Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="soberups" data-source="post: 1342495" data-attributes="member: 14668">It is not true that the NRA opposes &quot;all gun restriction.&quot;The Instant Background Check system that is in place in my state was endorsed by the NRA.Limiting magazine size is a pointless, feel-good measure that would have no effect on the outcome of gun crimes, but it is a slippery slope that Bloomberg and his minions will use to whittle away at our rights. Look at what they did in New York; NY already had a 10 round limit in place, but in a midnight vote with no public input they changed it to 7, thereby rendering thousands of guns and magazines illegal with the stroke of a pen. And once the 7 round limit is established and the manufacturers have gone to great expense to change their tooling and other processes, whats to stop the anti-gunners from changing it again to 6? or 5? And with literally tens of millions of higher-capacity magazines already in existence nationwide, do we really think that limiting the law-abiding to 6 or 7 or 10 rounds will prevent criminals from committing gun crimes with hi-cap mags?I don&#039;t have a problem with the idea of reasonable gun laws but people like Bloomberg...who would use the force of law to deny me the right as a free person to buy a 32 ounce cup of soda...are not &quot;reasonable&quot; in any way and his ultimate goal is the complete and total disarmament of all law-abiding people in this country.Here is a philosophical question for you. If I as a gun-owner and holder of two concealed handgun licenses am willing to agree to at least some increased level of licensing and training and background checks as a condition for gun ownership, will you as an anti-gunner be willing to at least consider the idea that &quot;gun free&quot; zones are a farce? Will you be willing to consider the idea that licensed and trained persons like myself who have undergone all of the background checks should have their carry permits honored in all 50 states? Or, like Bloomberg and Feinstein, does your idea of &quot;reasonable&quot; end with the virtual disarmament of the law abiding and a virtual ban on armed self-defense?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="soberups, post: 1342495, member: 14668"] It is not true that the NRA opposes "all gun restriction." The Instant Background Check system that is in place in my state was endorsed by the NRA. Limiting magazine size is a pointless, feel-good measure that would have no effect on the outcome of gun crimes, but it is a slippery slope that Bloomberg and his minions will use to whittle away at our rights. Look at what they did in New York; NY already had a 10 round limit in place, but in a midnight vote with no public input they changed it to 7, thereby rendering thousands of guns and magazines illegal with the stroke of a pen. And once the 7 round limit is established and the manufacturers have gone to great expense to change their tooling and other processes, whats to stop the anti-gunners from changing it again to 6? or 5? And with literally tens of millions of higher-capacity magazines already in existence nationwide, do we really think that limiting the law-abiding to 6 or 7 or 10 rounds will prevent criminals from committing gun crimes with hi-cap mags? I don't have a problem with the idea of reasonable gun laws but people like Bloomberg...[B]who would use the force of law to deny me the right as a free person to buy a 32 ounce cup of soda...[/B]are not "reasonable" in any way and his ultimate goal is the complete and total disarmament of all law-abiding people in this country. Here is a philosophical question for you. If I as a gun-owner and holder of two concealed handgun licenses am willing to agree to at least some increased level of licensing and training and background checks as a condition for gun ownership, will you as an anti-gunner be willing to at least consider the idea that "gun free" zones are a farce? Will you be willing to consider the idea that licensed and trained persons like myself who have undergone all of the background checks should have their carry permits honored in all 50 states? Or, like Bloomberg and Feinstein, does your idea of "reasonable" end with the virtual disarmament of the law abiding and a virtual ban on armed self-defense? [/QUOTE]

Verification