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

But saying people should raise there kids to make good decisions as a solution to the problems in Chicago and other large cities is naive to ignorant of the reality that exists.

Say more.

-Allen

   It's been hard for me to ignore this thread,  But ,,,,  " I can't stands it no longer " .   
 
 I'm pretty sure the 2nd amendments intent was to prevent "Govt. Tyranny" as well as a method to keep an armed civilian militia.        That phrase,  " God created man, but Smith and Wesson made him equal"  holds a lot of truth.       
     I'd much rather be armed than become a victim.   Though I never understood the need for an assault weapon with a 30 rd clip,,, others should have that right to choose.  ( Same goes for abortion rights, or smoking )  That's what "Freedom " provides us.   Freedom is the issue here.      I don't think that government should have the ability to take those freedoms away from us.     YES I do think there should be a careful background check, and that not all should be allowed that privilidge to serve as a militamen.   

We're innocent until proven guilty...   Gun laws only infringe on the lawabiding.   
   IMHO  it's our liberal justice system is what has allowed the bad guys to no longer fear the hangmans noose.   ( 3 squares a bed and free medical... parole in a few yrs.    )

    Me;  Glad I didn't run out and  buy 10 rd clips to replace my 14s, .." Living on the wrong side of the law was scary for a while "

But saying people should raise there kids to make good decisions as a solution to the problems in Chicago and other large cities is naive to ignorant of the reality that exists.

Say more.

-Allen

Thought it was enough....... but saying that parents that are drug addicts and/or gang members should teach their kids to make good decisions is not reality. 

I realize this has nothing to do with magazine capacity or any other discussion on the 2nd amendment, but I do think the problem is much broader than a narrow focus on a choice of the amount of rounds and if the government should be able to regulate this.

 

I do think the problem is much broader than a narrow focus on a choice of the amount of rounds and if the government should be able to regulate this.

Say more.  Sorry, I don't mean to pester you, but there are some hidden nuggets in here.  It may be obvious to you, but not entirely to me.

-Allen

But saying people should raise there kids to make good decisions as a solution to the problems in Chicago and other large cities is naive to ignorant of the reality that exists.

Say more.

-Allen

Thought it was enough....... but saying that parents that are drug addicts and/or gang members should teach their kids to make good decisions is not reality. 

I don't think the comments are focused only on drug addict / gang parents.  The American society as a whole has raised a disrespectful, me-first, blah-blah-blah generation(s).

-Allen

"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...

"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...

While you might be a collective rights person, District of Columbia v. Heller 2007 establishes the individual right.  We can debate all we want about this, but that is the current view upheld by the Supreme Court.

-Allen

But saying people should raise there kids to make good decisions as a solution to the problems in Chicago and other large cities is naive to ignorant of the reality that exists.

Say more.

-Allen

Thought it was enough....... but saying that parents that are drug addicts and/or gang members should teach their kids to make good decisions is not reality. 

I don't think the comments are focused only on drug addict / gang parents.  The American society as a whole has raised a disrespectful, me-first, blah-blah-blah generation(s).

-Allen

The me first/entitled reality tv should be my reality generation that exists is a separate problem but it typically does not lead to gun issues or lawlessness.  Its annoying as all get out I'll give you that. 

American society as a whole isn't killing people over dime bags or a couple of $$ like they do in the areas of Chicago, D.C, etc that are plagued with drug violence.  Suggesting that parents raise there kids to make good decisions is great, but it is not the reality of many of the people in America.

That was my point.

OK so you guys pulled me in. Ugh.

I have to make an assumption that collectively we are against school shootings, mass shootings, church shootings, etc? I mean, we are,.... right?

so what can we do collectively or individually that might reduce or stop these types of things happening so frikkin often? Something between guns for everyone everywhere and no guns for anyone anywhere. I hate to see this discussion always devolve into "guns good" vs "guns bad".

what would our existence look like with those in place? Metal detectors at every door, armed security everywhere, a bunch of new mental health facilities? Range armories that hold your high capacity pieces at the facility? Would it look just like today since doing nothing is the best option?

I don't know, but I just wonder when do we reach a point where doing nothing is no longer acceptable and some action is undeniable? Will we ever reach that point? Have we passed it? Is this just our natural world trying to keep our population in check by any means necessary, like a virus, so nothing will actually stem it?

I ask this as a moderate enthusiast and plinker who rarely has reason to shoot anymore (I used a machete or a piece of firewood to dispatch the last couple of death deserving varmints I came across) but one who still treasures the old pieces I have access to.

I don't have skin in the 30 rd mag game and never had to go through a metal detector in school. I've never been shot except with a matchstick or an airsoft pellet (I love always ya Joel but it still hurt through my jeans). I do have many friends with little kids that are legitimately freaked about school shooters.

Just brainstorming, I could see stronger punishments for gun violence, maybe mandatory training and re-ups every few years for gun owners, and stronger pre-purchase checks making their way into law.
I don't know if these would do anything, but would wager they might garner enough support from the populace.

I'm interested to see what we all have to say about where we go in the future.

I could care less about armed civilian militias, etc. Do I honestly believe that in my lifetime or in my childrens' lifetimes that civilians will somehow need to bear arms against a tyrannical US government? No, not at all.

Do I believe that in that same time there could possibly be widespread rioting/looting/killing due to food/water/electricity shortages or some type of racial unrest. Sure I do.

But even putting all that aside I'm just against people trying to chip away at my rights. Baitman's meme is dead on. There's people lobbying right now to decrease the number of rounds a mag holds to 7. Why? Is it because 7 is somehow safer than 10? Nope, it's because these fuckers know that the majority of gun manufacturers won't make a modified mag and jump through the extra hoops it takes just to get their product acceptable for sale in this pussy ass state. There's already tons of guns you can't buy in CA because manufacturers don't want to deal with the extra costs of the more stringent drop test laws, etc. So the tactic is definitely working.

"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...

While you might be a collective rights person, District of Columbia v. Heller 2007 establishes the individual right.  We can debate all we want about this, but that is the current view upheld by the Supreme Court.

-Allen

Yep.  two centuries of thought reversed.  Good Job NRA!

I do think the problem is much broader than a narrow focus on a choice of the amount of rounds and if the government should be able to regulate this.

Say more.  Sorry, I don't mean to pester you, but there are some hidden nuggets in here.  It may be obvious to you, but not entirely to me.

-Allen

My view on the debate around magazine capacity is an effort to stop an individual from another Vegas/Orlando etc type of massacre.  I also believe that all the debate does is create headlines for each side of the argument and solves nothing.  Taking guns away from law abiding citizens will never happen and I am not suggesting anything of that nature.  I believe that there is common ground that murder is wrong.  In areas with a very high murder rate (like areas of Chicago), I would not oppose a solution that would take away individual rights in order to slow down the murder rate.  I do not believe this will ever happen as it would be viewed as too extreme and unconstitutional; which is unfortunate because the root problem will never go away.   

If MS13 (and similar criminal organizations) are a known problem and our local/State/Federal officials know where they are, then what is stopping them from going in and removing them.  Isn't this why we have laws?  To prosecute the criminal so the law abiding citizens can live their lives in a safer environment.   Maybe someone on this forum wears a badge (or has worn one) can provide some useful insight into this.

Man do I need to get out and go fishing.......

what's curious, and hasn't been discussed, is i see it as a public safety issue.
there were approximately the same number of firearm deaths as car accident deaths in 2017.

We have spent decades putting in safety mechanisms to reduce car fatalities, yet seems we've done diddly with firearms.

Why?

what's curious, and hasn't been discussed, is i see it as a public safety issue.
there were approximately the same number of firearm deaths as car accident deaths in 2017.

We have spent decades putting in safety mechanisms to reduce car fatalities, yet seems we've done diddly with firearms.

Why?

because cars are not part of 2nd amendment

what's curious, and hasn't been discussed, is i see it as a public safety issue.
there were approximately the same number of firearm deaths as car accident deaths in 2017.

We have spent decades putting in safety mechanisms to reduce car fatalities, yet seems we've done diddly with firearms.

Why?

because cars are not part of 2nd amendment

Because there's way more idiots accidentally killing people with cars than there are criminals intentionally killing people with guns?