If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NYPost)   NY state lawmakers rush a gun-control law through that prohibits the sale of magazines that can hold more than seven bullets without checking to see if anybody makes seven-bullet magazines   (nypost.com) divider line 219
    More: Fail, New York, school massacre, Chris W. Cox, Andrew Cuomo  
•       •       •

2001 clicks; posted to Politics » on 22 Mar 2013 at 12:05 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



219 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-22 11:57:55 AM
Woohoo!!! M1911s for everybody!!!!!
 
2013-03-22 11:59:28 AM
Granted I'm a bit slow, but why do they have to put a hold on the measure? Are they changing it to 6 or 8? What is happening? Why can't they still keep it at 7?
 
2013-03-22 12:06:47 PM
Subby and the Post are apparently unfamiliar with the mathematical concept of "greater than"
 
2013-03-22 12:07:47 PM
Imagine that: politicians trying to legislate stuff about which they are wholly ignorant. Color me shocked.
 
2013-03-22 12:08:15 PM
I heard the compromise being floated is that you can own a 10-round magazine, but you can't put more than 7 rounds in it.
 
2013-03-22 12:10:19 PM
It wouldn't be hard to turn 10 round magazines into 7's, just need a plastic filler at the bottom. You know, an easily removed plastic filler.
 
2013-03-22 12:10:57 PM
People, such as Wilson Combat, make 7 round magazines. And like hardinparamedic said, these are usually for a M1911.
 
2013-03-22 12:11:14 PM

Car_Ramrod: Granted I'm a bit slow, but why do they have to put a hold on the measure? Are they changing it to 6 or 8? What is happening? Why can't they still keep it at 7?


Because 7 is the largest number in the universe so it is impossible to have magazine that holds that number of bullets or more.
 
2013-03-22 12:11:16 PM

CPennypacker: Subby and the Post are apparently unfamiliar with the mathematical concept of "greater than"


That's really all there is to say about this.
 
2013-03-22 12:11:32 PM
Which means that Charlton Heston's cold, dead hands are automatically president and Obama has to spend the next four years hunting grizzly bears with Trunk Palin.
 
2013-03-22 12:11:57 PM
Good. Any legislation that can actually be passed is a start. This is getting out of control.

Btw: 2883 gun deaths in the US since Newtown.
 
2013-03-22 12:12:20 PM
Right, because if they had spec'd greater than 8, 7 round magazines wouldn't be on shelves next month. Nice try at the savage burn, subby and Post-tards, but no banana. Plenty to be mad about, don't make your position look stupid by regressing to jr. high "logic" traps.
 
2013-03-22 12:13:24 PM

hardinparamedic: Woohoo!!! M1911s for everybody!!!!!


M1911: For those rare times when you don't have a shotgun.

/Just this once, I'll admit that it's difficult to find a good holster for a 12GA.
 
2013-03-22 12:15:27 PM
good for businesses that are now going to make 7 shot magazines that everyone now has to buy?
 
2013-03-22 12:16:23 PM
"Rushed" meaning the gun lobby failed to halt it.
 
2013-03-22 12:17:09 PM
Can't they just get the phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range instead?
 
2013-03-22 12:18:19 PM
Adopt Canadian gun laws already. Sheesh.
 
2013-03-22 12:18:31 PM

Car_Ramrod: Granted I'm a bit slow, but why do they have to put a hold on the measure? Are they changing it to 6 or 8? What is happening? Why can't they still keep it at 7?


'Cause no one makes 7-round magazines, so this becomes a "back door" ban on all new magazine sales (at least until someone is arsed to design new mags for that massive NY market) and therefore a viable claim can be made in court that the law is overly restrictive.

Gov. Cuomo earlier suggested that 10-round magazines be allowed, but New Yorkers would be legally required to load no more than seven bullets into the magazine.  Lulz aside, the problem with this is that it would only impact law-abiding gun owners (as the criminal elements would undoubtedly top-up) and makes obvious the fact that this law is not about reducing gun violence, but about making guns no fun to shoot.
 
2013-03-22 12:18:40 PM

vygramul: Imagine that: politicians trying to legislate stuff about which they are wholly ignorant. Color me shocked.


and what color is that?
 
2013-03-22 12:18:43 PM
Was it Blazing Saddles where one of the characters said something like "Seven shots?!  What do you think this is a western?!"  Or was it something else?
 
2013-03-22 12:19:06 PM
Fortunately, the prohibition upon semi-automatic rifles featuring pistol grips or threaded barrels will be unaffected, as any educated individual knows that rifles with such features are inherently more dangerous.
 
2013-03-22 12:20:10 PM

HotWingConspiracy: "Rushed" meaning the gun lobby failed to halt it.


Sure buddy.
 
2013-03-22 12:21:27 PM

HotWingConspiracy: "Rushed" meaning the gun lobby failed to halt it.


No he pretty much wiped his *** w/ the democratic process in NY and forced a bill through w/o any debate screaming think of the children!!!!!
 
2013-03-22 12:21:32 PM

qorkfiend: I heard the compromise being floated is that you can own a 10-round magazine, but you can't put more than 7 rounds in it.


Which, as an anti-gun nut, is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
 
2013-03-22 12:21:35 PM

Dimensio: Fortunately, the prohibition upon semi-automatic rifles featuring pistol grips or threaded barrels will be unaffected, as any educated individual knows that rifles with such features are inherently more dangerous.


Don't forget about the barrel shroud
 
2013-03-22 12:21:55 PM
Even my old Ruger 10/22 has a stock 10 round mag.
 
2013-03-22 12:22:54 PM

DrRatchet: Car_Ramrod: Granted I'm a bit slow, but why do they have to put a hold on the measure? Are they changing it to 6 or 8? What is happening? Why can't they still keep it at 7?

'Cause no one makes 7-round magazines, so this becomes a "back door" ban on all new magazine sales (at least until someone is arsed to design new mags for that massive NY market) and therefore a viable claim can be made in court that the law is overly restrictive.

Gov. Cuomo earlier suggested that 10-round magazines be allowed, but New Yorkers would be legally required to load no more than seven bullets into the magazine.  Lulz aside, the problem with this is that it would only impact law-abiding gun owners (as the criminal elements would undoubtedly top-up) and makes obvious the fact that this law is not about reducing gun violence, but about making guns no fun to shoot.


Would loading seven rounds into a magazine, loading the magazine into a firearm, loading one of the cartridges into the firearm chamber, removing the firearm, adding an additional cartridge to the magazine (bringing its total back to seven) and reloading the magazine into the firearm (thus enabling a total of eight rounds to be fired before reloading) be prohibited under the statute?

Are the authors of the SAFE act sufficiently knowledgeable of firearms technology to even comprehend and account for such an occurrence?
 
2013-03-22 12:23:06 PM
I can keep my recurve right? I only carry 6 arrows in the quiver
 
2013-03-22 12:23:56 PM

soia: vygramul: Imagine that: politicians trying to legislate stuff about which they are wholly ignorant. Color me shocked.

and what color is that?


It's a very different color from "there" - about 100 THz different in wavelength.
 
2013-03-22 12:24:16 PM

cram_hole: Can't they just get the phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range instead?


i47.tinypic.com
 
2013-03-22 12:24:23 PM

DrRatchet: Car_Ramrod: Granted I'm a bit slow, but why do they have to put a hold on the measure? Are they changing it to 6 or 8? What is happening? Why can't they still keep it at 7?

'Cause no one makes 7-round magazines, so this becomes a "back door" ban on all new magazine sales (at least until someone is arsed to design new mags for that massive NY market) and therefore a viable claim can be made in court that the law is overly restrictive.


But, couldn't they still make 6-round magazines? Or start making 7-round magazines?

Gov. Cuomo earlier suggested that 10-round magazines be allowed, but New Yorkers would be legally required to load no more than seven bullets into the magazine.  Lulz aside

Agreed, that's f'n stupid.

the problem with this is that it would only impact law-abiding gun owners (as the criminal elements would undoubtedly top-up) and makes obvious the fact that this law is not about reducing gun violence, but about making guns no fun to shoot.

Yes, laws only affect people that abide by the laws. Thank you for pointing out that concept. Why even have laws, amiright? People keep on murdering each other, why even make it illegal?
 
2013-03-22 12:25:52 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: M1911: For those rare times when you don't have a shotgun.


Don't laugh, y'all. Here in Kalifornia, when the congress-critters passed a ten-round magazine limit, sales of '45's and other big-bore pistols rose, along with the super-small (and easy to conceal) pocket pistols. Full-size 9mm's aren't selling like they used to. 380's are so unpopular that even the preppers leave the ammo on store shelves.

SO, yah, mag restrictions == BIGGER BULLETS.
 
2013-03-22 12:26:05 PM
www.nypost.com
 
2013-03-22 12:26:55 PM

Car_Ramrod: DrRatchet: Car_Ramrod: Granted I'm a bit slow, but why do they have to put a hold on the measure? Are they changing it to 6 or 8? What is happening? Why can't they still keep it at 7?

'Cause no one makes 7-round magazines, so this becomes a "back door" ban on all new magazine sales (at least until someone is arsed to design new mags for that massive NY market) and therefore a viable claim can be made in court that the law is overly restrictive.

But, couldn't they still make 6-round magazines? Or start making 7-round magazines?

Gov. Cuomo earlier suggested that 10-round magazines be allowed, but New Yorkers would be legally required to load no more than seven bullets into the magazine.  Lulz aside

Agreed, that's f'n stupid.

the problem with this is that it would only impact law-abiding gun owners (as the criminal elements would undoubtedly top-up) and makes obvious the fact that this law is not about reducing gun violence, but about making guns no fun to shoot.

Yes, laws only affect people that abide by the laws. Thank you for pointing out that concept. Why even have laws, amiright? People keep on murdering each other, why even make it illegal?


While comparing malum prohibitum laws with malum in se laws is a popular tactic of firearm regulation advocates, the comparison is still dishonest.
 
2013-03-22 12:26:56 PM
I can't wait for all the deals on the fun stuff leaving New York.
 
2013-03-22 12:28:32 PM

Dimensio: Would loading seven rounds into a magazine, loading the magazine into a firearm, loading one of the cartridges into the firearm chamber, removing the firearm, adding an additional cartridge to the magazine (bringing its total back to seven) and reloading the magazine into the firearm (thus enabling a total of eight rounds to be fired before reloading) be prohibited under the statute?


If that's accepted, I imagine some lazy person going "screw it, I'm just putting 8 in at once, no one will know" and all of a sudden a cop tackles him out of nowhere, yelling "Can't you count?!"
 
2013-03-22 12:28:35 PM
I am cheerfully awaiting the violent breakdown of liberty and the institution of horrible tyranny this bill will surely bring about, for certain, absolutely.
 
2013-03-22 12:29:23 PM

DrRatchet: (at least until someone is arsed to design new mags for that massive NY market)


Someone will be arsed. Someone has probably already been arsed. Someone is probably making a design for people to make on those 3D printers so they can then go 'THIS LAW WON'T STOP ANYTHING JUST LOOK AT ALL THE GUNS I CAN MAKE WITH SPIT AND DUCT TAPE'.

Honestly, someone invents a 3D printer and the first thing society thinks to make with it is guns? This is why we can't have nice things.
 
2013-03-22 12:29:29 PM

Prank Monkey: I can't wait for all the deals on the fun stuff leaving New York.


you assume it's leaving.
 
2013-03-22 12:29:32 PM

Dimensio: Car_Ramrod: DrRatchet: Car_Ramrod: Granted I'm a bit slow, but why do they have to put a hold on the measure? Are they changing it to 6 or 8? What is happening? Why can't they still keep it at 7?

'Cause no one makes 7-round magazines, so this becomes a "back door" ban on all new magazine sales (at least until someone is arsed to design new mags for that massive NY market) and therefore a viable claim can be made in court that the law is overly restrictive.

But, couldn't they still make 6-round magazines? Or start making 7-round magazines?

Gov. Cuomo earlier suggested that 10-round magazines be allowed, but New Yorkers would be legally required to load no more than seven bullets into the magazine.  Lulz aside

Agreed, that's f'n stupid.

the problem with this is that it would only impact law-abiding gun owners (as the criminal elements would undoubtedly top-up) and makes obvious the fact that this law is not about reducing gun violence, but about making guns no fun to shoot.

Yes, laws only affect people that abide by the laws. Thank you for pointing out that concept. Why even have laws, amiright? People keep on murdering each other, why even make it illegal?

While comparing malum prohibitum laws with malum in se laws is a popular tactic of firearm regulation advocates, the comparison is still dishonest.


Uh, this is America. How about you talk in American, college boy.
 
2013-03-22 12:30:22 PM

Car_Ramrod: Dimensio: Would loading seven rounds into a magazine, loading the magazine into a firearm, loading one of the cartridges into the firearm chamber, removing the firearm, adding an additional cartridge to the magazine (bringing its total back to seven) and reloading the magazine into the firearm (thus enabling a total of eight rounds to be fired before reloading) be prohibited under the statute?

If that's accepted, I imagine some lazy person going "screw it, I'm just putting 8 in at once, no one will know" and all of a sudden a cop tackles him out of nowhere, yelling "Can't you count?!"


I could imagine law enforcement attempting to argue that having seven rounds in a magazine and one round in a firearm chamber is impossible without loading eight rounds into the magazine initiall. I could also imagine a jury of individuals ignorant of firearms technology accepting that lie without question.
 
2013-03-22 12:30:26 PM

Gosling: DrRatchet: (at least until someone is arsed to design new mags for that massive NY market)

Someone will be arsed. Someone has probably already been arsed. Someone is probably making a design for people to make on those 3D printers so they can then go 'THIS LAW WON'T STOP ANYTHING JUST LOOK AT ALL THE GUNS I CAN MAKE WITH SPIT AND DUCT TAPE'.

Honestly, someone invents a 3D printer and the first thing society thinks to make with it is guns? This is why we can't have nice things.


guns were the second thing.

Dildos were the first.
 
2013-03-22 12:30:54 PM

SploogeTime: Guns are NOT the problem. People are the problem. They always have been, they always will be.


I agree.  Keep people away from guns - problems solved.
 
2013-03-22 12:31:28 PM

Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: Was it Blazing Saddles where one of the characters said something like "Seven shots?!  What do you think this is a western?!"  Or was it something else?


I think you're thinking of Silver Streak.  Richard Pryor talking to Gene Wilder.
 
2013-03-22 12:31:38 PM
Biden 2008:
"I guarantee you Barack Obama ain't taking my shotguns, so don't buy that malarkey," Biden said to voters during a campaign stop in Castlewood, Virginia on September 20. "Don't buy that malarkey. They're going to start peddling that to you."
Biden informed the crowd that he was the proud owner of two guns.
"If he tries to fool with my Beretta, he's got a problem," Biden added, referring to Obama.


Biden 2013:
"Limiting it to 10 rounds makes a difference in how many shots you can let off before someone can intervene."

Hey Joe,
Keep in mind your argument works both ways -- sure, everyone's got insane mass shooters in mind today because of recent events, but remember if a law abiding citizen gets caught in a firefight through no fault of their own, you are limiting their ability to defend themselves, too. The average 9mm handgun magazine carries 14-17 rounds. How many rounds does your Beretta's magazine hold?  Kinda sounds like Obama's fooling with your Beretta, if you ask me.
 
2013-03-22 12:31:50 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: hardinparamedic: Woohoo!!! M1911s for everybody!!!!!

M1911: For those rare times when you don't have a shotgun.

/Just this once, I'll admit that it's difficult to find a good holster for a 12GA.


And where am I gonna find a plug to limit the magazine for a Lee-Enfield?
 
2013-03-22 12:31:58 PM
Maybe instead of biatching about the laws that get passed the gun lobby and their mouth pieces can sit down to discuss real effective compromises for legislation. When you stick your fingers in your ears and say "la la la" this is what happens.
 
2013-03-22 12:32:09 PM

Dimensio: Car_Ramrod: Dimensio: Would loading seven rounds into a magazine, loading the magazine into a firearm, loading one of the cartridges into the firearm chamber, removing the firearm, adding an additional cartridge to the magazine (bringing its total back to seven) and reloading the magazine into the firearm (thus enabling a total of eight rounds to be fired before reloading) be prohibited under the statute?

If that's accepted, I imagine some lazy person going "screw it, I'm just putting 8 in at once, no one will know" and all of a sudden a cop tackles him out of nowhere, yelling "Can't you count?!"

I could imagine law enforcement attempting to argue that having seven rounds in a magazine and one round in a firearm chamber is impossible without loading eight rounds into the magazine initiall. I could also imagine a jury of individuals ignorant of firearms technology accepting that lie without question.


Stupidity of the regulation aside, isn't that what lawyers are paid for? To explain to the jury why it's possible?
 
2013-03-22 12:33:24 PM

SploogeTime: Guns are NOT the problem. People are the problem. They always have been, they always will be.


Unlimited abortion for everyone! We need to start limiting people!
 
2013-03-22 12:33:36 PM
First of all, subby, they're not called MAGAZINES.  They're called CLIPS.  Calling a clip a magazine tells me that you know nothing about guns and are possibly a homosexual.
 
Displayed 50 of 219 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report