Defending Magazines & the 2nd Amendment

[Noble Cause]

It may be presumptuous of me, but I think CDfingers is thinking from a
"worst case" scenario... ie.. we lose one of the Heller 5 and now we have
a liberal leaning set of judges looking at anyway they can to allow
the 2nd to be defanged or somewhat nullified.

Logic flow being: In 1791 Mags did not exist, hence when BoR was written,
magazines would not have been included in the word "arms".

If we have a valid defense against such an attempt, even if most
consider it unlikely, we have done our due diligence in leaving no stone
unturned.

If we maintain the Heller five, I would wager Kcbrowns arguements would
rule the day.

Noble

[kcbrown]

It may be presumptuous of me, but I think CDfingers is thinking from a
"worst case" scenario... ie.. we lose one of the Heller 5 and now we have
a liberal leaning set of judges looking at anyway they can to allow
the 2nd to be defanged or somewhat nullified.

There is no defense against that scenario. In that scenario, any and all RKBA-infringing laws subsequently brought before the Court will be decided to be "Constitutional".

Some argue that if that happens, we'll just have a Constitutional Convention to "clarify" the 2nd Amendment. That will result in one of two outcomes:

1. The states assert "states rights" over the entire 2nd Amendment field, thereby nullifying McDonald and removing the ability to regulate 2A-related things from the federal government entirely. I regard this as the most likely outcome. It will, however, mean that California and other similar states will eliminate RKBA within them utterly.
2. The Supreme Court issues a ruling which nullifies the result of the Constitutional Convention, much like the Supreme Court nullified the 14th Amendment's PorI clause in Slaughterhouse. Since the Court is the final arbiter of what the Constitution (including its amendments) means, there is no recourse against this. This even applies to a clause which would otherwise forcibly remove one or more of the justices.

There may be even more dire possibilities than those in the event a Constitutional Convention takes place.


In any case, once we lose one or more of the Heller 5, the game is almost certainly over, with the only recourse left being armed insurrection (something that historically has almost always yielded something at least as bad as what came before).

This is why I regard the United States as the "walking dead", as it were. The country is finished. It's only a matter of time before that becomes apparent to everyone. I will, of course, fight as if that weren't the case, but I am a realist, and that is what I see before me.

[ap3572001]

From LE training, I learned that having a lot of rounds in a magazine and having a lot of those magazines can make a huge difference in SOME situations. ( Active shooter, hostage rescue,providing cover fire etc)

From talking ( and shooting at the range) with people (not LEO's) who carry handguns CCW style , I learned that MOST of them carry single stack pistols and DA revolvers.

I am talking about folks who ACTUALLY carry loaded handguns all the time for protection , not people just talk about it.

I carry both , single stack and 10+ . On and off duty.

I think people should have a choice.

[kcbrown]

From LE training, I learned that having a lot of rounds in a magazine and having a lot of those magazines can make a huge difference in SOME situations. ( Active shooter, hostage rescue,providing cover fire etc)

From talking ( and shooting at the range) with people (not LEO's) who carry handguns CCW style , I learned that MOST of them carry single stack pistols and DA revolvers.

I am talking about folks who ACTUALLY carry loaded handguns all the time for protection , not people just talk about it.

Yes. But how many of those people you talked to are not limited by the 10 round magazine limit here in California? It matters, a lot.

And in any case, you're talking about concealed carry, which can impose constraints on size and weight due to the need to keep the firearm concealed. Single stack firearms are thinner and easier to conceal, generally.

Combine those two together, and it does't surprise me in the least that most of them would carry single stack handguns and DA revolvers.

I carry both , single stack and 10+ . On and off duty.

In your case, you're not subject to the magazine size restriction, so you can carry what you believe suits your needs best. That's as it should be. That you choose to carry 10+ means that you obviously believe there are some self defense situations you might face in which the 10 round magazine limit would impose a potentially lethal burden on you. And that reinforces the very point I was making.

I think people should have a choice.

Same here (obviously ). It's heartening to see some from law enforcement supporting our cause. My hat's off to you!

[ap3572001]

I meet people with CCW all over the US. I travel a lot.

They have a choice to carry all kinds of handguns.

Speaking about me, I carry anything form G22/G17 with full capacity magazines to Smith and Wesson 642 five shot revolver and S&W 3914 single stack 9mm.

[dunnigan]

For me Gingrich says it best (the argument against any gun control measures)

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2013/01/25/gingrich-schools-gun-grabbing-piers-morgan-isnt-your-real-view-you-w#ixzz2J1YW1f8d

[dunnigan]

For me Gingrich says it best (the argument against any gun control measures)

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-w...#ixzz2J1YW1f8d

Gingrich to Piers Morgan:
GINGRICH: Okay, right now, and the reason you find so many of us, and by the way, it's a substantial majority, I think the last time I saw, 63 percent of the American people agree that the Second Amendment is actually there to protect us from tyranny. The reason you find so many of us very reluctant to go down this road is we believe each step down this road leads to the next step and the next step and the next step. And we actually think the Second Amendment is central to our liberties, not just something there for hunters, not something there for target practice, but actually there because the founding fathers remembered that when your army tried to defeat us, luckily, our peasants weren't peasants. They were citizens. And as citizens, they were in fact armed. And that's the only reason we were able to win the Revolutionary War.

[Noble Cause]

As stated in my original OP, I do not think Feinsteins AW Ban will succeed,
at least not this time. When the next massacre occurs, as it will, courtesy
of the "Gun Free Zones"... she will once again take advantage of the tragedy.

This particular push in 2013 is about getting "lesser targets" with a smoke
screen of the AW Ban. Getting a ban on "high capacity magazines" to 10, or
New Yorks 7, is their real goal. Once they get that, our semi-auto weapons
will slowly have their effectiveness reduced each time there is a massacre,
until we are down to 1 to 2 round magazines...effectively neutering the 2nd.

Here is a video from Colion Noir. I think he does a rather good job
explaining why anyone would want a "high capacity magazine":



Noble

[Noble Cause]

..........Feinstein in Future Hell:


Historys
most
Tyrannical
Leaders:


......<--- Wow, what a coincidence guys !
.............................I also enjoyed taking guns from
.............................innocent people right after they
.............................didn't do anything wrong !



Noble