So, now an "Assault" weapon is any gun holding more than 10 bullets...we told you...

[progressive hunter]

The Police neither have a duty to protect you, nor are they physically able to protect you. They CAN NOT ANTICIPATE CRIME. So, you are on your own for your own defense, and safety. Home invasions by multiple attackers happen all the time. Why would anyone want to VOLUNTARILY limit their ability to defend themselves from that threat.

Wait, let me call my insurance agent. I'm going to reduce my Homeowner's Insurance to only cover SMALL FIRES. If a large one happens, oh well.

thats all true,,,

its just that self defense nor hunting is the intent of the 2nd amendment

 

[2aguy]

what if there are 11 bad guys???

This is NOT a war. You are NOT a cop. 11 bad guys?
2AGuy likes to say that just showing the bad guys that you have a gun is enough to stop many many many crimes. So no, you don't need 30 bullets or whatever the hell you're talking about. Just show 'em the gun and they'll be gone, 2AGuy promises.

No, I don't promise they will be gone, that is just how many of the criminals behave...since they don't want to die. You don't get to tell people how many bullets they get to save their own lives or the lives of their families considering they have committed no crime, and they are not criminals.....

Yes, the laws most certainly CAN tell them how many bullets can be in their gun at one time. If it slows down a mass shooting, that's a good thing.

It doesn't slow down a mass shooting...as actual research shows. Magazine capacity has no bearing on the deaths in a mass shooting......however, armed citizens have a 94% success rate in stopping mass shooters and/or limiting the injuries and deaths.......

If it doesn't slow anything down, what is everyone bitching about?

Mass shooters are different from law abiding citizens. A mass shooter is shooting unarmed, helpless people.....they can take their time, they are relaxed, as witnesses testify to.....and they don't have anyone shooting back at them in most cases since they pick gun free zones.

A law abiding citizen will be alone, under attack, with adrenaline flooding their system making small motor movements like changing a magazine much harder...not to forget the "under attack" part of the equation which makes changing a magazine much harder ......

And on top of that... the only reason the anti gunners want to ban magazines over 10 bullets is because it makes guns that take 11 or more illegal...it is a back door gun ban.

 

[OldLady]

If you can't hit a bad guy with 10 bullets, you shouldn't have a gun.

OK, what are you going to do when ten rounds hit him and the baddie doesn’t stop?

Why one cop carries 145 rounds of ammo on the job

The problem is that nothing is 100% guaranteed in real life. My own preferred weapon is the .357 Magnum. When fired, the round has nearly double the kinetic energy of the .45 used by the police officer who fired just about every single round he had on him at the baddie. He reloaded his pistol twice during the shootout. Now, the cop was using a round he believed to be superior, and extremely effective, but the baddie despite having multiple hits to “vital organs” which were “kill shots” stayed on his feet, and continued attacking.

There is no such thing as one size fits all. You make your choice, weapon, capacity, and caliber. You roll the dice that your choice was correct in that horrific moment that pits your life against the life of an attacker.

This is one of the ways in which we differ. I believe you should be free to make whatever choice you feel proper for your personal safety, and protect. I don’t encourage you to follow my reasoning. I will give you mine if you like, but in the end, it’s your life, and your choice.

As I said my Magnum is roughly twice as powerful, using the Kinetic Energy calculations, as the 9MM. It is far more powerful than the .45 used by the cop, but has similar “one shot stop” statistics from real world shootings.



Notice if you bother to watch the video, there is no weapon, none, that has a 100% one shot stop result from real world shootings. None have even as 90% one shot stop result. The best you can say is that it is a coin toss. Heads, you’ll stop the baddie, tails, you won’t. In some cases, nothing you can shoot him with will stop him. The cop from above, shot the man in the head, and he still lived at the scene.

Now, imagine you are fighting for the lives of your loved ones. You fire your ten rounds, and then what? Perhaps you stopped one baddie, but what if there were just one more baddie? They tend to travel in packs you know. We call these others accomplices.

Even if you are fortunate, and you like the cop fire your ten rounds of .45 ACP, and the baddie doesn’t stop, do you have time to reload? Or do you just toss the gun over your shoulder and accept your death?

I want you to have every tool available for your safety, I do not feel so arrogant that I believe I know what is best for you. I would never foist my choices or beliefs upon you.

If you believe ten rounds is enough, then make your play, but don’t push your belief on anyone else. Your rights end, where mine begin. That has long been the truth of equality under the law.

Sorry, but gun owners' rights END where innocent civilian lives are being taken, on a daily basis. You people need to wake up.
You don't need to worry about it anyway--you've got a Magnum.

My rights end when someone else abuses theirs? How totalitarian of you.

You aren't losing your rights by being restricted to ten bullets at a time.

Yes....you are. D.C. v Heller specifically protects these items...

And an S.C. decision can be overturned, as many are hoping Roe will be. Heller has not stopped gun restrictions around this country. Ask 2AGuy how many exist.

 

[progressive hunter]

what if there are 11 bad guys???

This is NOT a war. You are NOT a cop. 11 bad guys?
2AGuy likes to say that just showing the bad guys that you have a gun is enough to stop many many many crimes. So no, you don't need 30 bullets or whatever the hell you're talking about. Just show 'em the gun and they'll be gone, 2AGuy promises.

No, I don't promise they will be gone, that is just how many of the criminals behave...since they don't want to die. You don't get to tell people how many bullets they get to save their own lives or the lives of their families considering they have committed no crime, and they are not criminals.....

Yes, the laws most certainly CAN tell them how many bullets can be in their gun at one time. If it slows down a mass shooting, that's a good thing.

It doesn't slow down a mass shooting...as actual research shows. Magazine capacity has no bearing on the deaths in a mass shooting......however, armed citizens have a 94% success rate in stopping mass shooters and/or limiting the injuries and deaths.......

If it doesn't slow anything down, what is everyone bitching about?

your nthe one bitching,,,we just want left alone

 

[OldLady]

This is NOT a war. You are NOT a cop. 11 bad guys?
2AGuy likes to say that just showing the bad guys that you have a gun is enough to stop many many many crimes. So no, you don't need 30 bullets or whatever the hell you're talking about. Just show 'em the gun and they'll be gone, 2AGuy promises.

No, I don't promise they will be gone, that is just how many of the criminals behave...since they don't want to die. You don't get to tell people how many bullets they get to save their own lives or the lives of their families considering they have committed no crime, and they are not criminals.....

Yes, the laws most certainly CAN tell them how many bullets can be in their gun at one time. If it slows down a mass shooting, that's a good thing.

It doesn't slow down a mass shooting...as actual research shows. Magazine capacity has no bearing on the deaths in a mass shooting......however, armed citizens have a 94% success rate in stopping mass shooters and/or limiting the injuries and deaths.......

If it doesn't slow anything down, what is everyone bitching about?

Mass shooters are different from law abiding citizens. A mass shooter is shooting unarmed, helpless people.....they can take their time, they are relaxed, as witnesses testify to.....and they don't have anyone shooting back at them in most cases since they pick gun free zones.

A law abiding citizen will be alone, under attack, with adrenaline flooding their system making small motor movements like changing a magazine much harder...not to forget the "under attack" part of the equation which makes changing a magazine much harder ......

What a load of malarkey.
Yet another GIJoe fantasy from you.

 

[2aguy]

OK, what are you going to do when ten rounds hit him and the baddie doesn’t stop?

Why one cop carries 145 rounds of ammo on the job

The problem is that nothing is 100% guaranteed in real life. My own preferred weapon is the .357 Magnum. When fired, the round has nearly double the kinetic energy of the .45 used by the police officer who fired just about every single round he had on him at the baddie. He reloaded his pistol twice during the shootout. Now, the cop was using a round he believed to be superior, and extremely effective, but the baddie despite having multiple hits to “vital organs” which were “kill shots” stayed on his feet, and continued attacking.

There is no such thing as one size fits all. You make your choice, weapon, capacity, and caliber. You roll the dice that your choice was correct in that horrific moment that pits your life against the life of an attacker.

This is one of the ways in which we differ. I believe you should be free to make whatever choice you feel proper for your personal safety, and protect. I don’t encourage you to follow my reasoning. I will give you mine if you like, but in the end, it’s your life, and your choice.

As I said my Magnum is roughly twice as powerful, using the Kinetic Energy calculations, as the 9MM. It is far more powerful than the .45 used by the cop, but has similar “one shot stop” statistics from real world shootings.



Notice if you bother to watch the video, there is no weapon, none, that has a 100% one shot stop result from real world shootings. None have even as 90% one shot stop result. The best you can say is that it is a coin toss. Heads, you’ll stop the baddie, tails, you won’t. In some cases, nothing you can shoot him with will stop him. The cop from above, shot the man in the head, and he still lived at the scene.

Now, imagine you are fighting for the lives of your loved ones. You fire your ten rounds, and then what? Perhaps you stopped one baddie, but what if there were just one more baddie? They tend to travel in packs you know. We call these others accomplices.

Even if you are fortunate, and you like the cop fire your ten rounds of .45 ACP, and the baddie doesn’t stop, do you have time to reload? Or do you just toss the gun over your shoulder and accept your death?

I want you to have every tool available for your safety, I do not feel so arrogant that I believe I know what is best for you. I would never foist my choices or beliefs upon you.

If you believe ten rounds is enough, then make your play, but don’t push your belief on anyone else. Your rights end, where mine begin. That has long been the truth of equality under the law.

Sorry, but gun owners' rights END where innocent civilian lives are being taken, on a daily basis. You people need to wake up.
You don't need to worry about it anyway--you've got a Magnum.

My rights end when someone else abuses theirs? How totalitarian of you.

You aren't losing your rights by being restricted to ten bullets at a time.

Yes....you are. D.C. v Heller specifically protects these items...

And an S.C. decision can be overturned, as many are hoping Roe will be. Heller has not stopped gun restrictions around this country. Ask 2AGuy how many exist.

Yes....it hasn't stopped gun restrictions because the lower courts are simply ignoring it. They are breaking the law with their decisions.

 

[OldLady]

This is NOT a war. You are NOT a cop. 11 bad guys?
2AGuy likes to say that just showing the bad guys that you have a gun is enough to stop many many many crimes. So no, you don't need 30 bullets or whatever the hell you're talking about. Just show 'em the gun and they'll be gone, 2AGuy promises.

No, I don't promise they will be gone, that is just how many of the criminals behave...since they don't want to die. You don't get to tell people how many bullets they get to save their own lives or the lives of their families considering they have committed no crime, and they are not criminals.....

Yes, the laws most certainly CAN tell them how many bullets can be in their gun at one time. If it slows down a mass shooting, that's a good thing.

It doesn't slow down a mass shooting...as actual research shows. Magazine capacity has no bearing on the deaths in a mass shooting......however, armed citizens have a 94% success rate in stopping mass shooters and/or limiting the injuries and deaths.......

If it doesn't slow anything down, what is everyone bitching about?

your nthe one bitching,,,we just want left alone

Who started this thread?

 

[Anathema]

Sorry, but gun owners' rights END where innocent civilian lives are being taken, on a daily basis.

There are no innocent over age 3 in this world, just as there are no legitimate limits on my God-given Rights to Self-Defense and tgeciwbership of weapons for that end.

If I’m going into an urban area I carry no less than 31 rounds of ammunition and no less than three other (non-firearm) weapons on my person.

 

[2aguy]

No, I don't promise they will be gone, that is just how many of the criminals behave...since they don't want to die. You don't get to tell people how many bullets they get to save their own lives or the lives of their families considering they have committed no crime, and they are not criminals.....

Yes, the laws most certainly CAN tell them how many bullets can be in their gun at one time. If it slows down a mass shooting, that's a good thing.

It doesn't slow down a mass shooting...as actual research shows. Magazine capacity has no bearing on the deaths in a mass shooting......however, armed citizens have a 94% success rate in stopping mass shooters and/or limiting the injuries and deaths.......

If it doesn't slow anything down, what is everyone bitching about?

Mass shooters are different from law abiding citizens. A mass shooter is shooting unarmed, helpless people.....they can take their time, they are relaxed, as witnesses testify to.....and they don't have anyone shooting back at them in most cases since they pick gun free zones.

A law abiding citizen will be alone, under attack, with adrenaline flooding their system making small motor movements like changing a magazine much harder...not to forget the "under attack" part of the equation which makes changing a magazine much harder ......

What a load of malarkey.
Yet another GIJoe fantasy from you.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[progressive hunter]

No, I don't promise they will be gone, that is just how many of the criminals behave...since they don't want to die. You don't get to tell people how many bullets they get to save their own lives or the lives of their families considering they have committed no crime, and they are not criminals.....

Yes, the laws most certainly CAN tell them how many bullets can be in their gun at one time. If it slows down a mass shooting, that's a good thing.

It doesn't slow down a mass shooting...as actual research shows. Magazine capacity has no bearing on the deaths in a mass shooting......however, armed citizens have a 94% success rate in stopping mass shooters and/or limiting the injuries and deaths.......

If it doesn't slow anything down, what is everyone bitching about?

your nthe one bitching,,,we just want left alone

Who started this thread?

but who keeps telling us what we can or cant have

 

[OldLady]

Sorry, but gun owners' rights END where innocent civilian lives are being taken, on a daily basis. You people need to wake up.
You don't need to worry about it anyway--you've got a Magnum.

My rights end when someone else abuses theirs? How totalitarian of you.

You aren't losing your rights by being restricted to ten bullets at a time.

Yes....you are. D.C. v Heller specifically protects these items...

And an S.C. decision can be overturned, as many are hoping Roe will be. Heller has not stopped gun restrictions around this country. Ask 2AGuy how many exist.

Yes....it hasn't stopped gun restrictions because the lower courts are simply ignoring it. They are breaking the law with their decisions.

Maybe we should put all those judges in prison, ey?

 

[Pilot1]

its just that self defense nor hunting is the intent of the 2nd amendment

Yes, but it is a BY PRODUCT of our Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

 

[2aguy]

My rights end when someone else abuses theirs? How totalitarian of you.

You aren't losing your rights by being restricted to ten bullets at a time.

Yes....you are. D.C. v Heller specifically protects these items...

And an S.C. decision can be overturned, as many are hoping Roe will be. Heller has not stopped gun restrictions around this country. Ask 2AGuy how many exist.

Yes....it hasn't stopped gun restrictions because the lower courts are simply ignoring it. They are breaking the law with their decisions.

Maybe we should put all those judges in prison, ey?

They should be removed from the bench.

 

[OldLady]

Yes, the laws most certainly CAN tell them how many bullets can be in their gun at one time. If it slows down a mass shooting, that's a good thing.

It doesn't slow down a mass shooting...as actual research shows. Magazine capacity has no bearing on the deaths in a mass shooting......however, armed citizens have a 94% success rate in stopping mass shooters and/or limiting the injuries and deaths.......

If it doesn't slow anything down, what is everyone bitching about?

Mass shooters are different from law abiding citizens. A mass shooter is shooting unarmed, helpless people.....they can take their time, they are relaxed, as witnesses testify to.....and they don't have anyone shooting back at them in most cases since they pick gun free zones.

A law abiding citizen will be alone, under attack, with adrenaline flooding their system making small motor movements like changing a magazine much harder...not to forget the "under attack" part of the equation which makes changing a magazine much harder ......

What a load of malarkey.
Yet another GIJoe fantasy from you.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Neither do you.

 

[2aguy]

It doesn't slow down a mass shooting...as actual research shows. Magazine capacity has no bearing on the deaths in a mass shooting......however, armed citizens have a 94% success rate in stopping mass shooters and/or limiting the injuries and deaths.......

If it doesn't slow anything down, what is everyone bitching about?

Mass shooters are different from law abiding citizens. A mass shooter is shooting unarmed, helpless people.....they can take their time, they are relaxed, as witnesses testify to.....and they don't have anyone shooting back at them in most cases since they pick gun free zones.

A law abiding citizen will be alone, under attack, with adrenaline flooding their system making small motor movements like changing a magazine much harder...not to forget the "under attack" part of the equation which makes changing a magazine much harder ......

What a load of malarkey.
Yet another GIJoe fantasy from you.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Neither do you.

I understand the two dymanics far better than you do....

 

[Pilot1]

When people deal in pure emotional responses, like Liberal/Progressive anti gun nuts here, then expect to deal with lies, and misinformation.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Yep.....democrats are gun grabbers to their core. They will take guns one gun, bullet and piece of equipment at a time...and as they do this the definition of each item will change to make the next grab easier.....as we now see in Virginia....it used to be the mythical "assualt" weapon was a scary looking military gun....now, it is any gun with a magazine that holds more than 10 bullets....

So...good buy to your semi automatic pistols....they are now "assault weapons."

This is the back door gun ban they dream of....one step in many to take our guns...

Smelling Blood: Virginia Democratic Governor Readies New Anti-Gun Package

Del. Kathy Tran (D-Fairfax) and Sen. Adam P. Ebbin (D-Alexandria) are also sponsoring a ban on assault weapons, defining them as any firearm with a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

That these laws are unConstitutional is without question....as stated in the 2nd Amendment, as ruled on in D.C. v Heller, McDonald v City of Chicago, Caetano v Massachusetts and Scalia specifically stating that the AR-15 civilian rifle is protected by the 2nd Amendment in his opinion in Friedman v Highland Park....

What does anyone want more than 10 bullets for, unless it's for an assault?
And don't say duck hunting. That's another kind of bullet.

Shall not Infringe its as simple as that.

 

[progressive hunter]

 

[hadit]

What does anyone want more than 10 gallons of water during a house fire, unless they are just there to play with it?

Self defense is not where you question how many bullets you may need to save your family..... law abiding people don't use their guns for crime, they do not increase the gun crime rate.....criminals can already be arrested if they use guns to commit rape, robbery and murder. Those laws are all we need to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, the problem comes when the same people who want to ban guns, keep letting violent, repeat gun offenders our of jail, and out on the streets on bail, right after they are arrested....stop that, and you don't have to worry about gun crime.

If you can't hit a bad guy with 10 bullets, you shouldn't have a gun.

OK, what are you going to do when ten rounds hit him and the baddie doesn’t stop?

Why one cop carries 145 rounds of ammo on the job

The problem is that nothing is 100% guaranteed in real life. My own preferred weapon is the .357 Magnum. When fired, the round has nearly double the kinetic energy of the .45 used by the police officer who fired just about every single round he had on him at the baddie. He reloaded his pistol twice during the shootout. Now, the cop was using a round he believed to be superior, and extremely effective, but the baddie despite having multiple hits to “vital organs” which were “kill shots” stayed on his feet, and continued attacking.

There is no such thing as one size fits all. You make your choice, weapon, capacity, and caliber. You roll the dice that your choice was correct in that horrific moment that pits your life against the life of an attacker.

This is one of the ways in which we differ. I believe you should be free to make whatever choice you feel proper for your personal safety, and protect. I don’t encourage you to follow my reasoning. I will give you mine if you like, but in the end, it’s your life, and your choice.

As I said my Magnum is roughly twice as powerful, using the Kinetic Energy calculations, as the 9MM. It is far more powerful than the .45 used by the cop, but has similar “one shot stop” statistics from real world shootings.



Notice if you bother to watch the video, there is no weapon, none, that has a 100% one shot stop result from real world shootings. None have even as 90% one shot stop result. The best you can say is that it is a coin toss. Heads, you’ll stop the baddie, tails, you won’t. In some cases, nothing you can shoot him with will stop him. The cop from above, shot the man in the head, and he still lived at the scene.

Now, imagine you are fighting for the lives of your loved ones. You fire your ten rounds, and then what? Perhaps you stopped one baddie, but what if there were just one more baddie? They tend to travel in packs you know. We call these others accomplices.

Even if you are fortunate, and you like the cop fire your ten rounds of .45 ACP, and the baddie doesn’t stop, do you have time to reload? Or do you just toss the gun over your shoulder and accept your death?

I want you to have every tool available for your safety, I do not feel so arrogant that I believe I know what is best for you. I would never foist my choices or beliefs upon you.

If you believe ten rounds is enough, then make your play, but don’t push your belief on anyone else. Your rights end, where mine begin. That has long been the truth of equality under the law.

Sorry, but gun owners' rights END where innocent civilian lives are being taken, on a daily basis. You people need to wake up.
You don't need to worry about it anyway--you've got a Magnum.

My rights end when someone else abuses theirs? How totalitarian of you.

You aren't losing your rights by being restricted to ten bullets at a time.

Do you lose your first amendment rights if you're restricted to publishing 100 words or less at any one time? If you're restricted to only using dialup speeds to write on a debate board? Words are deadly too. Should we only allow licensed writers to write opinions?

To you, no one is being harmed by restrictions, but that's not your call.

 

[Yarddog]

Yep.....democrats are gun grabbers to their core. They will take guns one gun, bullet and piece of equipment at a time...and as they do this the definition of each item will change to make the next grab easier.....as we now see in Virginia....it used to be the mythical "assualt" weapon was a scary looking military gun....now, it is any gun with a magazine that holds more than 10 bullets....

So...good buy to your semi automatic pistols....they are now "assault weapons."

This is the back door gun ban they dream of....one step in many to take our guns...

Smelling Blood: Virginia Democratic Governor Readies New Anti-Gun Package

Del. Kathy Tran (D-Fairfax) and Sen. Adam P. Ebbin (D-Alexandria) are also sponsoring a ban on assault weapons, defining them as any firearm with a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

That these laws are unConstitutional is without question....as stated in the 2nd Amendment, as ruled on in D.C. v Heller, McDonald v City of Chicago, Caetano v Massachusetts and Scalia specifically stating that the AR-15 civilian rifle is protected by the 2nd Amendment in his opinion in Friedman v Highland Park....

What does anyone want more than 10 bullets for, unless it's for an assault?
And don't say duck hunting. That's another kind of bullet.

What does anyone want more than 10 gallons of water during a house fire, unless they are just there to play with it?

Self defense is not where you question how many bullets you may need to save your family..... law abiding people don't use their guns for crime, they do not increase the gun crime rate.....criminals can already be arrested if they use guns to commit rape, robbery and murder. Those laws are all we need to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, the problem comes when the same people who want to ban guns, keep letting violent, repeat gun offenders our of jail, and out on the streets on bail, right after they are arrested....stop that, and you don't have to worry about gun crime.

If you can't hit a bad guy with 10 bullets, you shouldn't have a gun.

You can shoot a big guy three times unless your using a 45 maybe..and he can keep coming at you. Especially because in those situations people are running on pure adrenaline. Three guys break into your house or business? well, you know.. its safer just to give up every time right? just hope they don't hurt you.