Printable View
I'm ready to be flamed but I just have to say... Using the excuse that you don't want the 15rd mag bill to pass because you shoot competition that requires you to shoot more than 15 rounds before reloading is a lame argument.
If I was a true opponent of the bill I would suggest the rules of the competition be changed to conform to the new law. That is all.
What is your reasoning against the mag bans? ( if you have any)
Status quo. There is no legitimate reason to limit the amount of rounds held by magazines.Quote:
Originally Posted by jackthewall81
and that is pretty much the argument being used. IDPA and USPSA limit to 10 rounds due to history with the 1994 ban. I would like to hear MarkCO's opinions on what will happen to 3giun rules.
Shoot He-Man with an M1...
It is better than saying "Go ahead and ban whatever. We will conform."Quote:
Originally Posted by kidicarus13
You are right that competition is a lame "excuse" to oppose magazine limits.
However, that's even lamer.Quote:
Originally Posted by kidicarus13
No limit should be enforced. What is next...the number of mags you can carry. The number of rounds you can own. Registering those rounds? Erosions of freedom start with a single drop of water, then the mudslide commences.
That is my quote.
How is it a lame excuse? The opposition keeps saying they believe in hunting and sporting use, competition is sporting use.
Stop giving them ideas....Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper7
It truly doesn't matter to me what the reasons someone is against a mag limit ban, so long as they are willing to voice it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidicarus13
IMHO, the kid has it right on - no legitimate reason at all to limit the amount of rounds held by magazines. What's lame about that?Quote:
Originally Posted by spqrzilla
What's better than 30rds?
60rds.
what is better than 60 rds?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBelly
120 rds.
Sure fire makes a 100 round mag commercially. As does the Koreans and the beta mag company.
Belt fed full autos are still legal if you have the cash. There is a potential for unlimited amounts of ammo on that belt.
I conclude with no mag limit should be applied.
Run up a mountain with that, tough guy![Coffee]Quote:
Originally Posted by DFBrews
That is what this summer is all about. Hike shoot to 400 yds repeat. Only way I can afford to feed the AR's. precise aimed fire. No more beta drum mag dumps into a wall of clays at 30 yardsQuote:
Originally Posted by TheBelly
Well, no, this is a direct response to the dims saying "There is no legitimate hunting or sporting reason for having
these magazines."
It pretty much proves that statement false.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spqrzilla
DfBrews I'd be interested in joining you for that!Quote:
Originally Posted by DFBrews
I'm sorry I thought this was America the greatest country in the history of the world, where we can have things we want not just the things we need.
The most precision we had came from the aviation folks.Quote:
Originally Posted by DFBrews
Opposing the magazine ban on competition grounds is just one completely legitimate argument (among many) against these kinds of arbitrary and capricious bans.
Just because I, or anyone else, argue in favor of them from a competition standpoint doesn't mean that we don't also think these magazines should be available for self-defense and other more serious needs.
Personally, the argument that I think should be used the most is to point out that if you are caught violating this law, they can throw you in jail for up to a year for every magazine you're caught with.
A year.
I don't know of anyone who wouldn't lose their family, job, and house after spending a year (or more) in prison.
That makes sense, thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drilldov2.0
I must admit I have many 30 rd magazines and never have I had 30 rounds in a magazine at one time mainly because I don't want to blow through a box of ammo in 20 min. at the range. BUT.........This is more about opening a door that them greasy ass liberal politicians can start to take and take slowly ...first the mag limit then they work on other things one small step at a time. In Illinois they are pushing a law to turn in any guns to your local police. More than likely posturing but I can see where all this is going. Children told to report to their schools if mom or dad have any guns in the house. Sorry for the rant but what the HELL is going on in this country?? There was a debate on a local morning radio show and the subject was how flying the American flag may be offensive to people here from other countries....WHAT??
A box in 20 min? I go through a box in a few seconds some times! And it feels awesome!
I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by GilpinGuy
[Beer]Quote:
Originally Posted by SA Friday
im gonna try 3 gun with a trench gun , m1 garand ,and 1911 this summer if i can find the time
When I have written my letters to the representatives and now the senators, I always make sure that I touch on the competition use of standard capacity magazines. It is a sport and does establish that these magazines are used for sporting purposes. It is a valid and logical argument. Nothing wrong with it.
BP
I am not going to reveal all of my cards here, because I know for a fact one of the senate leadership staffers (hi!) is reading this forum.
When asked if the magazine limit would affect competition...YES, most definately. The basic premise of practical shooting competition is a level playing field in terms of equipment. When new shooters can not use standard (30) or High Capacity (48, 55, 60, 100) magazines in their ARs the sport will have to write new rules or the participation will steadily decrease. In pistol competition, there are no firearms except the 100+ year old 1911 that is in play that would not have their magazines outlawed by 10 (now 15) round magazine limits. There are no US rulesets that have 15 rounds as a limit, it is 10 and then unrestricted. However, high level competition being thwarted is a threat to national security. The top LE and MIL shooters compete along with civilians in the crucilbe of competition. The techniques and equipment developed by the free market driven by the top skilled shooters transfers to our LE and warfighters. Having trained LE and MIL shooters, they take this "sporting education" and apply it to the battlefield. Passing a magazine limit on civilians will eventually lead to neutered competition and a reduction in the readiness of our LE and MIL. The world sniper competitions are dominated by US Military who compete in 3Gun competitions. They developed those skills competing against civilians, not military! So, yes standard and high capacity magazines DO have a sporting purpose and one of the primary (and desired) effects of that sporitng purpose is the advancement of LE and Military skill levels and new equipment innovations as well. This bill may well kill my company which revolutionized shotgun loading in 3Gun competition with the majority of the top shooters using our techniques and equipment. That technology is now being transferred to LE and MIL. Without the dollars of the civilian competitor paying for our R&D, this would not have been possible.
When asked if the magazine limit will affect my ability to defend myself...NO. As a highly skilled shooter, I can do a mag change in a second. With ten 10 round magazines and a 1911 I can shoot 100 rounds in less time than the average shooter with 100 rounds in 30 round magazines. We don't train criminals and the competition shooting community is tight knit and shuns all illegal activity. However, my wife is not highly trained. An AR-15 with a 30 round magazine is the single best tool for recoil, accuracy, fit and minimal penetration for her to protect herself and my children when I am not with her. Why would you want to prohibit her effective defense for a bill that has been proven by FBI and CDC statistics to have absolutely no beneficial impact.
Since the sunset of the Clinton gun-ban, millions of Americans have armed themsleves with AR15s and 30 round magazines, however there has not been a corresponding increase in gun violence with these weapon types. When I mentioned that the increase in gun violence CAN be connected to the failure of the family, mental health and media related violence, the answer I received was "We can not infringe on 1st amendment rights nor medical privacy issues."
Bravo. Good stuff mark.
I put competition use in my letters because that is one of the things that has a direct, measurable impact on ME. And one of the tips to writing the letters is to make them personal and how they impact me as a private citizen. I don't think it's a "lame" reason.
Thanks again Mark, for ALL that you do. You are truly a pillar of the CO shooting community.
The Dems want to ignore sporting activities as valid, because it doesn't fit their agenda. But in reality, it's in the same field as NASCAR, the NFL, etc., where there is some risk, and safety is important. I only started shooting competition in May of 2012, but I was incredibly impressed by the professionalism, helpfulness, and general friendliness of the other people who regularly attend USPSA matches in the area. I haven't shot a 3 Gun match yet, but these proposed restrictions will definitely impact my ability to participate at the same level. My cash flow does not allow me to go and purchase 10 30 round magazines to hoard at the current market prices. I got into the game late, and that may be my bad luck, but it is what it is.
I hope these bills do not pass. I know that's a grim hope, but that's my hope.
MarkCO, for the M-F'n win!
Thanks guys. But I am not running for anything. :)
There are a bunch of people out there talking to legislators. If anything I write rings true for you, you have my express permission to use it as your own as long as you run it through spell check and alter the specific references to make them your own.
Caithford, one of the best 3Gun matches around will be at CRC on April 4-7. MagPul is a sponsor and you can come and thank them in person.
So, did you change your mind after reading my post?Quote:
Originally Posted by kidicarus13
I just dont like people saying I can use a gun to defend myself but only have 15 "Chances" to do so.
Agreed. Really disheartening to know that MarkCO eloquently explained all of that to some of the senate leadership, and yet they still voted to do away with our rights (and high-fived each other afterwards). Utterly shameless and reprehensible of those people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamnanc
I can follow your logic if I try hard enough and understand you have a vested interest in firearm competitions and associated equipment but if I personally had a chance to speak to Hick or Prez and had to give 3 reasons why to not ban, competition would not make my list.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkCO
I do think we can agree that no new laws limiting mag round capacity needs to be passed. Sometime I choose my thread titles for effect and to elicit response. Thanks for your opinion and your most recent activism regarding this matter.
Sporting purpose however is a tipping point for some Dems and there are actual laws based upon that notion.
Ask them about C.R.S. 19-3-304 and why the same thing could not be used for Mental Health issues.Quote:
"We can not infringe on 1st amendment rights nor medical privacy issues."
When a Politician brings up why they "can't" I always like to think of the 19-3 and how it was expanded to include 26-3.1-101 for "at risk" adults.
It is much less work to look at the easy things. A new statute for mental health issues would require work and thought unlike the present solutions they have come up with. Just a thought.
Good info Mark! Hopefully those guests who visit here understand how many voters they are impacting. Even my left leaning teacher family members understand this legislation is feel good bullshit that has no impact on anything,