PDA

View Full Version : NY made a criminal out of law abiding citizens



Punisher11
01-15-2013, 12:49 AM
we lost 43 to 18

Key points: all mags over 10 rounds banned. mags 10 rounds allowed but can only be filled to 7
no online ammo purchases
and a bunch of other shit that doesnt make any common sense to me



http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=&bn=A02388&term=2013&Summary=Y&Text=Y

http://www.scribd.com/doc/120400946/Cuomo-gun-bill-fact-sheet

http://www.youtube.com/user/NYSenate?feature=watch

but im so glad this is in, cause you know criminals will think twice before loading that 8th round in the mag...

BOHICA

ISPKI
01-15-2013, 04:13 AM
I really feel bad for the police officers that may be called upon to enforce some of these laws. Lord knows I would not want to be the cop who has to go to a citizen's house and try to confiscate their 2nd second amendment.

I also wonder if any of these law makers actually know what a Bushmaster is. I keep hearing people calling out to ban a Bushmaster assault weapon, but do they get the fact that Bushmaster is a company and not a firearm? Or that its just a clone of a hugely popular firearm? I wonder if any of the people who voted for these laws grasp the massive economic impact their actions will cause when dozens of companies tank and thousands of jobs are lost. The level of ignorance...just astounds me.

sfd
01-15-2013, 08:56 AM
This has gotten 0 news coverage obviously. Haven't seen a peep on any national news sites or anything outside of NY.

Stealth
01-15-2013, 09:17 AM
everything is going to be okay lol.

GimPy™
01-15-2013, 09:27 AM
Fucking sucks guys. Hope they don't take it any further. The Armi Jager AP80 .22 long rifle was just banned here because it's scary looking. Not restricted. Banned.

Double R
01-15-2013, 10:30 AM
I'm sure this will stop a violent criminal from shooting up a school.

"Oh man, I guess I'll have to abide by the law while I'm killing people."

sfd
01-15-2013, 02:47 PM
So we can just buy more clips yea? I mean I bet as a psychopath who wants to shoot up a school carrying more clips would be cooler looking anyway. Problem solved.

Next NY will say you can only have one clip at a time on your person. I bet the range will be a blast with 7 rounds per trip.

sfd
01-15-2013, 03:07 PM
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/01/15/154249/3d-printable-ammo-clip-skirts-new-proposed-gun-laws

boofthese
01-15-2013, 07:06 PM
Im glad I live in Texas. As far as i know we havent gotten any stupid fucking laws yet.

Gustav129
01-15-2013, 07:46 PM
You are a felon if you own 3 or more firearms in NY State as of today.

http://www.bob-owens.com/2013/01/new-york-gun-law-about-to-be-passed-would-turn-you-into-a-felon-for-owning-three-or-more-guns/

Gustav129
01-15-2013, 07:50 PM
A person is guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the first
degree when such person:

(1) possesses any explosive substance with intent to use the same
unlawfully against the person or property of another; or
(2) possesses ten or more firearms; OR
(3) POSSESSES AN ASSAULT WEAPON; OR
(4) POSSESSES A LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICE.
Criminal possession of a weapon in the first degree is a class B felo
ny.

You are a felon if you possess a large capacity magazine.

This was all signed into law this afternoon.

http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/S1422-2013

PoisonTheWell
01-16-2013, 01:22 AM
Just watched Game of Thrones a few weeks ago. What keeps ringing clear in my head is that "He who passes the sentence should swing the sword." It would be interesting to see the politicians try to grab the guns and enforce the laws themselves.

boofthese
01-16-2013, 10:36 PM
For when people shoot up schools, they can keep track of how many rounds they have left/used......






to early ?

Double R
01-17-2013, 10:08 AM
I can't wait until firearms manufacturers in NY and the NE close up shop.

If I'm a lawmaker in a pro-gun state, I am salivating over this.

I'd say "Hey, Remington, bring your business down here. We'll even throw in a tax credit".

Punisher11
01-17-2013, 10:37 AM
I can't wait until firearms manufacturers in NY and the NE close up shop.

If I'm a lawmaker in a pro-gun state, I am salivating over this.

I'd say "Hey, Remington, bring your business down here. We'll even throw in a tax credit".

Kimber is in yonkers, not in the banned list... cause they make 1911s. anybody know what the original mag capacity of the 1911 is? ill just leave that here

Double R
01-17-2013, 11:41 AM
I made this argument to someone else about the assault weapons ban and I think it's pretty clever.

Beer. We drink a lot of it. I'm guessing a good number of alcohol related crimes are carried out by someone who drank too much beer.
However, some guy drinks a bottle of absinthe and kills 10 people in a drunken rage. Suddenly, politicians everywhere want to ban absinthe because of this terrible incident, even though this event is a statistical anomaly. Although it's a fact that people doing stupid shit drunk off of beer represents a good majority of the alcohol related crime, everyone is scared of the effects of absinthe because of that one highly publicized event. Since so many people are killed every day from beer-related incidents, the public becomes numb to it. Just like the public is numb to the thousands of inner-city kids who are killed every year from hand gun violence.
This is what it's like as a gun enthusiast when people want to go after "assault weapons".

Punisher11
01-17-2013, 12:18 PM
I made this argument to someone else about the assault weapons ban and I think it's pretty clever.

Beer. We drink a lot of it. I'm guessing a good number of alcohol related crimes are carried out by someone who drank too much beer.
However, some guy drinks a bottle of absinthe and kills 10 people in a drunken rage. Suddenly, politicians everywhere want to ban absinthe because of this terrible incident, even though this event is a statistical anomaly. Although it's a fact that people doing stupid shit drunk off of beer represents a good majority of the alcohol related crime, everyone is scared of the effects of absinthe because of that one highly publicized event. Since so many people are killed every day from beer-related incidents, the public becomes numb to it. Just like the public is numb to the thousands of inner-city kids who are killed every year from hand gun violence.
This is what it's like as a gun enthusiast when people want to go after "assault weapons".

college looking kids buy multiple 30 can packs, bottles of 40s and a keg, no background check required.

i go to buy a box of .22 50 rounds, need backrgound check

Stealth
01-17-2013, 12:21 PM
so your saying if there were more AR killings it will eventually be okay?

ISPKI
01-17-2013, 01:01 PM
What we are saying Stealth is that banning semi automatic rifles is pointless, they are just impractical for crime. So few crimes are committed with them that it will have exactly no effect on crime. The most common firearm that is used in crime is a revolver yet nobody says anything about those. In fact, many people reference revolvers as being a "model" for what they believe all firearms should be like.

This would be like banning Audi S4s because they look like they are dangerous when in fact more accidents occur with SUVs and shitbox civics. If you do not own an Audi S4, then you wont give a shit, but people who own Audi S4s would be fucking furious and frustrated at the ignorance of people.

The crime rates between handguns and semi automatic rifles are so staggeringly lopsided that it blows me away that people actually want to ban them. As I recall, something like 98% of firearm related crimes are committed with handguns and of those, way over half of them are shitty little revolvers.

Double R
01-17-2013, 01:36 PM
so your saying if there were more AR killings it will eventually be okay?

There aren't a lot of AR killings.

If you want to REALLY ban guns, go after hand guns. They kill the most people by far.

Harry
01-17-2013, 02:13 PM
Does anyone honestly believe that banning assault rifles will have any measurable effect on gun deaths whatsoever on any statistic anywhere. Does anyone believe that one life will be saved? Honestly.

borlax
01-17-2013, 02:14 PM
Does anyone honestly believe that banning *guns of any type* will have any measurable effect on gun deaths whatsoever on any statistic anywhere. Does anyone believe that one life will be saved? Honestly.

fixed...

ISPKI
01-18-2013, 01:49 AM
Well honestly borlax, if we banned most or all of firearms, deaths from firearms would decrease, not as much as people would want them to, criminals could still obtain them, but accidental deaths would not happen since people would not have the firearm, criminals could not get them AS EASILY since they could not steal them from citizens, so yes, banning guns would decrease deaths from guns. Just like limiting the number of vehicles on the road would reduce the amount of people killed in car accidents, or banning booze would reduce deaths caused by alcohol poisoning and other booze related incidents.

The real issue I see is that when you ban firearms, all other forms of crime will increase. If you look at some charts of crime rates in England for example, you will see that when they banned firearms in the late 90s (1997 I think) deaths from firearms decreased but all other violent crimes increased - mostly rape and assault. That is simply because people lost their ability to defend themselves, their property, and their loved ones. Anti-gun activists dangle that example in the media alot but they never make note of england's increased crime rates, only the reduced number of firearm related deaths. Its all lopsided in favor of someone's agenda. Semi Automatic rifles are just too large, too heavy, too complicated, too expensive, too obvious, too hard to conceal for criminal use. Any idiot with a brain can see that. No criminal is going to bother with them because a tiny snub nose revolver in 38 special kills innocent, unarmed civilians just as easily as a pimped out 3000$ custom AR15. They know that the police wont respond fast enough to stop them. They know that most people do not have a firearm and since they do not have a firearm, they cannot defend themselves.

Double R
01-18-2013, 07:27 AM
Does anyone honestly believe that banning assault rifles will have any measurable effect on gun deaths whatsoever on any statistic anywhere. Does anyone believe that one life will be saved? Honestly.

To be statistically relevant?

No. Will at least ONE life be saved? Probably.

However, banning alcohol will save lives, too. So would banning high caloric foods.

What point does it end?

borlax
01-18-2013, 10:52 AM
Well honestly borlax, if we banned most or all of firearms, deaths from firearms would decrease, not as much as people would want them to, criminals could still obtain them, but accidental deaths would not happen since people would not have the firearm, criminals could not get them AS EASILY since they could not steal them from citizens, so yes, banning guns would decrease deaths from guns. Just like limiting the number of vehicles on the road would reduce the amount of people killed in car accidents, or banning booze would reduce deaths caused by alcohol poisoning and other booze related incidents.

The real issue I see is that when you ban firearms, all other forms of crime will increase. If you look at some charts of crime rates in England for example, you will see that when they banned firearms in the late 90s (1997 I think) deaths from firearms decreased but all other violent crimes increased - mostly rape and assault. That is simply because people lost their ability to defend themselves, their property, and their loved ones. Anti-gun activists dangle that example in the media alot but they never make note of england's increased crime rates, only the reduced number of firearm related deaths. Its all lopsided in favor of someone's agenda. Semi Automatic rifles are just too large, too heavy, too complicated, too expensive, too obvious, too hard to conceal for criminal use. Any idiot with a brain can see that. No criminal is going to bother with them because a tiny snub nose revolver in 38 special kills innocent, unarmed civilians just as easily as a pimped out 3000$ custom AR15. They know that the police wont respond fast enough to stop them. They know that most people do not have a firearm and since they do not have a firearm, they cannot defend themselves.

I completely understand that, and I agree with you, my response was strictly sarcastic. I know that violence will not stop because we take away one of many means to kill, people will still find a way. I really like your use of England as an example because I had a "friend" on Facebook from England and he was claiming how amazing their gun ban has worked for them, but not only has the violent crime been about the same or increased like you said, the other thing was the amount of guns that England actually had prior to that ban was no where near that of the US. It's a smaller country, with less people, and guns aren't written into their federal and state constitutions and instilled in their culture. It is an unrealistic example to be used for the anti-gun argument in my opinion.

As far as the accidental gun deaths, there should be more emphasis on the amount of untrained people that are acquiring legal guns for personal protection. If you don't know how to handle, store, clean, manage and fire arm then i think it is more so your problem that an accident happened not the gun itself.

91integrs
01-18-2013, 11:35 AM
college looking kids buy multiple 30 can packs, bottles of 40s and a keg, no background check required.

i go to buy a box of .22 50 rounds, need backrgound check

It's because the ability to purchase and consume alcohol is a privledge, where as owning a firearm and purchasing ammo for it is a right. Appartently our privledges are starting to take priority of our rights. If I lived in New York, I would be seriously thinking about relocating, as these laws are putting a dent in my freedom and 2nd amendment right.

borlax
01-18-2013, 12:37 PM
It's because the ability to purchase and consume alcohol is a privledge, where as owning a firearm and purchasing ammo for it is a right. Appartently our privledges are starting to take priority of our rights. If I lived in New York, I would be seriously thinking about relocating, as these laws are putting a dent in my freedom and 2nd amendment right.

Well said, the idea that what we deserve and what we think we deserve are being so easily confused is not going to bode well for out society.

Double R
01-18-2013, 01:33 PM
Magazine size restriction? No problem.

http://i.imgur.com/mpbJb.jpg

Punisher11
01-18-2013, 04:15 PM
7rounds only? no problem

1074

ISPKI
01-19-2013, 08:34 PM
Both the UN and England's own BBC network have admitted that their ban on firearms was a complete disaster and that it not only failed to lower crime rates, it actually caused them to rise significantly. In fact, the UN has even been so bold to say that Citizens in England are more likely to be the victim of a violent crime than a citizen of the US. This was a pretty strong statement coming from a group that is unanimously against firearms.

Harry
01-19-2013, 10:00 PM
I don't think anybody has to worry about that anyway since its pretty much unanimously agreed that a ban on guns in the us is never going to happen, nor is it being pursued. You'll always be able to protect your property with a gun.