....
BAN...... we'll end up banning everything eventually...and the government will deliver every single one of us a 12oz container of gruel to feast on...
BAN cheeseburgers, they tend to clog people's arteries!
BAN TV's, they tend to fall and kill children!
BAN going to work, trucks give off emissions that are harmful to everyone!
BAN airplanes, they tend to crash everynow and then and lots of people die they also are big polluters!
BAN....
BAN...... we'll end up banning everything eventually...and the government will deliver every single one of us a 12oz container of gruel to feast on...
country_boy
TGT Addict
Sounds like cuba or some 3rd world country.
