skydyvr

I don't see it denying anyone the right to use a gun in self defense. It just adds to the rules already in place. I will be the first to recognize that gun laws only matter to law abiding people, but I believe reasonable gun laws can affect all people, law abiding or not. For example, if you outlawed large mags, their accessibility would eventually go down and the cost up, making them harder to obtain.

Agreed. Guns, being the inanimate objects that they are, are not the "cause" of anything. The people who use them for bad purposes are the cause indeed. But here we are in 2012, and we've somehow arrived at the point where mass murders of innocents by one-off lunatics is an aspect of our culture. Yes, people intent on killing innocents will find a way, large mags or no large mags, but the easy availability of them today makes mass killing REAL easy. Is there just nothing we can do about it? . . =(_8^(1)

As you I am sure know, banning something doesn't make it go away. It just creates a black market. Marijuana is currently under a Federal ban. How easy is it to buy? You're asking a Coloradoan?

The previous 90's ban was weak, including grandfathering in existing high capacity mags. A stronger ban might "work", as in fewer children being summarily executed by loons so easily. . . =(_8^(1)

Damn near impossible to implement and with so many already in circulation it wouldn't make a difference. It's not a middle of the road compromise if it doesn't work. It's just another useless law. Would require outlawing and confiscation of existing large mags to have any impact. Yea I know, good luck with that. . . =(_8^(1)

Magazine sizes should be on the table. Easy access to large capacity semi-auto weapons makes mass murder just a little too convenient. I just bought a dozen 30 5.56 magazines I dont own a 5.56 anymore but views like this are likely to make worth 10 times what I paid for them soon BTW, the US's major shooting/gun suppliers just told thier distributors that they are completely sold out of all high cap mags and AR15 type weapons I dont know how many that is but, you can bet it is a lot Sure they're sold out, because that's the obvious conversation to have about gun control right now. Semi-auto weapons will never be touched, nor should they be, but legal magazine sizes are worth a chat. . . =(_8^(1)

Magazine sizes should be on the table. Easy access to large capacity semi-auto weapons makes mass murder just a little too convenient. Doesn't make any difference. Ejecting an empty magazine and inserting a full one doesn't take much time at all and is especially irrelevant when attacking unarmed people. Also there are so many high capacity magazines out there that banning future sales will make very little difference in the availability. It will only affect the cost. I do understand the futility of bans, and am very much pro SA. But I am also distraught over all the mass killings lately. What if it took a more thorough background check and/or justification to possess more than one magazine of an agreed to size for any given type of firearm, and a law making it illegal to possess otherwise? How about some mid-road compromise along those lines, the goal being to eventually mitigate easy access to large magazines. . . =(_8^(1)

Magazine sizes should be on the table. Easy access to large capacity semi-auto weapons makes mass murder just a little too convenient. . . =(_8^(1)

exactly

Ah, not to worry. At best I've enjoyed a very small role around here -- entertaining Amazon and annoying Billvon. Such is my lot in dizzy com social life. . . =(_8^(1)

Sorry to hear that. . . =(_8^(1)

There you go again! Do you drive a Hummer? . . =(_8^(1)

Well hello to you too Amazon, I see you're stirring up the shit in here as usual

You mean like when you spout off about your immense knowledge of Law? . . =(_8^(1)

If MLB pulls the All Star game, they'll face a huge backlash from the majority of Americans that support AZ's new law. That's why they won't pull it. . . =(_8^(1)

Racist comment. Your own brand of racism drips from you -- ever took an honest look at that? . . =(_8^(1)

I notice he didn't reply! pwnd. When did uncle Kallend let you start posting again? . . =(_8^(1)

But now the question is -- who are the real deniers? http://www.examiner.com/x-28973-Essex-County-Conservative-Examiner~y2009m11d19-Hadley-CRU-hacked-with-release-of-hundreds-of-docs-and-emails "The University of East Anglia's Hadley Climatic Research Centre appears to have suffered a security breach earlier today, when an unknown hacker apparently downloaded 1079 e-mails and 72 documents of various types and published them to an anonymous FTP server. These files appear to contain highly sensitive information that, if genuine, could prove extremely embarrassing to the authors of the e-mails involved. Those authors include some of the most celebrated names among proponents of the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW)." . . =(_8^(1)

He wasn't convicted of fraud or perjury. He was convicted of tax evasion. There's also a few sayings about people who hurl insults at others. . . =(_8^(1)

AKA.... I can't so I'll say it's been done and run. See post 104 in "Are Republicans Autistic?". That's where the tie between increased government sponsored health care and increased taxation was established for you. Just because you elected not to reply to the poster's point does not invalidate it. Stop putting words in people's mouths so often ("AKA. . . I can't") and you'll be a better person for it. I didn't say there was. I just said that increased government spending on healthcare all things remaining the same would cost the taxpayer more. The DUH factor there is huge. The rest of your reply is a load of your standard BS unrelated to my simple point, so I'll pass on addressing it. I't not my concern that you don't understand what "all things remaining the same" means. . . =(_8^(1)

I have a friend currently serving 25 in prison for knowing and acting on the exact same thing. I bet he'd love to have known your secrets! . . =(_8^(1)

The tie has already been established, you're just not hearing. All other things remaining the same, providing better health care to people who can't pay for it would also increase the amount coming out of the taxpayer's pocket. Rather obvious isn't it? . . =(_8^(1)

Lucky and others like him want more of it taken away from you than what already is -- how do you like that? . . =(_8^(1)

You certainly do make a lot of blind assumptions about people without any supporting "data and facts". Hypocrite much? . . =(_8^(1)

I'll sponsor your citizenship You rock, dude! Two peas in a pod here, no doubt about it. . . =(_8^(1)