Federal judge strikes down California’s ban on high-capacity gun magazines

Or take the plug out and put 5 shells in your shotgun.

If you looked out your front window and saw an unfriendly group of fine upstanding citizens,  which magazine would you put in your gun? 10 or 30 or 100? Maybe you'll say that has never happened and never will. If I'm going to keep a gun for protecting my home and family, I want it to work well for more than a single intruder.

That's why i prefer a pump action shotgun.  There is no one in the world that doesn't recognize that sound, and i barely have to aim.

But if there is 5 guys you only have 3 shots then what? Hope they wait so you can reload?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Not if you own an 8+1 just sayn’....

I’m sure after the first guys cranium takes a round you’re going to  see nothing but asses getting smaller fast... slim REAL fast!

That is when you break out the long gun!

If you looked out your front window and saw an unfriendly group of fine upstanding citizens,  which magazine would you put in your gun? 10 or 30 or 100? Maybe you'll say that has never happened and never will. If I'm going to keep a gun for protecting my home and family, I want it to work well for more than a single intruder.

That's why i prefer a pump action shotgun.  There is no one in the world that doesn't recognize that sound, and i barely have to aim.

But if there is 5 guys you only have 3 shots then what? Hope they wait so you can reload?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Not if you own an 8+1 just sayn’....

I’m sure after the first guys cranium takes a round you’re going to  see nothing but asses getting smaller fast... slim REAL fast!

That is when you break out the long gun!

300 Win Mag just like old Ma Bell’s comercialls  “ Reach out, reach out and touch someone, reach out , reach out and just say hi!

From the Wikipedia page on the Parkland shooting:
YouTube comments linked to him include "I wanna die Fighting[sic] killing shit ton[sic] of people", threats against police officers and Antifa, and intent to mimic the University of Texas tower shooting.[82][92][93] In February 2017, Cruz legally purchased an AR-15 style semi-automatic rifle from a Coral Springs gun store.


The problem is we, as a society, no longer heed the subtle warning signs. 

From the Wikipedia page on the Parkland shooting:
YouTube comments linked to him include "I wanna die Fighting[sic] killing shit ton[sic] of people", threats against police officers and Antifa, and intent to mimic the University of Texas tower shooting.[82][92][93] In February 2017, Cruz legally purchased an AR-15 style semi-automatic rifle from a Coral Springs gun store.


The problem is we, as a society, no longer heed the subtle warning signs.

the Isla Vista thing was similar. Parents even asked the sheriffs office to visit the kid, and they did (knowing he had recently purchased at least one Glock) but they concluded he was fine.
He was not fine.
This is why I mention education and mental health. I don't know what other tack to  take.

the felon thing: sure, strengthen the laws already out there on gun violence. OK I totally agree on this as I said previously.

but the thing of it is none of the mass shootings I mentioned were committed by felons. So while this is a valid concept I can support, it sidesteps my actual questions of : what do firearms enthusiasts see as a way forward to try and prevent these events from occurring?
What would be acceptable?

I'm trying to come at this rationally and discuss this beyond gun good vs gun bad, and I am legitimately keen to know because the usual "do nothing" isn't going to appease anyone who fears gun violence.

From the Wikipedia page on the Parkland shooting:
YouTube comments linked to him include "I wanna die Fighting[sic] killing shit ton[sic] of people", threats against police officers and Antifa, and intent to mimic the University of Texas tower shooting.[82][92][93] In February 2017, Cruz legally purchased an AR-15 style semi-automatic rifle from a Coral Springs gun store.


The problem is we, as a society, no longer heed the subtle warning signs.

the Isla Vista thing was similar. Parents even asked the sheriffs office to visit the kid, and they did (knowing he had recently purchased at least one Glock) but they concluded he was fine.
He was not fine.
This is why I mention education and mental health. I don't know what other tack to  take.

the felon thing: sure, strengthen the laws already out there on gun violence. OK I totally agree on this as I said previously.

but the thing of it is none of the mass shootings I mentioned were committed by felons. So while this is a valid concept I can support, it sidesteps my actual questions of : what do firearms enthusiasts see as a way forward to try and prevent these events from occurring?
What would be acceptable?

I'm trying to come at this rationally and discuss this beyond gun good vs gun bad, and I am legitimately keen to know because the usual "do nothing" isn't going to appease anyone who fears gun violence.

The “do nothing” is the problem far too many parents are too busy to even sit down and eat a meal with there kid, too many times the parents say “I had no idea he could do that, or had that” of course not you had no idea what your kid did cuz you ain’t got time for them! (Sorry ranting there). If you don’t have 4-5 hours a day average to spend with a “kid” please don’t have one! They require interactive parenting and instruction that the public school system certainly ain’t providing. Accidental children shootings come down to poor handling by an adult DO NOT LEAVE A GUN LYING AROUND! Also no education of gun safety to the child, my kids and now my grand kids all know what a gun is, what it can do at 4-5 years old and how to safely handle a gun at 7-8 years old. People who fear “gun violence” should actually fear “criminal violence” a human can be killed with at least 1,000,000 common everyday items. So let’s not worry so much about gun control, mine are covered... I control mine just fine! Let’s start with criminal control, if the punishment fit the crime, criminals would quit committing the crime.... remember the chain gangs? Society decided that criminals rights far outweigh the rights of the victims, or severity of the crime.

it sidesteps my actual questions of : what do firearms enthusiasts see as a way forward to try and prevent these events from occurring?
What would be acceptable?

Don't take away people's ability to defend themselves by limiting magazine capacity or creating gun free zones.  Criminals and those intent on doing harm will not be deterred by such limitations, and there are millions upon millions of firearms in our society that you will never, ever be able to round up and take away.

Arm whoever wants to be armed, and criminals will think twice because of the fear that armed citizens will shoot back.  If someone opens fire at you or innocents around you, then return fire until the threat is eliminated.

but the thing of it is none of the mass shootings I mentioned were committed by felons. So while this is a valid concept I can support, it sidesteps my actual questions of : what do firearms enthusiasts see as a way forward to try and prevent these events from occurring?

Allow every law abiding citizen to carry.  Personally, I think open carry sends the strongest message to would-be murders. 
Look; banning inanimate objects does nothing at best and likely causes more harm.  Spot the one common thread–not the weapon, but a person with intent.  Liberal laws do their best not to 'profile', but there's just something plain wrong when grandma is groped by TSA and 100,000 illegals pour across our borders last month alone unchecked. 

From the Wikipedia page on the Parkland shooting:
YouTube comments linked to him include "I wanna die Fighting[sic] killing shit ton[sic] of people", threats against police officers and Antifa, and intent to mimic the University of Texas tower shooting.[82][92][93] In February 2017, Cruz legally purchased an AR-15 style semi-automatic rifle from a Coral Springs gun store.


The problem is we, as a society, no longer heed the subtle warning signs.

the Isla Vista thing was similar. Parents even asked the sheriffs office to visit the kid, and they did (knowing he had recently purchased at least one Glock) but they concluded he was fine.
He was not fine.
This is why I mention education and mental health. I don't know what other tack to  take.

the felon thing: sure, strengthen the laws already out there on gun violence. OK I totally agree on this as I said previously.

but the thing of it is none of the mass shootings I mentioned were committed by felons. So while this is a valid concept I can support, it sidesteps my actual questions of : what do firearms enthusiasts see as a way forward to try and prevent these events from occurring?
What would be acceptable?

I'm trying to come at this rationally and discuss this beyond gun good vs gun bad, and I am legitimately keen to know because the usual "do nothing" isn't going to appease anyone who fears gun violence.

This is supposed to be a free society. Maybe not every problem can be solved by writing a law. Do you support taking rights from people to prevent these events from occurring? We have lots of people dying from health problems. Do we outlaw big mac's, fries and soda to solve that problem?  Do we outlaw alcohol to prevent those deaths? Mandatory exercise will be needed too.

but the thing of it is none of the mass shootings I mentioned were committed by felons. So while this is a valid concept I can support, it sidesteps my actual questions of : what do firearms enthusiasts see as a way forward to try and prevent these events from occurring?

Allow every law abiding citizen to carry.  Personally, I think open carry sends the strongest message to would-be murders. 
Look; banning inanimate objects does nothing at best and likely causes more harm.  Spot the one common thread–not the weapon, but a person with intent.  Liberal laws do their best not to 'profile', but there's just something plain wrong when grandma is groped by TSA and 100,000 illegals pour across our borders last month alone unchecked. 

There's kind of a lot to unpack in this comment, but I disagree with most of it.  Concealed carry is better.  The common thread is that there isn't a common thread and figuring out who is going to go off the rails is not remotely easy and would probably require unacceptable intrusions into people's privacy.  Illegals pouring across our border has nohing to do with guns or magazine size.  They aren't coming here to shoot you.  They just want to work or escape a shit situation or get free high quality medical care or some combination of those.

Agreed that banning things that people want and can get anyway is dumb.
Agreed that TSA groping of granny is stupid.

Every time you buy a gun, you have to take a weird kid fishing.

We like to play the What If game in America. What if this happens, what if that happens? Here’s some of my own. What if we just use common sense? What if we just stop acting like scared little bitches? What if we stopped being soo offended by everything? 

but the thing of it is none of the mass shootings I mentioned were committed by felons. So while this is a valid concept I can support, it sidesteps my actual questions of : what do firearms enthusiasts see as a way forward to try and prevent these events from occurring?

Allow every law abiding citizen to carry.  Personally, I think open carry sends the strongest message to would-be murders. 
Look; banning inanimate objects does nothing at best and likely causes more harm.  Spot the one common thread–not the weapon, but a person with intent.  Liberal laws do their best not to 'profile', but there's just something plain wrong when grandma is groped by TSA and 100,000 illegals pour across our borders last month alone unchecked.

May 3, 1967 California state office. Black Panthers exercise their right to open carry in California. One year later under Ronald Reagan open carry right is gone. The sense of intimidation, particularly in public settings, of armed individuals and groups walking around  is too much for civil society to bear. Right call by Reagan or wrong?

"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."

I'm a collective right person.  The well regulated militia was to prevent the Feds from taking away a States right to militia-- that was the defense against tyranny that was being asserted. That view was held for more than two CENTURIES.

The NRA did a bang up job of resurrecting and promoting the individual right view...

No it wasn't.  This is a falsehood that has been perpetrated for far too long.

Read District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 605-619 (2008).  The Court went through post-enactment through the end of the 19th Century and most commentary supported an individual's right to bear arms irrespective of militia service.

As for the militia language, prefatory language - stating a purpose for the law then stating the operative clause, was common at the time of the drafting of the 2nd Amendment.

"Although this structure of the Second Amendment is unique in our Constitution, other legal documents of the founding era, particularly individual-rights provisions of state constitutions, commonly included a prefatory statement of purpose. See generally Volokh, The Commonplace Second Amendment, 73 N. Y. U. L. Rev. 793, 814-821 (1998)."  Heller at 577.

That's it. 

but the thing of it is none of the mass shootings I mentioned were committed by felons. So while this is a valid concept I can support, it sidesteps my actual questions of : what do firearms enthusiasts see as a way forward to try and prevent these events from occurring?

Allow every law abiding citizen to carry.  Personally, I think open carry sends the strongest message to would-be murders. 
Look; banning inanimate objects does nothing at best and likely causes more harm.  Spot the one common thread–not the weapon, but a person with intent.  Liberal laws do their best not to 'profile', but there's just something plain wrong when grandma is groped by TSA and 100,000 illegals pour across our borders last month alone unchecked.

May 3, 1967 California state office. Black Panthers exercise their right to open carry in California. One year later under Ronald Reagan open carry right is gone. The sense of intimidation, particularly in public settings, of armed individuals and groups walking around  is too much for civil society to bear. Right call by Reagan or wrong?

Overaggressive response, but understandable in the context of the day with the war in Vietnam raging and political assassinations occuring both at home and around the world.

Would have clearly been better to ban carry of firearms in the secure perimeter of state houses and government buildings.  If the building is unsecured, then firearms should be allowed.  Of course, that is with the benefit of 50 years of hindsight.  It is understandable how they screwed it up back in the day.