arma virumque cano (et alia)
And Mass shootings combined with high amounts of gun violence are just the cost of freedom.GOD BLESS AMERICAOr should that beGOD HELP AMERICA!
Get a call out to the Queen, she'll parachute in and save us all.....Wheeeeeheeeeee!!!!
The Texas Clocktower shooter used a bolt action rifle with a five-round magazine as his primary weapon. Oswald did the same. Anyone who trains with firearms can switch out magazines quickly. What this comes down to is the fact that control advocates want guns to have no ammunition capacity. No deals.
these 100 round mags are not reliable...every indication is that the CO shooter's mag jammed, saving a lot of lives since he was turned down for a gun range that would have allowed him to test fire and see that it would jam and learn to clear the weapon.btw, Mikeb, glad you're back and the nuts aren't in charge of the nuthouse anymore..I stopped coming here b/c of the abusiveness of laci, jade and democommie (I thought he'd already left).
Extra-large magazines are not part of the "bear arms" thing in the 2A, but they are part of the "reasonable restrictions" thing in Heller.
Mikeb, be honest. You see anything related to guns as part of the "reasonable restrictions thing." If not, if you're ready to say that we do have a right to own firearms and to carry them, I'll listen.
Extra extra large mags are something I already have hundreds of, loaded and ready to shoot any agent of a tyrannical government the people decide to replace.
"Hundreds?!!!" I can see why you don't identify yourself.
Explain your comment, blue helmet.
If a person has "hundreds" (is that like 700 or 800?) of high capacity magazines loaded and ready to go, he should be arrested for a new crime that I'm proposing: "hording weapons and ammunition with bad intent."I suspect that anybody who mouths off about having "hundreds" of them is just a lying blowhard tough-talking internet guy.
I have thousands of books. Am I guilty of hoarding writing with the intent to commit a thought crime?But you do love to come up with new laws and new crimes. Fortunately, no legislature is listening.
Hoarding books is good. Hoarding bullets is bad.
I don't plan to take your word for it, Mikeb.
I curious, what amount considered hoarding? Rounds total? Rounds per gun? What would be an acceptable amount of rounds to have on hand? Can you temporarily store lots of rounds to go to the range later to burn up? Is there a time limit on "to be used at a later date" for the rounds to be considered too many to have on hand?If I were to limited to say 500 rounds total for all ten of my guns per month purchase, then I could just buy that limit every month until I had saved up the amount I would want to keep on hand. It would take me a year to save up for a weekend out on a range to burn up in just a few hours for fun. That would be 6000 rounds of various calibers to play with.I can buy that or more right now at the drop of the hat just for the fun for me, my wife, my sister and brother in law to enjoy ourselves in poking holes in paper, trying to out do one another.Or each one of us could save it up individually at a 500 rounds per month and have our get together four times a year.500, 50, 15, 5000 rounds per week? Per day? Per month? Per year?Inquiring mind wants to know!
Does this mean you agree there should be a limit and we're down to haggling over exactly what it should be?
No, I dont agree that there should be limits at all. I was just wondering on what limit you thought there should be, and why.I was also showing how limits could be worked around.If you start to ban or limit ANYTHING, not just firearms of any kind, people are going to hoard them up. Just like a dog and his food. If there is plenty for him to eat, he will only eat what he needs. If you ration his food, he will gourge himself on anything he can find. People are no different.If I am not restricted on how much ammo I can buy, I will buy what I need at the time. Put restrictions on me and I will stock up on it. This is also just ONE of the reason gun sales are so high, if not the main reason. People are afraid they will not be able to get what they want or anything at all soon. Talks of bans on certian weapons that LOOK military (but dont function anything like the military) are forcing panic in the people by thinking that they wont be able to get them. So buy them while they can. Buy the ammo while they can. Dogs will glut food before the food is rationed.I still have a habit of stocking ammo anyway even tho I have no real reason to do so anymore. Its just habit. I bought a couple of new rifles and with them a case of rounds for each without even thinking about it. Until that is when I was putting it up. WOW, its going to take me a couple of years to even use that much nowdays, I was thinking to myself!Politicions and anti-gun people are driving the sales of both guns and ammo. If it were to be left alone, the fear factor gone, so would the sales of both diminish.Instead of the fear of guns and concentrate on the criminals themselves, you could actually drive up the awareness and reporting the wrong doing people to get them away from society. The public would be far more willing to help in this regard. Law enforcement needs to catch up on the value of reporting suspicious people and investigate credible warnings being reported, like the Maryland guy. That worked, and worked well. It should have worked with the Aurora shooter as well. Apparently it has turned out that there were actual concerns about this guy that went nowhere with law enforcement. Why that was is the big question.
If you there should be no limits, then there's no point in discussing the numbers.
No, Mikeb, you just don't want to look foolish by naming a number. The point that we keep making is this: It's not the tool or the number, it's the actions of the person that matter.
Maybe no point of, but I like the discussion of the possiblities. If you understand the point on "no limits" VS "limits" then you can see my point on why things are happening the way they are. Emotions are high right now on both PRO and CON. CONs see it as no avalibility for anything gun related in private hands, PROs see it as a 2A right. Both sides, in my view, are extream right now because of the finger pointing and blame. Both sides are not addressing a solution.My point of a solution is, at least in part, stated in my last comment in the last paragraph. But I for one like to discuss possible solutions. It has been one thing that I have done for many years in my position and worked out ways that worked for everyone. Closed minds dont try, and doesnt achieve anything.I took you for a fair minded guy Mike, are you saying to me now that there is no discussion? You have been fair to me, or at least made me belive so.
I don't see the point in discussing details if you're totally closed to the idea.
I never said I was totally closed, couldnt be since I said I like discussions. C,mon Mike, read my entire posts. I know they are long but thats the way I discuss things.
Mikeb, the reports that I've seen say that the hundred-round magazine used in Aurora jammed. Shouldn't you be advocating that all of us be required to use enormous magazines? They're unreliable and really hard to conceal.
Besides with those things being fully loaded they are HEAVY! 100 rounds of .223 weighs a LOT plus the drum itself.Unless your jolly green giant, the average person cant carry as much ammo as one would assume. It was probably all this guy could muster to walk in there with that rifle, a shotgun and two pistols. He couldnt have been able to move fast, which would have made him a great target to return fire to if someone else carrying would have been in there.For example, when I go hunting I carry a Mosin Nagant 7.62X54R and 20 rounds in a pouch, one pistol .45 1911 loaded but no extra magazines. Now I know I am old but I am a big guy and not really fat at all. At 300 yards to the deer blind and I am rather tuckered out. And thats not including the clothing that you have to wear in the cold, dried snacks, water, communications equipment, flash light for being there overnight and so on. If I get a deer and the truck cant get to it, its a half a day just to drag that thing to where I can get the truck to it.A lot of noise was made about the shooters 6000 rounds. OK, he had that. So what? There was absolutley NO WAY he could have carried that amount with him, unless he was one of those fictional cartoon characters with super human strength. So what was he going to do with all of that? Nothing! It was useless to have that many and commit that crime, any crime. If he were to commit mass murder crime sprees unapposed, it would still take him days to do so. And that chance would be what? Nothing, nada. His crime on that theater in order to make use of everything he had would mean that he would have to set himself up in THAT theater at least a day ahead of time, barracade himself in and get everything loaded and in place before the shooting could begin. And again, whats the chance of that happening? NONE, nada!Putting limits on ammo wont do anything to stop someone from committing that kind of shooting. It wouldnt matter if he had 600, or 60,000 rounds, he simple could not employ it all. A crowded theater would be the same a shooting fish in a barrel, maybe even easier than that. He couldnt have been that great of a shot in the first place or a LOT more would be dead. He was shooting at random, thats all. Most CHL holders, or at least the ones I know PRACTICE and practice a lot. So do I. I am a VERY good shot, making each one count. A law officer on the other hand shoots just enough to qualify to carry each year. On the average the typical law man burns about 10 rounds a year and can hit their target one out of six times. They practice more on physical take downs, not shooting. I wont get physical with you, I will shoot you instead.This Aurora shooter probabaly practiced just enough to be familiar with his gun to know how to fire it and verify that it would actually go bang and nothing more. His concern wasnt accuracy, it was terror pure and simple. The question to that reason has yet to be determined tho.