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

Wtf does this have to do with high capacity magazines?

Wtf does this have to do with high capacity magazines?

Start at the beginning of the thread if you’re interested in the evolution. Short answer is that magazine size is not a realistic solution to a much broader issue.

Can’t we all just get a fish?

Great thread to know who to avoid in NCKA.

Guess I was typing at the same time you were, I’d hope you wouldn’t avoid someone based on there opinions of political issues or government beliefs/disbeliefs.... I’d fish with either of them! Opinions are who make use who we are, if everyone I fished with was as big an asshole as me at times I wouldn’t want to fish with them. But theses guys are just opinionated at different ends of the board, but I bet there’s more they agree on then disagree! 

Great thread to know who to avoid in NCKA.

Guess I was typing at the same time you were, I’d hope you wouldn’t avoid someone based on there opinions of political issues or government beliefs/disbeliefs.... I’d fish with either of them! Opinions are who make use who we are, if everyone I fished with was as big an asshole as me at times I wouldn’t want to fish with them. But theses guys are just opinionated at different ends of the board, but I bet there’s more they agree on then disagree! 

+1

That’s unusual—a judge that has actually read the constitution.

I didn't realize the 2nd Amendment makes mention of high-capacity magazines. The 2nd Amendment specifically says "well regulated militia." That part seems to have been ignored.

I think it's ridiculous that people feel they need these weapons. I fully believe in the right to have revolvers, shotguns, and hunting rifles. Those are plenty sufficient for home defense and recreation, but also not efficient enough to kill 50 people in a nightclub or at a concert.

Guess you ignored that pesky little "shall not be infringed upon." part?

Great thread to know who to avoid in NCKA.

lol. Jerry is a good guy. People have different opinions. I look forward to fishing with him and seeing him at GS and this conversation goes pretty much the same around the campfire as it did here. NCKA isn’t a political echo chamber. We just like to fish and now we finally have a decent winter thread. It came late this year.

I think it's ridiculous that people feel they need these weapons. I fully believe in the right to have revolvers, shotguns, and hunting rifles. Those are plenty sufficient for home defense and recreation, but also not efficient enough to kill 50 people in a nightclub or at a concert.

Really, we are going to determine the extent of the rights laid out in the 2nd amendment based upon what we believe is the amount of people we could kill at one time?  A couple of ten round handguns with a few extra clips can do a lot of damage in a very short amount of time.  Also, ten round magazines are legal as are rifles. 

can't shout fire in a crowded theater.  clear infringement of first amendment.

Rights aren't unlimited.

Nothing I posted below argues for unlimited rights.....

and that is why as citizens we don't have the right to own an automatic weapon, rpg, tank, stealth fighter........, but we do have the lawful right to own rifles, shotguns, handguns, knives, fishing rods, etc.  Clearly defined limitations and nowhere close to unlimited. 

Whats your point? 

can't shout fire in a crowded theater.  clear infringement of first amendment.

Rights aren't unlimited.

This is also a bad example.  There is very little prior restraint on speech. You are free to shout fire in a crowded theater, but you might be charged with the aftermath if your false claim causes harm to others. Same goes for libel, slander, etc.

Pretty much the only things you face a prior restraint for is publishing troop movements, directly inciting illegal immediate violence, and producing kiddy porn.

Wtf does this have to do with high capacity magazines?

Right?  Its because people keep using weak ass analogies/examples to justify the whole high capacity magazines that tangents into multiple topics. 

Wtf does this have to do with high capacity magazines?

Right?  Its because people keep using weak ass analogies/examples to justify the whole high capacity magazines that tangents into multiple topics.

or is it because people make weak ass comments that express nothing on the topic. 

What difference is it going to make to either side if you can have a magazine with 10 rounds, 15, 30,....?  I get both sides of the argument and I get that no one wants another mass murder carried out by an individual (I intentionally left out the type of weapon here) but if we are only talking about a rifle with a high capacity magazine, I really don't see how a ten round magazine becomes a game changer.  The only logical game changer is to limit all weapons for citizens to a single shot regardless of weapon and allow sworn officials (police, military) to carry multi round weapons.  We all know that will never happen and is not a reality (I am not arguing for this). 

Don't let this distract you from the the fact that in 1966, Al Bundy scored four touchdowns in a single game while playing for the Polk High School Panthers in the 1966 city championship game versus Andrew Johnson High School, including the game-winning touchdown in the final seconds against his old nemesis, Bubba "Spare Tire" Dixon.