Yes, gun banners want to confiscate items currently owned legally

Do you think Hilary would have proposed a less intrusive "solution"

 

you continually distort my point. Let me guess you voted for Biden?

 

I think if Hillary said the same thing as Trump, the right would still be repeating it

 

Show me where I have "distorted" your point.

Wrong again...I have REPEATEDLY stated on this forum that I have NEVER voted for a Dem. My history of voting has been Repbs and as of lately third party.

 

she said far worse and her actions against gun owners were far more pernicious

 

neither party is coming for your guns, it's a political issue both want to continue to be such

 

I agree. Given we have 2A (grateful we do), there is no way our govt can just come for all of our guns. Case in point when the federal assault weapons was implemented in 1994, govt did not come for any guns. Anyone who currently owned an "assault" weapon kept their weapon. When MA implemented its "assault" weapons ban, govt did not come for any guns. Anyone who currently owned an "assault" weapon kept their weapon. I know this because there are a number of guys at my gun club who shoot their "assault" weapons all the time.

 

so the democrats didn't make owning an 11 round magazine a felony in Rhode Island? yeah you can quibble and say they aren't "coming" for your guns but this sort of nonsense is just another attempt to eliminate firearms ownership because that won't do a damn thing to prevent crime so the next step will be 5 round limits or banning any gun and making it contraband if it can accept more than X amount of rounds

 

is making ownership of a normal capacity magazines a felony an attempt to prevent someone from using firearms?

 

MORE REASONS to thank God I live in Texas where any legal gun owner can carry open or concealed without any permit or registration... where there are no waiting periods, no magazine capacity limits, no "red snitch" laws, and all the rest of the blue state silliness!
TEXAS!!! WHERE FREEDOM LIVES!!!

 

What do you think is the reason behind Rhode Island making it a felony for anyone to even possess an 11 + round magazine-even if they bought it legally 30 years ago

 

Any little thing libs can do to "infringe" second amendment rights... will be attempted... no matter how silly. Do you know that any forward grip on a handgun must at 45 degrees? 90 degrees is illegal. I just found that out when I bought a Kel Tec P50.
Libs can get really silly. Do you know about California's "bullet button" requirement?

 

and republicans are trying to force rape victims to have their rapists babies, neither will succeed

 

yeah I know all about those attempts to harass honest gun owners. Criminals cannot possess any firearms legally so steaming bullshit like the "bullet button" only harasses those who legally own firearms. The scum in office who pass those laws should have their bodyguards limited to the same weapons those turds will allow the peasants to own

 

FYI...MA implemented a high capacity mag ban back in, I believe, 1994. In 29 years MA has not even attempted to limit to 5 rounds. Seems odd since, according to you, that would be the "next step".
Now, I know you're going to scream that I'm siding with the gun banners. Nope. I'm trying to be the voice of reason in the chaos that is in your head by pointing out a real life situation where your scenario hasn't played out. It's my attempt to maybe help you sleep at night.

 

if abortion is banned in every state you would have a point. You see, your "right" to terminate your pregnancy is a right you exercise once or twice. Owning a firearm is a right that you exercise 24/7 for your entire life. I cannot travel to a state I don't live in to adequately exercise my right and my natural right of self defense.

 

New York state did rather soon after they pushed the ten round limit in.

what is the valid reason for a magazine limit and if you believe a state has the power to implement a 10 round limit, you must agree they have the equal power to make a five round limit

 

No. Get a 10 round mag. The Sig I have can hold a 10 round mag or 15 round mag.

 

There is no valid reason in my mind. Yes, they have the power to do so. The govt has the power to do a lot of things. I don't believe in 'what if'ing' every situation to death. Good way to lose ones mind.

 

and do you believe the state has the proper power to do that
and then move it to 7 rounds as NYS did under Cuomo?

 

so you essentially don't believe that there is a second amendment prohibition on state action

 

No idea if they have the proper power as I'm not a lawyer. Can you provide a link showing NYS as having a 7 round max capacity?

 

I'm not sure what you mean. Can you say it another way? I'm not being snarky

 

I assume you are familiar with the Heller and McDonal v Chicago holdings

at what point does a state law violate the second amendment as incorporated by the fourteenth and McDonald v Chicago?

 

IIRC the seven round magazine limit was kiboshed and this was put into place
https://www.gunlaws101.com/state/law/new-york/magazine-capacity-restriction