PDA

View Full Version : How in trouble are hi-cap mags???


IrishPirate
01-13-2011, 4:00 PM
in light of recent events, it seems that the anti's have latched onto hi-cap mags as their new big target. the issue is all over the media and the sheeple seem to be getting a pretty biased view point. So since we all know we can't trust voters or lawmakers to be smart, how in danger are hi-caps both in CA and on a Federal level????

wash
01-13-2011, 4:07 PM
If there is any trouble, it's federal.

I doubt there will be any trouble.

PhantomII
01-13-2011, 4:22 PM
Right now it's all posturing so they can look good to their constituents and say they really pushed for this "common sense" gun control bill but they were outmaneuvered by the NRA and those stubborn Republicans.

I don't think any of it will go anywhere, but it's always a good time to think about the next election. Damn the constitution... The campaign never stops.

jtmkinsd
01-13-2011, 4:23 PM
IMHO, legislation will be forthcoming to ban hi-cap mags...and it will be signed into law. The only question in my mind is will they simply adopt the 10 round limit, or will it be something else. So, my advice is to buy now...it's only a matter of when the law comes, not if.

Super Spy
01-13-2011, 4:27 PM
I worry a little because I know the Senate and Pres are Dem's and "Anti". Deals have been made in the past and I wouldn't expect the Boxer's, Brady's, and Pelosi's of the country to do anything else but try and pass more ridiculously asinine gun control laws....What's saving us is the amount of political ill will that would create. Almost every new full size semi-auto pistol holds well over 10 rounds so a 10 round mag limit would seriously annoy a LOT of people and cost Dem's seats they can't afford to lose.

CCWFacts
01-13-2011, 4:35 PM
NRA-shill publication the Los Angeles Times says (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-gun-control-20110114,0,630261,full.story):

Tucson tragedy unlikely to advance gun control legislation
Not only do Republicans now dominate the House, but more Democrats advocate gun rights than in decades past

Reporting from Washington —
The first federal gun control law was passed in 1968 after the assassinations of Robert F. Kennedy and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., and the Brady bill mandating background checks on gun purchases was enacted in the years following the attempted assassination of President Reagan in 1981. But don't expect any new gun control laws coming out of Capitol Hill in the wake of the Tucson shooting rampage.

That underlined section is the big win for us. Once gun rights become a non-partisan issue, we really have won.

Exile Machine
01-13-2011, 4:37 PM
My take, as a man on the street... Legislation will be introduced, it will not pass. Eventually this will blow over and the gun grabbers, like giant turkey vultures, will wait patiently for the next fresh corpse to alight on.

Meantime, good luck trying to find a high-cap mag anywhere. The distributors are dry. Soon the retailers will be dry. Little bit of panic out there. I've got a small warehouse full here but they will not last long.

I give it two weeks to a month before the panic normalizes.

-Mark

SuperSet
01-13-2011, 4:43 PM
If the insane butchery of 30+ people at VA Tech wasn't enough to introduce magazine limits, I don't think this will. If anything, the NRA should be pressing to close the mental health loophole. No one is against that idea and it will provide something tangible to those that say 'something must be done about this.'

fiddletown
01-13-2011, 4:47 PM
When something like Tucson happens, the politicians are under great pressure from their constituents to "do something." And a high capacity magazine ban is pretty low hanging fruit. It would look good to a lot of people even though it wouldn't accomplish anything meaningful. So a ban on the horizon is short money.

c good
01-13-2011, 4:51 PM
Nothing worse than we're already stuck with in California. I don't see anything coming from this at a Federal level. c good

IrishPirate
01-13-2011, 5:01 PM
Nothing worse than we're already stuck with in California. I don't see anything coming from this at a Federal level. c good

i think all new guns in the US not being able to have +10rd mags would be alot worse than just new guns in CA.....I'm not happy about our situation, but it would still be worse if it was a nation wide thing...

RRangel
01-13-2011, 5:05 PM
IMHO, legislation will be forthcoming to ban hi-cap mags...and it will be signed into law. The only question in my mind is will they simply adopt the 10 round limit, or will it be something else. So, my advice is to buy now...it's only a matter of when the law comes, not if.

Did you forget about the astounding defeat that many of the gungrabbers suffered in November? Who's going to support it? Many of the new faces in the capitol were elected to oppose such garbage.

IrishPirate
01-13-2011, 5:16 PM
yeah but many of those Republicans were elected by anti-gun democrats who just followed the flow....the anti's have their spotlight and they are going to milk it pretty hard for as long as possibly. They want to strike while emotions are high and logic is low...

bwiese
01-13-2011, 5:21 PM
yeah but many of those Republicans were elected by anti-gun democrats

Many of those Republicans replaced pro-gun Democrats.

And many Democrats that won in 2004 actually were more pro-gun than the Republicans they replaced.

Window_Seat
01-13-2011, 5:45 PM
But remember also, that the "R" in NRA does not stand for Republican, and don't forget that Congresswoman Giffords is on our side.

Doctors at the University Medical Center (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704307404576080361307329644.html?m od=googlenews_wsj) in Tucson said the congresswoman was rubbing her eyes and yawning, and that her eyes could also track people's movements—a sign that she could see.

This is a VERY GOOD THING. There has never been a time when we needed a member of Congress as desperately as this, than ever before.

Erik.

the_quark
01-13-2011, 5:45 PM
I think we'll see legislation introduced to reenact the 1994 assault weapons "ban" (which, note, was mostly a ban on manufacture and import, not a real ban). This legislation will fail, it won't even get out of the Senate.

taperxz
01-13-2011, 5:54 PM
I think we'll see legislation introduced to reenact the 1994 assault weapons "ban" (which, note, was mostly a ban on manufacture and import, not a real ban). This legislation will fail, it won't even get out of the Senate.

Agreed, Anyone can propose anything, doesn't mean it will go anywhere. Even Feinstein new back then not to push to extend the AWB because she knew it would not go anywhere. LOL she lets Boxer propose all the stuff that is never going to pass.

jtmkinsd
01-13-2011, 6:00 PM
If the insane butchery of 30+ people at VA Tech wasn't enough to introduce magazine limits, I don't think this will.

He used 10 round magazines. In this case, the extended mag has taken center stage...and IMHO, the argument for a 30+ round handgun magazine probably will have a hard time standing up to the hysteria.

NorCalDustin
01-13-2011, 6:04 PM
But remember also, that the "R" in NRA does not stand for Republican, and don't forget that Congresswoman Giffords is on our side.

This is a VERY GOOD THING. There has never been a time when we needed a member of Congress as desperately as this, than ever before.

Erik.

Agreed. We need Congresswoman Giffords... I hope she recovers quickly and is soon able to speak up. Beyond that, I hope that what has happened has not swayed her opinion's on gun control.

That will help us a great deal in preventing new legislation..

Imagine, the Congresswoman who survived her own attempted assassination saying that additional gun control is not the answer. That will carry a great deal of weight in preventing new legislation.

diginit
01-13-2011, 6:15 PM
Agreed. We need Congresswoman Giffords... I hope she recovers quickly and is soon able to speak up. Beyond that, I hope that what has happened has not swayed her opinion's on gun control.

That will help us a great deal in preventing new legislation..

Imagine, the Congresswoman who survived her own attempted assassination saying that additional gun control is not the answer. That will carry a great deal of weight in preventing new legislation.

You really think that getting shot in the head won't change her way of thinking???

Beelzy
01-13-2011, 6:17 PM
"There's a bad moon on the rise".......CCR.

DannyInSoCal
01-13-2011, 6:23 PM
What hi-cap mags? I have noooo idea what you're talking about....?

jtmkinsd
01-13-2011, 6:32 PM
What ever it takes to disarm the peasants since John Kennedy signed the U.N. Freedom from War Treaty in the early 1060s.

1060? :eek:

HAHA....got it in before the delete! :43:

yellowfin
01-13-2011, 7:13 PM
I think magazines are safe--McCarthy and her kind are borderline illiterate, so I doubt very seriously they'll start grabbing them up and start reading them.

But anyway, compared to '94, we have how many millions of rifles in common ownership these days with standard capacity of 30 rounds, and pistols too? Probably half to 2/3 of gun owners in the US own something to that effect and I seriously doubt they'll be as kind to any attempt on invading upon that.

the_quark
01-13-2011, 7:15 PM
New York Times reports nothing's going to happen:

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/13/remedies-chewing-gum-for-heartburn/?src=mv


Democrats who favor more restrictive gun laws say they do not expect new legislation to be passed, especially now that Republicans control of the House and Democrats have lost seats in the Senate.



Gun control advocates said that they hoped the circumstances of this attack — including the facts that the suspect obtained his weapon legally and that one of the victims was a member of Congress — would help their cause... But lawmakers seeking even modest limits on gun rights seem almost resigned to failure.

SuperSet
01-13-2011, 7:31 PM
He used 10 round magazines. In this case, the extended mag has taken center stage...and IMHO, the argument for a 30+ round handgun magazine probably will have a hard time standing up to the hysteria.

Check again..

http://www.vpc.org/studies/vatechgunsbackgrounder.pdf

"Armed with the Glock 19 and the Walther P22, The Washington Post reports that in the attack at Virginia Tech the shooter used 15-round ammunition magazines for the Glock, and 10-round ammunition magazines for the Walther. Since 1979, 7,031,596 22 caliber pistols have been produced in the United States, making the .22 the most popular pistol caliber produced in America during this period."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/17/AR2007041701780.html

"The lapsed gun law was back in focus yesterday, amid evidence that Virginia Tech shooter Cho Seung Hui used high-capacity ammunition clips that had been banned, allowing him to fire more rounds without reloading. If Democratic leaders cannot muster the votes to reinstate the full assault weapons ban, some suggested that at least the clip-capacity portion could be passed.

"It's hard to explain why a person needs a clip with more than 10 bullets in it," said Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.). "

These arguments were made in 2007 and nothing happened. I predict the same result this time too.

chris
01-13-2011, 9:13 PM
I think we'll see legislation introduced to reenact the 1994 assault weapons "ban" (which, note, was mostly a ban on manufacture and import, not a real ban). This legislation will fail, it won't even get out of the Senate.

just remember Fiensteins words. she will wait for the right time to introduce an AWB again. and as long as she holds office the possibility remains.

$P-Ritch$
01-13-2011, 9:24 PM
In another thread McCarthy just announced that she will introduce a new bill for sure.

It will be similar the original AWB on mags, but add that it will also be illegal to transfer any high caps, period.

So, if it passed whatever mags you had that were grandfathered in would be all you'd ever get, no pre-ban mags to sell/trade.

IrishPirate
01-13-2011, 9:35 PM
i hope they are stupid enough to just say "clip" in the legislation....we could rush the legislation through and have everyone support it, and then when it turns out to be ABSOLUTELY MEANINGLESS....everyone will point and laugh at the anti's and push them off the monkey bars.

RRangel
01-13-2011, 9:40 PM
just remember Fiensteins words. she will wait for the right time to introduce an AWB again. and as long as she holds office the possibility remains.

Keep in mind that we've seen bad legislation already over the years. That never ends. It's whether it gets anywhere when introduced that matters. The math on the prospective votes is in our favor. That doesn't exactly mean that we should breath easy, but I'm just saying.

magsnubby
01-13-2011, 9:53 PM
just remember Fiensteins words. she will wait for the right time to introduce an AWB again. and as long as she holds office the possibility remains.

It won't be under the current administration. If he gets re-elected all bets are off. People seem to forget that when the AWB was scheduled to sunset Dubya stated if a new AWB made it to his desk he would sigh it.

Nessal
01-13-2011, 10:53 PM
You really think that getting shot in the head won't change her way of thinking???



I think losing a child to this tragedy prompting a grieving father to admit that no additional control is needed may still hold some hope.

violator22348
01-13-2011, 10:59 PM
in light of recent events, it seems that the anti's have latched onto hi-cap mags as their new big target. the issue is all over the media and the sheeple seem to be getting a pretty biased view point. So since we all know we can't trust voters or lawmakers to be smart, how in danger are hi-caps both in CA and on a Federal level????

This is where I remember it all starting (the magazine restrictions):

"On the morning of 17 January 1989, an anonymous person phoned the Stockton Police Department and warned of a death threat against Cleveland Elementary School. At noon that day, Patrick Purdy, a disturbed drifter and former Stockton resident, began his attack by setting his Chevrolet van alight that he had parked behind the school. He then moved to the school playground and began firing with a Chinese-made Norinco Type 56 semi-automatic rifle from behind a portable building. Purdy fired more than 100 rounds in three minutes killing five children and wounding thirty others including one teacher."

DocSkinner
01-13-2011, 11:03 PM
IMHO, legislation will be forthcoming to ban hi-cap mags...and it will be signed into law. The only question in my mind is will they simply adopt the 10 round limit, or will it be something else. So, my advice is to buy now...it's only a matter of when the law comes, not if.

If you are in Cali, you can already only buy 10 rounders...

Anchors
01-13-2011, 11:15 PM
Check again..

http://www.vpc.org/studies/vatechgunsbackgrounder.pdf

"Armed with the Glock 19 and the Walther P22, The Washington Post reports that in the attack at Virginia Tech the shooter used 15-round ammunition magazines for the Glock, and 10-round ammunition magazines for the Walther. Since 1979, 7,031,596 22 caliber pistols have been produced in the United States, making the .22 the most popular pistol caliber produced in America during this period."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/17/AR2007041701780.html

"The lapsed gun law was back in focus yesterday, amid evidence that Virginia Tech shooter Cho Seung Hui used high-capacity ammunition clips that had been banned, allowing him to fire more rounds without reloading. If Democratic leaders cannot muster the votes to reinstate the full assault weapons ban, some suggested that at least the clip-capacity portion could be passed.

"It's hard to explain why a person needs a clip with more than 10 bullets in it," said Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.). "

These arguments were made in 2007 and nothing happened. I predict the same result this time too.

Ban the high powered .22lr caliber that is killing our kids!!

On a more serious note, I wish our illiterate politicians would read something about what they are trying to ban instead of getting their gun facts from rap music. "Clips". I'm going to ask that they write "stripper clip" into their next legislation and see if they notice.

Damn, no more stripper clips that hold over 10 rounds....hahaha.

Justincase22
01-13-2011, 11:20 PM
I don't think there should be a limit on how many bullets you guns can hold to protect life or liberty from criminals, personally I only carry 8+1 and 2 extra mags of 8.

Maybe it's time to start buying rebuild kits for the prebans?

Purdey
01-13-2011, 11:23 PM
IMHO, legislation will be forthcoming to ban hi-cap mags...and it will be signed into law. The only question in my mind is will they simply adopt the 10 round limit, or will it be something else. So, my advice is to buy now...it's only a matter of when the law comes, not if.
Wow, what a fatalist!

BTW, your Yamamoto quote is fake -- check Snopes...

the_quark
01-14-2011, 2:03 AM
just remember Fiensteins words. she will wait for the right time to introduce an AWB again. and as long as she holds office the possibility remains.

She's introduced it before. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if it's been introduced every single year since it expired. If she ever retires

I'm just saying it won't get anywhere. There are enough pro-gun Democrats, and there is a very deep appreciation amongst Democratic strategists that the '94 AWB is what lost them the '94 congressional elections.

In fact, here's Bill Clinton in his 2004 memoirs:


[House leaders] said that if we made them walk the plank again on the assault weapons ban, the overall bill might not pass, and that if it did, many Democrats who voted for it would not survive the election in November.

...

On November 8, we got the living daylights beat out of us, losing eight Senate races and fifty-four House seats, the largest defeat for our party since 1946... The NRA was an unforgiving master: one strike and you're out. The gun lobby claimed to have defeated nineteen of the twenty-four members on its hit list. They did at least that much damage.

...

With the ban due to sunset on September 14th of this year, and Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) continuing to push for an extension of the ban, one wonders whether other members of the Democratic party will be anxious to repeat history.


http://www.gunshopfinder.com/legislativenews/clinton8_1_04.html

Yes, there are a handful of nutcases out there who think there's still some profit in this. But I've talked to a lot of politically involved Democrats, and most of them absolutely recognize that they can't hold any seats at all in about 42 states if they're perceived by their constituants as anti-gun.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to be vigilant, and oppose all of this with all our might. It will be introduced. In June, there will be a million emails launched about how this thing is certain to pass and Obama is going to personally come to your door and confiscate every single firearm you own. And then, the bill is going to die in committee and not even come up for a vote, because the last thing the Democratic leadership in the Senate wants is a vote on something like this.

All the doom-and-gloom this is going to pass :willy_nilly: stuff is hooey. You should have a presupposition we're going to win, because we will.

NightOwl
01-14-2011, 5:44 AM
My take, as a man on the street... Legislation will be introduced, it will not pass. Eventually this will blow over and the gun grabbers, like giant turkey vultures, will wait patiently for the next fresh corpse to alight on.

Meantime, good luck trying to find a high-cap mag anywhere. The distributors are dry. Soon the retailers will be dry. Little bit of panic out there. I've got a small warehouse full here but they will not last long.

I give it two weeks to a month before the panic normalizes.

-Mark

Get out of the street with your computer, you're going to get hit by a car. :p

Beelzy
01-14-2011, 6:07 AM
This thread is almost funny......Folks are saying a Mag Cap Law won't make it anywhere.
The same thing was said about the ObamaCare dabacle that we ALL voted for.

Oh I forgot, we didn't get to vote on that.

"They" plan on throwing tons of legislation at the System until one sticks. Just like all the other un-Constitutional laws we now have.

I am watching the Today show right now, and the Scene of Carnage was just described as a "battle field".........It's over.

cmichini
01-14-2011, 7:35 AM
If the insane butchery of 30+ people at VA Tech wasn't enough to introduce magazine limits, I don't think this will. If anything, the NRA should be pressing to close the mental health loophole. No one is against that idea and it will provide something tangible to those that say 'something must be done about this.'

Unfortuneately you may be wrong. One of their own was attacked in this instance. They don't really care about regular citizens but when you attack a member of the annointed class, SOMETHING has to be done. And when something has to be done the thing to do is violate the constitution and infringe on people's rights. Take the Patriot Act as an example.

thrasherfox
01-14-2011, 7:39 AM
My take, as a man on the street... Legislation will be introduced, it will not pass. Eventually this will blow over and the gun grabbers, like giant turkey vultures, will wait patiently for the next fresh corpse to alight on.

Meantime, good luck trying to find a high-cap mag anywhere. The distributors are dry. Soon the retailers will be dry. Little bit of panic out there. I've got a small warehouse full here but they will not last long.

I give it two weeks to a month before the panic normalizes.

-Mark

Mark -

Please make sure the order I placed yesterday gets processed ASAP lol :) it was the one with the painters special hammer head, associated equipment and uhh one other item :)

I have one AR-15 that I am actually looking forward to making it totally featureless. This one is real basic anyway so it will be perfect to make it into a featureless rifle.

rabagley
01-14-2011, 7:42 AM
This thread is almost funny......Folks are saying a Mag Cap Law won't make it anywhere.
The same thing was said about the ObamaCare dabacle that we ALL voted for.

Democratic and Republican strategists are saying that a Mag Cap Law won't pass.

Some Republican strategists were saying that Obamacare shouldn't pass.

Huge difference.

Wherryj
01-14-2011, 8:15 AM
If there is any trouble, it's federal.

I doubt there will be any trouble.

How much more trouble could "standard capacity" magazines get into in CA? They are already banned. I'd agree that if there's any trouble it would be the rest of the country joining CA in our troubles.

thrasherfox
01-14-2011, 8:22 AM
She's introduced it before. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if it's been introduced every single year since it expired. If she ever retires

I'm just saying it won't get anywhere. There are enough pro-gun Democrats, and there is a very deep appreciation amongst Democratic strategists that the '94 AWB is what lost them the '94 congressional elections.

In fact, here's Bill Clinton in his 2004 memoirs:



http://www.gunshopfinder.com/legislativenews/clinton8_1_04.html

Yes, there are a handful of nutcases out there who think there's still some profit in this. But I've talked to a lot of politically involved Democrats, and most of them absolutely recognize that they can't hold any seats at all in about 42 states if they're perceived by their constituants as anti-gun.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to be vigilant, and oppose all of this with all our might. It will be introduced. In June, there will be a million emails launched about how this thing is certain to pass and Obama is going to personally come to your door and confiscate every single firearm you own. And then, the bill is going to die in committee and not even come up for a vote, because the last thing the Democratic leadership in the Senate wants is a vote on something like this.

All the doom-and-gloom this is going to pass :willy_nilly: stuff is hooey. You should have a presupposition we're going to win, because we will.


I in the most sincerest sense I can be, I mean absolutley no disrespect in any capacity.

But I heard the exact same thing on this board when I joined not too long about abou AB-962. I kept hearing "dont worry about it, its not going to happen"

Well it looks like at this stage in the game everyone is starting to agree that yeah, its going to happen.

As I said, I am trying to get a feel for this board. I am trying to get a feel for gun laws since it is all new to me. and I am trying to get a feel for the membership as to who is who.

I thought I saw somewhere that you are high up on the food chain in some capacity.

Other than that, I wish there was some kind of listing of a chain of command around here. who is who. who has what responsabilties, who does what.

I get the sense we have lawyers on this site, but I dont know what the relationship is.

I guess I need to dig around a little more, maybe all this information is out there and I just havent found it.

I guess what I am trying to say is I do not want to offend anyone that is actually working and activley involved in helping secure our gun rights. but at the same time I am a pessamist. I count on people letting me down, so if they do I am not all butt hurt about it, and if they dont, then I am happy.

But honestly, hearing on this board that AB-962 was going to be defeated and it being said with confidance, and now watching the date come closer and closer and mroe and more people seem to be accepting it is going to happen. It is difficult NOT to look at worse case scenarios regardless of how much people say it isnt going to happen.

I hope you understand what I am saying. It is not meant to be inflamatory, it is just my perception from my limited time on this board.

stix213
01-14-2011, 8:41 AM
I in the most sincerest sense I can be, I mean absolutley no disrespect in any capacity.

But I heard the exact same thing on this board when I joined not too long about abou AB-962. I kept hearding "dont worry about it, its not going to happen"

Well it looks like at this stage in the game everyone is starting to agree that yeah, its going to happen.

As I said, I am trying to get a feel for this board. I am trying to get a feel for gun laws since it is all new to me. and I am trying to get a feel for the membership as to who is who.

I thought I saw somewhere that you are high up on the food chain in some capacity.

Other than that, I wish there was some kind of listing of a chain of command around here. who is who. who has what responsabilties, who does what.

I get the sense we have lawyers on this site, but I dont know what the relationship is.

I guess I need to dig around a little more, maybe all this information is out there and I just havent found it.

I guess what I am trying to say is I do not want to offend anyone that is actually working and activley involved in helping secure our gun rights. but at the same time I am a pessamist. I count on people letting me down, so if they do I am not all but hurt about it, and if they dont, then I am happy.

But honestly, hearing on this board that AB-962 was going to be defeated and it being said with confidance, and now watching the date come closer and closer and mroe and more people seem to be accepting it is going to happen. It is difficult NOT to look at worse case scenarios regardless of how much people say it isnt going to happen.

I hope you understand what I am saying. It is not meant to be inflamatory, it is just my perception from my limited time on this board.

The AB-962 fight isn't over yet.

rod
01-14-2011, 9:17 AM
All my mags are safe. I think I have enough to last a lifetime for all my guns with more on the way. I have made it a point, since moving to Virginia, to purchase a couple of mags every time I buy ammo.

Beelzy
01-14-2011, 9:46 AM
Democratic and Republican strategists are saying that a Mag Cap Law won't pass.

Some Republican strategists were saying that Obamacare shouldn't pass.

Huge difference.


Poppycock!

CAL.BAR
01-14-2011, 10:13 AM
There seems to be a lot of concern from all of us living in KA where hi caps have been banned for a decade and don't show any real promise of coming back.

the_quark
01-14-2011, 10:22 AM
Well it looks like at this stage in the game everyone is starting to agree that yeah, its going to happen.


AB-962 still is going to go down. It's just taking a little bit longer than we hoped. I'll admit I was surprised the courts ducked the issue as they have, but they haven't ruled on the fundamental issues. Once they do, AB-962 will go down in flames. I'd expected them to do that before it went into effect, but they replied, very clearly, that it needs to go into effect before they'll raise a finger.

This is very much a different matter. I linked to this yesterday, but here is the New York Times, in an entry titled, "A Clamor for Gun Limits, but Few Expect Real Changes".


But lawmakers seeking even modest limits on gun rights seem almost resigned to failure... This kind of legislation is very difficult,” Mr. King said, noting there had been “no enthusiasm,” even among Democrats, for the renewal of the assault weapon ban of 1994 in 2004. “The fact is Congress has not done any gun legislation in years,” he said, adding, “Once you get out of the Northeast, guns are a part of daily life.”


So, the Times is quoting people who want to ban guns as saying there's no way anything is going to happen in this Congress. The overall tone of the article is bafflement that something isn't being done.

The reason why I think this is important is because I think some ostensibly on our side (like The Billy Jack) have convinced themselves this is simply going to happen, so there's no sense fighting it. I'm saying it's not going to happen, but we should fight it as hard as we can to make sure it's dead. Just don't panic.

Steyr_223
01-14-2011, 10:37 AM
Democratic and Republican strategists are saying that a Mag Cap Law won't pass.

Some Republican strategists were saying that Obamacare shouldn't pass.

Huge difference.

This...If the Democratic party wants to keep the senate majority, take back the house and keep the white house they will not push for more gun control. Do the math..If they pushed for new Fed gun control laws; Nevada, Indiana, North Carolina, Florida, Virginia and maybe Pennsylvanian/Vermont/New Hampshire and others will flip to Red...

IrishPirate
01-14-2011, 11:22 AM
once this makes it to facebook.....we're screwed.

the_quark
01-14-2011, 11:25 AM
I thought I saw somewhere that you are high up on the food chain in some capacity.

Other than that, I wish there was some kind of listing of a chain of command around here. who is who. who has what responsabilties, who does what.

I get the sense we have lawyers on this site, but I dont know what the relationship is.


So, I think I understand some of the previous confusion. You (I believe you) previously said, "Where the heck was everyone on AB962?" and got jumped on. When you said that, I think the jumpers thought you were talking about when AB962 was moving through the legislature, but you were actually talking about more recent attempts to stop it.

There really isn't a "hierarchy", but let me explain my affiliations, what they mean, and where we are on AB962.

First, I'm on the Board of Directors of the Calguns Foundation (CGF). We're primarily an educational and legal foundation - we help educate people about California's gun laws, and engage in lawsuits and legal defense. Our main interaction with bad laws is trying to overturn them, after the fact.

Second, I'm also on the Board of Directors of the California Rifle and Pistol Association (CRPA). The CRPA is the California affiliate of the NRA. CRPA does a lot of stuff (like organizing matches), but what matters most for this conversation is that we have a full-time lobbyist in Sacramento, and also engage is lawsuits against unconstitutional bills.

Third, the NRA is involved here, but I'm not affiliated with them (other than being a Life member). California is one of the few states NRA has a dedicated lobbyist in. They also fund lawsuits against unconstitutional bills.

Finally, I'm not a lawyer.

When AB962 was working its way through the legislature, NRA and CRPA worked hard to oppose it, but they lost the fight (you certainly can't win 'em all in Sacramento from our perspective).

In the intervening time, three lawsuits were filed - one by CGF/NRA, one by CRPA, and one by a third party, and I'm not particularly familiar with them. They all had different basises.

All three of those lawsuits moved for a preliminary injunction - saying that the law was so clearly illegal that it should be stopped before it went into effect. In my opinion, all three of these cases have arguments that are this air tight. I will admit, six months ago, I was saying, "One of these three has to win, there's no way AB962 will actually go into effect." I underestimated Judges' laziness and ability to duck the question - two of them said, in effect, "I don't care what your arguments are; the law hasn't gone into effect, and so it can't be infringing, yet." I believe they were mistaken in that assessment, but, by the time we could appeal it, the law will be in effect, so the most effective thing we can do it wait for the law to go into effect, and then re-file. There is still one last hope - the CRPA case has not yet been dismissed.

Now, I want to be clear, even if the CRPA case is dismissed, AB962 absolutely is still going down. Any of these cases will be enough to take it down.

I don't know if all that gives me more or less credibility in your eyes. I'm certainly not a lawyer, and I'm not a politician. But, I talk to a lot of people, I read a lot, and I know a lot of the people involved. I try to synthesize the best information I can. I'm far more confident we won't see a Federal large-cap magazine ban this year than I was that AB962 would be stopped via a preliminary injunction. You certainly never saw me offer to bet anyone on AB962. You certainly never saw the New York Times publish articles about how AB962 wasn't going to go into effect - but they are publishing them saying there won't be any new Federal gun control laws.

thrasherfox
01-14-2011, 11:58 AM
So, I think I understand some of the previous confusion. You (I believe you) previously said, "Where the heck was everyone on AB962?" and got jumped on. When you said that, I think the jumpers thought you were talking about when AB962 was moving through the legislature, but you were actually talking about more recent attempts to stop it.

There really isn't a "hierarchy", but let me explain my affiliations, what they mean, and where we are on AB962.

First, I'm on the Board of Directors of the Calguns Foundation (CGF). We're primarily an educational and legal foundation - we help educate people about California's gun laws, and engage in lawsuits and legal defense. Our main interaction with bad laws is trying to overturn them, after the fact.

Second, I'm also on the Board of Directors of the California Rifle and Pistol Association (CRPA). The CRPA is the California affiliate of the NRA. CRPA does a lot of stuff (like organizing matches), but what matters most for this conversation is that we have a full-time lobbyist in Sacramento, and also engage is lawsuits against unconstitutional bills.

Third, the NRA is involved here, but I'm not affiliated with them (other than being a Life member). California is one of the few states NRA has a dedicated lobbyist in. They also fund lawsuits against unconstitutional bills.

Finally, I'm not a lawyer.

When AB962 was working its way through the legislature, NRA and CRPA worked hard to oppose it, but they lost the fight (you certainly can't win 'em all in Sacramento from our perspective).

In the intervening time, three lawsuits were filed - one by CGF/NRA, one by CRPA, and one by a third party, and I'm not particularly familiar with them. They all had different basises.

All three of those lawsuits moved for a preliminary injunction - saying that the law was so clearly illegal that it should be stopped before it went into effect. In my opinion, all three of these cases have arguments that are this air tight. I will admit, six months ago, I was saying, "One of these three has to win, there's no way AB962 will actually go into effect." I underestimated Judges' laziness and ability to duck the question - two of them said, in effect, "I don't care what your arguments are; the law hasn't gone into effect, and so it can't be infringing, yet." I believe they were mistaken in that assessment, but, by the time we could appeal it, the law will be in effect, so the most effective thing we can do it wait for the law to go into effect, and then re-file. There is still one last hope - the CRPA case has not yet been dismissed.

Now, I want to be clear, even if the CRPA case is dismissed, AB962 absolutely is still going down. Any of these cases will be enough to take it down.

I don't know if all that gives me more or less credibility in your eyes. I'm certainly not a lawyer, and I'm not a politician. But, I talk to a lot of people, I read a lot, and I know a lot of the people involved. I try to synthesize the best information I can. I'm far more confident we won't see a Federal large-cap magazine ban this year than I was that AB962 would be stopped via a preliminary injunction. You certainly never saw me offer to bet anyone on AB962. You certainly never saw the New York Times publish articles about how AB962 wasn't going to go into effect - but they are publishing them saying there won't be any new Federal gun control laws.


Thank you very much for articulating everything. I greatly appreciate it. it does help me understand the AB-962 a little better (not than my understanding of it better helps in the grand scheme of the universe in any capacity :) )

and thanks for the Hierarchy info. I was in the Marines for awhile and still work for for the DoD. I have this "chain of command" imbedded into me so deeply it is followed in my household (yes, other people feel sorry for my children also, but hey!! they could pump out a 100 push ups when they were 9 if they screwed up :) )

Thanks again


Ron

the_quark
01-14-2011, 12:08 PM
Thank you very much for articulating everything. I greatly appreciate it. it does help me understand the AB-962 a little better (not than my understanding of it better helps in the grand scheme of the universe in any capacity :) )


I just reread what I wrote and I don't think I was absolutely clear - where we were is we thought we could stop it before it went into effect, and the judges have said, "No, it has to go into effect before you can stop it." We'll still stop it, it's just going to be in effect a little while, first.


and thanks for the Hierarchy info. I was in the Marines for awhile and still work for for the DoD. I have this "chain of command" imbedded into me so deeply it is followed in my household (yes, other people feel sorry for my children also, but hey!! they could pump out a 100 push ups when they were 9 if they screwed up :) )


We're a bunch of volunteer individuals, so it's a lot less formal. It's further confused by the fact that, for example, as far posting on this board goes, I'm just a regular guy like you, and have no control over the board.

GM4spd
01-14-2011, 2:08 PM
There seems to be a lot of concern from all of us living in KA where hi caps have been banned for a decade and don't show any real promise of coming back.

Nothing will happen at the Federal level,however some states may try
adopting the CA thing "that goes up". Pete

inbox485
01-14-2011, 3:13 PM
You really think that getting shot in the head won't change her way of thinking???

When stuff like this happens there are two schools of thought:

1 - take all the guns away (which only marginally qualifies as a thought since any further thought reveals this as a logical fallacy).
2 - ask why the only gun in the area was held by a nut job in a state where you don't even need a license to carry.

The media predictably is following #1, but every time it has come up around me, I hear people ask why nobody else was able to shoot back (be it police, or armed bystanders). I think the public at large has got a grip on the concept that you can't control violent people with laws, but you can stop them with force when needed.

jpigeon
01-14-2011, 7:19 PM
The left has brainwashed us all. Stop calling standard mags HI CAPS everyone. Since when did a 10rd mag become the damn standard capacity? Those lefties have u all mesmorized or something...

IrishPirate
01-14-2011, 7:55 PM
2 - ask why the only gun in the area was held by a nut job in a state where you don't even need a license to carry.

because it was a Democratic "convention". If that guy showed up to a Republican talking in the parking lot, it's much more likely that someone would have shot back (IMHO).

The left has brainwashed us all. Stop calling standard mags HI CAPS everyone. Since when did a 10rd mag become the damn standard capacity? Those lefties have u all mesmorized or something...

High Capacity or Large Capacity are the legal definitions of a +10rd mag. It's important to know that so that when we talk about legal things, people don't get confused. Is it stupid? sure, but it's also necessary at the time being. Before this tragedy, we might have had a good chance at getting rid of the hi-cap mag ban in CA....I'm sure the fight just got much harder...

the_quark
01-14-2011, 7:58 PM
Before this tragedy, we might have had a good chance at getting rid of the hi-cap mag ban in CA....I'm sure the fight just got much harder...

As long as the Federal ban doesn't get repassed (and it won't), we'll still win that fight, here.

Toorop
01-15-2011, 11:54 AM
She's introduced it before. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if it's been introduced every single year since it expired. If she ever retires

I'm just saying it won't get anywhere. There are enough pro-gun Democrats, and there is a very deep appreciation amongst Democratic strategists that the '94 AWB is what lost them the '94 congressional elections.

In fact, here's Bill Clinton in his 2004 memoirs:



http://www.gunshopfinder.com/legislativenews/clinton8_1_04.html

Yes, there are a handful of nutcases out there who think there's still some profit in this. But I've talked to a lot of politically involved Democrats, and most of them absolutely recognize that they can't hold any seats at all in about 42 states if they're perceived by their constituants as anti-gun.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to be vigilant, and oppose all of this with all our might. It will be introduced. In June, there will be a million emails launched about how this thing is certain to pass and Obama is going to personally come to your door and confiscate every single firearm you own. And then, the bill is going to die in committee and not even come up for a vote, because the last thing the Democratic leadership in the Senate wants is a vote on something like this.

All the doom-and-gloom this is going to pass :willy_nilly: stuff is hooey. You should have a presupposition we're going to win, because we will.Do you got a source for that quote from Bill Clinton's memoirs? I have not seen any actual proof and I looked through the book at teh store but I could not find it.

IrishPirate
01-15-2011, 12:43 PM
As long as the Federal ban doesn't get repassed (and it won't), we'll still win that fight, here.

I'm sure we will eventually, but this had to have been a set back....if nothing else, no one will rule on it until the Federal ban fails...

I_Love_My_.22
01-15-2011, 5:21 PM
My take, as a man on the street... Legislation will be introduced, it will not pass. Eventually this will blow over and the gun grabbers, like giant turkey vultures, will wait patiently for the next fresh corpse to alight on.

Meantime, good luck trying to find a high-cap mag anywhere. The distributors are dry. Soon the retailers will be dry. Little bit of panic out there. I've got a small warehouse full here but they will not last long.

I give it two weeks to a month before the panic normalizes.

-Mark


:confused: Talk like this had me stop and take a look at Cabelas and one other gun store in Reno. I was very surprised to see they had a full rack of 33rnd Glock 9mm mags in both stores at their regular retail price. However both had .40s&w 30rnd Glock mags back ordered with no idea of when they were coming in.