tynimiller
New member
just wrote my representative....prolly won't matter but I can say i did my part.
Just to be on the safe side, we should also:
(tongue in cheek)
1) Set a limit as to how sharp a knife should be.
2) All new vehicles should be equipped with a governing system allowing a maximum speed of 20 MPH.
3) Also, all fuel tanks should be limited to 2 quarts of fuel, to minimize their explosive power.
4) Anyone who wishes to take a life, must limit their victims to 1 per year, and must establish a $5,000,000 life insurance policy in the victim's name with their loved ones as the beneficiaries, prior to the act.
5) Electricity should be abolished.
6) As well as, all medications capable of causing an overdose.
7) Fatty foods, Gone.
8) Stress, heart attacks, cancer, strokes, any terminal disease...History.
Did I miss anything?
Ask yourself honestly, who needs a 32 round pistol Magazine?
a.lol.cat said:Or how about a Draco or AR pistol?
Powderman said:This was a terroristic, criminal act.
Ask yourself honestly, who needs a 32 round pistol Magazine?
Who's talking about appeasement? They no longer hold such sway that we have to give them anything.
Just a quick deviation: I should never have to prove to anyone, least of all the government, why I need to own anything. I should be allowed to acquire all the private property I want, so long as I'm not infringing on anyone's rights in the process.It doesn’t matter whether anybody needs a large cap mags.
I agree with the utter absurdity of the bill as written. If we want to discuss what a bit of lunacy it is, that's fine. But please relax folks. I can tell you with 100% certainty that this thing isn't going to pass.Now, possession of a numbered magazine after the law went into effect would be proof of a crime. And what a crime! TEN YEARS in prison for owning a spring loaded metal box larger than what the govt allows!
This new version would allow ownership, but not sale or transfer of the banned hi-cap mags.
The old AWB also included a requirement that new made hi-cap mags have the mfg date on them. So a LEO could tell the difference between a mag made before the ban (no date) and one after (dated). I see in the draft proposal that new large capacity (> 10 rnds) would be serial #.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriot86
I sent an E mail to Robert Dold urging him to oppose this bill unless the maximum magazine capacity is raised to 20 rounds.
So you wrote your Congressman in favor of a ban that would throw everyone with 20+ mags under the bus ... since it would not affect you?
Ask yourself honestly, who needs a 32 round pistol Magazine? I have seen numerous posts on this site about them and how they are basically just flash. Yes it is another restriction but how many of you have 32 round glock magazines? Like I have said before, I am pro 2A and no legislation would be best but if it had to be at least let it be reasonable.
I only of only 1 pistol offhand that shoots more than 20 rounds as a standard that would be one of those Military grade glocks, dont remember exactly which one.
The SIG P-226 TAC OPS 9MM shoots 20, the Glock 17, almost every sig, H&K, Springfield, CA and the like have capacities ranging from 12-17 rounds.
The real question is how can you make a rational argument for having 32 round pistol magazines? the only defense beyond siting the 2A has been "common use" 32 round mags are far from common use. The issue about the no transfer is also BS, I included that as well as being a no no.
PS only 15+ would effect me.