New NY gun law

[Okki]

And as far as the second amendment goes, it was written in a time where they were firing muskets.. Like pour powder down, place ball, pack powder, put firing cap on, then shoot from close distance..

Sounds like an "military assault weapon" of the 1600~1700's to me... soooo that means your previous statement means... nothing much.

I'm fine with the background check; already happens when I pick up a gun from my dealer who performs the FFL transfer. So lets talk about the magazine/weapon type. I'm a lawful owner; Why am I being restricted when the person who commits the crime is A) violating the law by committing the crime and B) has usually obtained the weapon in an illegal fashion anyway.

If you don't have a recorded medical history you could still obtain a gun in a "legal' fashion and use it criminally. Or if you lie on the transfer form (ATF F 4473), you're breaking an already existing law.

In either case, more laws would not fix the "mass shooting" issue.

and on that note, some other incorrect items from the popular media:
"Clip" is not a Magazine.
AR-15 is NOT and assault rifle (plenty of accurate descriptions available on gun resource sites). The principal difference is the ability for an assault rifle to fire multiple rounds with a single trigger pull, which an AR-15 pattern rifle does not do.

High capacity magazines: for an average user, performing a magazine change does not take a whole lot longer than to re-sight on a target different from the previous target. i.e. a smaller magazine is not likely to have a statistically significant impact on the number of targets engaged. If you want to have some real fun, look at some video of performance shooters who will shoot (and reload) faster than a lot of full-auto rifles using a shotgun or semi-auto rifle.

Okki

 

[TOY2G]

Prohibited person? I doubt the kind of people that do what I was just talking about care if its a "prohibited person". But if ur cool with people buyin arsenals of weapons to sell on the streets that's cool with me, just hope it stays in your hometown haha. Think I've said all I want tho. Stay safe!

Right... so there are already laws that prohibit it... and you think more laws will stop it? :crazy:

What if they made a law that made it illegal to steel guns, or one that made it illegal to kill people. That would fix it. Because if you are a murder, psycho, raging husband and you don't have a gun...problem solved..

its not like you can buy cannon fuse, pipe, pipe caps, and smokeless black powder and make a pipe bomb to kill dozens of people. and its not like you can just go get a sharp object like a knife and stab your cheating spouse. or run them down with the car.

People want to feel safe, and uneducated or ignorant people want to feel safe no matter the cost. So they will gladly had over rights if they think it can help. Don't listen to humans push human agenda, read for your self, learn some facts, make an informed decision.

IMO if you think people should or should not have an arsenal of weapons is of zero importance. If you think bad people will stop being bad due to legislation, count yourself among the crazies. If you are willing to give up and force other people to give up guns to make you think you are more safe, you will continue to give up your rights and other until you have none, as long as you are safe. Lastly, for over 60 years number of guns owned by private users have increased nearly every single year, and in the last 5 years gun related crimes are down every single year.

That said, I do think screening could be a little better on gun sales, however little it may do. Turning millions of tax paying american citizens into criminals in the wake of taking away their property and rights is beyond belief. There is more to this than gun control, this is an offensive tactic IMO.

 

[Upchk]

Hey guys... I'm new, just joined yesterday and I'm from Alabama.... Wanted to chime in and let you know that these bans will only apply to law abiding citizens... The criminals that commit these gun crimes still get to keep there guns and break whatever other laws they feel like as well...

 

[Okki]

Hey guys... I'm new, just joined yesterday and I'm from Alabama.... Wanted to chime in and let you know that these bans will only apply to law abiding citizens... The criminals that commit these gun crimes still get to keep there guns and break whatever other laws they feel like as well...

Welcome to the forum.. and believe it or not.. we DO talk about 4Runners here a lot too! :lmao:

Okki

 

[TOY2G]

VERY IMPORTANT SIDE NOTE:

The communist Governor Andrew Cuomo has footing as a presidential candidate. This backstabber could be our next commander and chief. I have a sneaking suspension he may get stabbed...(kidding)

 

[Thai]

Welcome to the forum.. and believe it or not.. we DO talk about 4Runners here a lot too! :lmao:

Okki

Hmm, then he shouldn't be reading my threads!

 

[bofa]

What's the point in replying if you don't read? It's LEGAL to buy Twenty semi auto rifles with 30 round mags for "personal use".. That is what I was saying shouldn't be legal. But your right, later.

Yes, it is legal for a citizen that is not a current or former criminal to buy multiple weapons. The good news is I can only pull one trigger at a time, okay maybe two.

And how many of these travesties were the result of a lawful individual buying 20 guns at a time?

On a side note, I actually feel bad for the liberal side of the argument that has you representing them in this discussion.

 

[NJshadow93]

What I think is absurd is that gun laws are in the hands of the state. I think gun laws should be federal. Some states gun laws are too strict, while others are too lenient. NJ, for example is way too strict. The fact that you're not allowed to conceal carry is insane. Only 1500 people in the state are permitted to conceal carry. I was at a restaurant the other night and thought, if some psycho walked in with a gun and started firing off, nobody would be able to get their gun out and shoot him down. The same goes for schools and gun-free malls, etc.

 

[Logan714]

What I think is absurd is that gun laws are in the hands of the state. I think gun laws should be federal. Some states gun laws are too strict, while others are too lenient. NJ, for example is way too strict. The fact that you're not allowed to conceal carry is insane. Only 1500 people in the state are permitted to conceal carry. I was at a restaurant the other night and thought, if some psycho walked in with a gun and started firing off, nobody would be able to get their gun out and shoot him down. The same goes for schools and gun-free malls, etc.

Who is forcing you to live in New Jersey? Exactly. You're free to move to a state with better gun laws. The federal government should have a minimal impact on what the individual states do especially concerning gun rights and laws. Obviously they are trying to disarm you so why would you want to support them in doing that?

 

[bofa]

Guns and their ownership are regulated at the federal and state levels. As with many laws, in general, the state cannot be more lenient than the Fed, but can be more strict. What will be interesting is when states refuse to abide by or enforce federal law (back to the MJ discussion all over again).

 

[Reino]

I'm in favor of tougher gun laws in the 'blue states'. This will cause every gun-owning Patriot to move the hell out of New York, etc. and into 'red states', which will eventually lead to less electoral college votes in the 'blue states' and more in the 'red states'. Keep it up...

 

[theizzardking]

I'm in favor of tougher gun laws in the 'blue states'. This will cause every gun-owning Patriot to move the hell out of New York, etc. and into 'red states', which will eventually lead to less electoral college votes in the 'blue states' and more in the 'red states'. Keep it up...

or a pretty one sided civil war.....ainkiller:

 

[jam46283]

Hahaha good luck shooting that F-117 or Abrams with your AR. And thats assuming you dont get hit by a laser guided missile prior haha. And I don't know what any law abiding citizen needs a 35 round mag for.. I've never seen 30 hogs or deer in one field, but I have seen 30 kids in one classroom. And if it was a 15 round mag maybe someone would have been able to tackle the assailant while he reloaded. Don't know why this convo went personal, just a debate.

 

[Logan714]

Hahaha good luck shooting that F-117 or Abrams with your AR. And thats assuming you dont get hit by a laser guided missile prior haha. And I don't know what any law abiding citizen needs a 35 round mag for.. I've never seen 30 hogs or deer in one field, but I have seen 30 kids in one classroom. And if it was a 15 round mag maybe someone would have been able to tackle the assailant while he reloaded. Don't know why this convo went personal, just a debate.

You think there would be actual tank battles? No. It would be the exact same thing that we experienced in Iraq. And good luck fielding a military that largely shares a similar view point about gun ownership or finding a soldier that would actually march or take up arms against an american citizen. Doubtless there would be some but not nearly enough to actually enforce or sustain.

History has shown that despite technology a highly motivated lower technology force can defeat the technologically superior. Ask the Russians how that turned out. Turn on the news and see how Afghanistan radio shack is being used to build home made bombs.

 

[beerstash]

@ jam46283- you couldn't be further from the truth and the the most inept gunowner of all time. It is illegal in ALL states to do what you are saying. An individual has to have a Federal Firearms License to buy and sell guns like that. The 2nd amendment states to have the same weapons as the government has to be able to overthrow them in the event that the citizens need new representation. Read the 2nd amendment in its entirety- its NOT for hunting or sports.

 

[TOY2G]

Hahaha good luck shooting that F-117 or Abrams with your AR. And thats assuming you dont get hit by a laser guided missile prior haha. And I don't know what any law abiding citizen needs a 35 round mag for.. I've never seen 30 hogs or deer in one field, but I have seen 30 kids in one classroom. And if it was a 15 round mag maybe someone would have been able to tackle the assailant while he reloaded. Don't know why this convo went personal, just a debate.

oops your azz is showing. its 30rnd mags btw and 40 and so on..not 35 (i digress). my ammo is not for hunting alone so I don't need to shoot 30 hogs, my guns are to defend my family and my countrymen against foreign and domestic threats. So in short, when my people need a militia to protect them, my guns and my 40 and 30 rounds mags will be called into action.

Guns are not for hunting alone, or fighting, or self defense.

BTW, for the most part Military (soldiers) are republican. The people apposed to guns are the ones that would never have the guts to pick one up to protect this country. Somehow people have decided the world would be safer with less guns and bullets. So drunk driving deaths: by the same standard should dictate that vehicles are too large a threat and must be removed and limited in ability.

 

[wanta4runner]

Hahaha good luck shooting that F-117 or Abrams with your AR. And thats assuming you dont get hit by a laser guided missile prior haha. And I don't know what any law abiding citizen needs a 35 round mag for.. I've never seen 30 hogs or deer in one field, but I have seen 30 kids in one classroom. And if it was a 15 round mag maybe someone would have been able to tackle the assailant while he reloaded. Don't know why this convo went personal, just a debate.

if you were a civilian in a bank robbery would you trust your life thinking he had only shot 15 rounds and had to reload. Maybe the situation got to you and you thought he shot 15 but only shot 10. Would you really tackle him thinking he has to reload oh but wait he has 5 more shots. That is a moot point in my opinion. Any normal civilian(one with no law enforcment or military training) is more than likely not to endanger themselves in a situation like this. And yes i am a civilian with no military or law enforcement training. My ccw is for my personal defense in a situation that only would endanger me. if I were in a public space and a gunman opened fire and I was carrying I'm not sure if I could trust myself to keep my nerves to fire a shot to take down an armed assalant with out harming an innocent bystander.

 

[TOY2G]

Republican:A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

Demobrat: :A well regulated Militia, is so scary for the security of a brain washed state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, should not be infringed, but it is okay if you wanna

IT DOES NOT MATTER IF YOU AGREE OR NOT...it says SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED... there is no question here NO means NO

 

[theizzardking]

There is more to this than gun control, this is an offensive tactic IMO.

give this a read
EDITORIAL: The U.N. is coming for your guns - Washington Times

actual bill
http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/22C35.txt

sandyhook is just going to be the catalyst that kicks all of this off as they have just been waiting for years to kill the 2nd amendment and disarm America, as mentioned in this thread having an armed populace is more than just about hunting, the Constitution was written not with muskets in mind but with having the potential to remove a tyrannical government by the people if needed....that is the intention, what wasn't in the intention was hunting, as relative to the day,that was the same as getting food from the grocery , do you really think they would bother mentioning grocery shopping in the constitution? you know what, right after the freedom of speech we should add the ability to get food followed by the the government not being able to commandeer your home without consent.....i mean really have you even read the GD constitution?

are you people so stupid that you do not see that? where the heck were you in history class? remember the first Americans where actually British for the most part and had lots of friends and family that supported the British, you forget the war for Independence was also a civil war in a sense....make no mistake it was a messy war with neighbor vs neighbor in some cases, the founding father were all to aware of what was needed to keep tyranny at bay and the people free, they knew government would become corrupt as it always has, and as people have always been corrupt to begin with, god dam human nature, why do you think government doesn't reflect us and human nature, why would government be so altruistic when people in of themselves are not? would you strip the only defense the people have against tyranny? tell you what, get some term limits passed,get rid of lobbyist and make our government honest again and we'll talk about gun control after that, until then you morons can all get bent as most of my family and friends are ready to be called criminals by the state if it is needed to defend our constitutional rights and second amendment, like has been said before "an unconstitutional law isn't a law"....

 

[02SE]

I read most of it and it doesn't really seem 'absurd' to me.. Don't know why a normal person, even one that likes to hunt or shoot needs guns with drums or belts or huge clips..

And as far as the second amendment goes, it was written in a time where they were firing muskets.. Like pour powder down, place ball, pack powder, put firing cap on, then shoot from close distance.. I don't think they intended every citizen (including the mentally handicapped and insane) to be able to wield assault rifles with 40 round mags.. I'm all for the right to bear arms but their needs to be stricter legislation on the sale of guns.. As of now you can walk into a gun shop/show, buy 30 guns "for your personal use" then decide you don't want them and sell them out of your trunk to anyone.. That shouldn't be legal.. Just my $.02

By your 'logic', we should eliminate the First Amendment right to Freedom of Speech on the Internet, Telephone, Television, and Radio, since those communication mediums didn't exist at the time of the framing of our Bill Of Rights.


By the way, Citizens can't own "assault rifles" that weren't registered by May 19, 1986.