If we don't get a new AWB...

[IncendiaryGunner]

I think the ban is certainly coming. The question is, how will it affect you? I am not advocating a law against hi-cap mags but in all honesty, the law never affected me earlier last decade when I got into shooting/carry during the AWB and won't affect me now.

I simply never feel under-gunned with a 1911 at my side and two spare 8 round mags on my other hip. 99% of the time I have a S&W 3913 with a spare mag or two and would never think this isn't enough to defend myself or family when I'm out and about. 8 rounds of Speer GD or Federal HST in the mag with one in the pipe and another 8 to 16 on my belt is certain to do the trick if god forbid I ever have to defend myself.

If anything, a new AWB will force people to practice high stress shot placement, marksmanship and quick mag changes, which to me, is half the fun of owning a gun...the other half is rolling my own!

Again, this is just my own personal experience and I am in no way advocating any new laws. Just offering an anecdote or two to add to the thread.

I do own 15 and 18 round mags for my service sized pistols but always felt that 30 to 45 rounds on me was a bit superfluous for self defense. Now in a situation of total social breakdown would I like that comfort...sure, but I am fairly certain that is statistically very unlikely to happen. We've been through a major depression and even Civil War and the societal glue held together. Besides, if I find myself in the midst of a zombie apocalypses I have no doubt that my 1911 and 6 to 8 spare mags all along my belt and a shotgun slung over my shoulder will handle my defense needs just fine.

To each his own but for me, I think a hi-cap ban, which is the MOST they could ever pass right now, would be no big deal....again, for me personally. YMMV

Maybe not anytime soon, and hopefully not in our lifetime... but given a long enough time frame, societal breakdown is almost statistically assured.

The founding fathers did not craft the second amendment to protect their generation, or to protect the guns they chose to keep - they did it with the hopes of protecting their descendents from tyranny in the future. When we fight gun control legislation, we should keep in mind that we are not only fighting to protect the guns we choose to keep - but the right of our grandchildren, and their grandchildren - to exercise their rights.

 

[Liberty1911]

God is allowed in schools, he is allowed anywhere you are. God is in your heart and your mind if you are Christian, he cannot be taken away anywhere.

It always baffles my mind when people say they take away prayer in school, no they dont. You can pray to yourself anytime you want, you just arent allowed to make others pray too. Prayer/God/whatever shouldnt be forced upon anyone, but you are always allowed to pray and have your faith. That has never changed.

The line of prohibition should have been drawn at FORCING someone else to pray.

However it wasn't drawn there. The Valedictorian who prays during her speech is no more forcing her religion on others than the person praying to herself.

Do you really believe your free speech rights and freedom of religion should be limited to "praying to yourself", or at home.

I'm sure you wouldn't tolerate, and rightly so, anyone banning OC because they're offended at seeing someone else exercise their 2A rights.

OCing is no more forcing your 2A rights on others than praying out loud forces your 1A rights on others.

We have gone a long way to restrict freedom of religion, and sadly, it's advocated by many 2A proponents.

 

[45calibre]

The shirts said something about God not protecting the kids because he doesn't go where he isn't allowed. I'm not sure where the shirts originated but I've seen several vendors on Facebook sharing the pictures for the shirts. I'd go back and find them but I decided when I saw it that it was a good time to stop following their posts.

Here is what the shirt looks like. While it isn't specifically about this incident, the timing sure doesn't look good.

classy...

 

[scottka]

I think the ban is certainly coming. The question is, how will it affect you? I am not advocating a law against hi-cap mags but in all honesty, the law never affected me earlier last decade when I got into shooting/carry during the AWB and won't affect me now.

I simply never feel under-gunned with a 1911 at my side and two spare 8 round mags on my other hip. 99% of the time I have a S&W 3913 with a spare mag or two and would never think this isn't enough to defend myself or family when I'm out and about. 8 rounds of Speer GD or Federal HST in the mag with one in the pipe and another 8 to 16 on my belt is certain to do the trick if god forbid I ever have to defend myself.

If anything, a new AWB will force people to practice high stress shot placement, marksmanship and quick mag changes, which to me, is half the fun of owning a gun...the other half is rolling my own!

Again, this is just my own personal experience and I am in no way advocating any new laws. Just offering an anecdote or two to add to the thread.

I do own 15 and 18 round mags for my service sized pistols but always felt that 30 to 45 rounds on me was a bit superfluous for self defense. Now in a situation of total social breakdown would I like that comfort...sure, but I am fairly certain that is statistically very unlikely to happen. We've been through a major depression and even Civil War and the societal glue held together. Besides, if I find myself in the midst of a zombie apocalypses I have no doubt that my 1911 and 6 to 8 spare mags all along my belt and a shotgun slung over my shoulder will handle my defense needs just fine.

To each his own but for me, I think a hi-cap ban, which is the MOST they could ever pass right now, would be no big deal....again, for me personally. YMMV

But would you stand up against a high cap ban with the rest of us? Even if it doesn't affect you? Because that's what gun owners need to do. We can't all just stand up for what we want and watch as rights are eroded away. I don't own an "evil" .223 AR yet, but you can bet your ass I'd stand up against an AWB on them. We all must stand together, not only for our own selfish reasons, but to protect gun ownership as a whole.

It makes me sick to see self-proclaimed "proud gun owners" agree with antis that say "assault weapons" serve no purpose and shouldn't be available to civilians. (This is not a slam on the indymike; I saw it on Facebook the other day)

 

[Hop]

**** Diane Feinstein and shame on all you softies for allowing the libtards to play on your emotion and turn this tragedy into a gun control issue. This is not the time to do anything but mourn the victims. The next step is to push to get rid of these horrendous gun free zones that cause these tragedies in the 1st place. We as law abiding gun owning citizens need to be vocal that these liberal anti-gun politicians and policies of sticking heads in the sand and not recognizing pure evil are the cause of the bloodshed.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Folks, get ready for a ban. The chances we will see a new AWB are very high, IMHO.

How?

Like the magazine banned that happened after a member of Congress was shot? Like the ban after the Sikh temple?
Do the math in both chambers. Show your work.

 

[zibby43]

I think the ban is certainly coming. The question is, how will it affect you? I am not advocating a law against hi-cap mags but in all honesty, the law never affected me earlier last decade when I got into shooting/carry during the AWB and won't affect me now.

I simply never feel under-gunned with a 1911 at my side and two spare 8 round mags on my other hip. 99% of the time I have a S&W 3913 with a spare mag or two and would never think this isn't enough to defend myself or family when I'm out and about. 8 rounds of Speer GD or Federal HST in the mag with one in the pipe and another 8 to 16 on my belt is certain to do the trick if god forbid I ever have to defend myself.

If anything, a new AWB will force people to practice high stress shot placement, marksmanship and quick mag changes, which to me, is half the fun of owning a gun...the other half is rolling my own!

Again, this is just my own personal experience and I am in no way advocating any new laws. Just offering an anecdote or two to add to the thread.

I do own 15 and 18 round mags for my service sized pistols but always felt that 30 to 45 rounds on me was a bit superfluous for self defense. Now in a situation of total social breakdown would I like that comfort...sure, but I am fairly certain that is statistically very unlikely to happen. We've been through a major depression and even Civil War and the societal glue held together. Besides, if I find myself in the midst of a zombie apocalypses I have no doubt that my 1911 and 6 to 8 spare mags all along my belt and a shotgun slung over my shoulder will handle my defense needs just fine.

To each his own but for me, I think a hi-cap ban, which is the MOST they could ever pass right now, would be no big deal....again, for me personally. YMMV

The problem, my friend, is that if you allow the chipping away of a constitutional right to any degree (no matter how trivial it may be in your mind), eventually, the right will cease to exist.

Take the First Amendment as an example. Look at the history of the SCOTUS precedent. You will see that the overwhelming number of landmark cases deal with guarding against free speech attacks on the "margins" or "periphery." If you don't protect the ability to freely and openly communicate via certain forms of symbolic speech, if you don't protect speech containing patently offensive statements about public figures (Hustler Magazine v. Falwell), etc., then pretty soon, you have no First Amendment rights left.

If you want to protect your Second Amendment rights, you MUST protect the central core of Second Amendment rights as much as possible by attacking ANY seemingly insignificant perimeter threats.

If you are defending Athens from invasion, you don't fight the battle in Athens or just outside its walls, you fight that battle miles and miles outside of Athens.

 

[IndyDave1776]

How?

Like the magazine banned that happened after a member of Congress was shot? Like the ban after the Sikh temple?
Do the math in both chambers. Show your work.

There are two things that do not give me a sense of comfort here. First, none of the previous incidents involved killing a bunch of children at school, hence this time we get to here the scream that we are being unreasonable because it's for the children. Second, do you really believe that you cannot find 13 R congressmen who will flip, especially if it is 'only' an 'evil black rifle' ban?

 

[Kutnupe14]

If we don't get a new AWB, which I think is probable, then Obama may have to go down as the most PRO gun president of all time.

If he's going to grab guns, THIS is his chance.

 

[Indy60]

I don't think Obama wants our guns he just wants the nut cases not able to get the keys to the gun cabinet. Back to the drawing board for a solution.

 

[Mosinguy]

I don't think a ban is coming. It will be business as usual after the sheep find something else to focus on. Gun ownership is up. We've had many pro-gun laws enacted, or anti-gun laws overturned recently. This was a horrible tragedy and we should keep our guard up, but I don't think any restriction is coming.

 

[Raskolnikov]

I think the ban is certainly coming. The question is, how will it affect you? I am not advocating a law against hi-cap mags but in all honesty, the law never affected me earlier last decade when I got into shooting/carry during the AWB and won't affect me now.

I simply never feel under-gunned with a 1911 at my side and two spare 8 round mags on my other hip. 99% of the time I have a S&W 3913 with a spare mag or two and would never think this isn't enough to defend myself or family when I'm out and about. 8 rounds of Speer GD or Federal HST in the mag with one in the pipe and another 8 to 16 on my belt is certain to do the trick if god forbid I ever have to defend myself.

If anything, a new AWB will force people to practice high stress shot placement, marksmanship and quick mag changes, which to me, is half the fun of owning a gun...the other half is rolling my own!

Again, this is just my own personal experience and I am in no way advocating any new laws. Just offering an anecdote or two to add to the thread.

I do own 15 and 18 round mags for my service sized pistols but always felt that 30 to 45 rounds on me was a bit superfluous for self defense. Now in a situation of total social breakdown would I like that comfort...sure, but I am fairly certain that is statistically very unlikely to happen. We've been through a major depression and even Civil War and the societal glue held together. Besides, if I find myself in the midst of a zombie apocalypses I have no doubt that my 1911 and 6 to 8 spare mags all along my belt and a shotgun slung over my shoulder will handle my defense needs just fine.

To each his own but for me, I think a hi-cap ban, which is the MOST they could ever pass right now, would be no big deal....again, for me personally. YMMV

Any infringement on our rights is a big deal...regardless of whether it personally affects you. I don't use 30-round mags in my handguns either, but I have a right to use them should I ever feel so inclined. I do use 30-round mags in my Kalashnikov. The 10-round mag that came with the weapon (during the previous AWB) just doesn't cut it. Are you going to tolerate it when the UN takes over the internet and attempts to control what you write? It's the same things. "Little tweaks" on your rights will lead to bigger and bigger one. Don't give in!

**** Diane Feinstein and shame on all you softies for allowing the libtards to play on your emotion and turn this tragedy into a gun control issue. This is not the time to do anything but mourn the victims. The next step is to push to get rid of these horrendous gun free zones that cause these tragedies in the 1st place. We as law abiding gun owning citizens need to be vocal that these liberal anti-gun politicians and policies of sticking heads in the sand and not recognizing pure evil are the cause of the bloodshed.

That's damn right.

I'm sick to death of hearing gun owners feeling guilty about what happened in CT. Unless your name is Adam Lanza, or you're one of the officials who let that kid into the school, you don't have any reason to feel guilty. Sure, we all, as human beings, grieve for the innocence lost that day. But, do I feel guilty? Not a chance.

 

[Que]

...it will be a miracle.

I'm reading comments from gun owners on places like Facebook saying they feel guilty for being so pro-gun given the events of Sandy Hook. It's that guilt by some of our own that will give the anti-gun forces the slight edge they need to get something through. If you fight against any new laws you will be painted as an insensitive Neanderthal... and many gun owners aren't all that die hard about their rights to begin with, they are what I consider casual gun owners. They will sign on with "reasonable" gun laws just because it makes them feel better about recent events.

This is our problem! I feel saddened by the loss of precious life, especially the lives of babies. However, I do not feel guilty. There isn't one legislature or anti-gun rights/ownership advocate who can give me one legitimate reason for me to feel guilty. I hope people will just calm down and realize we have bigger problems to deal with.

There is no logic in believing a 10-round magazine will be less lethal than a 30-round magazine. Will they limit the number of magazines that can be owned? Why not just have 5-round magazines? There is no limitation or banning that will prevent a sick person from achieving their goal, other than someone who can confront them with the same level of power or even more.

 

[Que]

How?

Like the magazine banned that happened after a member of Congress was shot? Like the ban after the Sikh temple?
Do the math in both chambers. Show your work.

Kirk, I agree the chances are slim, but Gifford and those in the temple were adults. The heart strings will be pulled because these were children. I am not sure how the legislators will allow their emotions to be challenged by this episode. I'm sure some will come forward and say, "I couldn't help but to wonder what I would do if that was my child. So, although I don't want to infringe the rights of our citizens, I believe as a concerned citizen I must..."

This will give us an opportunity to see how conservative the Conservatives are and how much liberty the Libertarians really believe we should have.

 

[MilitaryArms]

I don't think a ban is coming. It will be business as usual after the sheep find something else to focus on. Gun ownership is up. We've had many pro-gun laws enacted, or anti-gun laws overturned recently. This was a horrible tragedy and we should keep our guard up, but I don't think any restriction is coming.

This is one of those rare instances where I would not relish being able to say "I told you so". I hope you're right.

 

[Mosinguy]

This is one of those rare instances where I would not relish being able to say "I told you so". I hope you're right.

If I'm right you should hook me up with that PKM you reviewed awhile back.

 

[04DarkShadowGT]

The line of prohibition should have been drawn at FORCING someone else to pray.

However it wasn't drawn there. The Valedictorian who prays during her speech is no more forcing her religion on others than the person praying to herself.

Do you really believe your free speech rights and freedom of religion should be limited to "praying to yourself", or at home.

I'm sure you wouldn't tolerate, and rightly so, anyone banning OC because they're offended at seeing someone else exercise their 2A rights.

OCing is no more forcing your 2A rights on others than praying out loud forces your 1A rights on others.

We have gone a long way to restrict freedom of religion, and sadly, it's advocated by many 2A proponents.

I am not sure how you can say that a Valedictorian speaking about any topic during a speech is not pushing their opinion on others. That is exactly what it is. The nature of the topic is irrelevant.

Your valedictorian example is more akin to Bob Costas and his speil on gun control the other weekend. Both are talking to captive audiences about topics that don't pertain to the event.

My question to you is, would you feel the same if the Valedictorian was praying to Allah?

What about if he was talking about how Obama was great and has been a mentor of his?

What about if he was talking about the recent events and that he thinks guns should be banned?

What if they were talking about how religion was a bunch of bunk?

Would you be so supportive of their 1A rights in that case? Something tells me probably not.

Personally I would have zero issue with a Valedictorian praying, not even a little. I am merely pointing out the hypocritical nature of many of these type of debates. Many think that whatever it is they are passionate abotu should be allowed, but look the other way when its something they dont care about.


Now onto your OC example, I am not for the government banning open carry. I never would OC, but doesnt mean I want it banned. But I do support the rights of business owners or anyone on their private property saying they do not want guns or people OCing. Ya know property rights and all.

 

[bwframe]

Hopefully some INGOer with writing skills will draft us letters to start sending to our congress critters. We need to get them out immediately.

 

[Magneto]

Those that look to infringe on gun rights wait for awful events like this to make noise. Hopefully their noise will fade into the background quickly, and any attempted AWB will fall flat on its face.

 

[Wreaver]

I think 20 murdered children, 6 and 7 years old, gives the gun control an awful lot of fuel. I don't usually get into the panic buying but I agree with OP and ordered several magazines for each firearm I own. I'm not sure why I did considering Feinstein says ownership would be illegal and there is no grandfather clause in the bill.