So, you say you would let us keep 10 round magazines? You are liars...

[Daryl Hunt]

My ruger 450 bushmaster has a three round clip and you can put one in the chamber so 4. Can’t see how you need more than this.

You're a Commie faggot?

Probably, but the main thing is that he is an ideologue.

He believes that because some behavior is outside of his experience, like needing a 6 shooter, he therefore supports banning and throwing in prison anyone who thinks they need more.

Same logic Stalin used.

And if you can't find something to panic about, create something.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Also...most revolvers hold 6 bullets....this now scoops them up......it would also end concealed carry, since almost all of the compact and sub compact guns hold more than 5 bullets........

this is a back door gun ban...and it needs to be stopped.....

This is exactly what the Judge in California pointed out when he put a stay on the California magazine ban...

http://michellawyers.com/wp-content...rra_Order-Granting-Preliminary-Injunction.pdf

(n) a slippery slope
What is clear from the preliminary evidence presented is that individuals who intend to engage in mass gun violence typically make plans. They use multiple weapons and come loaded with extra ammunition.
They pick the place and the time and do much harm before police can intervene. Persons with violent intentions have used large capacity magazines, machine guns, hand grenades and pipe bombs, notwithstanding laws criminalizing their possession or use.
Trying to legislatively outlaw the commonly possessed weapon de jour is like wearing flip flops on a slippery slope.
A downhill slide is not hard to foresee.
Tragically, when 30-round magazines are banned, attackers will use 15 or 17- round magazines.
If magazines holding more than 10 rounds are banned they will use multiple 10-round magazines.


If all semi-automatic weapons are banned they will use shotguns and revolvers.


All of these scenarios already occur.

Because revolvers and handguns are the quintessential home defense weapon protected by the Second Amendment and specifically approved in Heller, and because the average defensive gun use involves firing 2.2 rounds (according to the State’s experts), states could rationalize a ban on possession of rounds in excess of three per weapon.

Criminals intent on 13 violence would then equip themselves with multiple weapons.
The State could then rationalize a one-weapon-per-individual law.

Since “merely” brandishing a firearm is usually effective as a defense to criminal attack (according to the State’s experts), it could be argued that a one-revolver-with-one-round-per-individual ban is a reasonable experiment in state police power as a means to protect citizens and law enforcement officers from gun violence.


Statutes disarming law-abiding responsible citizen gun owners reflect an opinion on gun policy.

Courts are not free to impose their own policy choices on sovereign states.

But as Heller explains, the Second Amendment takes certain policy choices and removes them beyond the realm of debate. Disarming California’s law-abiding citizenry is not a constitutionally-permissible policy choice.

And you can keep what you have we just aren’t making them anymore.

Because when 6 blacks home invade you, all you need is 5 bullets, amirite? Sorry, I was just watching this documentary about a home invasion gang in Detroit. Not only did they come 6 deep, they had automatic weapons ..machine guns and body armor.

Outlawing the good weapons for citizens doesn't stop criminals from getting them.

Automatic weapons and machine guns (which are the same thing), huh. You already got the BS flag on this one. Now if you had said they were armed with ARs, I might believe it. But you said automatic weapons and machine guns. That wasn't a documentary, that was a shootem up violence exploitation movie grade b from hell.

 

[rightwinger]

Make your first shot count

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Make your first shot count

Don't worry about them. They only want someone else to do their killing, murdering and maiming.

 

[sealybobo]

My ruger 450 bushmaster has a three round clip and you can put one in the chamber so 4. Can’t see how you need more than this.

You're a Commie faggot?

Probably, but the main thing is that he is an ideologue.

He believes that because some behavior is outside of his experience, like needing a 6 shooter, he therefore supports banning and throwing in prison anyone who thinks they need more.

Same logic Stalin used.

I never said that. See why it is impossible to talk to you idiots? See why we hate you? You hate us but you don't even know what we actually believe or want.

We get it. You don't want any laws rules or regulations on guns. But the fact is we do have background checks, 3 day waiting periods and all kinds of regulations and rules on guns. Do you object to them all? What laws are on the books right now that you would do away with regarding guns? Would you do away with background checks?

Can I start manufacturing guns without serial numbers? I'm sure a nut like you could make an argument for why that's true freedom, right? How nuts are you?

If they only made muzzleloaders that would be the best. One shot, not very accurate and it takes 3 minutes to reload. LOL

Funny thing is I talk to a left wing nut on another site and he really is as nuts as you think I am.

If all we sold was 4 round guns then guess what criminals would only have access to? 4 round guns. Criminals aren't inventing 10 round clips. They break into your home and take yours stupid. If you didn't have them they'd never get their hands on them.

 

[sealybobo]

My ruger 450 bushmaster has a three round clip and you can put one in the chamber so 4. Can’t see how you need more than this.

You're a Commie faggot?

Probably, but the main thing is that he is an ideologue.

He believes that because some behavior is outside of his experience, like needing a 6 shooter, he therefore supports banning and throwing in prison anyone who thinks they need more.

Same logic Stalin used.

Maybe I am a commie or socialist. That depends on how capitalism works out for everyone. Don't expect us to be loyal to capitalism just because it works for you. If it's not working for us, we'll vote for something else. And don't get all sour about it. Everyone has a right to vote. Don't yell at us. Don't call us losers. Show us your way works.

For young people, socialism is now more popular than capitalism

Most Americans are wrong about how much they need for retirement

1 in 3 Americans have less than $5,000 saved for retirement—here's why so many people can't save

Why inequality is an economic problem | New Economics Foundation

 

[sealybobo]

Unregulated capitalism is just another corrupted ISM.

 

[sealybobo]

Also...most revolvers hold 6 bullets....this now scoops them up......it would also end concealed carry, since almost all of the compact and sub compact guns hold more than 5 bullets........

this is a back door gun ban...and it needs to be stopped.....

This is exactly what the Judge in California pointed out when he put a stay on the California magazine ban...

http://michellawyers.com/wp-content...rra_Order-Granting-Preliminary-Injunction.pdf

(n) a slippery slope
What is clear from the preliminary evidence presented is that individuals who intend to engage in mass gun violence typically make plans. They use multiple weapons and come loaded with extra ammunition.
They pick the place and the time and do much harm before police can intervene. Persons with violent intentions have used large capacity magazines, machine guns, hand grenades and pipe bombs, notwithstanding laws criminalizing their possession or use.
Trying to legislatively outlaw the commonly possessed weapon de jour is like wearing flip flops on a slippery slope.
A downhill slide is not hard to foresee.
Tragically, when 30-round magazines are banned, attackers will use 15 or 17- round magazines.
If magazines holding more than 10 rounds are banned they will use multiple 10-round magazines.


If all semi-automatic weapons are banned they will use shotguns and revolvers.


All of these scenarios already occur.

Because revolvers and handguns are the quintessential home defense weapon protected by the Second Amendment and specifically approved in Heller, and because the average defensive gun use involves firing 2.2 rounds (according to the State’s experts), states could rationalize a ban on possession of rounds in excess of three per weapon.

Criminals intent on 13 violence would then equip themselves with multiple weapons.
The State could then rationalize a one-weapon-per-individual law.

Since “merely” brandishing a firearm is usually effective as a defense to criminal attack (according to the State’s experts), it could be argued that a one-revolver-with-one-round-per-individual ban is a reasonable experiment in state police power as a means to protect citizens and law enforcement officers from gun violence.


Statutes disarming law-abiding responsible citizen gun owners reflect an opinion on gun policy.

Courts are not free to impose their own policy choices on sovereign states.

But as Heller explains, the Second Amendment takes certain policy choices and removes them beyond the realm of debate. Disarming California’s law-abiding citizenry is not a constitutionally-permissible policy choice.

And you can keep what you have we just aren’t making them anymore.

Because when 6 blacks home invade you, all you need is 5 bullets, amirite? Sorry, I was just watching this documentary about a home invasion gang in Detroit. Not only did they come 6 deep, they had automatic weapons ..machine guns and body armor.

Outlawing the good weapons for citizens doesn't stop criminals from getting them.

Automatic weapons and machine guns (which are the same thing), huh. You already got the BS flag on this one. Now if you had said they were armed with ARs, I might believe it. But you said automatic weapons and machine guns. That wasn't a documentary, that was a shootem up violence exploitation movie grade b from hell.

 

[rightwinger]

I NEED ten rounds just in case I miss the first nine

 

[sealybobo]

I NEED ten rounds just in case I miss the first nine

They don't want to be outgunned. They don't want to just have a 6 shooter when the criminal is coming in with a AK.

What they don't understand is that in 100 years no one will know where to even find a 10 round clip. They won't exist. Sure maybe some black market criminals might produce something but it will be on such a small scale. Then instead of 100 people dying at Sandy Hook only 4 will. I say it's worth it.

Republicans want to build a 30 trillion dollar wall to stop 1 or 2 illegals from murdering 1 or 2 Americans but they won't do anything to stop Americans from killing each other.

 

[Pilot1]

^^^^You are clueless about firearms. Some nut could walk into a building with a small bag of only five, six shot revolvers, and take out THIRTY PEOPLE in no time. So, it isn't magazines, it isn't semi auto rifles it is criminal acts by PEOPLE.

 

[2aguy]

My ruger 450 bushmaster has a three round clip and you can put one in the chamber so 4. Can’t see how you need more than this.

You're a Commie faggot?

Probably, but the main thing is that he is an ideologue.

He believes that because some behavior is outside of his experience, like needing a 6 shooter, he therefore supports banning and throwing in prison anyone who thinks they need more.

Same logic Stalin used.

I never said that. See why it is impossible to talk to you idiots? See why we hate you? You hate us but you don't even know what we actually believe or want.

We get it. You don't want any laws rules or regulations on guns. But the fact is we do have background checks, 3 day waiting periods and all kinds of regulations and rules on guns. Do you object to them all? What laws are on the books right now that you would do away with regarding guns? Would you do away with background checks?

Can I start manufacturing guns without serial numbers? I'm sure a nut like you could make an argument for why that's true freedom, right? How nuts are you?

If they only made muzzleloaders that would be the best. One shot, not very accurate and it takes 3 minutes to reload. LOL

Funny thing is I talk to a left wing nut on another site and he really is as nuts as you think I am.

If all we sold was 4 round guns then guess what criminals would only have access to? 4 round guns. Criminals aren't inventing 10 round clips. They break into your home and take yours stupid. If you didn't have them they'd never get their hands on them.

How have those regulations stopped criminals from getting guns? Criminals have access to any guns they want.....just like in Britain where the island can't stop illegal guns from flooding into the country.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Also...most revolvers hold 6 bullets....this now scoops them up......it would also end concealed carry, since almost all of the compact and sub compact guns hold more than 5 bullets........

this is a back door gun ban...and it needs to be stopped.....

This is exactly what the Judge in California pointed out when he put a stay on the California magazine ban...

http://michellawyers.com/wp-content...rra_Order-Granting-Preliminary-Injunction.pdf

(n) a slippery slope
What is clear from the preliminary evidence presented is that individuals who intend to engage in mass gun violence typically make plans. They use multiple weapons and come loaded with extra ammunition.
They pick the place and the time and do much harm before police can intervene. Persons with violent intentions have used large capacity magazines, machine guns, hand grenades and pipe bombs, notwithstanding laws criminalizing their possession or use.
Trying to legislatively outlaw the commonly possessed weapon de jour is like wearing flip flops on a slippery slope.
A downhill slide is not hard to foresee.
Tragically, when 30-round magazines are banned, attackers will use 15 or 17- round magazines.
If magazines holding more than 10 rounds are banned they will use multiple 10-round magazines.


If all semi-automatic weapons are banned they will use shotguns and revolvers.


All of these scenarios already occur.

Because revolvers and handguns are the quintessential home defense weapon protected by the Second Amendment and specifically approved in Heller, and because the average defensive gun use involves firing 2.2 rounds (according to the State’s experts), states could rationalize a ban on possession of rounds in excess of three per weapon.

Criminals intent on 13 violence would then equip themselves with multiple weapons.
The State could then rationalize a one-weapon-per-individual law.

Since “merely” brandishing a firearm is usually effective as a defense to criminal attack (according to the State’s experts), it could be argued that a one-revolver-with-one-round-per-individual ban is a reasonable experiment in state police power as a means to protect citizens and law enforcement officers from gun violence.


Statutes disarming law-abiding responsible citizen gun owners reflect an opinion on gun policy.

Courts are not free to impose their own policy choices on sovereign states.

But as Heller explains, the Second Amendment takes certain policy choices and removes them beyond the realm of debate. Disarming California’s law-abiding citizenry is not a constitutionally-permissible policy choice.

And you can keep what you have we just aren’t making them anymore.

Because when 6 blacks home invade you, all you need is 5 bullets, amirite? Sorry, I was just watching this documentary about a home invasion gang in Detroit. Not only did they come 6 deep, they had automatic weapons ..machine guns and body armor.

Outlawing the good weapons for citizens doesn't stop criminals from getting them.

Automatic weapons and machine guns (which are the same thing), huh. You already got the BS flag on this one. Now if you had said they were armed with ARs, I might believe it. But you said automatic weapons and machine guns. That wasn't a documentary, that was a shootem up violence exploitation movie grade b from hell.

That's exactly what I said, you fucktard. The gang used full-auto weapons and body armor. Everything was stolen, some of it from Police. They had MAC 10s and AK47s.

This is them.

https://www.crimeindetroit.com/documents/Police Stop Bandits who Posed as Officers, Invaders.pdf

 

[RealDave]

Here we have a bill from Oregon...banning all magazines that hold more than 5 bullets. The anti gunners can't help themeselves...they can lie all day long that they only want "common sense" gun laws, but their irrational fear of guns will drive them to ban them when they get the power. Here we see the lie that is the "we will let you keep your 10 round magazines." By banning anything over 5, they are banning all semi automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns.....a back door ban without having to expose themselves to a ban against the actual guns...

Instead of making a law that would actually impact criminals...this law is directed at law abiding gun owners who have committed no crime, they have not used their gun to harm anyone...but they will become criminals for mere possession of a piece of equipment that has been in existence since the creation of guns capable of semi auto fire.......

We know what you want, we know who you are......lie all you want, your lies are known to us....

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB501/Introduced

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB501/Introduced

Prohibits possession of magazine with capacity to hold more than five rounds of ammunition. Provides that person in possession of such magazine must sell or otherwise dispose of magazine within 180 days of effective date of Act. Punishes unlawful possession of magazine capable of holding more than five rounds by maximum of 364 days’ imprisonment, $6,250 fine, or both

Learn to shoot.

 

[sealybobo]

My ruger 450 bushmaster has a three round clip and you can put one in the chamber so 4. Can’t see how you need more than this.

You're a Commie faggot?

Probably, but the main thing is that he is an ideologue.

He believes that because some behavior is outside of his experience, like needing a 6 shooter, he therefore supports banning and throwing in prison anyone who thinks they need more.

Same logic Stalin used.

I never said that. See why it is impossible to talk to you idiots? See why we hate you? You hate us but you don't even know what we actually believe or want.

We get it. You don't want any laws rules or regulations on guns. But the fact is we do have background checks, 3 day waiting periods and all kinds of regulations and rules on guns. Do you object to them all? What laws are on the books right now that you would do away with regarding guns? Would you do away with background checks?

Can I start manufacturing guns without serial numbers? I'm sure a nut like you could make an argument for why that's true freedom, right? How nuts are you?

If they only made muzzleloaders that would be the best. One shot, not very accurate and it takes 3 minutes to reload. LOL

Funny thing is I talk to a left wing nut on another site and he really is as nuts as you think I am.

If all we sold was 4 round guns then guess what criminals would only have access to? 4 round guns. Criminals aren't inventing 10 round clips. They break into your home and take yours stupid. If you didn't have them they'd never get their hands on them.

How have those regulations stopped criminals from getting guns? Criminals have access to any guns they want.....just like in Britain where the island can't stop illegal guns from flooding into the country.

They should build a wall. That will stop guns from getting in right?

 

[sealybobo]

Here we have a bill from Oregon...banning all magazines that hold more than 5 bullets. The anti gunners can't help themeselves...they can lie all day long that they only want "common sense" gun laws, but their irrational fear of guns will drive them to ban them when they get the power. Here we see the lie that is the "we will let you keep your 10 round magazines." By banning anything over 5, they are banning all semi automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns.....a back door ban without having to expose themselves to a ban against the actual guns...

Instead of making a law that would actually impact criminals...this law is directed at law abiding gun owners who have committed no crime, they have not used their gun to harm anyone...but they will become criminals for mere possession of a piece of equipment that has been in existence since the creation of guns capable of semi auto fire.......

We know what you want, we know who you are......lie all you want, your lies are known to us....

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB501/Introduced

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB501/Introduced

Prohibits possession of magazine with capacity to hold more than five rounds of ammunition. Provides that person in possession of such magazine must sell or otherwise dispose of magazine within 180 days of effective date of Act. Punishes unlawful possession of magazine capable of holding more than five rounds by maximum of 364 days’ imprisonment, $6,250 fine, or both

Learn to shoot.

I just had a great idea. When you are in your teens you get a muzzleloader and that's it. Shotgun and handguns at 21. You can buy a clip type gun when you are 40. If we can say you can't buy a gun till 21 who says we can't raise the age on when you can buy a semi auto? I say at 50 you can own one of these.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Here we have a bill from Oregon...banning all magazines that hold more than 5 bullets. The anti gunners can't help themeselves...they can lie all day long that they only want "common sense" gun laws, but their irrational fear of guns will drive them to ban them when they get the power. Here we see the lie that is the "we will let you keep your 10 round magazines." By banning anything over 5, they are banning all semi automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns.....a back door ban without having to expose themselves to a ban against the actual guns...

Instead of making a law that would actually impact criminals...this law is directed at law abiding gun owners who have committed no crime, they have not used their gun to harm anyone...but they will become criminals for mere possession of a piece of equipment that has been in existence since the creation of guns capable of semi auto fire.......

We know what you want, we know who you are......lie all you want, your lies are known to us....

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB501/Introduced

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB501/Introduced

Prohibits possession of magazine with capacity to hold more than five rounds of ammunition. Provides that person in possession of such magazine must sell or otherwise dispose of magazine within 180 days of effective date of Act. Punishes unlawful possession of magazine capable of holding more than five rounds by maximum of 364 days’ imprisonment, $6,250 fine, or both

Learn to shoot.

I just had a great idea. When you are in your teens you get a muzzleloader and that's it. Shotgun and handguns at 21. You can buy a clip type gun when you are 40. If we can say you can't buy a gun till 21 who says we can't raise the age on when you can buy a semi auto? I say at 50 you can own one of these.

Fuck you, cuntboy. I've had a semi-auto rifle since I was 11.

Semi-auto 18+1 rounds.

You missed that "shall not be infringed" part, huh?

 

[sealybobo]

Here we have a bill from Oregon...banning all magazines that hold more than 5 bullets. The anti gunners can't help themeselves...they can lie all day long that they only want "common sense" gun laws, but their irrational fear of guns will drive them to ban them when they get the power. Here we see the lie that is the "we will let you keep your 10 round magazines." By banning anything over 5, they are banning all semi automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns.....a back door ban without having to expose themselves to a ban against the actual guns...

Instead of making a law that would actually impact criminals...this law is directed at law abiding gun owners who have committed no crime, they have not used their gun to harm anyone...but they will become criminals for mere possession of a piece of equipment that has been in existence since the creation of guns capable of semi auto fire.......

We know what you want, we know who you are......lie all you want, your lies are known to us....

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB501/Introduced

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB501/Introduced

Prohibits possession of magazine with capacity to hold more than five rounds of ammunition. Provides that person in possession of such magazine must sell or otherwise dispose of magazine within 180 days of effective date of Act. Punishes unlawful possession of magazine capable of holding more than five rounds by maximum of 364 days’ imprisonment, $6,250 fine, or both

Learn to shoot.

I just had a great idea. When you are in your teens you get a muzzleloader and that's it. Shotgun and handguns at 21. You can buy a clip type gun when you are 40. If we can say you can't buy a gun till 21 who says we can't raise the age on when you can buy a semi auto? I say at 50 you can own one of these.

Fuck you, cuntboy. I've had a semi-auto rifle since I was 11.

Lucky Poland doesn't have semi autos

Polish Mayor Dies After Being Stabbed In The Heart On Stage At Charity Event | HuffPost

Only one was stabbed. If this guy was an American 10 plus would have died.

 

[Vastator]

None of these gun “control” measures are aimed at reducing crime. It serves only to criminalize gun owners, and render the populace incapable of resisting government henchmen...

 

[sealybobo]

None of these gun “control” measures are aimed at reducing crime. It serves only to criminalize gun owners, and render the populace incapable of resisting government henchmen...

Why would they/we want to criminalize gun owners? I myself am a gun owner you fucking fool. I have a muzzleloader, a 4 shot powerful ruger 450 american made bushmaster, a handgun with 5 shots and a 410 one shot shotgun.

You may not believe these measures will accomplish the goal but to question what our aim is makes you look like a fucking tool.

Your such a right wing retard you've gone from thinking these things won't work to thinking we are pushing these things for sinister reasons. You're mad. Mad I tell you.