Senator's proposals would ban high-vo...

Senator's proposals would ban high-volume bullet magazines

There are 722 comments on the Capital News 9 story from Mar 2, 2011, titled Senator's proposals would ban high-volume bullet magazines. In it, Capital News 9 reports that:

A downstate senator is hoping to ban the sale of powerful bullet magazines in New York.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Capital News 9.

First Prev
of 37
Next Last

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#1 Mar 3, 2011
Article wrote:
But some gun advocates say we don't need gun control, we need crime control.
Nope. We need govt control, and an armed society (not a regulated society).

We have too many gun control laws AND too many useless crime control laws. Both do not achieve their intended objectives.

NewYork Senator Eric Adams does not have the solution, but he is part of the problem. We need an armed society to make us safer. Gun control laws don't reduce crime or make us more safe, they increase crime and make us less safe.

Eric Adams is increasing the potential for crime performed with a high capacity magazine.
zeldo

Middleburgh, NY

#2 Mar 3, 2011
give us a break.

Since: Jul 08

Greenville, SC

#3 Mar 3, 2011
Tory better yet a Armed society is a Free Society.
Tory II Eric Holder says drawing attention to what the black panthers did demeans his people. wonder who his people is cause it should be the American People. Why do liberals put their race/gender/creed before America. By the way have you read about the un small arms treaty and how hillary was pushing it

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#4 Mar 3, 2011
I'm a NRA, ISRA, and GOA longtime member, so I know about all gun control efforts.

Two minute video:

How to Create A Gun Free Zone:

Jagermann

Wenatchee, WA

#5 Mar 3, 2011
They've already banned 11 round magazines or more in New York. They are going to ban them again? Maybe if they ban them enough times over and over nobody will have them and New York will become a gun free utopia with pink fairies everywhere.
Bruce V

Birmingham, AL

#6 Mar 3, 2011
From the article "A downstate senator is hoping to ban the sale of powerful bullet magazines in New York"

POWERFUL BULLET MAGAZINES? Just goes to show how dumb the author, Erin Connolly, is. I wonder if she would be OK with citizens using "less powerful" magazine?
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#7 Mar 3, 2011
I wonder if New York State Senator Eric Adams realizes that the majority of gun control laws were passed after the Civil War to keep the freed black man from owning and carrying guns...?
Bruce V

Birmingham, AL

#9 Mar 3, 2011
Marauder wrote:
I wonder if New York State Senator Eric Adams realizes that the majority of gun control laws were passed after the Civil War to keep the freed black man from owning and carrying guns...?
I find it unbelievable so many Black "leaders" are in favor of gun control laws. Either they don't know their history or they are "sitting on the porch" of their master - Big Government. They don't seem to remember (or realize) no mater how hard they "shuffle and dance" the master is only going to let a few inside so to speak. Hopefully the people who elect them will realize that FREE MEN have unlimited access to arms, slaves don't.
FOOL

Rochester, NY

#10 Mar 3, 2011
It has been proven time and time again, gun control laws rarely keep the guns out of criminal hands, they just keep the honest people from obtaining them.
Mike D

Clifton Park, NY

#11 Mar 3, 2011
Gun nuts and criminals are the only ones who care about owning high-cap mags.

These are the same nuts who think that gun-ownership is going to save them from some future-oppression by the Chinese.
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#12 Mar 3, 2011
Mike D wrote:
Gun nuts and criminals are the only ones who care about owning high-cap mags.
These are the same nuts who think that gun-ownership is going to save them from some future-oppression by the Chinese.
Another "non-arguement" from an under educated, "frustrated control freak".
FOOL

Rochester, NY

#14 Mar 3, 2011
Mike D wrote:
Gun nuts and criminals are the only ones who care about owning high-cap mags.
These are the same nuts who think that gun-ownership is going to save them from some future-oppression by the Chinese.
Wow you ignorance to the issue almost deserves no comment, ah but I will anyways. When you say gun freak, do you mean anyone owning a gun?
The criminals couldn't care less about if they can purchase a high-cap mag legally. They are breaking the laws all the time, why would this law stop them? It wouldn't. Got another dumb point to make?
Mike D

Clifton Park, NY

#15 Mar 3, 2011
Marauder wrote:
<quoted text>
Another "non-arguement" from an under educated, "frustrated control freak".
Just because you don't understand my argument, doesn't mean that it's not valid.

Look, I'm a handgun-owner and avid shooter, and I cannot forsee a situation where anyone needs high-cap clips. I've been around guns, ranges, and gun-shows for years. There is a significant percentage of loonies at all of these. You know the type; terrified white men who forsee the Chinese coming over the hill, or an armed-insurection by the black population. They envision themselves sitting on their porch, firing off thousands of rounds at the occupying force, like some childish fantasy out of "Red Dawn".

Look, the gun-nut lobby has been talking down to Americans for years, saying that "we just don't understand" why they need high-cap clips. Give me a break; you're all just a bunch of rednecks who want high-cap clips for toys. Why not just make owning poison gas canisters legal? After all, you could protect your entire compound with those.

I spent my whole life around gun-shows and the wierdos who attend them. Grow up, nobody... NOBODY...needs high-cap clips.
GreenLiving

Clifton Park, NY

#19 Mar 3, 2011
Law wrote:
<quoted text>"Gun nuts"...."rednecks "..."your entire compound"....
Got anymore addled-minded cliches to hurl around? Hanky-twisting bed wetters like yourself are so comical to watch as you soil your pink thong.
Hey, I'm not the guy who's so terrified of the world that he needs to carry around an arsenal to defend himself.
Mike D

Clifton Park, NY

#20 Mar 3, 2011
Law wrote:
<quoted text>It's called the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of Needs. Grow up, yourself!
Well, there are "arms", and there are "arms. The question is "what is reasonable and what it excessive"?

High-cap clips are excessive, for no other reason other than the fact that they are wholly unecessary.

I'm going out on a limb and guessing that you're hoping that Sarah Palin runs for Prez...am I right?
JimmyT

Coplay, PA

#21 Mar 3, 2011
Tory II wrote:
<quoted text>Nope. We need govt control,
What are you alluding to here?
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#23 Mar 3, 2011
Mike D wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because you don't understand my argument, doesn't mean that it's not valid.
Look, I'm a handgun-owner and avid shooter, and I cannot forsee a situation where anyone needs high-cap clips. I've been around guns, ranges, and gun-shows for years. There is a significant percentage of loonies at all of these. You know the type; terrified white men who forsee the Chinese coming over the hill, or an armed-insurection by the black population. They envision themselves sitting on their porch, firing off thousands of rounds at the occupying force, like some childish fantasy out of "Red Dawn".
Look, the gun-nut lobby has been talking down to Americans for years, saying that "we just don't understand" why they need high-cap clips. Give me a break; you're all just a bunch of rednecks who want high-cap clips for toys. Why not just make owning poison gas canisters legal? After all, you could protect your entire compound with those.
I spent my whole life around gun-shows and the wierdos who attend them. Grow up, nobody... NOBODY...needs high-cap clips.
Who said I didn’t understand it…? I understand perfectly where you are coming from…and again, it’s a non-argument. Your entire tirade above is oozing “frustrated control freak”. Just because you “…cannot foresee (sp) a situation where anyone needs high-cap clips…” doesn’t mean others have not…as in our founding fathers. Your “significant percentage” of gun owners being “loonies” is just another control freaks opinion in order to try and justify your position. As seen in the recent USSC rulings, more and more people are standing up against the gov’t infringements on our rights and winning the cases to regain our rights. This seems to be causing you and many others great “frustration” over your loss of control over the people. Too bad.

In Miller, the USSC decision was addressed in the Heller case. Here’s a portion of what they said;

It is entirely clear that the Court’s basis for saying that the Second Amendment did not apply was not that the defendants were “bear[ing] arms” not “for ... military purposes” but for “nonmilitary use,” post, at 2. Rather, it was that the type of weapon at issue was not eligible for Second Amendment protection:“In the absence of any evidence tending to show that the possession or use of a [short barreled shotgun] at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instru¬ment.” 307 U. S., at 178 (emphasis added).“Certainly,” the Court continued,“it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.”

Since high capacity magazines are standard issue within our active military and the organized militia, they are in fact “…part of the ordinary military equipment…” that’s “…use could contribute to the common defense.”…as stipulated in the Miller case. Therefore, contrary to your inability to “foresee” such a need, high capacity magazines provide for the “common defense”.

From your display of lack of knowledge regarding firearm magazines, I highly doubt your alleged "handgun-owner and avid shooter" remark.
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#24 Mar 3, 2011
GreenLiving wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey, I'm not the guy who's so terrified of the world that he needs to carry around an arsenal to defend himself.
"arsenal"...Good...t here's another one...lol. I just carry one concealed...no license...no permit...no nanny state training or testing either.

Now you can hurl a few more Brady Bunch buzzwords.
Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#25 Mar 3, 2011
Mike D wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, there are "arms", and there are "arms. The question is "what is reasonable and what it excessive"?
High-cap clips are excessive, for no other reason other than the fact that they are wholly unecessary.
I'm going out on a limb and guessing that you're hoping that Sarah Palin runs for Prez...am I right?
I fully support your right to express your opinion...just don't think that you can deny the individual rights of others.
Mike D

Clifton Park, NY

#26 Mar 3, 2011
l M WHlTE wrote:
<quoted text>
......in your opinion.
Fair enough...then give me ONE concrete reason why you would need a high-cap clip?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 37
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

East Greenbush Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 23 hr Well Well 20,775
Anyone know gino goldfarb? (Mar '11) Fri Kathy 17
Similitudes (Dec '15) Jan 19 anonymous 65
Bervonais "Love" Donley (Jun '16) Jan 19 step n fetch it 3
News Stopped train triggers major political row in B... Jan 15 Slobodan Jovanovic 1
News Reports: Paladino stands by offensive Obama com... Jan 14 kingmuthufukkah 28
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is the new James... Jan 12 Local 1

East Greenbush Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

East Greenbush Mortgages