Gun owners say goodbye to high-capacity magazines at Freedom Shoot (Colorado)

[madamesilverspurs]

Amid bursts of near and distant gunfire, Ray Sanchez looked down his rangefinder and told the man lying prone with his rifle the bad news: “No joy.” Sanchez was giving pointers on long-range shooting Saturday at the Pawnee Sportsmens Center, 40914 Weld County Road 71, as part of the Colorado Freedom Shoot. The event, which was sponsored by the shooting range, was dubbed the final opportunity to shoot high-capacity magazines in the state of Colorado before a ban on 15-round clips goes into effect on Monday. ...

http://www.greeleytribune.com/news/7113588-113/sanchez-law-state-already


Because nothing says 'loss of freedom' like having to take twice as long to shoot a roomful of people.

[krispos42]

1. Funny how when our side implements laws of no practical purpose...

...other than to irritate "those people" and secure fund-raising for candidate, it's a good thing.

[bluedigger]

8. Just wait until we start treating gun dealers like they do abortion clinics.

Mandatory steel and concrete vaults for storage, wide hallways with separate entrances and exits, daily reporting of inventories, etc... The moral crusaders have shown us how to do it, after all.

[krispos42]

11. It's the same basic playbook

"I have a moral problem with what you are doing; ergo it is my DUTY to make what you are doing as hard as possible, regardless."

[NutmegYankee]

53. I've commented on that simularity multiple times.

And the thing that really irritates me is that gun control is often the opposite of liberal philosophy. In general, Liberals seek to give people greater rights and freedoms and make less restrictions on people. Full access to legal and safe abortion, fully legal and recognized gay marriage, freedom to practice your own faith, or none at all without being forced by the government to worship their way, etc. It's the moral crusaders that bother me. I've spent my life fighting them on abortion, gay rights, and religion.

Not that I oppose every gun control law. Background checks are rather obvious a need. What I hate are the really onerous rules I've seen proposed like requiring the police to come into my home once a year and inspect my storage containers. That's just creepy anti-4th amendment bad. But given what I've seen lately with NSA here...

[Mojorabbit]

176. I know right! nt

[Hoyt]

2. I feel such sorrow for the poor pitiful losers whining about this.

[galileoreloaded]

10. Lol. Physician heal thyself. Nt

[rdharma]

3. And this Greeley Tribune article is full of beans!

The Colorado law states only that it will be illegal to purchase, manufacture or sell magazines that hold more than 15 rounds. There is nothing in the law that states you can not use high-capacity magazines previously owned.

Whether intentionally or not, the Greeley Tribune is posting gun-hugger propaganda.

[lhecker51]

184. Would an outright ban of all existing mags be effective?

If so, who would it likely impact? I can tell you from experience as an LEO that the only ones impacted are non-criminal gun owners. Significant numbers of arrests made where a semi-auto handgun is involved, the suspect had high cap magazines that are against our city's ordinance that bans the possession of them. The only effective way to do this is to go house to house, block by block with dogs trained to find firearms and explosives. Even then, it will not stop the flow until we can ban them in all states and they are all mandated to search them out house by house. The national guard could be used to perform this action along with police and sheriffs but it must be done in every state and done concurrently. I recommend that the NSA be put to a good use and identify suspect internet searches, purchases, and forum comments to develop lists of suspected owners of illegal firearms and magazines. This is the only way to effectively reduce the number of illegal guns and magazines. As has been stated, who needs to hunt with anything other than a bolt action rifle or sporting shot gun? Once the guns are gone, the only thing we will have to worry about are bombs as knives will not be used in mass killings. There is no feasible way to stop the crazies from making bombs which worry me more than the guns because the potential for mass casualties is MUCH greater. Poisons are another worry. We need more LEO's on the street because being 6 to 10 minutes out from an attack leaves the crazies enough time to kill many. I see no solution other than to triple the size of active LEO's on the street and deploy a massive network of CCTV cameras for surveillance to be proactive in the prevention of violent crime.

[Travis_0004]

4. This law will be easy to get around.

I have a .223 rifle, and buying 16 round magazines is illegal. Its not illegal to buy 10 round mags chambered in .50 beowulf.

You know what fits in a 10 round .50 baowulf mag? 30 .223 rounds, and its all perfectly legal.

[rdharma]

5. And who manufactures 10 round mags for .50 Beowulf?

Nobody! So if you think you're circumventing the law....... think again!

[CokeMachine]

16. Quit it, you'll hurt his feewings!!

Good luck getting that one to admit he's wrong though.

[Duckhunter935]

7. I see they don't

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/780479/alexander-arms-magazine-ar-15-50-beowulf-10-round-aluminum-matte



http://www.shopalexanderarms.com/Magazines-10-Round_.50_Beowulf_Polymer_Magazine.html

[Duckhunter935]

12. think he will reply? nt

[friendly_iconoclast]

13. Doubt it; I explained how that sort behave when confronted in a recent post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=126213

Inevitably, when confronted with evidence, the bullshitters will 1) disappear, 2) act
as if you hadn't posted anything, or 3) try some bafflegab to cover.

One of them just pulled a #3 on me in another thread when asked for evidence of their claims.

[Duckhunter935]

15. my guess will be self delete to hide

"rdharma (2,611 posts)

5. And who manufactures 10 round mags for .50 Beowulf?

Nobody! So if you think you're circumventing the law....... think again!"

[friendly_iconoclast]

17. Ha! Well played.

[CokeMachine]

18. That one has problems with backing up his claims or admitting when he's wrong.

I do believe Premium is offering a $5000 donation if this poster can back up another spurious accusation. This poster seems to disappear when asked for proof of anything.

[Eleanors38]

118. That's a gas! But don't they make 'em for 40mm?

NOTE TO JURORS: The 40 mm is a real round with millions served during WW II. I am only inquiring.

[BainsBane]

25. The hallways are busy

[rdharma]

20. Try that mag with 30 rounds of .223!

Gotcha!

"It is basically a standard AR15 30 round mag with the top modified to take the 50 Beowulf."

Probably a different follower too!

[NickB79]

24. So cannibalize a 10-rd mag for a .223 follower

And install that to the .50 mag. Or, just buy a new follower from Midway. Either one would work.

[rdharma]

57. The lips on mag are still different. nt

So back to the drawing board, eh?

[NickB79]

111. That's what files and pliers are for, dude

I've had to tweak the lips on a few mags that fed poorly before. Not a big deal, and already frequently done to improve feeding.

Barring that, you can cut off the top few inches of Beowolf mag, and TIG-weld the body of the 10-rd mag onto the top of it. Pretty simple, actually, and a lot of people already do it with.

Actually, after 10 sec on Google, it appears you've been wrong on BOTH counts. You don't need a new follower, OR any changes to the feed lips. It appears the differences are too small to stop proper feeding: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/archive/index.php/t-343517.html

Hey I had a couple questions about my .50 beowulf upper that I have attached to my spikes tactical lower (marked in .223/5.56 cal). I also use 30 round .223/5.56 magazines because it holds 10 .50 beowulf rounds(but the mags are marked .223/5.56). I also have ar-15's that are chambered in .223/5.56 that I usually store together and take to the range together. Is this in anyway illegal because my lower is marked .223/5.56 instead of multi-cal?

[rdharma]

112. You give that a try!

[Lizzie Poppet]

113. Your addendum is exactly correct.

.50 Beowulf mags will accept (and feed) 5.56 rounds w/o modification. There is nothing illegal about ordering 10-round mags marked ".50 Beowulf" in restricted states, although it's a good idea to make sure the marked chambering is mentioned in your order.

[rdharma]

114. Yes! By all means, follow Lizzie Poppet's advice!

The "school of hard knocks" is the best teacher for slow folks trying to skirt the law!

[Lizzie Poppet]

115. Thanks for yet another indication...

...that you know jack shit about firearms. Tell us again about you being a LEO.

Pure. Comedy. Gold.

[rdharma]

119. Like I said..... don't believe me? Try it!

[Lizzie Poppet]

120. Watch and weep:

How's that foot taste...?

[rdharma]

124. I watched a guy take a 5 round Beowulf and remove a pin to make it a 15 round 50 Beowulf........

So....... what's your point?

Keep diggin'!

[Lizzie Poppet]

125. BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

That's what you think you were seeing there? Not that I needed confirmation that you know fuck-all about firearms, but I certainly appreciate the additional demonstration. If only for the comedy value...

What you were seeing, of course, was the guy firing 15-16 round strings of 5.56 from a .50 Beowulf mag, which he demonstrated would only hold 5 rounds of the latter chambering. I realize you're going to pretend otherwise (as you have previously demonstrated you lack the character and honor to admit even the most conclusively demonstrated fuck-ups), but you just got proven wrong. Again.

Feel free to commence flailing...but I'm certainly going to enjoy reminding you of this. A lot.

[rdharma]

126. That's what it was!

I don't know what you imagined you saw.

I know what I saw!

BTW - 15 rd. mags are legal in CO. So why jump through hoops to modify a 50 Beowulf mag to a 15 round capacity?

[Lizzie Poppet]

127. Bullshit. Watch the whole thing this time. Read the desc. Or just stop lying.

The guy makes it perfectly clear that he's loading and firing 5.56. From the description:

This is the Israeli TAR-21 going through a few mag dumps on New Year's Eve 2012. These magazines are legal, as they originally designed for .50 Beowulf. But they can also contain 15-18 rounds of .223 ammunition.

Also, from the guy's response to a comment:

But yes, .223 does fit in there! Hence the video

Moreover, the weapon being used is a Tavor TAR-21...which is chambered for the following rounds: 5.56 NATO, 9mm Parabellum, 5.45 x 30 MINSAS, and 5,43 x 39. Note that .50 Beowulf isn't one of these. It is literally impossible for him to have been firing that round through that rifle.

I know you don't have the character to own up, but you just made a complete and utter fool of yourself. Again.

"I know what I saw!"

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

[Duckhunter935]

128. some here are just not capable

of admitting an error or they were wrong. I think there is still a 5000 dollar bet open some where around here.

[Lizzie Poppet]

130. See that a lot in online forums, alas.

This forum's rules prohibit me saying what I really think about that particular (despicable) personality trait. Probably just as well...

It's the "no real accountability online" thing. In person, people are more subject to humiliation, to that eye contact moment when they both know who's right and who's wrong. Of course, online, assholes will also sling insults they'd never in a million years have the sack to say to someone's face, which is an even more contemptible practice, IMO. Nature of the internet beast, really...

[rdharma]

129. Why modify a Beowulf mag to 15 rounds?

15 round mags are legal in CO. Any reason to jump through hoops to modify a Beowulf mag instead of buying a 15 round purpose made 5.56 mag? Like to do things the hard way?

There's a reason he didn't load it with 30 rounds.

Here's another way to make a junkyard hi-cap!

[Lizzie Poppet]

132. He didn't.

15 round mags are legal in CO.

LOL. Which has precisely jack-shit to do with the video, which was shot in Canada.

The mag was modified to 10 rounds for it's marked chambering (.50 Beowulf), to be legal in Canada, where the video was shot. The reason for using a Canada-legal 10-round .50 Beowulf magazine to hold 15-18 rounds of .225 is because Canada has a 10-round limit, regardless of chambering. Duh.

You didn't actually watch the whole thing or read the text, did you? If you had done either, you wouldn't have asked such a pointless question.

[rdharma]

133. Canada has a 10-round limit

That explains why he only loaded and fired 15 rounds instead of 30, eh?

Riiiiiiight! Keep diggin'!

[Lizzie Poppet]

136. 5-round, actually. My mistake in the previous post.

The magazine he was using was a 10-round .50 Beowulf mag modded to hold only 5 rounds. Canada has a 5 round limit on magazine capacity for center-fire semi-automatic rifles. .223 takes up a third of the space of .50 Beowulf, thus the 15 round .223 capacity of the pinned-to-5-rounds .50 Beowulf mag.

My mistake in the previous pose. See how easy that is? Your turn (especially since your errors were more numerous and more egregious than mine...show some courage).

The fact remains that he couldn't have been firing .50 Beowulf from that weapon. It's not chambered for that round.

Watch the whole video. Read the description and comments. Admit your mistake. Have some fucking character...

[rdharma]

139. OK! The Tavor is not chambered in .223.

Satisfied?

But the fact remains...... the 10 round 50 Beowulf mags will not function in an AR without modifying the followers and feed lips.

And I figure this would be HIGHLY ILLEGAL under the new CO law.

Sorry, to keep your sad going........ but those are the facts.

[Lizzie Poppet]

141. Well done.

I retract my assertion about your character. That was good of you.

Now, as for the "fact" that firing .223 out of .50 Beowulf mags in an AR requires modifying the follower and feed lips, you've proven nothing of the sort. Nor, to be fair, has anyone here proven the opposite. Interestingly, the comment thread in the video just got a question along those very lines.

I have no idea whether this would be illegal in Colorado or not. I don't know if the law is like Canada's (where only the chambering stamped on teh magazine is relevant), or is worded differently. I don't live there, so I've had no reason to get to know the details of the ban.

[rdharma]

142. Like I said before......... try it!

That "lump" on the M-16 type mag followers is there to make the round feed alternately right and left (not straight forward like the 50 Beowulf). If you use a flat Beowulf type follower, you are probably going to have rounds hanging up on the receiver extension.

Also the feed lips on the Beowulf are slightly narrower.

[rdharma]

143. Do you understand what I said in post #142.... or should I provide a picture......

.... to explain it?

[Lizzie Poppet]

144. Just got back home.

And yes, I understand the point perfectly (I'm not an AR gal, but I've shot dozens of them, reloaded thousands of rounds worth of mags for them, and know what the followers look like).

But I'm not going to accept that .223 won't feed in .50 Beowulf mags on that basis, given multiple claims online that they will do just that. I'd need to see it in action to form an opinion on that in the face of contradictory claims. I'm sure you'd feel teh same way.

[lhecker51]

186. The law as written is unenforceable.

School of hard knocks? How can they be charged under the current law that does not address the loading of 5.56 rounds in a .50 Beowulf magazine without making the entire .50 Beowulf caliber illegal? Nowhere in the penal code does it state it is illegal to own a 10 round Beowulf magazine if you don't own the actual firearm that utilizes that cartridge. What hard knocks will they encounter? Please cite the applicable law.

[lhecker51]

185. Here is your answer and then some....

These guys! So if you think the law can't be circumvented legally.......think again!

http://www.shopalexanderarms.com/Magazines-10-Round_50_Beowulf_Magazine.html


You are wrong. Did you even try to look? The only difference between a Beowulf mag and a 5.56 mag is the designation inscribed on the base plate. That is the problem with many folks commenting on that of which they know nothing or very little. Many still think that gun manufacturers are producing new AR based automatic firearms and selling them to the public, although this has been illegal for decades.

I hunt wild boar on my ranch that destroy my crops. They come out in huge numbers and although I use an AR to dispatch them, it is barley adequate. Many make the statement: AR's have no purpose other than war. This is so patently wrong. On any given night, I have 10 to 20 boar in my fields. A bolt action rifle with only five rounds is entirely inadequate. The same goes for coyotes that go after my livestock in packs. I do not know of a single rancher in my area that is NOT using AR's, AK's or SKS semi-auto rifles. This year I have already killed over 70 wild boar and even more coyotes. If you remember the e-coli outbreaks in California spinach, that was due to wild boar feces that litter ENTIRE acres of spinach. An AR is a tool like any other dangerous tool that must be treated with respect. When was the last time you read about a crazy rancher taking his AR and going on a murder spree? Never. Yet each of these knee-jerk reactions to criminal use of firearms ends up only impacting our legitimate and legal use and has NO impact on criminals. Remember that the next time folks are sickened and possibly die due to e-coli outbreaks from boar feces contaminated produce.

Those against high capacity magazines and semi-auto rifles are supporting laws that have exactly no impact on the criminals that will still get their hands on them. Did you know gangs now are manufacturing their own semi-auto firearms? Leland Yee, a California anti-gun legislator was just sentenced to five years in prison for traveling to the Philippines to facilitate the trafficking of semi-auto rifles and pistols into the US. These firearms are all home built in the Philippines, look and function exactly like AR's and Colt 1911's.
Raymond "Shrimp Boy" Chow was his partner and took advantage of the gun restrictions that opened up new revenue opportunities for the Chinese gangs in California. We do not have a gun problem. We have violent criminal problem. How will any law get firearms out of criminal hands short of outright search and seizure of all firearms from all citizens? The number one source for criminal access to firearms is burglary. Second is straw purchases through non-criminal relatives and girlfriends. What could possibly be done or law written, short of seizing all firearms and making them all illegal could impact their ability to acquire them by stealing and straw purchase?

Next time do some research before sticking your foot in your pie-hole.

[Hoyt]

23. Yep gun nuts will always push the spirit and intent of the law.

[bowens43]

50. This is why we need a TOTAL ban

On All ammunition.

[CTyankee]

51. "You better hope I can't get no bullets on layaway!"

[Lizzie Poppet]

58. After all, it works so well for drugs.

Oh, wait...

[Hoyt]

59. Good point, gun nuts are not nearly as "law-abiding" as they want us to believe.

[Lizzie Poppet]

61. This just in: people disregard laws they consider harmful, pointless, and/or fuckwitted.

Welcome to, oh, the entire history of human society.

[Hoyt]

64. And gun nuts are at the top of ignoring laws and modern societal mores.

[Lizzie Poppet]

69. Not even close, of course.

But I do love over-the-top hyperbole like that. It's not only entertaining, it does harm to a cause I oppose. Win-win...

[SQUEE]

100. ever been to Denver on April 20th?

But they are standing up to tyranny right? Also, I am sure no one here has ever been an armed robber, right?

[Hoyt]

102. Nope, but I have been to enough gun stores, gun shows, etc., in my early years to know gun owners

are often -- like most of the time -- right wingers and bigots.

[SQUEE]

105. hmmm

I doubt you KNOW many gun owners, and seeing as your admitted history here precludes you from legally even touching a firearm, I suggest in the interest of integrity you remain clear of most anyway. Too bad, I actually believe you and I would get along famously aside from this one issue.

[Hoyt]

106. I could legally get a permit to carry, if I were stupid and paranoid enough to want one.

Why would I want to associate with gun nuts, who are usually right wingers and bigots?

[SQUEE]

108. only if you lied on your app..

or...you lied here.

Gun owners are very rarely gun nuts, but you know that. All else? echo echo echo...

[Hoyt]

110. I did not lie here, SQUEE -- you simply can't comprehend posts in context.

[SQUEE]

116. OH, I believe what you said here, Hoyt

completely, it is what I think of anytime you post on any firearm related issue. I think it clearly explains why you want all lawful gun owners disarmed.

[Lizzie Poppet]

117. I shocked. Shocked, I tell you!

[premium]

149. Wow, look,

another accusation.

[oneshooter]

168. One that apparently failed.

[premium]

171. Oh my,

about time.

[SQUEE]

156. nope.. Hoyt, always SQUEE, just me.

but nice try, what next a can of beans to my head or a John Woo-esque disarmament and pool dunking of my firearm?

But as is de rigueur with you, prove your assertion, or apologize. It's so easy to throw that out, perhaps you are projecting.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

138. OK, I'm curious. What did the little scamp admit to?

[Rod Walker]

167. I'll second a request for that info!

[SQUEE]

169. Much as I would like to,

My no nark policy requires him to admit to his supposed crimes.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

172. He already did, apparently. Got a link?

[SQUEE]

173. sorry no I don't

But it was a few years ago in the Gungeon. He boasted to a felony, involving a firearm.

[premium]

148. Good luck with that.

[NickB79]

14. Grandfathered magazines are still perfectly legal to own and use

And there are literally HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of them in the US.

If someone in CO wanted a new 30-rd magazine, all they have to do is drive to a neighboring state, buy a bunch, and drive home.

You see, magazines DON'T HAVE SERIAL NUMBERS OR MANUFACTURING DATES ON THEM! This makes the new law virtually un-enforcible, as the burden of proof falls upon the state to prove your magazines are illegal and not just grandfathered models.

Whoever wrote this article knows very little about the new law.

[rdharma]

21. Read my post above.

And why are you giving advice on violating the law? Hmmmmmm?

[NickB79]

26. Just goes to show how unenforcible the law really is

And what I said isn't anything anyone with a minimum of intelligence can't think up on their own.

Why are YOU pretending this law is workable in any way?

[Gravitycollapse]

28. "AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service"

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

At Sun Jun 30, 2013, 01:54 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Now, I don't live in CO, but if I did, do you know how much this would affect me?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3132466

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Advocating and explaining how to violate laws limiting high capacity magazines.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Jun 30, 2013, 02:05 AM, and the Jury voted 3-3 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: The rants of a small, fearful mind, but small minds are part of the price you pay for democracy.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: This isn't the place to advocate breaking the law on guns, etc. We all know that, even the troll who wrote that post.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: not hide worthy
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: I support hiding this post not specifically because it advocates breaking the law. That alone would not motivate me to hide. What I find despicable about the post is the apparent total disregard for dangers associated with high capacity magazines. I use to own an AR-15 and a Mini-14. I know the advantages to having hi-cap magazines. Although I also admit that it is not enough to limit magazines to 15 rounds, I also find a benevolent motivation behind the law. And I do think it will help.

With that in mind, this poster is advocating violating a law that is both helpful and necessary in protecting human beings from spree killers. It reflects the opinion of many gun nuts; which is not to be confused with gun owners in general. I take his or her comments as exceptionally crass, self absorbed, idiotic and insensitive.

Hide it.

-Gravitycollapse
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[The Straight Story]

29. Huh. So if someone suggested going over a state line for an abortion would someone alert?

Good call by some in the jury in this case.

[Gravitycollapse]

30. I think the issue is not advocating breaking the law.

But the specific law that one is advocating being broken. That's in my explanation.

[The Straight Story]

31. Still seems stupid to alert on it at all

Like saying "Hey, I can't get over a 16oz soda in NYC, but know what, I can go outside the city and get one or buy two of them!"

Some people really hate open discussion and run to a jury to protect them from hearing things. I am guessing those same people don't get out on the internet much (give em an hour at reddit/fark LOL )

[Gravitycollapse]

32. That's a legitimately poor comparison.

Whereas one revolves around our apparent inability to regulate what we put in our mouths and stomachs, the other revolves around the issue of spree killing.

[The Straight Story]

34. Ah, once again though folks miss a point

Like with smoking in bars...never was about the smoking but on limiting the choices of free people (abortion is about the same thing, your body, your choice).

Less than 1% of gun owners use them in a crime, something like 0.4-0.6 percent. So why should the vast majority have laws changed when so very few abused them? Because it is easier than getting to the root of the problem and makes people feel all warm and fuzzy.

And then those very few use two guns we will say 'hey, let's limit people to 1' and so on.

Focus on the cause, not the tools, or you will never solve the real problems.

[Gravitycollapse]

35. Again, terrible comparisons. Second hand smoke kills.

And bans on smoking in bars and other public areas are in place to protect those who do not wish to die from cigarettes.

[The Straight Story]

42. Because people are forced at gun point to go to such places? Have you been forced to drink

at a bar you didn't want to go to?

Not talking about hospitals and grocery stores, places people need to go - but places people want to go.

Why do some want others to make choices for them?

[Gravitycollapse]

43. If the argument is that I shouldn't go to a bar for socializing...

because it's too much to ask that I not die from someone else's cigarette smoke, then let's just call it a night. Because I'm not interested in debating over the merits of bars and pubs as legitimate social, public spaces.

[The Straight Story]

48. Then let the owner decide and you can decide to take your business to a non-smoking one

Choices, people like them. Not all people, but some of us.

[Gravitycollapse]

49. The owner will always choose to cater to more patrons.

Which means they will nearly always cater to smokers if given the option. Which then means that smoking areas pervade my every day life. And it then is no longer a decision of patronizing one business over the other because they all cater to smokers.

[Gravitycollapse]

45. So then we should probably ban any magazine with a capacity higher than 2.

Which Germany has done and it has worked quite well.

[Rod Walker]

73. Given that there are *billions* of magazines in circulation in the United States,

how successful do you think such a ban would be?

[BainsBane]

65. right, because high capacity magazines are just the same as sodas

[BainsBane]

19. I know lazy, believe me

but too lazy to put another round in a gun? I can't compete with that.

[rdharma]

22. Oh, they has a sad!

[Gravitycollapse]

37. Like oxygenating a good wine and tasting the many subliminal layers.

One swig, I can taste the idealized male machismo. Then I get a brief hint of teenage fantasy. And it finishes with a gun nutty flavor. Overall, it's a full bodied taste reflective of the absurd conflation of the defensive interests of a private citizen with the defensive interests of a soldier.

[BainsBane]

40. It's the gunner fantasy

Play soldier and pretend they are heroes like Sly and the Arnold.

[BainsBane]

46. This isn't Iraq

or Afghanistan. Put your guns down.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

134. Chicago as a city is deadlier than Iraq was as a nation at war.

[BainsBane]

145. And the US is deadlier than the West Bank

thanks to gun proliferation.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

147. In Switzerland they issue actual honest-to-goodness assault rifles of military quality

to their citizens. Not the mislabeled sort you're trying to ban here but real military weapons. And yet they're gun crime and rampage killings are nearly non-existent.

Are you interested in dealing with actual crimes or just crusading against an inanimate tool that leaves you emotionally distraught?

[BainsBane]

150. I understand you worship guns

and love to pretend they are instruments of love. That position is delusional. It signals profound cognitive dissidence. But please, feel free to move to Switzerland any time you like.

The gunner game of cherry picking stats fed to you by the NRA is transparent. The US has the highest homicide rate in the First World, and higher than many, many developing countries. That is because gun folk place greater value on guns than they do human life. It's really that simple.

BTW, Chicago doesn't even crack the top 10 of the most deadliest cities of America. Watching a lot of Fox News gives you a skewed view of the world. The same old talking points are tiresome and just plain pathetic.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfisher/2012/10/18/detroit-tops-the-2012-list-of-americas-most-dangerous-cities/

[Nuclear Unicorn]

157. .

I understand you worship guns and love to pretend they are instruments of love. That position is delusional. It signals profound cognitive dissidence.

"cognitive dissidence"?

Cognitive -- to think

Dissidence -- to dissent.

I gladly plead guilty.

It is very disingenuous of you to singularly cite the West Bank and then accuse me of cherry-picking statistics to serve a particular argument. Nor does it disprove my contention that the per capita violent death rate of Chicago made being a citizen of the Windy City (must be all the bullets whizzing past) more dangerous than being a US soldier in Iraq. Nor does your article, which lumps drugs and non-gun violent crimes into its statistics, disprove my contention/cognitive dissent.

Some states with strict gun laws are also some of the most gun-violent. Some states with lax gun laws are some of the least gun-violent. Exceptions to both of those statements can be found. The point I'm making is: contrary to your assertion the mere presence of guns does not equal an uptick in gun violence. Guns are not the variable you are looking for. If you have even an ounce of sincerity for the victims you claim to champion perhaps you would serve them better focusing on more viable factors.

And there are other factors in play; factors that are more accessible to society to mitigate violence as a whole and that do not require abrogation of personal rights or political suicide in the pursuit of abrogation of personal rights. Once you mitigate those factors then maybe you could make an honest statement that guns are no longer required for self-defense.

[BainsBane]

151. Of course, we could always impose compulsory military service

Like in Switzerland, but I'm guessing that won't go over big among a group of people who focus exclusively on their own wants. People who go nuts over background checks and limits on magazine bans and can't be bothered to care about the lives struck down as a result of the policies they advocate for are hardly going to spend a couple years of their life in service to the nation.

[Duckhunter935]

153. I volunteered for 20 plus years

I have years of weapons training, should I be allowed to own the type of weapon I was trained on? I will not even ask for the full burst or automatic version. Just the civilian equivalent.

[Gravitycollapse]

155. No, you should not.

[BainsBane]

177. Perhaps you could do a poll in the gungeon

To see how many support universal, mandatory conscription.

[oneshooter]

178. Why don't you?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

158. My husband is a veteran and he opposes capacity restrictions.

And the military tends to overwhelmingly vote Republican. Just making a general observation military service as a virtue is debatable even in the best of times here on DU so I'm not sure what this comment is supposed to mean.

And then there is your own self. You oppose guns vehemently. Have you ever volunteered for military service? Per your assertion, those opposing gun restrictions are also too timid to endure the rigors of service I suppose it then falls to the pro-ban faction to carry the mantle of national defense.

But even then your suggestion of compulsory service does nothing to refute my point that the prevalence of guns does not lead to a corresponding rise in gun violence.

[Gravitycollapse]

154. If only this were true. Most of the ammunition is stored at depots.

So it is not the case that there is an army of Swiss soldiers at the ready with guns loaded. They possess the firearms but not necessarily the ammunition. They must first retrieve it. Which is a good system. To protect the most dangerous element of the firearms, the bullets that ultimately kill.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

159. Ammunition, I imagine, is as importable as illicit drugs or any other small-sized commodity.

I think the virtue lies in Swiss society as a whole. Once we develop similar virtues the angst over gun violence will fade.

[Gravitycollapse]

160. It is inherently impossible to persuade such virtue with the American gun culture.

That is to say, our love of firearms makes the proliferation of gun violence inevitable.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

161. One society deliberately arms its citizens, while the other leaves it to choice

But the latter is the sinner.

Curious.

[Gravitycollapse]

162. A country that abhors war trains its citizens to view firearms...

As necessary tools of last resort. There is no implication of the firearm as a hobby or as recreation. There is no massive gun industry churning out gun pornography.

The American gun culture is precisely that which the Swiss are not. We view guns not as tools of last resort or survival. They are toys for our own amusement. We rarify our perception of firearms with movies and magazines and lobbying groups. We make firearms easily accessible with little or no training and little or no prior authorization.

We construct the idealized male machismo as inseparable from the gun. So we have raised a population that cannot help but view firearms as primary means of coercion while also rewriting the consequences of firearms through film and other propaganda that paints guns and death in a positive light.

Do not try to tell me that our gun culture is voluntary and that every single citizen is not changed by it. That would be an absolute lie.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

163. You wrote,

There is no implication of the firearm as a hobby or as recreation. There is no massive gun industry churning out gun pornography.

The American gun culture is precisely that which the Swiss are not. We view guns not as tools of last resort or survival. They are toys for our own amusement.

But --

Recreational shooting is widespread in Switzerland. Practice with guns is a popular form of recreation, and is encouraged by the government, particularly for the members of the militia.[13] Swiss firearms-related rights are supported by the organization ProTell.

200,000 people attend the annual Feldschiessen weekend, which is the largest rifle shooting competition in the world.[4][14] In addition, there are several private shooting ranges which rent guns.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland

I'm not sure if the Swiss watch action films.

[Gravitycollapse]

170. You just sourced to an article that is sourced from RKBA advocates.

And is outdated by nearly 20 years.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

174. Which part is untrue?

[oneshooter]

164. All Swiss Militia have the rifle, uniform, loaded pack, and a full combat load of rifle ammo

at home. The only item not issued till needed are explosives.

[Gravitycollapse]

165. False. The tradition of keeping 50 rounds at home ended in 2007.

http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/Specials/Gun_debate/Background/Archives/Soldiers_can_keep_guns_at_home_but_not_ammo.html?cid=970614

[oneshooter]

179. Well I'll be. Do they still allow them to purchase

their issue firearm? As long as it is taken to the armory and a semi-auto fire group installed.

[Eleanors38]

122. Sly, in real life, is one of the Brady Center's favorite gun controllers...

Also, in reality, he has a CCW permit for several handguns. No surprise, given the supremely elitist character of the control/ptrohibitionist outlook.

[BainsBane]

38. Pepperoni or sausage?

[Gravitycollapse]

47. Goodnight sweet prince.

[The Straight Story]

39. I think it goes to some people feel powerless and want to leverage a higher power

to make them feel safe. They don't mind limiting more and more things when they are things those people don't themselves do.

The second someone comes along and suggest the government should restrict something they enjoy it is suddenly about choice and freedom.

There is a vanishing point, if you will, on issues - some regulations are sensible and beneficial, other ones tend to slide right past that line into the absurd where it serves no real purpose except emotional ones to cling to.

Add to this that we don't read news reports every day of the 50 million people who own guns and don't do anything wrong with them and you start seeing a bias/fear that develops because you only hear the negative about a group (which leads to stereotyping, etc).

I personally think it would be nice to have a list of all the people in the US with guns and the type of each gun they own - for the sole reason I could post 50 million posts a day about about each day about the people who didn't use them in a negative manner....but then that would not push the agenda of people who like to paint a picture of us all being akin to potential terrorists who will snap any minute and need to be monitored and tracked by our government. Reminds me of the how the RW talks about Muslims and terror and how others here say 'you can't judge them all by the few'

Yeah, not a good idea in that case or in others.

[In_The_Wind]

41. IMO: Gun owners don't need high-capacity magazines!

[Hoyt]

55. Life is just not worth living without them.

[In_The_Wind]

56. My life is!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

135. 30 rounds is standard issue.

[ileus]

52. Hopefully everyone is stocked up for the future.

15-20 maybe 30 mags should last for a lifetime of shooting.

The only real bad news is for future platforms that come out using a new style of magazine, they'd be limited to 15.

[Hoyt]

54. Such a poor pitiful plight. Maybe it's time to give up the gun love.

[Rod Walker]

60. In anticipation of this law (which takes effect tomorrow), I've purchased about 80 normal capacity

magazines, some of them for firearms I don't even own yet but plan to at some point.

Mostly for AR & AK platform guns, but even some oddballs life the FN Five Seven pistol, the Thompson 1927A1, and the Suomi KP31. If I don't get them now, I'll never be able to legally purchase them. Thanks heavens for grandfathering.

The only real bad news is for future platforms that come out using a new style of magazine, they'd be limited to 15.

If a rifles uses STANAG magazines, it will be a big selling point to me in the future!

[Lizzie Poppet]

62. It seems to me...

It seems to me that most folks in Colorado who want magazines with a higher capacity than the law allows would just hop over the border to a state that doesn't have reactionary, feel-good laws in place and buy all they want. Of course, as a fellow Western-state-dweller, I realize that can be a bit of a journey out here...

[Rod Walker]

63. Oh, the law is completely unenforceable...I'm just a law-abiding sort of guy.

Getting around this law is utterly trivial, granted. There's going to be a gun show in Cheyenne, Wyoming in August; I confidently predict that there will be more Colorado license plates in the parking lot then usual...

[Lizzie Poppet]

68. I tend to be, as well. Er...except for the "guy" part.

But as I said to Hoyt, when a law is harmful, pointless, and/or just generally fuckwitted, then my compliance is directly proportional to the likelihood of being observed and arrested for it. Most folks are like that, to varying degrees, really...always have been, always will be.

[BainsBane]

70. So clearly "most folks"

are not law abiding gun owners. So let's put to bed that fiction once and for all. You're all quite anxious to violate any law you choose. So according to you most gun owners are felons. I'll be bookmarking this for future reference the next time anyone tries to pass off the fiction of the "law abiding" gun owner.

[Rod Walker]

72. The penalty for the law being discussed is a misdemeanor, not a felony.

Just an FYI.

[BainsBane]

75. ok

It's still a violation of the law, which shows that gun nuts are not law abiding.

[Rod Walker]

77. And your evidence for this is an anonymous internet post?

[BainsBane]

79. My evidence is what people are saying here on this site.

People here are advocating and talking about how to violate laws designed to promote public safety.

A lot of folks believe laws against rape and domestic battery are optional too, which is why they are violated at incredibly high rates.

[Rod Walker]

81. As I said...an anonymous internet post.

A lot of folks believe laws against rape and domestic battery are optional too

Are people on this site advocating how to violate such laws?

If not, it's a pretty bad analogy, isn't it?

[BainsBane]

83. the claims of the law abiding gun owner

come from the same anonymous internet posters.
Yes, people here are advocating how to violate the laws. That's obvious to anyone who can read.

[Rod Walker]

87. Was the claim that gun owners are law abiding only supported by the fact that someone making

an anonymous internet post claimed that they were law abiding?

Yes, people here are advocating how to violate the laws. That's obvious to anyone who can read.

They're illustrating how easy a particular law is to violate. Not the same thing.

[Duckhunter935]

85. I guess you have never

sped, not fully stopped at red or stop sign, crossed the street outside crosswalk. There are probably hundreds of laws that are broken but rarely enforced.

[BainsBane]

86. like laws against rape and domestic battery

for example.

[Rod Walker]

91. Did you just compare jaywalking to rape?

[BainsBane]

93. I compared stock pilling ammo with rape

You compared jaywalking with high capacity magazines, which is repulsive.

[Rod Walker]

97. Equally absurd.

You compared jaywalking with high capacity magazines, which is repulsive.

I didn't first bring up jaywalking, Duckhunter935 did.

[BainsBane]

103. If you're going to enter a discussion

try reading first.

[BainsBane]

94. The effects of "jaywalking"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023080177

Guns come in very handy for men who want to kill their partners.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

137. If obedience to the law is the highest moral duty then why do you

claim to be a part of the Progressive where movement that supported avoiding the draft for Vietnam, disregard for destructive anti-drug laws, gays serving in the military when is was still against regulation, disregard for Jim Crowe laws, etc., etc., etc.?

This nation was founded on civil disobedience and its every greatest blemish has been overcome by those who refused to obey unjust words written on a distant pieces of paper.

[BainsBane]

67. Another nail in the coffin of the myth

of the law abiding gun owner. I guess laws are for ordinary people, not the heavily armed.

[NutmegYankee]

107. Do you ever exceed the speed limit?

I find that everybody disobeys minor laws they disagree with. And I mean everybody! But very few people ever disobey the big laws, like murder. That's what law abiding means when used like that. These are the people who are not robbing stores or shooting their "competition".

[Eleanors38]

123. Oh, my! I'm already there. Have you ever...

?

NOTE TO JURORS: This inquiry merely goes to the efficacy & consistency if Bane's argument that perhaps 80,000,000 gun-owners being in a mythological state regarding their law-abidingness, and is not meant as a personal attack.

Of course, I am not implying she burns rope, either. In fact, she doesn't even have to answer the question.

[BainsBane]

66. and what on earth are you going to do with that stuff?

[Rod Walker]

71. Given that these are magazines...for guns...I anticipate loading cartridges into them, taking them

to the gun range, and shooting them. They will normally be stored unloaded, except for the one firearm I have ready for use (AR-10) in the case of the unlikely event of a home invasion.

What else would I do with them?

[BainsBane]

74. What is so onerous about reloading?

Common uses for high-capacity magazines are mass shootings, like in Aurora. That is why the Colorado legislature banned them. Imagine their thinking people might actually care about the lives of their fellow citizens more than the horrendous inconvenience of taking a few seconds to reload a gun. I suppose they couldn't imagine the profound selfishness of the gun nuts who would evade the law.

[Rod Walker]

76. A common use for "high-capacity" magazines is not mass shootings.

There are billions of such magazines in circulation in the United States. What percentage of these are used in mass shootings? Hint: this number is less than 0.0001%.

Not exactly a "common" use, is it?

That is why the Colorado legislature banned them.

They didn't ban them, they banned their transfer. Those already owned (such as the hundred or so I have) are grandfathered.

[BainsBane]

78. but you're too important to follow the law

the law is for suckers like us who are the victims of gun violence. Not important people with stockpiles of weapons.

What other laws do you consider optional?

[Rod Walker]

80. What law am I not following? "High-capacity" magazines are still fully legal to own and use

as long as they were owned no later than June 30th, 2013 (today). Every one of my firearms and their accessories is perfectly legal.

What part of "grandfathered" don't you understand?

[BainsBane]

82. What part of public safety do you not understand?

Why is taking a second to reload such an inconvenience for you that you are willing to disregard the public will of your state that seeks to protect its citizens from that threat?

[Rod Walker]

84. You accused me of not following the law. Either tell me what law I'm violating, or retract

your statement.

Why is taking a second to reload such an inconvenience for you that you are willing to disregard the public will of your state that seeks to protect its citizens from that threat?

I am *not* disregarding the public will of my state. The public will of my state mandates that I only use those "high capacity" magazines that I own prior to July 1st, 2013. I am following that dictate to the letter.

Will you acknowledge that you are falsely accusing me of breaking the law?

[BainsBane]

92. fine

You are violating the spirit of the law but not the letter. You have showed that you believe your desire to have high capacity magazines is more important than public safety.

[Rod Walker]

95. Apology (such as it is) accepted.

You are violating the spirit of the law but not the letter.

Considering that not one Colorado lawmaker has asked owners of legal "high capacity" magazines to turn them in, how does this violate the spirit of the law?

You have showed that you believe your desire to have high capacity magazines is more important than public safety.

Who is being endangered when I load a magazine with 16 rounds rather than 15?

[BainsBane]

96. You didn't buy 16 capacity magazines did you?

Keep laughing. As we've had this discussion another four people have died from gun violence. Yuck it up.

[Rod Walker]

98. Actually, I did...for my CZ75 pistol.

And while I didn't mention them specifically, I also bought 40 & 60 round magazines for my AR-15, 45 round magazines for my AK-74, and 75 round drums for my AK-47.

So what?

Keep laughing. As we've had this discussion another four people have died from gun violence. Yuck it up.

Oh, I'm not laughing at them. I'm only laughing at you.

Well, that's it for now, gotta run.

[BainsBane]

101. That's what they always say

It shows exactly the kind of people we are dealing with. In a thread talking about dead children, gunners yuck it up. But hey, that's the America you made. You worked hard to make us the country with the highest homicide rate in the first world. Congratulations. Each and every corpse is victory for your side.

[Gravitycollapse]

140. Are you a second profile for the user banned in this thread?

Your name very closely matches the banned user and the odds of that being pure chance are very low.

[Rod Walker]

166. No I'm not. I have no other profiles on this board. Other than my assertion, I know of no way

to prove it to you.



Your name very closely matches the banned user and the odds of that being pure chance are very low.

The users banned in the post are Travis_0004, friendly_iconoclast, Hoyt, and someone whose name has been removed. I don't see that "Rod Walker" closely matches either of the first three, and I can't tell the user name of the person whose name has been removed, if that's the one that you are claiming is my doppelgänger.

[BainsBane]

175. joined Jun 13

They seem to have recruited a bunch of new members for that CC poll. Notice how he managed to stay in the gungeon until he got over 100 posts.

[Duckhunter935]

89. I think he said

he would follow the law and that is why he bought them now.

[Duckhunter935]

88. You are very wrong on that "common use"

Last edited Sun Jun 30, 2013, 02:46 PM - Edit history (1)

Very uncommon as far as how many are in use and used every day without being used for mass shootings. They were banned because people were not informed of this fact.

[BainsBane]

90. They are banned because most Coloradoans actually think

the lives spared when a mass murderer has to reload are more important than the inconvenience of ordinary gun owners reloading, as do the majority of Americans, according to polling data.

They are only human lives. Why would you concern yourself with something so insignificant?

[Duckhunter935]

99. If that were truly the case

They should not have allowed ones already owned to be grandfathered. I am sure millions are already in the hands of Coloradans. I have no big issues banning magazines over 30 rounds. I prefer 20 round magazines myself. His stupid 100 round magazine jammed as most of the time they will and they just ruin the weapon from overheating. I have pointed out many times on what I think should be done to help stop mass shootings but some are deaf to any suggestion that does not contain bans on something. I do not have a problem with UBC but it has to be paid for and good compete information entered. This is not the case under current law, can we get that fixed? Why do I need another background check if I already own firearms and also had a background check for my CCL? Talk about waste of resources.

[BainsBane]

104. So they should have empowered police to go around confiscating magazines?

Right. You people would raise bloody hell then. All the RW militias would rise up. Nice attempt at diversion.

Many times? I have no fucking idea who you are. I'm supposed to know who and what every gunner on this site says, like you're the President or something? Get over yourself.

You need another background check because it's possible you or anyone else might have committed a felony or been adjudicated dangerous since you're last purchase. Jesus. Is that really so difficult to figure out?

[Duckhunter935]

109. Well that is the only way to ensure the ban works, magazines do not expire like milk.

Right. You people would raise bloody hell then. All the RW militias would rise up. Nice attempt at diversion.

That is why this law is meaningless and will not do what you intend it to do. I just point that out.

Many times? I have no fucking idea who you are. I'm supposed to know who and what every gunner on this site says, like you're the President or something? Get over yourself.

Nope, just one individual on a discussion forum. I just know we have had enough discussions on here you have seen many of my posts. I need to get over myself? I could say something but you might get upset and try to get this post hidden. Not taking the bait.

You need another background check because it's possible you or anyone else might have committed a felony or been adjudicated dangerous since you're last purchase. Jesus. Is that really so difficult to figure out?

Than I should not have access to the weapons I currently own and they should be confiscated. I am sure that is what you mean. I just pointed out I think that is a waste of resources. The odds are much better that this is the norm not your speculation.

[BainsBane]

146. Your point is illogical

Background checks are for new gun purchases. The state does not have the power or inclination to run around to every gun nut and take their weapons. I understand you would love to stoke that flame to make sure nothing passes and stir up shit among the already unhinged NRA zombies. Your game is transparent.

The idea that you only have to go through a background check once in your life is absurd. The idea that one is either a felon at age 18 or never is nonsensical. If, however, you think you should not have access to any weapons, I suggest you surrender them.

Your version of background checks would allow a free flow of guns to felons. It's useless.

[Duckhunter935]

152. As I have said in other posts

I kind of prefer a voluntary firearms license. Pay a one time fee and have very in depth background check and proof of training, Like a CCL now. Show this at time of purchase. It can even be by type of weapon, revolver, semi-automatic pistol, rifle, bolt action, semi auto or shotgun. You do not volunteer and you go through the normal NICS check. License would be surrendered upon felony conviction or more tricky for mental health reasons. I think this is doable and would require less resources in the long run. Would not track what type of weapon but just gives you the authorization to purchase. Like many others here we have already comprimised over the years and are willing to again. Some around here are not.

[alarimer]

131. Get over yourselves, you pitiful losers.

People who loves guns that much have issues.

In a perfect world, guns would be readily available, but ammunition would be scarcer than hen's teeth.

[mwrguy]

180. This is a violation of their religious freedom

Since gun cultists basically worship the damned things.

[Zoeisright]

181. What a bunch of whining losers.

They all have serious mental problems.

[NaturalHigh]

182. People who had the foresight to stock up on these magazines...

are going to make a fortune now that this ban is in place. Gun shows in surrounding states likely will too.

[lhecker51]

183. Gun Laws

Tactical mag changes take about 3 seconds or less. If the mags were limited to 5 rounds, that would only add 18 seconds to fire thirty rounds. If the mags are limited to 10 rounds, that would be less than 10 seconds added to shoot thirty. My nephew is a career criminal felon that is in and out of jail and prison. He uses firearms and I can tell you that high cap mags have been banned in my state for years yet that never stopped him. How can this be??? The only ones these laws impact are the law abiding gun owner that has never been the problem in the first place. Criminals could care less about new gun laws or gun bans and in fact they support gun bans because it makes their job so much safer knowing that the odds their victims are disarmed are very good.

Because nothing says "loss of freedom" like creating laws that do not impact the criminal and place the law abiding in greater danger.

These are not just words out of my mouth. My wife was sexually assaulted in a parking garage and my sister-in-law was carjacked and BEATEN to death. Could you please explain to them how high cap magazine limits and banning concealed carry is in their best interest of safety??

A murderous criminal looking to murder as many as possible will most likely limit themselves to 10 round magazines and will see the gun free school zone signs and move on to a different target due to these gun laws.

My daughter went to high school with Syed Farook. I thank God he was not radicalized back then. Remember that evil never makes an appointment.