RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way.

RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

BamaD -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/15/2013 9:27:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Just try`n to slow the nut jobs down.... Actually, is does not. A lot of us that learn to shoot defensively, learn to change out the magazine before it is empty. It is difficult to keep track of shots fired in an intense situation. So you carry extra and change them frequently. quote: As apposed to trying to arm them to the teeth with roto-mags and silencers,to conceal their blood baths better and make them longer/deadlier......like the NRA/nut-jobs are doing.... I could understand this if that was how most gun battles these days were "going down." But really. . . these new rules are going to have little to no positive effect on the gun homicides happening. quote: I gotta question for you. Why in hell would the NRA be pushing to have silencers legalized?....I meant WTF!?!! I am a bit confused on why you think that they shouldn't be. They add nothing to the firearms usefulness (they decrease accuracy and range actually) and yet they do add to the difficulty in concealing it. People can make silencers themselves out of home items. They (silencers) are a great deal safer if they are purchased specially for a weapon. I mean, let's face it, if I want to sneak in somewhere quietly with no sound, I am not going to be using a firearm in the first place for this. There are MUCH better ways. To add to this, our sensor techniques are such that, silencers are just not that. . . really. . . they are not that useful. but the movies show......

Powergamz1 -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/15/2013 10:05:46 PM)
If you are gambling on the odds of an AK jamming, you probably aren't going to like the results. They can jam, but the occurence is nowhere near as certain as you've just made out. quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee <SNIP>Please, please, PLEASE give them high capacity magazines! PLEASE! Yes, Yes, YES! Do you have ANY idea how often those things jam? Clearing a jam takes longer than seating a new magazine and they are harder to conceal. I will take on the nutjob with the 100 round magazine before the nutjob with the 10 ten round magazines. Please give me the idiot.

jlf1961 -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/15/2013 10:15:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Just try`n to slow the nut jobs down.... As apposed to trying to arm them to the teeth with roto-mags and silencers,to conceal their blood baths better and make them longer/deadlier......like the NRA/nut-jobs are doing.... I gotta question for you. Why in hell would the NRA be pushing to have silencers legalized?....I meant WTF!?!! Silencer are legal, you just have to pay a NFA fee and transfer the ownership of the silencer, same as machine guns.

Aylee -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/15/2013 10:20:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 If you are gambling on the odds of an AK jamming, you probably aren't going to like the results. They can jam, but the occurence is nowhere near as certain as you've just made out. quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee <SNIP>Please, please, PLEASE give them high capacity magazines! PLEASE! Yes, Yes, YES! Do you have ANY idea how often those things jam? Clearing a jam takes longer than seating a new magazine and they are harder to conceal. I will take on the nutjob with the 100 round magazine before the nutjob with the 10 ten round magazines. Please give me the idiot. Depends on the mag size and the care. The springs have to push a much greater mass while the weapon cycles. The rounds don't get pushed up fast enough (this is why you never bother to load the 30th round, the springs and the force needed to insert it are a bitch.) Then, they need to be cleaned, lubricated, cycled, cleaned and lubricated again to feed smoothly and reliably. Dropping them in the dust is all it takes to jam things up. The bigger the mag, the more impact dirt will have on them. Now. . . if a person is using a weapon illegally acquired, what are the chances they have taken needed care to prevent jams? Most gun homicides are NOT with these 'assault rifles.' They happen with one or two shots with a handgun and then the person runs away.

Powergamz1 -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/15/2013 10:25:34 PM)
Depends on the design and the tolerances as well. On weapons with tighter tolerances, and a lightweight spring to shave ounces off the total, the chances of that happening go up... on other weapons, not so much. quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 If you are gambling on the odds of an AK jamming, you probably aren't going to like the results. They can jam, but the occurence is nowhere near as certain as you've just made out. quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee <SNIP>Please, please, PLEASE give them high capacity magazines! PLEASE! Yes, Yes, YES! Do you have ANY idea how often those things jam? Clearing a jam takes longer than seating a new magazine and they are harder to conceal. I will take on the nutjob with the 100 round magazine before the nutjob with the 10 ten round magazines. Please give me the idiot. Depends on the mag size and the care. The springs have to push a much greater mass while the weapon cycles. The rounds don't get pushed up fast enough (this is why you never bother to load the 30th round, the springs and the force needed to insert it are a bitch.) Then, they need to be cleaned, lubricated, cycled, cleaned and lubricated again to feed smoothly and reliably. Dropping them in the dust is all it takes to jam things up. The bigger the mag, the more impact dirt will have on them. Now. . . if a person is using a weapon illegally acquired, what are the chances they have taken needed care to prevent jams? Most gun homicides are NOT with these 'assault rifles.' They happen with one or two shots with a handgun and then the person runs away.

jlf1961 -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/15/2013 10:34:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 If you are gambling on the odds of an AK jamming, you probably aren't going to like the results. They can jam, but the occurence is nowhere near as certain as you've just made out. quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee <SNIP>Please, please, PLEASE give them high capacity magazines! PLEASE! Yes, Yes, YES! Do you have ANY idea how often those things jam? Clearing a jam takes longer than seating a new magazine and they are harder to conceal. I will take on the nutjob with the 100 round magazine before the nutjob with the 10 ten round magazines. Please give me the idiot. Depends on the mag size and the care. The springs have to push a much greater mass while the weapon cycles. The rounds don't get pushed up fast enough (this is why you never bother to load the 30th round, the springs and the force needed to insert it are a bitch.) Then, they need to be cleaned, lubricated, cycled, cleaned and lubricated again to feed smoothly and reliably. Dropping them in the dust is all it takes to jam things up. The bigger the mag, the more impact dirt will have on them. Now. . . if a person is using a weapon illegally acquired, what are the chances they have taken needed care to prevent jams? Most gun homicides are NOT with these 'assault rifles.' They happen with one or two shots with a handgun and then the person runs away. I have put beta mags (100 round twin drum) through my AR frame weapons with no jam. I have put god knows how many rounds through my AK since I bought it 3 years ago and no jams.

Aylee -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/15/2013 10:58:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I have put beta mags (100 round twin drum) through my AR frame weapons with no jam. I have put god knows how many rounds through my AK since I bought it 3 years ago and no jams. Jeff. . . that could jam. They have a much greater chance of jamming than a 10 round mag. I am just asking for a chance here. I would much prefer having my own gun to shoot you with when you start spraying people with bullets. But. . . that is not the case. You are spraying people with bullets and I have my best chance for taking you out if your weapon jams. This is most likely to happen with a high capacity mag. So. . . that being the case, which do you think that I would prefer? Especially given that it is more difficult to hide the high cap mag.

joether -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/16/2013 3:44:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 It may be different in other countries, but in the US, the police are civilians. Was there anything in this law that would exempt off duty cops, or federal agents, etc. from the restrictions? Remember, NY is where they tried to arrest on duty feds for violating NYC's weapons ban. quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 That LEOs have guns..... isn`t a good argument that we should allow 100 round magazines be sold to civilians.... Who the hell do we think is going to have to respond when those hi-cap weapons are breaking another thousand hearts.............like they did at Sandy Hook ? Federal Agents would not be affected by this law since their duties are 'federal', not 'state'. There maybe on the books for the state of New York an existing exception that allows off-duty police officers to retain the use of their arms as long as it is used the same way and manner if they were on duty. Just because it is not mention in the newest law doesnt mean its not there or removed.

Nosathro -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/16/2013 3:47:44 AM)
I'm hoping the New York trend continues.

joether -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/16/2013 3:51:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee YAY! Law abiding citizen are now criminals! WoooooHoooo! The police can spend time counting bullets! No chance of falsity there! YAY! Yeah, all those mass shooters were considered 'honest and law abiding citizens' under the laws moments before they opened up their weapons on other Americans. In fact, until they are found guilty in a court of law, they are STILL 'honest and law abiding citizens' from the legal defination of 'guilt' and 'innocence'. If a police officer can not count over seven, they should not be on the force. If a 'honest and law abiding citizens' can not count at all, they should not own a firearm all together.

Yachtie -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/16/2013 5:59:01 AM)
fr I'd say, generally of course, Leftists would have a greater chance of a semi-auto handgun stove piping or improper cycling than a Rightist, Leftists being more prone to limp wrists and all.[8D]

Powergamz1 -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/16/2013 6:12:37 AM)
You are simply making up nonsense. quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 It may be different in other countries, but in the US, the police are civilians. Was there anything in this law that would exempt off duty cops, or federal agents, etc. from the restrictions? Remember, NY is where they tried to arrest on duty feds for violating NYC's weapons ban. quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 That LEOs have guns..... isn`t a good argument that we should allow 100 round magazines be sold to civilians.... Who the hell do we think is going to have to respond when those hi-cap weapons are breaking another thousand hearts.............like they did at Sandy Hook ? Federal Agents would not be affected by this law since their duties are 'federal', not 'state'. There maybe on the books for the state of New York an existing exception that allows off-duty police officers to retain the use of their arms as long as it is used the same way and manner if they were on duty. Just because it is not mention in the newest law doesnt mean its not there or removed.

mnottertail -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/16/2013 6:40:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I dunno about disarmament, but I wonder about the ex-post facto thing with the magazines...... I am not sure what their constitution says about that in NY. It doesn't seem to make present possesion of 8+ round magazines illegal. It requires the sale out of state or destruction of said magazines within one year. NY already limits magazines to 10 rounds so this does strike me as a nuisance change to the law as a 3 round difference in capacity is pretty minimal. I see that, nevertheless, they were bought legally, and if I am in possession of one at some later point they are illegal? I see that as ex-post facto, which the fed can't do, I don't know about a state. I think it would come to an 'among the several' issue. I don't like it, for several reasons.

LizDeluxe -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/16/2013 7:29:17 AM)
Here in Georgia we have some of the most lenient firearms laws in the country but we have not seen any mass shooting problems. I can recall a couple of workplace shootings in the past ten years but nothing on the scale of others we have seen. In Chicago, handguns are banned yet there were over 500 shooting homicides last year. If lax gun laws are the problem and stricter gun laws are the solution then those two scenarios should be reversed.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/16/2013 7:32:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I see that, nevertheless, they were bought legally, and if I am in possession of one at some later point they are illegal? I see that as ex-post facto, which the fed can't do, I don't know about a state. I think it would come to an 'among the several' issue. I don't like it, for several reasons. Interesting thought. I wonder if there is the ability for a State to pass ex post facto laws.

BamaD -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/16/2013 3:14:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I see that, nevertheless, they were bought legally, and if I am in possession of one at some later point they are illegal? I see that as ex-post facto, which the fed can't do, I don't know about a state. I think it would come to an 'among the several' issue. I don't like it, for several reasons. Interesting thought. I wonder if there is the ability for a State to pass ex post facto laws. It seems that the Feds made at least one tax retroactive (by a couple of years) back in 93 But Iam not sure about the details.

jlf1961 -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/16/2013 3:18:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LizDeluxe Here in Georgia we have some of the most lenient firearms laws in the country but we have not seen any mass shooting problems. I can recall a couple of workplace shootings in the past ten years but nothing on the scale of others we have seen. In Chicago, handguns are banned yet there were over 500 shooting homicides last year. If lax gun laws are the problem and stricter gun laws are the solution then those two scenarios should be reversed. Please keep quiet about this fact, you will upset the anti gun lunatics on these boards.

lovmuffin -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/16/2013 3:25:54 PM)
It seems the NY gun law is very similar to the Clinton ban. "Assault weapons" are defined by cosmetic features so change your butt stocks from the pistol grip and get rid of flash suppresser and you have a legal gun. The 7round limit on magazines is the height of ignorance along with the rest of the law.

OsideGirl -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/16/2013 3:27:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin "Assault weapons" are defined by cosmetic features Yup. It's the equivalent of banning a car because it has a spoiler.

jlf1961 -> RE: Disarmament: NY leads the way. (1/16/2013 3:30:11 PM)
Look, I already said how to solve the problem. Give all people with 1/4 Native American blood or more the right to carry and own guns. Make it illegal for all people of non native american blood to be sober when not working, and suspend the drunk driving and seatbelt laws for these people. Legalize pot.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625