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.
I guess i'm going to war every day while writing traffic tickets or responding to loud noise?
Indeed. I brought this same point up in post #73. Cops patrol our streets every day armed with "weapons of war"such as the Glock in various trim and the AR 15, or even the real deal M4. On other threads debating the "need" for citizens to be armed with such firearms in response to those who say we have no "need" I've asked another question. If the police need such firearms as the AR and now the Glock in it's myriad forms to patrol our neighborhoods 8 hours a day (assuming that 8 hours is spent patrolling and not on paperwork) how is it not proper that we have them since we live, work and raise our families in those same neighborhoods?
The hoplophobes do miss the rhino in the room a lot don't they?
Indeed. I brought this same point up in post #73. Cops patrol our streets every day armed with "weapons of war"such as the Glock in various trim and the AR 15, or even the real deal M4. On other threads debating the "need" for citizens to be armed with such firearms in response to those who say we have no "need" I've asked another question. If the police need such firearms as the AR and now the Glock in it's myriad forms to patrol our neighborhoods 8 hours a day (assuming that 8 hours is spent patrolling and not on paperwork) how is it not proper that we have them since we live, work and raise our families in those same neighborhoods?
The hoplophobes do miss the rhino in the room a lot don't they?
I also have an M4 rifle stored inside the patrol vehicle.
If antigun nuts think a Glock 17 is a "weapon of war", then they probably believe M4 is a "weapon of mass destruction"
Supreme Court will have a lot to say about this in June's ruling - concealed carry is expected to be ruled legal in all 50 states in the NYC lawsuit
Awesome!!!
I had a concealed weapons permit when I lived in New York. Hopefully they'll eliminate a lot of the BS that one had to go through in order to get one in states like New York. My guess is they won't? However instead of issuing "may issue" or restricted permits. They'll have to issue "shall issue" permits. They also won't be able to deny anyone a permit without having a justifiable cause.
The next fight should be for Constitutional Carry status for all 50 states. 21 states now have that status.
I think he was referring to the a Glock with a 40 round magazine not the Glock itself. But whatever...
Even if it has a 40 round magazine, doesn't change the natural, individual right to keep and bear arms.
Ammunition capacity of magazines just changes the frequency of reloading. Doesn't alter the caliber of the weapon, the firing mechanism, the fire-eject-reload sequence...nothing. Just what number X reloads will deliver Y number of total rounds.
Tactically, the oversized magazine actually detracts from the balance mechanics, ability to draw the weapon to the aim point, and recoil/re-aim process. Those things are clunky, heavy, bulky, etc. To me, they hamper tactical performance more than they help it, like most silly range toys, but they sure do scare the crap out of idiot politicians.
Then you get into what exactly is a high capacity magazine? A Glock (or any other semi-auto pistol) using its factory magazine at say, 17-18 rounds is not high capacity. It is what it was designed to use. They should properly be called standard capacity mags. Special magazines that only hold 10 rounds to make them legal in California are actually low capacity mags but if you somehow squeeze in an 11th round suddenly it is "high capacity" and illegal in there. (well, unless you have 10 in the magazine and one in the chamber, then it's ok, but an empty chamber and 11 in the mag is felony territory. And why the limitation? 10 well placed shots will kill at least 10 people. That is, by definition, a mass shooting. Does California have less mass shootings per capita then next door in Nevada where standard capacity magazines are legal?
What it really boils down to is they want you to have no guns, but until they weasel their way into that, they will settle for less gun then they have (capacity wise).
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.
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.
