1) can't say "grandfathering" any more
2) "between bans"
;-)
Oh, I'm sure it "occurs to them".
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
9th Circuit Strikes down Magazine Restrictions - Breaking
- Thread starter Rockrivr1
- Start date
2) "between bans"
;-)
Already limits on mag purchases on a few vendor sites. Price is stable though.....for now.
20 Hex Mags and 35 more Pmags inbound here from three different vendors. I'm not waiting for Kalifornia purchasers to drive the prices up to double in the next week.
20 Hex Mags and 35 more Pmags inbound here from three different vendors. I'm not waiting for Kalifornia purchasers to drive the prices up to double in the next week.
This is great, the judge cited no less a personage than Kamala Harris in the decision:
"Law abiding citizens in these places may find security in a gun that comes standard with an LCM. Further, some people, especially in communities of color, do not trust law enforcement and are less likely — over 40% less likely, according to one study — to call 911 even during emergencies. See 163 Cong. Rec. S1257-58 (daily ed. Feb. 16, 2017) (statement of Sen. Kamala Harris) (discussing a study showing that certain ethnic groups are over 40% less likely to call 911 in an emergency)… These citizens may rely more on self-defense than the “average” person in a home invasion or some other emergency."
Congratulations, you played yourself.![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
(via Bearing Arms)
"Law abiding citizens in these places may find security in a gun that comes standard with an LCM. Further, some people, especially in communities of color, do not trust law enforcement and are less likely — over 40% less likely, according to one study — to call 911 even during emergencies. See 163 Cong. Rec. S1257-58 (daily ed. Feb. 16, 2017) (statement of Sen. Kamala Harris) (discussing a study showing that certain ethnic groups are over 40% less likely to call 911 in an emergency)… These citizens may rely more on self-defense than the “average” person in a home invasion or some other emergency."
Congratulations, you played yourself.
(via Bearing Arms)
This is great, the judge cited no less a personage than Kamala Harris in the decision:
"Law abiding citizens in these places may find security in a gun that comes standard with an LCM. Further, some people, especially in communities of color, do not trust law enforcement and are less likely — over 40% less likely, according to one study — to call 911 even during emergencies. See 163 Cong. Rec. S1257-58 (daily ed. Feb. 16, 2017) (statement of Sen. Kamala Harris) (discussing a study showing that certain ethnic groups are over 40% less likely to call 911 in an emergency)… These citizens may rely more on self-defense than the “average” person in a home invasion or some other emergency."
Congratulations, you played yourself.
(via Bearing Arms)
Anxious to hear her back pedal story or her denial of even saying it.
It won't even come up in the campaign. And even if it does, it'll be too esoteric to matter; it's a legal opinion in a court case. Those are easy to take out of context. That's all she needs to tell The Faithful.
Look, these people are already voting for her and Joe. They operate off their feelz. No amount of legal reasoning or logic will change their minds.
That's a big assumption that they would rule in our favor.
Roberts has been completely compromised.
- Joined
- May 1, 2009
- Messages
- 2,193
- Likes
- 3,354
GM-GUY
NES Member
I agree, but if Roberts showcases himself as being further left than the 9th Circus - no one can deny it. Of course it will then be ‘settled law’ that magazine bans are not an infringement.
All of the above is why I no longer comply - AND NEITHER SHOULD YOU!!!!
Roadglide
NES Member
What about those on the fence. Hit her hard and often I say. Persuade those people
I'm being pragmatic, not idealistic.
Nobody who gives a rat's ass about magazine capacity is still on the fence. So this is not a winning argument with people who are. The overwhelming majority of the country neither knows nor cares about this issue.
Roadglide
NES Member
So 2A in general is not a factor to undecided voters
One of the NHFC board members, JR Hoell, made Breitbart news in a twitter fight with a former ESPN reporter over this issue
www.breitbart.com
View: https://twitter.com/NH_Braveheart/status/1294678180226371584?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1294678180226371584%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2Fsports%2F2020%2F08%2F15%2Fformer-espn-host-roasted-after-terrible-gun-control-take%2F
Former ESPN Host Roasted After Terrible Gun Control Take
Former ESPN host J.A. Adande took heat after responding to a U.S. Appeals Court ruling by asking now "high capacity" magazines can be constitutionally protected since "they didn't exist when the Second Amendment was written."
www.breitbart.com
View: https://twitter.com/NH_Braveheart/status/1294678180226371584?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1294678180226371584%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2Fsports%2F2020%2F08%2F15%2Fformer-espn-host-roasted-after-terrible-gun-control-take%2F
I'm not sure I'd put it that way. I'd say that voters for whom 2A is a factor are not undecided, and never were.
So wasting time on an esoteric legal issue involving magazine capacity is not a good use of limited messaging dollars in anyone's campaign. If you're a campaign manager with a million dollars to spend to take on Biden, and you use it to buy ads about a specific quote by Harris buried in a circuit court opinion, you're not reaching any Biden voters and turning them Trump. So you'll be fired.
CatSnoutSoup
NES Member
That is true.
However I believe more generally speaking the 2nd Amendment, or access to firearms by common folks, now has the potential to be a more prominent issue in the minds of a larger percentage of voters than it has been at any point in my lifetime.
This is thanks to the recent civil unrest and near total failure of authorities to protect citizens lives and property. We have all seen it with the record sales figures and anecdotal accounts of new ownership many of which are coming from quite unexpected quarters. To say nothing of Fudds who hopefully gained a new appreciation for that pistol in the drawer or shotgun in the closet.
The two people on the Democrat presidential ticket have both called for literal gun confiscation and I think continual pointing that out every day is certainly part of a winning argument in today's climate.
Further I do not believe for a minute that courts are not influenced by the mood of the country so more vocal support can't hurt.
That is true.
However I believe more generally speaking the 2nd Amendment, or access to firearms by common folks, now has the potential to be a more prominent issue in the minds of a larger percentage of voters than it has been at any point in my lifetime.
This is thanks to the recent civil unrest and near total failure of authorities to protect citizens lives and property. We have all seen it with the record sales figures and anecdotal accounts of new ownership many of which are coming from quite unexpected quarters. To say nothing of Fudds who hopefully gained a new appreciation for that pistol in the drawer or shotgun in the closet.
The two people on the Democrat presidential ticket have both called for literal gun confiscation and I think continual pointing that out every day is certainly part of a winning argument in today's climate.
Further I do not believe for a minute that courts are not influenced by the mood of the country so more vocal support can't hurt.
I'm not disagreeing with you, except that the post I was replying to was all about persuading undecided voters. I'm not denying the wisdom of going after those, nor even of using gun confiscation to do it; I'm denying that Kamala Harris' words in this particular case are going to resonate with any of those voters.
People on a website like this one are finely attuned to every aspect of firearms policy, and it's easy for us to see the hypocrisy of people like Harris. But step back and look at the reality of her words in that opinion (about magazines, not guns, which most non-shooters just don't care about). Ask a fence-sitter what a magazine even is; they're unlikely to know. To get them to understand the nuance of Harris' statement the way we do, you'd need to turn those people into Gun People, at which time they wouldn't vote Democrat anyhow. It's a waste of time to try to capitalize on that in the three months we've got left.
There's lower-hanging fruit.
Roadglide
NES Member
While I agree anyone who has 2A closer to the top of their priority list has probably made their mind up already. And I also agree that spending campaign funds trying to flip Biden voters regardless of issue is an uphill battle at best but that's not what I was saying. Calling magazine capacity something no one gives a rats ass about and an esoteric legal waste of time is imo a big part of the reason as to why we are here in the first place. There are many undecided swing voters out there who will make a decision based on a few different issues. Magazine capacity is a specific part of a broader issue but it shouldn't be ignored. The mere fact that specific issue made headlines and people are talking about it should put it out front. I'd say you are right that 2A wasn't as big of a factor for undecided voters in the past but to still think that way is not prudent.
Roadglide
NES Member
You don't try to get them to understand the way we do. You put it in such a way that the left does. Dummy it down and put it out there. They hammer us with every aspect of gun control. We need to do the same. Anything less is ignorant.
I understand what you're saying.
Campaigns have limited time and money, and voters have limited attention spans. I think there's lower-hanging fruit. I think if using this is as simple as you think it is, Trump's people will be using it. We'll see within the next few days whether they do.
![[mg]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/036.gif "Machine Gun [mg]")
So, where would you think the best bang for the buck is?
I'll say it again, the other side is killing us in the social media game. We all agree that the young people are our future. The only way to reach them is through social media. That is pretty much a given nowadays. How many NES'rs have an Instagram account?
Lol. If I knew that, I'd be in advertising.
Any issue that doesn't require lengthy and technical legal explanations and, more importantly, that directly impacts the lives of undecideds, today. Persuading people is easier when they already care about what you're talking about. Undecideds don't care about magazine capacity, especially as applied to a VICE-presidential candidate.
Roadglide
NES Member
I really think you are over thinking this. If the left can reach their base with gun control we should be doing the same with our platform for the undecideds. We don’t need to be technical. The people who support gun control are obviously not that intelligent. So if they can be persuaded it shouldn’t be too difficult to reach the swing voters. Undecideds may not focus on mag restrictions but they definitely care. If they didn’t we wouldn’t be talking about this. Like coyote eluded to. The battle has changed but we haven’t.
Was the stay of the lower court lifted? I thought CA's access was still blocked until the lower court did so?
Whatever the case I am glad I put my last planned pre election mag order in, and that they shipped, before the shit hit the fan with this.
Whatever the case I am glad I put my last planned pre election mag order in, and that they shipped, before the shit hit the fan with this.
I get it. And, again, if it's something the Trump people feel they can run with, I hope they do so.
Magazine control matters greatly to you and me and others on this site. I just don't think it matters at all to tens of millions of people. Other things, like "she slept her way to the top, has zero experience with the economy, and is a hypocrite on sentencing," probably matter a whole lot more. To be honest, even to a Gun Guy like me, those things are more important conversations to have about a Vice President who's running with a geriatric.
Maybe I'm wrong.
GM-GUY
NES Member
I didn't know that - the Gen 2's used to, but don't anymore. I do like I can find the windowed Gen 2's way easy then the Gen 3's. The Gen 2's work in all my stuff anyway.
I do have some issues with the AR-10/DPMS rifles (doesn't everyone) The mags (Gen2 or 3) fit one, don't fit the other due to the barrel extension (Rainer Arms Ultra Match) - so some dremel action is required on the front end. Not much, but enough that it won't fit otherwise. This issue doesn't effect the 223 wylde Ultra Match btw
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2010
- Messages
- 2,310
- Likes
- 7,306
Listen to this dick wad:
Joseph Blocher, a law professor at Duke University and a co-director of the Duke Center for Firearms Law, said the decision “goes too far in treating the right to keep and bear arms and the right to self-defense as if they’re the same, when they’re really not.”
“The vast majority of self-defense actions don’t involve guns at all, let alone large-capacity magazines, and the vast majority of gun owners will never use their weapons in self-defense,” he said.
Yeah most people never have to use fire insurance either. Doesn't mean it's not wise to have it. There are hundreds of thousands of examples of average Americans using plain vanilla firearms for self defense. Firearms that have mags with greater than 10 rounds for self defense. These fake arguments need to be called out for the garbage bullshit they really are.
Joseph Blocher, a law professor at Duke University and a co-director of the Duke Center for Firearms Law, said the decision “goes too far in treating the right to keep and bear arms and the right to self-defense as if they’re the same, when they’re really not.”
“The vast majority of self-defense actions don’t involve guns at all, let alone large-capacity magazines, and the vast majority of gun owners will never use their weapons in self-defense,” he said.
Yeah most people never have to use fire insurance either. Doesn't mean it's not wise to have it. There are hundreds of thousands of examples of average Americans using plain vanilla firearms for self defense. Firearms that have mags with greater than 10 rounds for self defense. These fake arguments need to be called out for the garbage bullshit they really are.
namedpipes
NES Member
Isn't that a little bit like going hunting for Gophers and coming home with a Lion?
From an episode of Boston Legal, I know getting to the Supreme Court is kind of a Big Deal.
