Fixed mag creating undue burden?

[steelrain82]

I was doing something, I don't quite remember what it was, but the thought came to my mind. How does this not create an undue burden and infringement on our rights? I know the courts have ruled that a trigger lock is not mandatory because it would affect my ability to defend myself. How does a fixed magazine not do the same?

I would like to think that if a shooting ever happened in my home, that after the first round or two the criminal(s) would be dead or fleeing. However, if reality hits and they don't flee, aren't dead, or there are multiple individuals, am I not now placed in a situation which creates an undue burden on my ability defend (or continue to defend) myself, or my family?

[R Dale]

Best thing is to have multiple firearms.

[cyborg]

They doan care.

[anonymous308]

They doan care.

This unfortunately. They don't seem to care.

[steelrain82]

I get that part. But I never hear of this as an argument. I know, bigger fish to fry.

[Stanze]

Sorry to say that due to CA tyranny, my fixed mag guns are mainly cool looking range toys until CA becomes free; or me or my guns move to a free state.

That said, I keep a few featureless rifles around for dropping mags.

Sorry if that doesn't answer your question OP, however the previous posts pretty much cover it.

[Librarian]

No litigation content - moved.

[omega]

carry multiple firearms like the pirates did

Best thing is to have multiple firearms.

back when they didnt have repeating firearms, the pirates would carry multiple pistols since they wouldnt have time to reload in a fight.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/61/cd/3b/61cd3b05145a3f9f8f72409928405bd9.jpg

[SheepDog78]

OP, you have the process all wrong. You have to die in a home invasion first because you couldn't reload, THEN your family gets to file the lawsuit on your behalf, but they'll probably lose since all that happened was a right wing extremist gun nut was stopped before he could use his evil gun to unjustly kill a poor criminal just trying to turn his life around.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[AregularGuy]

I was doing something, I don't quite remember what it was, but the thought came to my mind. How does this not create an undue burden and infringement on our rights? I know the courts have ruled that a trigger lock is not mandatory because it would affect my ability to defend myself. How does a fixed magazine not do the same?

I would like to think that if a shooting ever happened in my home, that after the first round or two the criminal(s) would be dead or fleeing. However, if reality hits and they don't flee, aren't dead, or there are multiple individuals, am I not now placed in a situation which creates an undue burden on my ability defend (or continue to defend) myself, or my family?

They don't care about this. The restrictions are not in place to make the guns safer to use. They don't want us to have guns at all. The compliance devices and means are our way to stay legal. But have nothing to do with safety.

[ojisan]

Best thing is to have multiple firearms.

Whoever thought that the AR15 would become a prime candidate for the "New York Reload"?

[Holden Caulfield]

Why would you want to kill a criminal? They're special snowflakes born into a life of crime by an oppressive regime. You're the bad guy for owning a gun.

[PogoJack]

Being pragmatic here, just thinking about protecting my family and not my rights at the moment...featureless and a normal mag release would be the best way to go in my situation. I've got an ARES SCR as my featureless HD weapon. My ARs are maglocked and in the safe.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk