Why do gun control advocates constantly prattle about "high capacity magazines"

you seem confused with freedom. the government has to have the legitimate power and a damn good reason to restrict magazine sizes. currently neither ground exists. And I have yet to meet a "magazine limit is good" advocate who isn't really a gun banner

 

Again: I was pointing out the illogic of the US v Miller decision. I'm sorry it flew by you, but saying short barreled shotguns were not military so they can be covered under NFA was a bad decision.

Yeah, the poor need machine guns and hand grenades.

In the real world freedom=guns is a public health hazard, but not in pretend soldier citizen world.

 

gun banners are a hazard to our freedom and safety.

 

Its a decision that was decided the way it was because defense counsel produced ZERO evidence otherwise when such evidence was freely available.

The poor have the same rights and duties to keep and bear arms in defense of self, others, property, and state as the rich. Putting up an intentional bar to the exercise of a right so the poor have a hard time exercising it is unconstitutional. Like a poll tax or a voting test.

You understand that the NFA and other fed gun control laws have a pronounced disparate racial impact... right? Just like the poll tax and voting tests did. Remind me what we did with the poll taxes and voting tests? O right.... we struck them down because they were unconstitutional restrictions on the exercise of a right.

 

http://volokh.com/2010/02/27/united-states-v-miller/

 

The world record for bolt-action rifle speed is 39 hits (not just shots, but target hits) at 200 yards in 60 seconds.....
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com...e-shockingly-fast-bolt-action-rifle-shooting/

I have a friend who also shoots long range (1000 yds) who can put three bullets in the air at the same time (fire two more before the first gets to the target, about 1.5 seconds) and hit with all 3 of them at that range.

Another friend who probably isn't so fast- but just set a competition record with a hit at 4,137 yards. That's 2.35 miles.....
They're both quite a bit better than me, that's for sure.

The world seems to be full of experts who have no experience at all.

Guns don't kill people- bad people kill people. Get rid of the bad people, and you have no gun problems.

 

I accept your surrender.

 

You will not catch any flak from me, it is your right to arm yourself as you feel you need to be armed and why, is no one's business other than your own.

 

Then why are they not serving time?

 

100% false, during the Cocaine Cowboy days the MAC style firearm was the gun of choice for drug dealers, it small and full auto, the 11 could be suppressed very easily and they where delivered in the same shipments that brought all the cocaine to our shores.

 

You picked an old cherry.

Said Mr. non sequitur.

 

Did the NFA ban hacksaws?

 

Sadly, nearly every argument from the anti-gun people is coming from a total lack of knowledge- and the endless search for a way to solve human mental issues with litigation over those who aren't part of the problem. Facts are simple, in that it is people, not guns, that kill. Guns are often the weapon of choice, but lacking a gun does not disarm the mind of the killer; he simply chooses an alternate weapon- and almost everything is a weapon. You can be fatally stabbed with a pencil, fatally impacted with anything solid from a baseball bat to a bar-stool to a rock. With a small amount of poison. With a needle, injecting a small amount of air into a bloodstream. With a plastic bag from the grocery store over your head.... ALL murder weapons. The common denominator in murder is the mental position of person- not the weapon they choose. Guns have no malice, regardless of caliber, magazine size or any other characteristic.

The primary role of guns today after sporting considerations is self-defense. This is for the protection of people who are the would-be victims of killers; THEY are the ones who would be the victims of more gun control- because only law abiding people would obey laws. Gun control does nothing to reduce homicide by gun, except to disarm victims.

The mis-conceptions of the anti-gun people is somewhat like those with a phobia of snakes; they see all varieties as evil and probably stalking them, just waiting for the opportunity to do them harm.
Holophobia- the fear of weapons... except for the weapons they control. That's different, and telling.

 

Mr. condensation is back. You use the usual specious argument. I must have missed all those episodes of people going postal with a pencil. That is not the first choice if you want to kill as many people as possible. The common denominator is the "mental position of person" and an efficient killing tool because a pencil won't get you very far.

Do you actually believe other countries with strict gun control have done nothing to control their gun homicides?

 

I believe that our efforts to control most things are poorly constructed and misdirected by emotional pressures, as evidenced by the fact that we fail to resolve those issues with what we do.
The "War on Drugs" has been in full swing since June, 1971... 50 years. We are no closer to winning than we were when it started- which should tell you the popular plan doesn't work.
That's more the norm for our solutions to problems than the exception.

If I was so unbalanced and enraged that wanted to kill a lot of people and a gun wasn't handy, what do you think I would do? Say, aw shucks, and forget about it?

Knives and stabbings have found popularity in London lately; the relatively silent method of killing on the streets is becoming popular among their criminals. Doesn't draw so much attention at the moment. Police there are now targeting "knife crime" due to the increasing prevalence. By the way, a person killed with a knife is just as dead as one killed with a gun- and if not killed outright, the odds of survival when you are shot are substantially higher than when you are stabbed.

In the middle east, the weapon of choice is a bomb. The ingredients needed to make a very potent bomb can be found in most homes, grocery stores, hardware stores. Everyday, over the counter stuff you wouldn't give a second thought to- like sugar. What's more, most bombs made with such ingredients are not at all hard to make, would not trigger metal detectors, could be easily concealed and detonated by timers, triggers, fuses or remotely. When one option isn't handy- people bent on murder do not become peaceful, they just chose an alternative.

The point is not that pencils constitute a great threat, but that even very simple things can become murder weapons. Guns however are the best defensive weapons as well as deterrents against most forms of violence. Thus, your effort to maintain the focus on guns being the threat as opposed to recognizing crazed psychopaths determined to kill is- is the usual hogwash, denying facts you don't want people to consider. That is what insures the criminals will continue to thrive- you blame the victims for what the criminals do and want to disarm the victims.

 

It's not -MY- fault you know you cannot demonstrate the necessity for and efficacy of the restrictions you seek.

 

Did you notice the post hoc fallacy inherent in your question, above?
I bet you did.

 

If you feel unsafe here, move there! Life is short, act now!

 

Oh listen to yourself... it's almost as if you really believe that drive by shooters and gang bangers would follow the law. You do realize that 'drive by shooters' aren't really following the law when the 'drive by shoot', right? The far fetched idea is believing that by banning high capacity magazines you would eliminate half the bullet spray from drive by shootings.

No, the only ones that would abide by the law are the gun enthusiasts, not the criminals.

 

They fear the lawful gun enthusiasts more, since gang-bangers only attack POC

 

Chicago had 4,033 shootings in 2020 and London had 14 in 2020. So you don't think guns in the hands of criminals has anything to do with that? BTW London is 3 times larger.

 

Not at all, can you drown in a desert?

 

The homicide rate in England/Wales in 1995, the year before NFA, was 1.22. In 2016, the homicide rate in England/Wales was 1.22. Why didn't NFA result in a long term, permanent drop in the homicide rate after all of those guns were confiscated?

 

All those guns? Maybe there were few guns to begin with. The '97 Firearms Act resulted in 162k pistols handed in from 0.1% of the population and it came about because of a mass shooting.
The US has a gun for every man, woman and child. Mass shootings in the UK? Not so much, whereas we have one at least weekly.

 

London has had more than 100 homicides every year for the last six years.
Look at the make-up of the population in the two cities. Look at the average respect for law and order and for other people- and for police. That is the difference in who people are- and thus, how they behave. Self-respect. Integrity. Dignity. Pride. Self-discipline. All the things the left doesn't think people need.

For the millionth time you have probably been told- People kill people. The weapon chosen does not control the motivation to kill- and no gun or knife or weapon of any kind is a murder weapon until a murderer uses it. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE- and the weapon they choose is only a convenient thing, not a cause.

You would have to be extremely ignorant of obvious facts to think otherwise.