Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-15-2013, 04:53 PM
 
Location: Long Island
57,317 posts, read 26,236,916 times
Reputation: 15654

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
Yeah, because if a gang of armed thugs does a home invasion, a stressed out person will be a crackshot and there won ever be more than 7 intruders.

This ban is going to go to court and is doomed. Even the Luger my grandfather brought back from WWI would be banned in NY (used 8 round mags). It bans some of the most popular guns today and even antique collectible guns.
How many people have a home invasion where they needed 7 rounds to fight off a gang, I know, could happen, might happen, has happened, too many imaginary situations.

Many of the gun owners here indicated they could shoot a fly in the butt at 50 yards and reload 6 magazines in a minute, now 7 round magazines are an issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-15-2013, 05:11 PM
 
Location: The Woods
18,358 posts, read 26,507,138 times
Reputation: 11351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
How many people have a home invasion where they needed 7 rounds to fight off a gang, I know, could happen, might happen, has happened, too many imaginary situations.

Many of the gun owners here indicated they could shoot a fly in the butt at 50 yards and reload 6 magazines in a minute, now 7 round magazines are an issue.
Trained police frequently have shootouts with one individual where they emptied 30 or more rounds from their guns, and hit the criminal once or twice or so.

Shooting at a range and at paper targets is very different than shooting under stress at a moving person shooting at you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 05:22 PM
 
Location: Columbia, SC
37,195 posts, read 19,225,735 times
Reputation: 14919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Roma View Post
That whooooshing sound was the point going over your head. What do you suppose they will do WHEN the next high profile shooting occurs? Will they propose magazine limits of 1 round?
That was the norm until the 1860s. Single-shot firearms tamed the wilderness.

It is true that Colt built the first revolvers in the 1830s, but they were not widespread until the Civil War.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 05:24 PM
 
Location: The Woods
18,358 posts, read 26,507,138 times
Reputation: 11351
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuebald View Post
That was the norm until the 1860s. Single-shot firearms tamed the wilderness.

It is true that Colt built the first revolvers in the 1830s, but they were not widespread until the Civil War.
The government and the criminals only had single shots and 6 shooters too (but there were exceptions, the Jennings 12 shot flintlock repeater, for example).

Revolvers were pretty widespread in the 1850's with those who could afford them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 05:35 PM
 
Location: Long Island
57,317 posts, read 26,236,916 times
Reputation: 15654
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
Trained police frequently have shootouts with one individual where they emptied 30 or more rounds from their guns, and hit the criminal once or twice or so.

Shooting at a range and at paper targets is very different than shooting under stress at a moving person shooting at you.
Police are not typical homeowners, how many need more than 7 rounds, some here have argued that they are better than police under stress, even those with no experience.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 05:39 PM
 
24,421 posts, read 23,084,509 times
Reputation: 15029
I guess if NYers don't like the hastily crafted gun laws they can either demand their repeal, ignore them, or see to it that anyone who voted for it gets thrown out of office. Or they can move.
Some jerk politician saying " The people want this" is not the same as it actually being the case. If the people don't want this no amount of phony polls or lies will make them change their minds.
.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 05:40 PM
 
Location: The Woods
18,358 posts, read 26,507,138 times
Reputation: 11351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Police are not typical homeowners, how many need more than 7 rounds, some here have argued that they are better than police under stress, even those with no experience.
You really missed the point didn't you. It can take even trained police dozens of shots before they stop a thug.

I'm going to turn the tables on you here. What justifies this infringement on a constitutionally protected right, that will pass strict scrutiny?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 06:06 PM
 
Location: Columbia, SC
37,195 posts, read 19,225,735 times
Reputation: 14919
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
The government and the criminals only had single shots and 6 shooters too (but there were exceptions, the Jennings 12 shot flintlock repeater, for example).

Revolvers were pretty widespread in the 1850's with those who could afford them.
You really didn't see multi-shot firearms that much until the Industrial Revolution when the concept of interchangable parts was thought up. Prior to that, each part was individually made for a single gun, which made the manfacturing process slow. A gunsmith in those days really was a smith.

The cowboys of the West didn't usually carry pistols because they got in the way when thery were roping, and the noise spooked cattle. They had Winchesters in low-hung scabbards that they knew how to use, but again only when it was absolutely necessary. Hollywood has done the West no favors.

The Jennings was a neat idea, but IIRC it was never used in but a couple of battles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 06:20 PM
 
Location: in my imagination
13,608 posts, read 21,402,861 times
Reputation: 10112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
How many people have a home invasion where they needed 7 rounds to fight off a gang, I know, could happen, might happen, has happened, too many imaginary situations.

Many of the gun owners here indicated they could shoot a fly in the butt at 50 yards and reload 6 magazines in a minute, now 7 round magazines are an issue.
Here is the point. They didn't want to openly say they will ban all these handguns, so they used the devious tactic of limiting the law to 7 shots knowing that for a vast majority of semi auto handguns there are no magazines made for that.

For example lets say a environmental extremist wanted to ban Ford Chevy Dodge SUV's or whatever make. Instead of banning them outright he creates a law saying you can keep your Ford Bronco but it can't have more than a 4 cylinder engine in it.

"hey I didn't ban your Bronco just limited its engine size" . Now some crafty company might then make a 4 cylinder engine to retrofit, but for some car models they won't so good luck on that.....

Their new law isn't about safety though they claim, it is about harassing gun owners anyway they can.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2013, 06:24 PM
 
Location: Pacific NW
9,437 posts, read 7,373,638 times
Reputation: 7979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
How many people have a home invasion where they needed 7 rounds to fight off a gang, I know, could happen, might happen, has happened, too many imaginary situations.

Many of the gun owners here indicated they could shoot a fly in the butt at 50 yards and reload 6 magazines in a minute, now 7 round magazines are an issue.
How many innocent victims are you willing to sacrifice for a useless, do nothing law that won't stop a single crime? If it costs one life it's too many.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:16 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top