The Political Party

[guido61]

---

TIMKEYS wrote:

No they are not sitting in the same bus.   NY citizens only get 7 round,    while criminals and police get 7.   Jug says 10 ,,   If NY is legal saying they can limit to 7 and be legal ,, it therefore should be legal for my state of texas to say screw that ,, we allow 15 or 20 or even 30. 

---

The way such laws work is as long as the state law doesn't conflict with the federal law, they can do what they want.   If the fed maximum is 10 rounds and NY wants to limit that to 7, they probably can.  But TX wouldn't be able to say 30, they'd have to go with 10.

But everyone within each of those states would be on the same bus.  What criminals do illegally is irrelevant.  You don't get to take as much money as you want out of the bank because the bad guys "get" to.   They don't "get" to have more rounds.  If they have them, they'd be doing so illegally.

And yeah, you don't have the same rights to weapons as the cops.   This is breaking news to you?

[TIMKEYS]

The tommy gun is not illegal ,,,, did you know that?   you can buy them, you can own them, and you can shoot them.  

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/rpt/2009-R-0020.htm

[guido61]

---

TIMKEYS wrote:

The tommy gun is not illegal ,,,, did you know that?   you can buy them, you can own them, and you can shoot them.  

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/rpt/2009-R-0020.htm

---

Define "illegal", I suppose.  "Highly regulated" under ANY definition.

You haven't been able to buy a new one since 1986.  You can buy old ones, if you pay a transfer tax and let the ATF know what you're doing.  You can't take one across state lines.  And I'm not sure when or where you could actually fire one.   On a firing range that allows it, perhaps?  That's about it.

You wanna put semi-autos and hi-cap mags in the same "legal" catagory as tommy guns?  I'd be cool with that.

[TIMKEYS]

---

guido61 wrote:

---

TIMKEYS wrote:

No they are not sitting in the same bus.   NY citizens only get 7 round,    while criminals and police get 7.   Jug says 10 ,,   If NY is legal saying they can limit to 7 and be legal ,, it therefore should be legal for my state of texas to say screw that ,, we allow 15 or 20 or even 30. 

---

The way such laws work is as long as the state law doesn't conflict with the federal law, they can do what they want.   If the fed maximum is 10 rounds and NY wants to limit that to 7, they probably can.  But TX wouldn't be able to say 30, they'd have to go with 10.

But everyone within each of those states would be on the same bus.  What criminals do illegally is irrelevant.  You don't get to take as much money as you want out of the bank because the bad guys "get" to.   They don't "get" to have more rounds.  If they have them, they'd be doing so illegally.

And yeah, you don't have the same rights to weapons as the cops.   This is breaking news to you?

---

interesting ,,, we have obama and holder not making a peep about the states that have made marajuana legal have we?    He has said he wont enforce those laws.   

[guido61]

---

TIMKEYS wrote:

---

interesting ,,, we have obama and holder not making a peep about the states that have made marajuana legal have we?    He has said he wont enforce those laws.   

---

He did make a peep.  He said he won't enforce the laws.

[TIMKEYS]

You can fire one anywhere its safe to fire one.  Hell I can go to a range down here and fire one.. its just across the ship channel.   A thompson isnt that big a deal,  Hell they just shoot 45ACP rounds.   Nothing special about that.   The problem with you dave is you really dont know much about firearms or laws , yet you come in here with all your lame **bleep** arguments and try to act like you are informed.   dude you are a gun dullard to the max.

[TIMKEYS]

---

guido61 wrote:

---

TIMKEYS wrote:

---

interesting ,,, we have obama and holder not making a peep about the states that have made marajuana legal have we?    He has said he wont enforce those laws.   

---

He did make a peep.  He said he won't enforce the laws.

---

Thats why many states are drafting legislation to tell obama to go pound sand on his gun grab.  Texas already has one in the works.   It will pass.  

[guido61]

Funny too...

since the restrictions on fully auto guns began in 1934, there's only been a couple of documented deaths attributed to them.

So much for "when guns are outlawed, only the bad guys will have them". The bad guys haven't used them either.

[guido61]

---

TIMKEYS wrote:

---

---

Thats why many states are drafting legislation to tell obama to go pound sand on his gun grab.  Texas already has one in the works.   It will pass.  

---

I don't know what part of his "gun grab" you're taking issue with or what it is Texas thinks they are drafting legislation to stop, but if they come up with something that conflicts with federal law, they won't have much legal ground to stand on if Obama decides to enforce the federal law.

[Used2BMarkoh]

---

guido61 wrote:

Is it useless in some fantasy scenario that never takes places?   Probably.  

Where it's NOT useless is in the myriad of REAL scenarios where it could be helpful: 

I am referring to the exact scenario as you - trying to stop the realworld crazies of the last few shootings. Real world, you don't pull out a pistol and drop the crazy with a single shot to the heart. You are **bleep** your pants, for starters, you are diving for cover, he's wearing armor, etc. It may take a lot more bullets than you think. I like to deal with facts, guido, instead of always arguing backwards from a desired conclusion. So I'm simply stating my opinion that half-assed magazine restrictions will actually favor the crazies, not prevent such crimes.

[Zooey]

---

TIMKEYS wrote:

interesting ,,, we have obama and holder not making a peep about the states that have made marajuana legal have we?    He has said he wont enforce those laws.   

---

For someone who posts on a political forum, you sure don't seem to follow political events at all. 

[guido61]

---

TIMKEYS wrote:

You can fire one anywhere its safe to fire one.  Hell I can go to a range down here and fire one.. its just across the ship channel.   A thompson isnt that big a deal,  Hell they just shoot 45ACP rounds.   Nothing special about that.   The problem with you dave is you really dont know much about firearms or laws , yet you come in here with all your lame **bleep** arguments and try to act like you are informed.   dude you are a gun dullard to the max.

---

All I've done is told you what the laws are and what the courts have said.

You want to ignore what the courts have said and proclaim YOU know better what the Constitution says than they do?  Fine.  You've got a right to say whatever you want.  But that isn't going to get you anywhere legally.  And isn't going to keep your 30-round clips legal.  You can scream "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" while they are dragging you out of the court room and into your cell all you want though....

[Zooey]

---

guido61 wrote:

---

TIMKEYS wrote:

---

interesting ,,, we have obama and holder not making a peep about the states that have made marajuana legal have we?    He has said he wont enforce those laws.   

---

He did make a peep.  He said he won't enforce the laws.

---

Holder stated in a 2009 memo that marijuana enforcement would be deprioritized in places that have decriminalized it, but the administration reneged on that.  Enforcement is ongoing. 

[guido61]

---

Used2BMarkoh wrote:

 

I am referring to the exact scenario as you - trying to stop the realworld crazies of the last few shootings. Real world, you don't pull out a pistol and drop the crazy with a single shot to the heart. You are **bleep** your pants, for starters, you are diving for cover, he's wearing armor, etc. It may take a lot more bullets than you think. I like to deal with facts, guido, instead of always arguing backwards from a desired conclusion. So I'm simply stating my opinion that half-assed magazine restrictions will actually favor the crazies, not prevent such crimes.

---

Except the facts are--SUCH A THING HAS NEVER HAPPENED.

No one is suggesting anyone be limited to a single shot.   But no one has ever needed a large-mag clip to stop a killer regardless of how many weapons he was carrying. 

Large cap mags give a huge advantage to the bad guys.  They are GREAT for being able to mow down a bunch of people before you risk being taken down while you're reloading.   But they offer no real advantage to the good guys.  Loughner was taken down while he was reloading.  Had he had a larger clip, he almost certainly would have shot and killed a few more people before he would have been stopped.

Again, show me an example of a crime being prevented/reduced by a good guy with a large-cap mag when a smaller one wouldn't have sufficied?  I don't think such an example exists, or surely SOMEBODY on this forum would have come up with one by now?

[guido61]

---

Zooey wrote:

---

For someone who posts on a political forum, you sure don't seem to follow political events at all. 

---

He follows events to the degree they show up in his INBOX via emails from Alex Jones and Glenn Beck.

[TIMKEYS]

obama and holder are the ones that belong in a cell.

[TIMKEYS]

---

guido61 wrote:

---

Zooey wrote:

---

For someone who posts on a political forum, you sure don't seem to follow political events at all. 

---

He follows events to the degree they show up in his INBOX via emails from Alex Jones and Glenn Beck.

---

I guess you are at the point in the debate where you start with this kind of stuff ,,,,.  

[guido61]

---

TIMKEYS wrote:

 

I guess you are at the point in the debate where you start with this kind of stuff ,,,,.  

---

You mean the point YOU were at a couple of pages ago where you started insulting ME? 

[guido61]

---

Used2BMarkoh wrote:

I am referring to the exact scenario as you - trying to stop the realworld crazies of the last few shootings.

---

And that's why we're even HAVING this discussion.   All the stuff you're trying to keep legal ALREADY IS legal, and HAS BEEN legal and hasn't stopped those realworld crazies.

Good guys with large-cap mags aren't stopping these guys.  Good guys with semi-auto rifles aren't stopping these guys.   They don't help.  They only give advantage to the bad guys.   And you want them to continue to have that advantage.

[TIMKEYS]

---

guido61 wrote:

---

Used2BMarkoh wrote:

I am referring to the exact scenario as you - trying to stop the realworld crazies of the last few shootings.

---

And that's why we're even HAVING this discussion.   All the stuff you're trying to keep legal ALREADY IS legal, and HAS BEEN legal and hasn't stopped those realworld crazies.

Good guys with large-cap mags aren't stopping these guys.  Good guys with semi-auto rifles aren't stopping these guys.   They don't help.  They only give advantage to the bad guys.   And you want them to continue to have that advantage.

---

You see this happen in gun free zones.    We used to call them criminal empowerment zones.   Chicago is a good example of one.