New NY gun law

Absolutely not. What makes a rifle with 3 "military characteristics" any more deadly than a rifle with none? In the wrong hands, it doesn't matter. The mag cap thing is just a dart on a dartboard. It takes less than 5 seconds to reload a magazine for most people. What will the extra 10 seconds buy us (10 rd vs 30rd)?

This reminds me of when I bought my Bushmaster. Sportsman's Warehouse said that because I lived in Denver, he couldn't sell me a 30. I was sad, expecting him to take out the 30 and put in a 5. He said "No, not a 5-round, you can have a 20-round."

20 rounds instead of 30...I said "What the hell is the point of that law?".
 
So take away our first amendment rights?

Any right can be abused. I think the media has gone too far on this one and killers are taking advantage of it. If we can limit the 2nd, we can limit the 1st too. Everyone has to sacrifice here....not just gun owners.
 
So take away our first amendment rights?

Freedom of the Press was not meant to support policy-making left-leaning sensationalism, misinformation, and flat out lies. They can still report, but it should be factual. Anything else can be filed in the fiction section of your local library.
 
This reminds me of when I bought my Bushmaster. Sportsman's Warehouse said that because I lived in Denver, he couldn't sell me a 30. I was sad, expecting him to take out the 30 and put in a 5. He said "No, not a 5-round, you can have a 20-round."

20 rounds instead of 30...I said "What the hell is the point of that law?".

lol... so arbitrary and absurd. So does that mean I need to get rid of my 30 rounders before I head that way? :wacko:
 
Freedom of the Press was not meant to support policy-making left-leaning sensationalism, misinformation, and flat out lies. They can still report, but it should be factual. Anything else can be filed in the fiction section of your local library.

If you don't think that the first amendment was adopted in a time when hyperbole and sensationalism was rampant, you're mistaken. Also, who would be the arbiter of the truth? It seems like it could be a formula for attacking the defense of all sorts of rights in the public forum, including 2nd Amendment rights.
 
If you don't think that the first amendment was adopted in a time when hyperbole and sensationalism was rampant, you're mistaken. Also, who would be the arbiter of the truth? It seems like it could be a formula for attacking the defense of all sorts of rights in the public forum, including 2nd Amendment rights.

At the time the 1st was adopted, misinformation (with intent or otherwise) was not as easily and widely spread as it is now. The knee-jerk reactions we see today, not just by the public, but also by politicians, especially those that intend to further their agenda when they see something they can use, are wide reaching and can actually change the course of the nation. The media is quick to jump on things because they are so competitive and are complacent with just putting out a correction "later"... after all it gives them another news story right? It's dangerous - flat out dangerous - and there's no repercussion for what they do.
 
Last edited:
There are harsh penalties for violent crimes already. The problem is funding and society make it too compelling to give early release and second chances. Stop letting the crooks out or make the death penalty easier to use.



Absolutely not. What makes a rifle with 3 "military characteristics" any more deadly than a rifle with none? In the wrong hands, it doesn't matter. The mag cap thing is just a dart on a dartboard. It takes less than 5 seconds to reload a magazine for most people. What will the extra 10 seconds buy us (10 rd vs 30rd)?



Nope... registration is only daunting for legal owners. People that buy on the black market or steal them will not register, thus this registry is useless and give the govt more info than they need. Most of these tragedies have been committed with guns that were illegally obtained already. You think they would stop to register them before a rampage?



No, the problem is parents. People probably shouldn't allow their children to watch shows that are meant for older ages and shouldn't be buying them 'M' rated video games. The effects of both are, in my opinion, purely speculation or coincidence. I've watched violent movies since I was a kid. I've played violent video games since I was a kid. I've been around guns and knives since I was a kid. I've also had a pretty challenging life... and I've never gone off the deep end or felt compelled to do so.



Yes, lets spend more money on public messages... because that's really worked in the past. How about this... how about we start licensing parenting instead? Make them complete courses, check for financial and social responsibility, proper budgeting and medical coverage, and intelligence, and then hit them with a fat registration fee for each one they pop out. That ought to weed out some of these duds. (Most of this is for humor, but there is some sincerity there as well)



Why retired? If we're going to have armed guards, especially considering we could probably only afford a couple per school, I would want the most able person for the job. I'm not saying a retired person automatically couldn't do it, but why limit it? We aren't hiring for Walmart. How about returning veterans that get certified to work with children and have CQC training?



This I agree with. Any mass murderer should be assigned a random alpha-numeric number, to be determined after the crime, and that should be the only thing used to reference them going forward. News stations should be limited to reporting verified facts only in these scenarios and prohibited from showing pictures of the crime scenes or the killers unless there is a specific public need.

Sorry, I don't see how most of this addresses the problem. These are mostly "feel good" measures that impede on those already following the law. "A" for effort, but I'm not a fan. The only compromising is on the part of those already following the law. The govt takes, we give, and the criminals carry on business as usual.

Bofa, I agree with you (in principal) on nearly every point. No matter how ignorant these legal efforts are to "end gun violence", I just think maybe us gun owners would be better off if we were willing to at least come to the table rather than just saying "No, this is stupid". I could be wrong though...could be a "frog in a pot" scenario.

Anyway, the only thing where I think you're wrong is the retired cop thing. Remember, most cops retire in their early or mid 50's. They're not senior citizens. My Uncle reitred 2 years ago, he's in his late 50's. He's a competitive shooter and makes me look like a damn fool on the range. I just think it might be a great, cost-effective way to keep kids safe and allow these guys to continue to serve their communities part-time.
 
Last edited:
I tried to articulate that I wouldn't automatically discount retired cops (I know some retire young, and many are pretty sharp). They should be eligible... but I think we may have young vets in their 20s-40s that may be even more suitable and are looking for work instead of choosing to retire. If we are going to cough up tax dollars to create jobs, I say get these soldiers back to work. Either way though, I think school security is a very viable solution that actually attempts to address the problem, unlike a lot of the crap politicians are trying to shove down our throats.
 
My parents are against armed guards at schools.... the reason? They'll just be a bunch of crazy, gun-toting men that could turn on the students. FML. (It's a lost cause with them. At least my Mom says she doesn't have a problem with guns. My step mom hates them though)
 
My parents are against armed guards at schools.... the reason? They'll just be a bunch of crazy, gun-toting men that could turn on the students. FML. (It's a lost cause with them. At least my Mom says she doesn't have a problem with guns. My step mom hates them though)

Unfortunately, their feelings are very common. Especially among those who've had little exposure to guns other than TV and movies. I'm not sure if it's an irrational fear that guns are evil and they somehow make good people do bad things? Maybe they just don't trust people as a whole and don't like the idea of them having that kind of power. Which is ironic, because our government is made up of flawed people as well.....would we be any safer if they were the only ones with guns?

The fact is, guns are a reality. People are flawed and some will do bad things. Guns can either be a great equalizer or a tool for terror, depending on who's hands they're in. In the end, it's the shooter that's the variable in the "gun violence" equation.

Has the world really become any more evil since the proliferation of the gun? Look back in history. Violence is nothing new to humanity. Look at how the European monarchs, the Romans, etc. treated their people. How many people have had to live under tyranny and terror in one form or another throughout time? All guns do is allow us to overcome our physical are numerical disadvantages and "level the playing field". Thanks to the gun, a society can gain it's freedom from a tyrannical monarch, or a single mom can protect her child from two male intruders.

A question I have for her is why are Guards in schools dangerous? What about police patrolling the streets with guns? Are they dangerous too? I don't think any of us want some hack off the street with a gun guarding our children's schools. I think they should go through an extensive screening process at least as thorough as what police candidates go through. Ideally, police or retired police officers should be used...those who've had a clean record of service.

Why is it so unreasonable to place LEO's at schools? What is more precious in our society than children? Why spend all this time and money on gun control, in the hopes that it might indirectly curb "gun violence", when you can directly address the issue with police/ guards at schools?
 
Last edited:
That's exactly what it was. Her idea of an armed guard is something like an alcoholic, half-crazy NRA supporter that thinks it's the Wild West (because all NRA members are like that). Not exactly her words, but that's the feeling I got from her.

I couldn't even own a bb gun (or airsoft) because of some crazy, over-thought reasoning that I won't need to explain. (And I knew to wear safety glasses etc.)

My dad is kinda ok with them I guess... but he doesnt want to piss her off. my step-grandpa was showing me his p238 and my dad came down an saw it and took a look at it. The first thing he did was turn it sideways (all gangsta yo!) and play with it like it was a toy. finger on the trigger... I got pissed at him for a second and told him to put it down.
 
Last edited:
Just spent the last 5 days down in baja, and thought i would check the progression of this thread. Pretty much right where i figured it would be.
Have a wonderful evening gentleman.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
278,316
Messages
3,554,110
Members
248,016
Latest member
Advally Service

Trending content

Back
Top