The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 31, 2013, 07:22 PM   #1
RamItOne
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2011
Posts: 976
Magazine quantity (not capacity) limit?

When/If the people who are wanting to decrease magazine capacities realize how quickly you can load a new magazine into your firearm, could they conceivably have a case on limiting the number of magazines you can legally carry or limit the total number of rounds you can carry.

Perfect example of a quick reload

http://youtu.be/Ls4Uq1aCiTA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nM8nwZjaf1Y

Anyone see Jerry Miculek reload his revolver? Man that's fast.
__________________
M&P- the other dark meat

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pet...rtant/DJyvnHz0
RamItOne is offline  
Old January 31, 2013, 07:41 PM   #2
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,355
Limiting the number of rounds we're allowed is already being talked about. I've seen one guy propose a 5 round limit in your home/person/total possession. For Law Enforcement too- unless you're at a range which will provide you rounds, though you can't leave with more than 5.

He hasn't yet answered me about how to handle the roll-your-own guys who reload exacting recipes for target match competitions... or how to make sure their recipe- which changes from powder lot to powder lot number, among other things- can be safely maintained when being forced to use some sort of community issues reloading tools and supplies to prevent going over the 5 round limit.

I also asked him if he would require the government to build and subsidize staffed ranges in exceedingly rural areas that would not support a free enterprise range based on supply and demand, but still have a right to bear arms.

And finally I asked him about what happens when someone gets in an honest to God defensive shooting, and has to get more bullets... does the law enforcement officer have to give up his 5 to the guy he answers the call on? Is he allowed to have a shooting response kit in his trunk? Or does the guy just in a traumatic but legally justified shooting have to go home without any ammunition until such time as a shooting range can be open? Or will they be required to be open 24/7 including holidays? Will the officer have to give him a police escort to the range so he's not empty?

To be fair he doesn't post often, so he might not have had a chance to answer, but I suspect he doesn't have a good answer to any of those questions.
JimDandy is offline  
Old January 31, 2013, 08:18 PM   #3
Dr Big Bird PhD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 778
Where is the individual responsibility in the world?

I have the write to eat myself to death yet I can't own more 5 bullets?
__________________
I told the new me,
"Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'"
But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back."
Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor
Dr Big Bird PhD is offline  
Old January 31, 2013, 09:05 PM   #4
JD0x0
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 30, 2013
Posts: 735
Making high cap magazines illegal isn't going to stop someone from obtaining or even fabricating a 90rnd drum mag for their rifle. Making a 5 round limit is ridiculous, they wouldn't be able to stop hand loaders from loading. And all a limit will do is make the criminals have more bullets than you and law enforcement.

Fine take away the bullets someone will just use their powder and a jar of spare change to make an IED. Take away all that, still wont stop someone from plowing down a dozen people in their SUV, and guess what I'd bet an SUV could kill faster than most automatic weapons with high cap mags. These laws do nothing for the honest people. A crazy person will find a way to cause mayhem either way.
JD0x0 is online now  
Old January 31, 2013, 10:30 PM   #5
speedrrracer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 15, 2011
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 259
It's another unbelievably stupid idea.

The point can never be to limit the bodycount to some acceptable number, because there is no (non-zero) acceptable number.

This is why I don't give a crap what idea they have wrt guns, it's wrong. The focus must be on people, because we are the problem.
speedrrracer is offline  
Old January 31, 2013, 11:53 PM   #6
Koda94
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2012
Location: Oregon
Posts: 367
IMO ammo or magazine limits are just an underlying medium for complete gun confistication.

first we had no restrictions, then we had magazine capacity limits of 10 rounds. Now NY has set an example of a limit of 7. What do you think will happen when the next tragic event happens (because the restrictions will not work or prevent)?

If we let them limit our magazines, ammo capacities it lets them gain "proof" that guns are still the problem. Its a stepping stone for complete removal.
__________________
lightweight, cheap, strong... pick 2
Koda94 is offline  
Old February 1, 2013, 02:45 PM   #7
jason_iowa
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 30, 2011
Posts: 686
Imagine the man power it would take to track down magazines. It would not be plausible. I doubt there will be any kind of ban of anything this time through. I keep telling my fellow liberals that its not worth the huge hit we will take in 2014 and 2016 should something actually get passed. Hopefully enough of them will see reason.
jason_iowa is offline  
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 06:33 PM.


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 0.08427 seconds with 9 queries