Don't want your AR's banned? How about this...

[liberal N proud]

Ban the ammunition that can be used in them. Or ban the clips that holds the ammo.

You can have all the damn AR's you want, just can't shoot 50 - 100 rounds.

If you can't kill the damn rabbit with a couple of bullets, then you need to learn how to aim better.

[Agschmid]

1. Yup.

[rock]

2. I believe this point has been discussed several times on DU

That would be unconstitutional.

[uponit7771]

9. Regulating firearms or their peripherals is not unconstitutional

[rock]

14. If the Law could ban the bullets

It would be a lot easier just to ban the gun (if that were constitutional). Don't take the indirect way when the direct way is available.

[uponit7771]

17. No need to even ban them just practically regulate them. Also, the avg gun owner should not be able

... to easily get devices that give them more or on par firepower than the avg police dept.

[hack89]

35. But such laws have to pass strict judicial review

And cannot be used as a defacto ban.

[CanonRay]

48. The 2nd Amendment is not absolute

even the lame brains on the SCOTUS said this.

[REP]

3. Only 10-round magazines legal in California

[Crepuscular]

16. not true

Only NEW 10 round magazines legal in California. Hundreds of thousands of large capacity magazines were grandfathered and are perfectly legal to possess and use.

[REP]

22. True. Cannot buy new or used magazines over 10 rounds

But if you have any larger capacity, you can keep them but may not sell them.

[Crepuscular]

25. The assertion

was that only 10 round magazines were legal in CA, which is not the case. There are limits on buying and selling larger capacity magazines but use and possession of larger capacity magazines owned prior to the law being passed is perfectly legal. Since there are hundreds of thousands of larger capacity magazines legally possessed in CA, not to mention the fact that they can be obtained legally in most nearby states, if a criminal really wants one, I'm hard pressed to see how such a law will have any tangible impact on reducing gun crime. But I guess it makes some people feel good to have such a limitation in place.

[REP]

43. We have no argument; I simply did not state California's restrictions completely

Switching out magazines isn't terribly difficult and large capacity magazines tend to jam on ARs and their clones. The magazine restriction is like the cosmetic bans on certain rifles; it feels as though something is being done but accomplishes nothing. The OP did make the assumption that anyone can buy a high-capacity magazine and strictly speaking, my reply was correct - not in California. I just didn't flesh it out to add that if you already had some, you can keep them. We have no argument.

ETA and yes, one could drive some in, but no dealer will ship them to California.

[Crepuscular]

46. ...

Concur.

[Crepuscular]

4. or maybe not

since both are constitutionally protected.

You want to ban AR's or any other gun? Change the constitution.

Barring that, get over it.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

5. Yeah I remember Madison specifically speaking about AR-15s back in 1787. nt

[Crepuscular]

11. silly argument

Maybe something of substance next time?

[Press Virginia]

39. Did he do it on the internet?

[uponit7771]

7. You're right and can be regulated and should be

[G_j]

8. Too bad

you don't know what you are talking about.. but no surprise there..

[Crepuscular]

12. Uh-huh

please enlighten us.

[liberal N proud]

15. Where in the Constituion or 2nd Ammendment does it state that you have the right to 100 round mags?

[Crepuscular]

18. it doesn't

nor did I say it did. It gives you the right to have a magazine, however, if it's an integral part of the firearm. The post I was responding to suggested banning ammunition and magazines, both of which fall under 2nd amendment protections. Magazine capacity is open to regulation, as is certain types of ammo not in normal use.

[hack89]

38. Right next to the words "privacy" and "abortion ". nt

[PoliticAverse]

53. Courts have found restriction on magazine size is constitutional.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-capacity_magazine_ban

[TeddyR]

54. Yep

But as noted in the link a court also found New York's law limiting magazines to 7 or fewer rounds to be unconstitutional. The devil is in the details. I certainly agree that some laws are permitted by Heller and others are not. I don't think the immediate question is whether a law is constitutional, the question is whether there is the political support to enact any laws.

[uponit7771]

6. +1, any device DESIGNED to kill a lot of humans efficiently shouldn't be in the hands of avg citizen

[ileus]

10. I don't recommend rabbit hunting with a 223.

Groundhogs, crows, coyotes sure. Rabbits just use a shotgun.

[jmg257]

13. Thomas Jefferson.

"The right to use a thing comprehends a right to the means necessary to its use, and without which it would be useless." --Thomas Jefferson to William Carmichael, 1790.

Ammo is tough, but magazine capacity restrictions are tried and true methods...To some extent.

[ManiacJoe]

19. What makes AR-15 style rifles so special that they need more restrictions than other rifles?

[Crepuscular]

27. ...

They look scary and can shoot 800 rounds per minute according to some internet experts.

[NaturalHigh]

34. Those same "internet experts" claim that they are automatic weapons.

[Crepuscular]

40. yep

but that is hardly surprising coming from those who view bayonet lugs as a feature contributing to the lethality of certain weapons.

[Marengo]

20. Blanket bans of entire calibers a for firearms in common use may not pass

Constitutional muster. Feeding devices however have been successfully restricted.

[liberal N proud]

21. 3 or 4 round magazine

If you can't kill what ever animal you are hunting (assuming that is why they need these things) with 3 or 4 rounds, then you need better aim.

[Crepuscular]

32. so.....

you are saying that I can legally possess a rifle or pistol with a 10 round capacity but that if it's an "assault weapon" or an AR, I should be limited to 3 - 4 shots?

Logic does not seem to be part of this conversation.

Btw, guns are used for other legal purposes then hunting, you know.

[Marengo]

36. That may pass. The AR family is an excellent hunting platform, despite the denials here on DU.

Although many I assume purchase for self-defense, in which 3 or 4 rounds is a bit slim. 10 is a commonly accepted legal limit.

[Lizzie Poppet]

37. It's not commonly a hunting rifle.

Yes, ARs (and other .223 Remington-chambered rifles) can be used for hunting, but it's not that common. The round isn't really powerful enough for deer, etc...but is way too much for most small game if you plan to harvest the meat. It was developed for "varminting" (removing crop-eating pests and such...). . Intermediate-power cartridges like that are popular with militaries because they get the job done on enemy soldiers (if not nearly as well as more powerful cartridges) and a soldier can carry a lot more of them.

The AR is also used a lot in certain types of competition. Not the kind I do (I shoot long range stuff...which is done with bolt-action rifles almost exclusively). And, of course, mostly for recreational shooting.

[Adrahil]

44. AR style rifles actually come in many calibers.

Even the venerable .308, which is PLENTY powerful enough for deer. Honestly, with good quality softpoint ammo, 5.56 is just fine for deer too.

banning specific calibers is unlikely to be very successful. I think it's wiser to go after magazines.

[Crepuscular]

45. I would beg to differ

The .223 is more then adequate for deer sized game, the determining factor being the construction of the bullet used.

Using a 70 Gr. Barnes TSX or some other solid, the .223 will produce around 1200 foot pounds of energy at 100 yards, about the same as the venerable 30/30 Winchester, which has certainly been used to kill a whole bunch of deer over the years.

[Lizzie Poppet]

47. Okay for whitetail, I suppose.

I don't hunt, but I grew up in mulie country with a dad who hunted (and whose daughter loved shooting from the get-go). I'd want more gun for mule deer...but that might just be echoing Pop's prejudices (and I've already used my evil daughter influence to convert him to the Church of .38 Superautomatic).

[REP]

49. Heh.

There's a family of mulies that hang out in my yard (I live on top of a mountain/big hill). I often find them with their noses pressed against the walls of my greenhouse. I remind them that they are delicious, and I've named them all "Tasty."

These deer have little shame and I could probably hunt them with a hammer.

[Lizzie Poppet]

58. *grin* Yeah, they get pretty bold.

[Crepuscular]

51. ...

I live and hunt in whitetail country so that's my primary experience, although I have hunted Muleys in Wyoming. The primary difference is not so much between the two species but the average shot distance involved. Typical shot in the Midwest is about 100 yards, out west in Muley country, 300 yards and longer is not unheard of, although I personally limit any shots to 200 yards or under. Bullet technology has come a long way in the last 20 years, the advent of copper solids and bonded bullets has made a lot of calibers that were considered marginal for deer, when cup and core construction was state of the art, into legitimate hunting calibers and I view the .223 as one of those.

[Lizzie Poppet]

55. Good to know.

I don't hunt, so I don't keep up on the available bullets for that purpose. I shoot .308 and .338 LM for what I do...and the bullets I use for my loads are pretty standard (for example, 168gr HPBT Match King from Sierra for the .308)

[Marengo]

56. SMK 168s are the bomb behind 47g of 4064 in my M1903. One ragged hole...

If I do my part.

[jmg257]

41. Go with 5 rounds then as that is typical hunting limitation.

Would give a better 'substantial relation between a means and the end" as described in the NY US court decision striking down the 7 round limit.

(Though of course hunting purposes is only a small part of the discussion.)

[shadowrider]

23. As long as the law specifically says to ban "clips" for an AR-15

I'm all for it.

Honest.

[TipTok]

29. Ha

[Hoyt]

31. The "nomenclature" boys are here.

[Lee-Lee]

24. Going to ban 3D printers?

If not, than anyone who doesn't care about your law can download plans that exist now and print everything but the spring. And print the form that they then wind spring stock wire around to make the spring.

3 printers are already cheap and soon will be in most homes. The plans are out there for free download.

A ban will stop exactly nobody except those inclined to follow the law.

[GummyBearz]

26. Ban .22 caliber bullets?

That caliber is one step up from a pellet gun. I was shooting a .22 at the age 12... and no one died.

[TipTok]

28. You can have all the paper you want.

However ink will be taxed at an exorbitant rate.

Ammo is just as protected as arms.

[mwrguy]

30. I do want them banned.

[Waldorf]

33. It doesn't use special ammo. Just regular ammo that is also used in regular

bolt action rifles. And it requires magazines to hold the ammo.

[Javaman]

50. Chris Rock said it best...

[hack89]

52. A noted constitutional scholar. nt

[Javaman]

57. say hello to my little friend...

ignore.

[hack89]

59. What a mature response

I suspect that I won't miss interacting with you.

[pansypoo53219]

60. DIY bullets.