Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting

But then it would likely be not allowed under the guys proposal as it would be "high powered"
Probably. But about anyone who proposses gun control these days doesn't know anything about them. So just tell them the S&W 500 is just a little pea shooter. Unless they go by the standard of "looking scary", then they'd cover it.
 
But then it would likely be not allowed under the guys proposal as it would be "high powered"

You gotta think outside the box and be creative at least he is doing that and admits he doesn't know that much about firearms.

A cosmetic assault weapons ban isn't going to really do anything and the definition of what an assault weapon is can be too fluid.

Most of my wife's family are teachers and I can tell you this none of them should have a firearm of any type. I do not see arming teachers as a very practical way of curbing violence and it does nothing to help shootings at a theater, church or mall. There are already nearly 300 million guns out in the US and concealed carry permit applications in many states have increased in recent years. Violent crime has also gone down overall in the US,despite a recession that would normally push those stats up, but these high profile mass shootings sure seem more common and more deadly. If 300 million guns isn't enough to deter a crazy gunman how many will be enough?

There have been armed guards at some of these shootings and it sure didn't help much. Virginia Tech has the corps of cadets right on campus and this isn't some dinky ROTC program. They have an armory on campus. The corps barracks is on the Upper quad just a five minute walk from Norris hall where the second round of shooting took place. I had classes In Norris when I lived in Thomas hall on the upper quad. I could sprint there in about two minutes.

There are armed cops all over Tech. There is typically at least one cop in squires hall, the building I ran, and that is also less then a five minute walk from Norris.

The key word is crazy. These are not rational people and what would be viewed as a deterrence by rational people is not going to work. Reducing access to weapons will help. I just do not know how exactly you do that in a practical way. When the only tool you have is a hammer then every problem is a nail. That is the crux of the NRA's position.

Better mental health programs where maybe you can catch someone before they snap will help. But how to you get over the stigma and how to you implement it in a practical way? There is an institutionalized stigma to getting help with mental health problems in this country. We need to institutionalize a responsibility to seeking help and getting help for people you know.

We are all guilty of it. I know I am. You know the guy at work the one that just doesn't seem right. The one that seems a bit unstable. Instead of trying to help in someway, even if it is a small way, we ignore it or make jokes. That kind of thing cannot happen anymore. If you are in a management position and you have an employee that does seem just off or unstable it should be your responsibility to try and help. The hard thing is finding a way to do that without scaring the person off or getting sued. That is where better training comes in. Just being personable and being friendly helps. Keeping an eye out for any sudden changes in behavior.

I am nice to all my employees even the ones I cannot stand personally and are lazy next to useless workers. Hey how was your weekend what did you do? I know you were sick last week feeling better? Did you see such and such? How is blankety blank doing? There are a couple that just cannot stand me and they usually completely ignore me. I know that when they don't ignore me and get angry or up in my face that something is going on and I bring in another management person later on.

Its not like that kind of things happens all the time but it has happened. Catching the more subtle instances that have built over time is what needs to be done.

Look at nearly all of these instances when they interview people that knew the shooter. You always have people that say that he was a nice friendly guy at least one or two. But then you always have a few people that say, "something wasn't right with him." Now obviously we can't go trying to commit every person who seems "not right' or nearly all of us would be put away but when there is a pastern of unusual behavior and a sudden change in that pattern someone has to step up. That person might be a co-worker either through some other management person or HR person. They might be a family member or close friend or they could be a church or school leader but someone has to step in and try and bend the curve.
 
Hoooly shit, conspiracy theories are starting to get REALLY generous with untenable evidence...



I mean, the logical leaps here are wider than the grand canyon.
 
Last edited:
Hoooly shit, conspiracy theories are starting to get REALLY generous with untenable evidence...



I mean, the logical leaps here are wider than the grand canyon.

Aw, I am disappointed. I expected it to go a little further and explain the government's plot to take away all our weapons and then invade our houses and rape us in the middle of the night.

Pity.
 
Last edited:
The biggest part of that bill is banning magazines over 7 rounds and not grandfathering in magazines over 10. That sucks, and it's stupid, but for the most part people will get to keep their guns. The expanded assault weapons ban is pretty sucky too. Pretty much eliminates all new "military-style" weapons, but I assume there are already enough in circulation to keep people happy, especially if they can be imported into the state (i didn't see any mention of that possibility).

I'm all for the license, registration, and storage parts, though.
 
The biggest part of that bill is banning magazines over 7 rounds and not grandfathering in magazines over 10. That sucks, and it's stupid, but for the most part people will get to keep their guns. The expanded assault weapons ban is pretty sucky too. Pretty much eliminates all new "military-style" weapons, but I assume there are already enough in circulation to keep people happy, especially if they can be imported into the state (i didn't see any mention of that possibility).

I'm all for the license, registration, and storage parts, though.

You missed the part where "over seven" bans most hunting shotguns outright. Most of them have 8 round magazines. Along with anyone having an Enfield deer rifle (10) or grampa's old Garand (8). NY is also already a AWB state, so you already can't import most guns with 'evil features'.

Direct from the law:
S 37. Subdivision 22 of section 265.00 of the penal law, as added by
chapter 189 of the laws of 2000, is amended to read as follows:

22. "Assault weapon" means -
(B) A SEMIAUTOMATIC SHOTGUN THAT HAS AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING
CHARACTERISTICS:

(I) A FOLDING OR TELESCOPING STOCK;
(II) A THUMBHOLE STOCK;
(III) A SECOND HANDGRIP OR A PROTRUDING GRIP THAT CAN BE HELD BY THE
NON-TRIGGER HAND;
(IV) A FIXED MAGAZINE CAPACITY IN EXCESS OF SEVEN ROUNDS;

Got a Winchester 1300? Remington 1100/11-87? Beretta XTrema? Too bad. They may all be common hunting shotguns, but now they're all banned in NY (and the list of shotguns that affects is much longer than just the above.)
 
Last edited:
So you're in NY state and have 8 guys come at you, you get to choose which one gets to rape/kill you. Congrats. Having a 10 rd mag with 7 in it, hilarious. Probably boost their revenue from the arrest/fines for more than 7 bullets. And increse gun sales due to logical people (that don't move) buying 1-2 more guns to carry muliple guns at once. At least we have some land we can sell back to the british.
 
So you're in NY state and have 8 guys come at you, you get to choose which one gets to rape/kill you. Congrats. Having a 10 rd mag with 7 in it, hilarious. Probably boost their revenue from the arrest/fines for more than 7 bullets. And increse gun sales due to logical people (that don't move) buying 1-2 more guns to carry muliple guns at once. At least we have some land we can sell back to the british.

If eight guys come at you one of them will have shot you before you get to shoot all eight of them, regardless of your magazine size.
 
A 1911 is now illegal in NY. As is a Ruger 10/22. What a miserable pathetic piece of garbage legislature. As if I needed any more reason not to move to NYC. Hell, NY state is now entirely worse than even Boston! Prizrak, get out while you can!
 
A 1911 is now illegal in NY. As is a Ruger 10/22. What a miserable pathetic piece of garbage legislature. As if I needed any more reason not to move to NYC. Hell, NY state is now entirely worse than even Boston! Prizrak, get out while you can!

Garands are also banned now, because the only way to load them is to stick in an 8 round en-bloc clip (clip, not magazine) but the language of the law says that any device that holds more than 7 is banned.

You can't even use a prior higher capacity magazine that's been blocked because it prohibits 'readily convertible' magazines too. Fixed tube magazines on rifles and shotguns are not exempted either except for tube magzines containing .22LR ammo. So there goes all the pump hunting rifles, too.

23. "Large capacity ammunition feeding device" means a magazine, belt,
drum, feed strip, or similar device, that (A) has a capacity of, or
that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten
rounds of ammunition, OR (B) CONTAINS MORE THAN SEVEN ROUNDS OF AMMUNI
TION, OR (C) IS OBTAINED AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE CHAPTER OF THE
LAWS OF TWO THOUSAND THIRTEEN WHICH AMENDED THIS SUBDIVISION AND HAS A
CAPACITY OF, OR THAT CAN BE READILY RESTORED OR CONVERTED TO ACCEPT,
MORE THAN SEVEN ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION; provided, however, that such term
does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and
capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition OR A
FEEDING DEVICE THAT IS A CURIO OR RELIC. A FEEDING DEVICE THAT IS A
CURIO OR RELIC IS DEFINED AS A DEVICE THAT (I) WAS MANUFACTURED AT LEAST
FIFTY YEARS PRIOR TO THE CURRENT DATE, (II) IS ONLY CAPABLE OF BEING
USED EXCLUSIVELY IN A FIREARM, RIFLE, OR SHOTGUN THAT WAS MANUFACTURED
AT LEAST FIFTY YEARS PRIOR TO THE CURRENT DATE, BUT NOT INCLUDING REPLI
CAS THEREOF,

(Caps are in the original document.) They're not going to allow grandfathering on a lot of this either, or so the law seems to read.
 
Last edited:
It sounds as if guns and magazines between 7 and 10 rounds WILL be grandfathered in.

Section 38 of the bill amends Penal Law ? 265.00(23) to ban all large
capacity magazines that have the capacity to hold more than ten
rounds of ammunition including those that were grandfathered in under
the original assault weapons ban and creates a new ban on magazines
that hold more than seven rounds of ammunition. Magazines that can
hold more than seven rounds but not more than ten rounds and are
currently possessed will be grandfathered in
, but may only contain
seven rounds of ammunition. Exceptions are made for large capacity
magazines that are curios or relics.

It also sounds as if all "assault weapons" are be grandfathered, but cannot be transferred in state except to a dealer.

Within one year of the effective date, all weapons defined as assault
weapons under the new "one-feature" test, as well as weapons
grandfathered in under the original assault weapons ban, must be
registered. Current owners of these banned weapons may transfer the
weapons only to a firearms dealer or transfer to an out of state
buyer. All registered owners will be subject to a review of
disqualifiers by the State Police.
 
It sounds as if guns and magazines between 7 and 10 rounds WILL be grandfathered in.

It also sounds as if all "assault weapons" are be grandfathered, but cannot be transferred in state except to a dealer.

Section 38 actually *eliminates* grandfathering. They struck it out. Also, they included tube magazines (the kind that are permanently installed on the weapon) which they didn't before. So lever and pump action guns are basically banned as they have 'large capacity ammunition feeding devices' permanently affixed.

Oh, and contrary to your assertions elsewhere, yes, it could ban the 1911.

(C) A SEMIAUTOMATIC PISTOL THAT HAS AN ABILITY TO ACCEPT A DETACHABLE
MAGAZINE AND HAS AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CHARACTERISTICS:
(IV) CAPACITY TO ACCEPT AN AMMUNITION MAGAZINE THAT ATTACHES TO THE
PISTOL OUTSIDE OF THE PISTOL GRIP;

Which could mean extended magazines; earlier laws with similar provisions were so interpreted.
 
A 1911 is now illegal in NY. As is a Ruger 10/22. What a miserable pathetic piece of garbage legislature. As if I needed any more reason not to move to NYC. Hell, NY state is now entirely worse than even Boston! Prizrak, get out while you can!

Believe me I'm considering it....
 
Section 38 actually *eliminates* grandfathering. They struck it out. Also, they included tube magazines (the kind that are permanently installed on the weapon) which they didn't before. So lever and pump action guns are basically banned as they have 'large capacity ammunition feeding devices' permanently affixed.

They didn't strike out the grandfathering, they struck out the date from the old law and amended it to 2013 (S38 Sub 23 C).

S 38. Subdivision 23 of section 265.00 of the penal law, as added by
chapter 189 of the laws of 2000, is amended to read as follows:

23. "Large capacity ammunition feeding device" means a magazine, belt,
drum, feed strip, or similar device, [manufactured after September thir-
teenth, nineteen hundred ninety-four,
] that (A) has a capacity of, or
that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten
rounds of ammunition, OR (B) CONTAINS MORE THAN SEVEN ROUNDS OF AMMUNI
TION, OR (C) IS OBTAINED AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE CHAPTER OF THE
LAWS OF TWO THOUSAND THIRTEEN WHICH AMENDED THIS SUBDIVISION

As for your 1911 quip (let's not mention I was speaking of national legislation), can you show examples of similar language banning extended magazines and thus guns that accept them? The language you quote there says magazines that attach outside of the grip, whatever the fuck that means. Even extended magazines go inside the grip and attach inside the grip, even if they extend out of the grip.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but essentially any magazine fed gun can accept an extended magazine. So if you're right, would that language not ban all magazine fed pistols?
 
Last edited:
Within one year of the effective date, all weapons defined as assault weapons under the new "one-feature" test, as well as weapons grandfathered in under the original assault weapons ban, must be registered. Current owners of these banned weapons may transfer the weapons only to a firearms dealer or transfer to an out of state buyer. All registered owners will be subject to a review of disqualifiers by the State Police.
all weapons defined as assault weapons under the new "one-feature" test, as well as weapons grandfathered in under the original assault weapons ban, must be registered.
all weapons defined as assault weapons must be registered.
weapons must be registered
weapons must be registered
I hereby invoke Godwin's Law
 
What I find most galling is the hypocrisy shown by so many liberals. Listen liberals, this is not a left or right issue nor should it be but by aligning yourselves with those who would deny the populace their liberty against those "crazy conservatives" you make it one. By your actions you are taking away our rights, our liberty. Notice how I say "our" without any qualifiers. By supporting legislation like what just passed in New York you are only hurting yourselves. I would fight just as hard if the government was attempting to severely curtail our freedom of speech or the freedom of the press. That you could just brush off attempting to muzzle our freedom in order to appease some nebulous sense of "greater good" is appalling.
 
They didn't strike out the grandfathering, they struck out the date from the old law and amended it to 2013 (S38 Sub 23 C).

As written, that says this: a large capacity ammunition feeding device means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that:

A: Can hold or be easily made to hold more than ten rounds OR
B: Is actually holding more than 7 rounds of ammunition OR
C: Is obtained after -effective date-.

Note that they don't say AND. They said OR. So, by the basic, raw, unedited and uninterpreted law itself, all magazines/drums/feed strips/etc., purchased after the effective date are all illegal - even if they only hold seven or less.

There is no provision in there *allowing* previously owned magazines. That's not grandfathering.

As for your 1911 quip, can you show examples of similar language banning extended magazines and thus guns that accept them? The language you quote there says magazines that attach outside of the grip, whatever the fuck that means. Even extended magazines go inside the grip and attach inside the grip, even if they extend out of the grip.

What they apparently intended to do was ban something like the TEC-DC9, which had the magazine in a housing forward of the grip:
Kg99.jpg


What they actually did was ban any pistol with 'the capability of accepting a magazine outside of the grip.'

Which means:
1. Any pistol with a Picatinny rail is or could be banned because you can buy a magazine holder that clips on to the Picatinny rail now - that 'accepts a magazine outside of the grip.' Note that the law doesn't say the weapon has to accept and feed off the mag, only that the capability to accept a magazine must exist. Here is one such device for a rifle (best pic of this type of device I could find):
M16%20AR15%20Quick%20Release%20Front%20Grip%20Mag%20Adapter%20Kit%20.jpg


There are lots of 1911s that have Pic rails now.

2. There are also pistols that can take a magazine clipped upside down ahead of the trigger to aid in stabilizing. The one in this picture is an illegal machine pistol, but the semi-automatic versions sold in large numbers in the US can do the same thing:
cz_75_automatic_with_handgrip.jpg

Even if you don't have the actual magazine installed there, by the letter of the law, that's 'capability to accept outside the grip' and you're done.

There are baseplates for 1911 magazines that allow them to do this as well.

As for prior language being interpreted so? Easy. NYC (not state, NY City) has had similar language in place for its (few, privileged) permit holders for a long time. It is interpreted as "no magazines that protrude from the grip". Discussion from people that found this out: http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=8&f=9&t=257590


Further the 1911 would/could be banned by the "semi-automatic version of a fully automatic weapon". In the 1940s, Colt built some fully-automatic 1911s in .45 ACP and .38 Super and received US patent number 2462505 for it. Here is one of them with all of its accessories:
1911.jpg


This is one of the .38 Supers that was built:
1911a.jpg


Before you ask, yes, they could be fired without the appliances attached in full auto.

The Browning High Power is out for the same reason, as the Nazis had the Belgians build some FA ones. So is every Beretta 92 (it's an evolved version of the M1951A and is actually the semi auto version of the Beretta 93R machine pistols). The CZ75 and it's hundreds of derivatives as well due to the CZ75 AUTOMATIC machine pistol (caps theirs.)
 
Last edited:
Top