The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 14, 2013, 11:44 PM   #26
Willie Sutton
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 26, 2012
Posts: 1,066
Now, switching to 7 rounds will require new manufacturing and tooling. Such a law will require people to dispose of or relinquish property they already own without compensation. Serious 5th Amendment issues abound.



Which is different, exactly, from what happened when NJ passed it's own EBR Ban and NJ residents had no choice but to sell or surrender?

This has already been done elsewhere, with lasting results.


Willie

.
Willie Sutton is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 12:06 AM   #27
jimbob86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 7,112
Quote:
^^ Move.

Take your intellectual value and your economic value elsewhere. And make sure you tell the leadership of your former state why. Maybe they will get the point. Probably not. In any event... it's your choice where to reside.


But nobody makes 7-round mags for the Glock 17, the Beretta 92, the Sig P226, the Ruger P95, or any other major service pistol.

They will. Market forces will prevail. And 1911's will come back into style.


Willie
I used to espouse this idea (probably on this very forum!) ..... until someone kindly reminded me that "Evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." ...... The question becomes, "Run" or "Fight" .... if you can effectively fight, do so. If everyone that did not have "Shall Issue" CCW or better had run when I was saying "move", then we'd not have had the huge gains we have had, and instead would be looking at fewer states with any Carry Rights ....

Quote:
I just talked to Jim. He said that anyone affected by this law should call him at his office tomorrow. The telephone number is 716.202.4301

He's doing the case pro bono.
God Bless him..... if this is so, and you have a spare dime, bless him as well, as you are able ......

Quote:
It will almost immediately be challenged in court. The Heller decision protects the ownership of handguns, and of weapons "in common use."
Will that help the folks that have their lives ruined in the present while the case wends it's way through the legal system?

Quote:
and what is a fella to do in the meantime with his stash of pre ban hi cap mags? court cases can take along time.
Ruthless beat me to it.... Whatever you do, Ruth, don't go all James Yeager ..... Calm and resolute is the better play, all the way around. If you can not abide life in New York, Nebraska is nice, still .......

Quote:
Maybe this would be a good time for magazine manufacturers and gun makers to simply refuse to sell guns, ammo or magazines to the State of NY or any of the political subdivisions thereof. Or at least no more than a 7 round mag.
This! It'd be difficult to do, with aso many sources, but it cetainly would be just.
__________________
TheGolden Rule of Tool Use: "If you don't know what you are doing, DON'T."

http://nefirearm.com/
jimbob86 is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 01:22 AM   #28
9mm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 9, 2011
Location: Land of the Free
Posts: 2,720
10rd to 7 'toughest gun control package in the nation' passed by New York Senate

Quote:
"This is going to go after those who are bringing illegal guns into the state, who are slaughtering people in New York City," Skelos said. "This is going to put people in jail and keep people in jail who shouldn't be out on the street in the first place...... "It is well-balanced, it protects the Second Amendment," said Senate Republican leader Dean Skelos of Long Island. "And there is no confiscation of weapons. Ammunition magazines would be restricted to seven bullets, from the current 10, and current owners of higher-capacity magazines would have a year to sell them out of state. An owner caught at home with eight or more bullets in a magazine could face a misdemeanor charge.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...#ixzz2I1SMUGSD
sign*. Corruption in New York again, are you guys going to leave the state now? this is insane, a bill that says "well balanced but removes magazines from 10 to 7. Like 99% of firearms. What about those 8 shot revolver and 9 and 10 shot revolver 22lrs? guess your all doooomed. That's going outlaw like most rifles too, who makes 10 shot 22lr magazines? Ruger doesn't have 7 shot magazines for 10/22. What about the bolt actions that hold 10 rounds like the enfield? What about shotguns with 8+1 ? Magazine tube/magazine box/magazine.
__________________
See user title
9mm is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 01:27 AM   #29
9mm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 9, 2011
Location: Land of the Free
Posts: 2,720
oh please move this to the other thread, just found out its already under another topic.
__________________
See user title
9mm is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 01:43 AM   #30
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,649
Already under discussion here.

ETA: Merged. Al.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 01:52 AM   #31
CharlieDeltaJuliet
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 25, 2012
Posts: 750
Tom, what if you own a handgun that has a 14 round (just for argument sake) magazine. The manufacturer and aftermarket companies do to make a 10 rounder for it.... They are forcing the owners to sell them within a year...

I am just curious. I have heard so much speculation. I had even heard first it was any firearm that could accept a magazine more than 7 rounds, but think that was just BS..

What about a Nylon 66 .22? Don't they hold 14 rounds in a tube magazine? Are they banned?
__________________
" The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to
keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect
themselves against tyranny in Government.
..." - Thomas Jefferson
CharlieDeltaJuliet is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 03:00 AM   #32
RampantAndroid
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 6, 2011
Posts: 226
Quote:
and what is a fella to do in the meantime with his stash of pre ban hi cap mags? court cases can take along time.
If I can get my legalese right here: hope they put a stay. Or injunction. Or whatever prevents enforcement until the court case is resolved. Oh, and bury them.
RampantAndroid is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 03:09 AM   #33
vranasaurus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 16, 2008
Posts: 1,175
This bill has serious 2nd and 5th amendment issues.


Castrating every convicted sex offender would save at least one child. Since were talking about violating constitutional rights to save children why stop with guns?
vranasaurus is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 04:00 AM   #34
iraiam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2012
Location: Lakewood, CO
Posts: 875
Quote:
Nope, seven bullets. I think we can all live with that. No honest man really needs more than 5 bull-its
This is just a rather underhanded way to ban most semi-automatics.

The only way I can live with that is if every government agency also has the same restrictions placed on them. If the government needs AR15's and 30 round magazines, then so do I.

Quote:
If I can get my legalese right here: hope they put a stay. Or injunction. Or whatever prevents enforcement until the court case is resolved. Oh, and bury them.
I'm not burying mine, I loaded them, ALL OF THEM! I'm not in NY but I have every magazine I own ready to go none the less.
__________________
NRA Lifetime Member Since 1999

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials." George Mason
iraiam is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 07:45 AM   #35
kayakersteve
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 17, 2007
Location: Western NY
Posts: 924
It's true! Just called Jim Tresmond and spoke with him personally. He is starting a class action lawsuit to suppport all affected by this draconian legislation. If you live in NYS and are affected please call him 716.202.4301.
__________________
See Ya!
kayakersteve is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 08:40 AM   #36
Jack_Bauer24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 139
NY Proposed Legislation Looks BAD

Looks as if NY residents are going to have it very, very rough if this legislation passes.

Proposed:
* ban on pre 1994 mags with cap of 11 or more
* ban on mags over 7 rounds
* background checks on all ammo purchases
* mental health reporting which is to be checked against the (new??) gun registry database
* 1 feature test for AW. Bushmaster AR banned by name* 10 round mags to be grandfathered in but may only be loaded with 7 rounds (read elsewhere this will be a misdemeanor)
* all sales of ammo from registered ammo dealers to be reported to local police
* background check on all ammo purcahses
* ban of direct internet ammo purchases
* ammo purchases to go through FFL
* five year renewable registration for AW and handguns

http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/S2230-2013
__________________
"When the people fear the govt there is tyranny, when the govt fears the people there is liberty."
Thomas Jefferson
Jack_Bauer24 is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 08:47 AM   #37
Willie Sutton
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 26, 2012
Posts: 1,066
A few observations:

Seems like a done deal. I expect that by the time I re-check the news tonight it will have been passed and signed.

This is the paragon of a state that has gone wrong, and where the people have become sheeple... just being told what to do and when to do it. It will be interesting to see how the next elections play out there. Really, if I lived there, this would be sufficient to cause me to leave. That's from someone who lived thru NJ's own EBR Ban some decades back.

There will obviously be court challenges, and it will be interesting to see how they play out.

It'll be interesting to watch the first old man arrested for having his own Fathers WW-II Luger in the bedroom drawer with it's 2 matched magazines in the holster.

It will equally be interesting watching the level of "enforcement" upstate, by local LEO's who undrstand that this crosses the line between anhything resembling common sense and simple power.


Willie


.
Willie Sutton is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 08:47 AM   #38
Jamie B
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 31, 2002
Location: OH
Posts: 136
Yea, I have been reading about this.

Worse than bad, IMHO.

Nuts!
__________________
Jamie
Jamie B is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 08:49 AM   #39
Pilot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2000
Posts: 3,715
It is bad, and it could get a lot worse. We all know that these measure often start in California, and/or New York SPREAD to other states and are copied because they "succeeded" to be passed in these states. Be wary of copycat legislation coming to a state capital near you.
__________________
Pilot
Pilot is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 08:50 AM   #40
bird_dog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 26, 2004
Posts: 222
I guess my Ruger P345 will be illegal, with its 8 round magazine.

Unreal.
bird_dog is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 09:20 AM   #41
spacecoast
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 14, 2009
Location: Sunshine and Keystone States
Posts: 4,173
Quote:
I guess my Ruger P345 will be illegal, with its 8 round magazine.
I think the focus is on the magazines (for now), not the guns. A lot of newer 1911 mags hold 8 rounds as well. I'm sure the owners will just love exchanging those out.

I wonder if this applies to rimfire as well as centerfire handguns or rifles, haven't seen any mention of a distinction.
spacecoast is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 09:21 AM   #42
BikeNGun1974
Member
 
Join Date: March 5, 2012
Location: Valley Forge, PA
Posts: 80
It's times like this where it sucks to have been right about them wanting to take guns away.

Even worse is the amazing number of people who don't see that as a problem.
__________________
-Tom
BikeNGun1974 is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 09:24 AM   #43
Fargazer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2010
Location: Chattanooga, TN
Posts: 466
Myself, I am waiting to see if manufacturers like Remington and Kimber move out of the state. I know there's a difference between manufacturing and use (think distilleries in dry counties), but at some point I would think the hostile environment would drive away firearm makers.
__________________
NRA Life Member
Fargazer is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 09:30 AM   #44
LockedBreech
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 6, 2009
Location: Rocky Mountain West
Posts: 3,162
Worse than I could have imagined. I'll never set foot in that state. Won't give them a single tourist dollar.
LockedBreech is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 09:32 AM   #45
Strafer Gott
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 12, 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,144
Not to mention the jobs they are sending away. This law will motivate Remington to move. If I was still in the economic development game, I'd be watching this like a hawk. A thousand jobs up in the air should get things in a proper perspective.
Strafer Gott is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 09:34 AM   #46
NJgunowner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,103
Quote:
One way to look at it is that 10-round magazines are readily available. In the eyes of many, limiting handguns to 10 rounds doesn't place a huge imposition on gun owners. In places like New York, most folks already have them by default.

Now, switching to 7 rounds will require new manufacturing and tooling. Such a law will require people to dispose of or relinquish property they already own without compensation. Serious 5th Amendment issues abound.
Sorry Tom but I think you're wrong on this one. I think it'll stick just fine, and nothing short of doing an etch a sketch shake and wipe and replacing everyone from the governor down will get the magazine limit fixed in NY. I HOPE you are right, but I don't think so. Time will tell.

I'm still hoping that Christie will be smart enough to realize that if he wants to be president someday, signing stupid laws like this isn't the way to go about it. NJ is a already a bigger pain than it's worth.
__________________
Sig 1911 Traditional reverse two tone, Sig p226 .40, Sig 556 Swat patrol, Baby Eagle/jerico steel .45
NJgunowner is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 09:37 AM   #47
NJgunowner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,103
As far as NY politicians are concerned, I'm betting the only thing going through their heads is GOOD RIDDANCE if Remington left. They'll tout how they chased off an evil gun manufacturer and turned the factory into a daycare or something.
__________________
Sig 1911 Traditional reverse two tone, Sig p226 .40, Sig 556 Swat patrol, Baby Eagle/jerico steel .45
NJgunowner is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 09:37 AM   #48
Jack_Bauer24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 139
From what I just read on Fox News website the legislation is now waiting for State Assembly approval and is expected to easily approve it today. My fellow members across the country thing do not look good.
__________________
"When the people fear the govt there is tyranny, when the govt fears the people there is liberty."
Thomas Jefferson
Jack_Bauer24 is offline  
Old January 15, 2013, 09:38 AM   #49
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 5,673
Quote:
I wonder if this applies to rimfire as well as centerfire handguns or rifles, haven't seen any mention of a distinction.
There is an exemption for an "attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition", but that's all. [Emphasis mine.]

IOW people who own something like a Marlin Model 60 or a Winchester Model 72 can breathe a sigh of relief, but virtually any full-size .22 target pistol owner is screwed, unless the gun AND the magazine qualify as a Curio & Relic.

I am kind of flabbergasted by this legislation. In terms of restrictions, NY residents are arguably better off if they were to move to Canada.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak

Last edited by carguychris; January 15, 2013 at 10:27 AM. Reason: minor edit, bolt actions apparently exempted...
carguychris is online now  
Old January 15, 2013, 09:43 AM   #50
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 5,673
Quote:
What about a Nylon 66 .22? Don't they hold 14 rounds in a tube magazine? Are they banned?
The law contains a specific exemption for permanently attached tubular .22-caliber rimfire magazines.

(FWIW I already posted this in the other thread, so this may be redundant if they are merged.)
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak
carguychris is online now  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14077 seconds with 7 queries