New knee-jerk legislation resulting from the AZ shooting (MERGED)

[razor02097]

The only common thing I see in these mass murder shootings is the good guy is always barred from carrying... guns in the hands of good guys don't kill people, why don't they understand that?.... no gun zones DO kill people, it gives a criminal a very juicy target that he/she knows nobody is armed.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[azchevy]

So the next mass murderer should have four 10 round glocks stowed in his belt, then they can go after 10 round mags and require 5 or less....... then the next mass murderer can have four five shot revolvers in his belt and they can say that single shots are sufficient for self defense and adequate under the second amendment as far as reasonable regulation ..... then I am sure everyone here advocating sensible regulation instead of fighting for their rights will wish they spoke out now instead of later when it was too late......

[hamlet]

-------------------- He is not anti-gun. Nor am I. What is being discussed is basically the boundaries of 2A in a practical world.

Some are disagreeing with where the boundaries are. A few are insisting there are no boundaries. That latter thought won't fly because the courts including Heller itself and Scalia's own words have as a practical matter allowed boundaries to be put on 2A, just as they put various boundaries on various provisions of 1A, 4A and 5A.

I have no doubt that it is perfectly legal for legislatures to limit magazine size, or caliber size, or type of weapons (semi- v revolver). Whether doing so is wise or a good idea is another matter.

I have no desire to have a high cap magazine, don't particularly object to most folks having one, but I do have a deep concern about their effect on officer safety, and for that reason am inclined toward disallowing their possession outside of law enforcement, armed security services, and the military, though I'm not firmly committed to that position.

Right, now this is an intelligent way for a man to look at an issue, whether someone else agrees or not.
It's thought-through, it isn't absolute but takes into consideration the whole picture, yet it's based on a clear position - in this case: in favor of the Right the 2nd A. confers. But it's the man's OWN, it's not blind, a slogan, a religious belief.

Our Fore Fathers and Founders INVENTED a country, it was unique, their thought was unique, for they were brilliant statesmen and had no role model of another such country to imitate.

I believe this is how discussion and political discourse should be in this country now - both on the floor of the Senate and on forums, in coffee-shops, or an TV - positions thought through and arrived at, not pre-packaged absolutes mouthed to mask attacks on others who disagree. It's better to attempt wisdom than always be right.

[azchevy]

Eventually you will all have the right to keep and bear arms, of the break over single shot variety of which caliber is deemed by the government to be acceptable after going through and extensive permit process and paying exorbitant fees. It will be found by judges to be reasonable and fair under the Heller decision. of course nobody will need a handgun or any weapon that can be concealed on the person, no need so it will be a long gun... completely acceptable for home defense and your 2d amendment right. Keep compromising.....

[razor02097]

So the next mass murderer should have four 10 round glocks stowed in his belt, then they can go after 10 round mags and require 5 or less....... then the next mass murderer can have four five shot revolvers in his belt and they can say that single shots are sufficient for self defense and adequate under the second amendment as far as reasonable regulation ..... then I am sure everyone here advocating sensible regulation instead of fighting for their rights will wish they spoke out now instead of later when it was too late......

Eventually you will all have the right to keep and bear arms, of the break over single shot variety of which caliber is deemed by the government to be acceptable after going through and extensive permit process and paying exorbitant fees. It will be found by judges to be reasonable and fair under the Heller decision. of course nobody will need a handgun or any weapon that can be concealed on the person, no need so it will be a long gun... completely acceptable for home defense and your 2d amendment right. Keep compromising.....

You are talking like them though... as if the ban is going to work... it won't... what would stop the bad guy from getting an illegal gun or an illegal magazine? All the ban does it prevent a law abiding citizen from buying one.

[azchevy]

You are talking like them though... as if the ban is going to work... it won't... what would stop the bad guy from getting an illegal gun or an illegal magazine?

I am just stating what is going to happen if we dont stand together as a community and fight this crap. it will ONLY affect us, the law abiding citizens, see my post above those two regarding the criminals.... compromise in this case is unacceptable and ridiculous.

So you would deny law abiding citizens the right to own them but are completely OK knowing that these magazines are mass produced all over the world and will be in the hands of criminals, gang members, and anyone else who has access to black market drugs and other illicit items in which this country has done such a great job in stemming the distribution of?

My hicap mags have not attacked or harmed anyone, but I sure do feel much better when i am out hunting near the border knowing I have a few of them on my person in case I turn from being the hunter into being the prey simply because I crossed a drug lane in my own FREE country.

I disagree with you and your stance 100%, it is not a hicap magazine problem, but a people problem. The ms-13 and bloods and cryps and hells angels and other criminals who have willingly used these hicap mags to spray public areas in gun battles and drive by shootings will continue to have access to these items and continue to endanger your safety no matter how many asinine laws are passed to hamstring law abiding citizens.

The bottom line is if the stories are true, and I have an inside line due to my jib that assures me they are, if the PCSO had done their job, they would have prevented this killer from ever accessing these weapons to begin with. Fix the system, don't punish the masses.

[razor02097]

I am just stating what is going to happen if we dont stand together as a community and fight this crap. it will ONLY affect us, the law abiding citizens, see my post above those two regarding the criminals.... compromise in this case is unacceptable and ridiculous.

right but if they push this through the next mass shooting isn't likely going to involve a gun that was limited to 10 rounds like they kept saying... as if the BG will have only 1 magazine with only 10 rounds. The BG will still have access to illegal guns and illegal magazines. At that it will have a hard time moving past an assault weapon/hi cap magazine ban.

[shooterX]

The recent events may very well be the turning point that sparks a new era of gun restrictions.

I pray I'm wrong, but I doubt it. Knee jerk reactions do little to solve the problems they intend to solve, and usually foster more problems never intended.

+1 Biker, sad but unfortunately true.

Biker

So you look to elevate the position of one class of people over another?
Threatening someone is already a crime. Therefore the laws are already in place, without creating yet another "special class" of people, to deal with these issues. Part of the problem, is a sense of elitism that some seem to have. Kneejerk laws, often passed in haste, and a flurry to prove the worth of the one doing the passing of the bill, do little to deal with the issues that brought the law forth in the first place.

Biker

+1 again Biker

I know...

My post was taking your lead, as a rhetorical query, to state the bigger answer to the bigger question; Who is Carolyn McCarthy, what is her motivation and why.

Honestly I feel for her as a human being.
I do not at all agree with her stances and positions, but I do as a human and a spouse as well as parent do very much understand her 'feelings' and by that where she has come from.

Same for the dad of the 9 yr. old killed who yesterday is reported as stating to the press; "Nothing good ever comes from guns.".
Of course we know this to not be a truth.
But in kind we all can very much understand the roots of his statement in that moment...And I would bet the keys to my home that he will be aligned at the hip with Carolyn McCarthy and her ilk in the weeks/months/years to come.

Again I would not agree with the position, but I very much do understand it.

As to the rest of my post it is me venting.
Becomes I am absolutely sick and tired of other mothers screwing it up for me and making my life, and the future life of my kids who will likely want to be sport & recreation shooters if not keep a gun for defense, that much more difficult than it already is.

How many times have we had threads here _before_ this incident just in the year of 2010 alone where folk have been all ehh it's not my problem or when I was a kid (back in an era, decade and America nothing at all like current times!) kids just acted right.
Yeah sure, things would be great in that utopia. Let me know when the Way Back machine gets re-fueled...Until then, lets look at the present into the relevant future.
We got people like former police chief Edward Fleury of neighboring to me town Pelham, MA who along with three partners facilitated the physical transfer of a specific type firearm not at all in any way suitable for a child to that of a damn 9 yr. old who of course wound up injuring himself with it, fatally. His blockhead dad ignored statements by a _child_ 'safety officer' (this in itself was stupid and wrong to have) who said the gun is too much for the boy but the dad passed on that advisory and began videotaping as his boy stands there and does the very much predictable. MORON.
Then we got all these crazy people running up on folks killing people, murdering wholesale their entire family (many of these this year!) and others shooting people in and around Wal-Marts as well as acting out in public spaces while carrying guns to wind up getting themself shot only to have family try to displace blame to the police who shot to stop the crazy person in the first place (See Eric Scott).

Myself I am tired of being lumped into the category of analysis of ehh he's another one of those gun nut loonies who any minute now might go bonkers and start shooting people up.
Oh and i do always carry everywhere I go when ever I leave the house and I train with my guns monthly and if work & family time allows weekly (OMG!!!)...Soooooo that makes me even more dangerous as being both paranoid and delusional as well as 'aggressive', 'violence minded' and 'skilled' never mind that I'm a negro too and everybody knows those folks are always mad about something quick fused ready to blow at any moment, that's why they got an epidemic of hypertension and heart disease (!).

People actually think this crap, and apply it to _Me_.
Why? Not because of how I myself might actually be and carry myself in demeanor be it here/online but in real life too.
No it's all about what do the OTHER people per broad general perception and how they act as related to what folk see depicted in the media and by TV & hollywood which sad as it might be even so called smart & educated people do look to as being reflection of fact.
It is bizarre, but true.

So again I was just venting as I am right now.
Because I'm sad for my America present, concerned for my childrens America future...And I am in specific very much disappointed with us all among those who are of like mind and view with me.

Ironically when this shooting occurred I was at of all places the Smith & Wesson Shooting Sports Center training a student of mine toward how to learn and apply the basic fundamentals of shooting a rifle.
He is by state law not yet able to purchase a firearm or ammunition simply because he has not yet passed a state recognized 'LTC' firearm course even as he did go through one of my basic hunter ed. courses spring 2010. As well he lives with his parents current and they are anti-gun concerned due to what he says they have seen on television and the media. He's a white male rural raised & oriented just about 13 yrs. my junior.
Further in the lane next to him as he was running my bolt action .22 using a 5 rd. low capacity magazine I noticed a young (early 20s I would guess) asian couple struggling to hit a man sized piece of target paper at 21 ft. They had a rental 10 shot revolver using .22LR. Neither showed any degree of even basic pistol fundamentals and the results were to match.
So, I volunteered and introduced myself to them. Shared with them the three most basic fundamentals of shooting a pistol; Stance, body positioning and manner of grasping the gun correctly as well as how to properly align the sights as in relation to the target.
At first they looked at me like I was some sort of weirdo. Black man standing there wearing a big silver gun and reserve magazines holstered on my weak side along with a can of pepper spray. I very much do not look the part of traditional sport shooter, as per what is commonly depicted within the media.
Just sharing these three items though and then donating to them some of my own ammo to show them how this is done...They both inside of :20m conversation wound up with grouping that measured 4" actual including multiple hits to the bullseye X on the Shoot N' See targets that I also donated to their cause.
They were ecstatic! No more weird face looks toward me from that point on. They went and bought another whole box of ammo and several more targets and stayed for another hour, even as they were preparing to leave before I approached them.
When they did pack up to leave they both approached me and shook my hand showing me nothing but teeth and genuinely happy faces to say "Thank you!".
My response was that I encourage them to seek out additional professional instruction be it from Smith or the NRA or wherever, and to continue to train & practice so as to hone their skills toward our sport...AND to actively support myself and themself by voting toward policys and programs that allow sport & recreation shooters as well as people like me who carry to continue doing same.
I'd literally said this to them in so many words. They are and remain complete strangers to me.

This is what we need more of...To counteract foolish people, gun ignorant people, inform fence riders AND the outright anti-gun emotional folk such as Carolyn McCarthy.
As to mentally nut bags who do criminal acts. They gonna be crazy and do bad things regardless no matter what the laws might be. I mean hell it's already illegal to assault and murder people so what more needs to be said or done.

Anyway I come home feeling very good about my time at the range with functionally three students exposing them all to something positive.
I go to my home office desk to check my mail and DC.Com just happened to be live in one of my browser tabs...So I hit refresh only to find at the top of this forum a posting about this shooting event.
Imagine how quickly my smiley face went to WTH!? frowns upon seeing that news.

I'm tried of it.
Sick and tired.

I have not been out my house since this event, but I know what will happen on my next trip into town or to my barber.
I'll be drilled on this event. And folk will be all see...GUNS they are the problem with society today, and Sarah Palin (!?).
To which I'll be left yet again to try my best t counter with facts and figures as I know them and to explain this tragedy was not caused by a gun nor because the guns magazine could hold X amount of rounds. But rather because some human being had the crazy.

We are not at fault for this incident singular.
But we all can do something to better our lot even if it is just one person having a sane and reasonable conversation with another, who might be a fence rider never mind an anti as to open their eyes to what our side is and can be.

To the majority we gun owners, sportsman, hunters, competitors and gun collectors are normal, sane harmless people.
We have not an interest nor hope toward killing anyone never mind running up into crowds to do walk by mass shootings.
You and I and everyone reading knows this. But it's on US to get the word out to the rest of the voting public.

Again very sorry for the the rant. I was not intending to be directed toward you specifically.
In hindsight I should have stated that in so many words.

I'm just emotionally tired and an am sick to my core toward people, innocent people who very easily could have been me or my wife and daughter (or son) suffering because of morons and mentally ill people....With guns.

I have the first of a series of 2011 BHE courses to teach coming next weekend.
I'm very sure this will be at the tips of every students tongue and I am just not looking forward to fighting even more of that fight.

- Janq

Jang well said sir

[hamlet]

So you would deny law abiding citizens the right to own them but are completely OK knowing that these magazines are mass produced all over the world and will be in the hands of criminals, gang members, and anyone else who has access to black market drugs and other illicit items in which this country has done such a great job in stemming the distribution of?

My hicap mags have not attacked or harmed anyone, but I sure do feel much better when i am out hunting near the border knowing I have a few of them on my person in case I turn from being the hunter into being the prey simply because I crossed a drug lane in my own FREE country.

I disagree with you and your stance 100%, it is not a hicap magazine problem, but a people problem. The ms-13 and bloods and cryps and hells angels and other criminals who have willingly used these hicap mags to spray public areas in gun battles and drive by shootings will continue to have access to these items and continue to endanger your safety no matter how many asinine laws are passed to hamstring law abiding citizens.

The bottom line is if the stories are true, and I have an inside line due to my jib that assures me they are, if the PCSO had done their job, they would have prevented this killer from ever accessing these weapons to begin with. Fix the system, don't punish the masses.

See, I don't actually believe Arizona was a "magazine-problem", that's your assumption, going beyond what I said : "I don't think it's unreasonable to regulate 30+ magazines".
So: surprise, I agree with some of your points - they are well made.

But I think others ignore some important real things so I don't agree with those, or arrive at the same general conclusion you do about magazines and limits-in-general.

[azchevy]

See, I don't actually believe Arizona was a "magazine-problem", that's your assumption, going beyond what I said : "I don't think it's unreasonable to regulate 30+ magazines".
So: surprise, I agree with some of your points - they are well made.

But I think others ignore some important real things so I don't agree with those, or arrive at the same general conclusion you do about magazines and limits-in-general.

Again, you don't see it unreasonable to regulate 30 round magazines. Some people don't see it unreasonable to regulate 10 round magazines. I see a direct correlation with this line of thinking

[razor02097]

See, I don't actually believe Arizona was a "magazine-problem", that's your assumption, going beyond what I said : "I don't think it's unreasonable to regulate 30+ magazines".
So: surprise, I agree with some of your points - they are well made.

But I think others ignore some important real things so I don't agree with those, or arrive at the same general conclusion you do about magazines and limits-in-general.

what makes it reasonable to regulate 30 round magazines? I'm curious... If someone wants to blow through half a box of ammo at the range without reloading why does that matter? What is your argument that you are in favor of regulating hi capacity magazines?

I don't buy into their argument that if he had only access to 10 rounds he would only have one 10 round magazine. I don't buy into the whole regulate magazines in general... why does it matter I ask you... One can carry more than one magazine right? One can carry more than one gun right? Should we limit how many magazines and guns one can carry? I'm sure criminals will happily follow that law....

[hamlet]

Again, you don't see it unreasonable to regulate 30 round magazines. Some people don't see it unreasonable to regulate 10 round magazines. I see a direct correlation with this line of thinking

Right. Well, I'd just prefer it lower and have some good reason for that, and you have good reasons for a different limit, or it being unlimited, so we end up with this wrangling and butting heads. So, then you have two solutions: one is the absolute-solution. Everyone has complete freedom to do whatever they like or no one has any freedom to do anything they like, in this case own a gun, let alone a magazine. But that's an idealism from those who want one absolute or the other. Practically, it never works, because different people want different absolutes, while a whole lot of others don't want either, they want a middle-ground. So, in the real world that solution doesn't happen (in a democracy anyway).

So, that leaves one other solution: there is no ideal solution. There's people and groups who want different things, and different legislatures in the same place making new laws that a few years later are changed to others, etc. etc. etc. So, finally a court steps in and makes a judgment and renders an opinion. If it's a good one, it relieves the tension and people accept it even with grumbling and get on with their lives. And 50 years later, many such opinions have laid down a general practice that seems to work for most even though it doesn't completely satisfy everyone's dream-world.

Our country and most democratic countries live in the tension between the two extremes of absolute freedom of the individual and absolute control. Absolute freedom for one takes away the rights of another, except in a country with a population of one. Absolute control takes away everyone's freedom. So, we live in the middle, and hopefully discuss instead of dismiss, and make an arrangement that gives everyone relative freedom and relative order.

[razor02097]

I find it unreasonable, inefficient, and pointless to regulate magazine capacity. The only thing it will do is disallow law abiding citizens to own a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds. I carry a 1911 that holds 7+1 rounds.... BUT THAT IS MY CHOICE! I can choose to carry a gun that holds more whenever I want. That is my freedom. Isn't America suppose to be all about freedom?

If you don't want a 30 round magazine then don't buy one. It is no different than an environmentalist saying it isn't unreasonable to regulate SUV sales or limit the size of the engine in a truck. If you don't want an SUV or truck then don't buy one... don't try to deprive me of buying one too... that is what is unreasonable.

[OD*]

"There is no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
…Ayn Rand

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." – Plato

So true, both.

[hamlet]

If you don't want a 30 round magazine then don't buy one. It is no different than an environmentalist saying it isn't unreasonable to regulate SUV sales or limit the size of the engine in a truck. If you don't want an SUV or truck then don't buy one... don't try to deprive me of buying one too... that is what is unreasonable.

....same as I feel about my nuclear reactor...


Have a ball with the SUV! ,

Pete