• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

They are at it again...

amzbrady

amzbrady

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
3,521
Location
Marysville, Washington, USA
BTW they are not related to me...
The Brady campaign to prevent gun ownership is at it again. They are trying to get Mag capacities reduced again. They claim 16 rounds in a mag are only good for one thing, killing... Evidently they havent had to load small mags during target practice. Besides they evidently havent seen someone drop a 10 round mag and load another in less than two seconds giving a shooter 20 rounds vs 16.
Just another fight for them to lose. Problem really lies with not enough citizens carrying a firearm for personal protection. If Gifford would have had proper security and more private citizens would have been carrying there would have been about 4 shots fired and 1 dead. Tax dollars wouldnt be paying for a trial right now either.
I would think if he walked up and saw 20 people standing around with a firearm strapped to their ass, he would have figured out something different to do that day.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...ml?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl1|sec3_lnk1|55510

Another BTW, they say a target is riddled with 32 shots, but count them I got 17, how bout you? Another lie in advertizing...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=62Va-Ll2vKw
 
sudden valley gunner

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
amzbrady said:
They claim 16 rounds in a mag are only good for one thing, killing...

[/URL]
Click to expand...

NO Sh!t Sherlock.....that is my response to people when they make these claims. Guns were not invented for hunting they were made to kill/injure people. And it bugs me to know end when even "pro-gun" politicians or "pro-gun" organizations tend to back inane stupid comments like this.

If there is a home invasion, and a gang of 5 are invading your home, I don't think a 10 round magazine is going to save you. You are going to want all you can get....

Oh yea and since the Second Amendment was to protect us from our government than I want as large and as many magazines as I can afford.
 
T

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,542
Location
Washington
sudden valley gunner said:
NO Sh!t Sherlock.....that is my response to people when they make these claims. Guns were not invented for hunting they were made to kill/injure people. And it bugs me to know end when even "pro-gun" politicians or "pro-gun" organizations tend to back inane stupid comments like this.

If there is a home invasion, and a gang of 5 are invading your home, I don't think a 10 round magazine is going to save you. You are going to want all you can get....

Oh yea and since the Second Amendment was to protect us from our government than I want as large and as many magazines as I can afford.
Click to expand...

You've got it spot on. Not only that, but the federal government even argued for that view in US v. Miller.
 
amzbrady

amzbrady

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
3,521
Location
Marysville, Washington, USA
sudden valley gunner said:
NO Sh!t Sherlock.....that is my response to people when they make these claims. Guns were not invented for hunting they were made to kill/injure people. And it bugs me to know end when even "pro-gun" politicians or "pro-gun" organizations tend to back inane stupid comments like this.

If there is a home invasion, and a gang of 5 are invading your home, I don't think a 10 round magazine is going to save you. You are going to want all you can get....

Oh yea and since the Second Amendment was to protect us from our government than I want as large and as many magazines as I can afford.[/QUOTE]

If they only knew...They would have written it so we could own tanks and scud missles.
Click to expand...
 
TechnoWeenie

TechnoWeenie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
2,084
Location
, ,
They can ban all the clips they want.....


.....As long as they don't ban magazines..
 
A

Agent 47

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
570
Location
, Washington, USA
LOL, I was just going to say, "oh, thank God they only care about my clips, they can have em. My magazines on the other hand....."
 
amlevin

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
Tawnos said:
You've got it spot on. Not only that, but the federal government even argued for that view in US v. Miller.
Click to expand...

The irony in "Miller" was that he was a dead broke hillbilly moonshiner who was represented pro-bono before the Supreme Court. He didn't show up for the arguments and the Attorney decided he'd had enough.

Where's the challenge to the decisions set forth in Miller that have given us so many more regulations? Where is the better funded challenger? The NRA? Pro-Gun Attorneys?

Miller is an excellent example of why cases should be well chosen to take to the Supreme Court. Not just well selected, but well funded and backed. The results can be long lasting.
 
O

oneeyeross

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
500
Location
Winlock, , USA
amlevin said:
The irony in "Miller" was that he was a dead broke hillbilly moonshiner who was represented pro-bono before the Supreme Court. He didn't show up for the arguments and the Attorney decided he'd had enough.
Click to expand...

Miller didn't show up because he was dead. He had been stabbed to death. No one argued Miller's case.

The only thing the court said in Miller was they were not on notice that a short barreled shotgun had any militia use. Since there was no one to argue for Miller to say that they had been used in WWI with quite some effect, the court reversed and remanded back to the lower court. Since Miller was dead, no further action was taken.

"In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense."

Should that case appear before the courts again, I believe that they would undo the Miller decision, since every LEA (even the department of education) uses short barreled shotguns now days, so they obviously have a use...
 
MSG Laigaie

MSG Laigaie

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
3,239
Location
Philipsburg, Montana
Oh yea and since the Second Amendment was to protect us from our government than I want as large and as many magazines as I can afford.

Jolly good comment, "all enemys, foreign and domestic" this could be the reason for the ninety round drum for the AR (Oh No a high cap, the sky will fall)
 
amlevin

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
oneeyeross said:
Miller didn't show up because he was dead. He had been stabbed to death. No one argued Miller's case.

The only thing the court said in Miller was they were not on notice that a short barreled shotgun had any militia use. Since there was no one to argue for Miller to say that they had been used in WWI with quite some effect, the court reversed and remanded back to the lower court. Since Miller was dead, no further action was taken.

"In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense."

Should that case appear before the courts again, I believe that they would undo the Miller decision, since every LEA (even the department of education) uses short barreled shotguns now days, so they obviously have a use...
Click to expand...

Not to mention all the other weapons that are widely used by a "Rifleman" in today's military. If all "crew served" weapons are excluded, and only those issued to a conventional rifle squad, there are a lot of new "Militia" weapons that would be allowed rather than on a banned NFA list.
 
T

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,542
Location
Washington
amlevin

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
Try this link

A little searching and I found this

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/10/15/us-arms-usa-treaty-idUSTRE59E0Q920091015

FWIW, this "Treaty" is supposed to only regulate the transfer of conventional weapons through import/export.

The proposed legally binding treaty would tighten regulation of, and set international standards for, the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons.
Click to expand...

It's not designed to "confiscate" our weapons but to limit access by despot Dictators and terrorist organizations. The US is practicing this form of regulation already by refusing arms sales to certain countries.
 
Last edited:
Y

YoungSoldier

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
13
Location
Auburn, Washington
While on the topic of the Brady Campaign although slightly unrelated I was hoping to know if anyone here is familiar with Rebecca Peters? I have not heard much about her lately. I suppose it would be to much to hope that she has kicked the bucket.
 
fatalhubris

fatalhubris

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
58
Location
renton wa
anyone notice the target in the first link is a silhouette of a little girl with pig tales? subtle, sneaky and sick...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top